HomeMy WebLinkAboutCUP 94-25/CDP 94-10/CE 94-33 ND 94-12 Maxwells Building J, CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
2000 MAIN STREET CALIFORNIA 92648
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
CONNIE BROCKWAY
CITY CLERK
April 21, 1995
California Coastal Commission
245 W. Broadway, Suite 380
Long Beach, California 90801-1450
Attention: Theresa Henry
Regarding: Coastal Development Permit No. 94-10 - Conditional Use Permit No. 94-25 -
Conditional Exception No. 94-33 -Negative Declaration No. 94-12 -
Maxwell's Building Located South Of The Municipal Pier At Main Street
Dear Ms. Henry:
On April 3, 1995 the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach approved Coastal
Development Permit No. 94-10, Conditional Use Permit No. 94-25, Conditional
Exception No. 94-33, and Negative Declaration No. 94-12, regarding the Maxwell's
building located South of the Municipal Pier at Main Street
The action mailed to you previouslX contained only the City Council motion. We are now
forwarding a statement of action of the entire public hearing.
If you have any questions or require further information, please contact the City Clerk's
Office at (714) 536-5227.
Sincerely,
Connie Brockway
City Clerk
CB:mj
(Telephone:714-536-5227)
STATEMENT OF ACTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
Council Chamber, Civic Center
Huntington Beach, California
Monday, April 3, 1995
A videotape recording of this meeting
is on file in the City Clerk's Office.
Mayor Pro Tempore Sullivan called the regular meetings of the City Council and the
Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach to order at 5:00 p.m. in Room B-8.
CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Harman, Bauer, Sullivan, Leipzig, Dettloff, Green, Garofalo
ABSENT: None
(City Council) PUBLIC HEARING -APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION'S CONDITIONAL
APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 94-25 - COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
NO. 94-10 - CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 94-33 - NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 94-12 -
MAXWELL'S BUILDING LOCATED SOUTH OF THE MUNICIPAL PIER AT MAIN STREET -
APPROVED (420.40)
The Mayor announced that this was the day and hour set for a public hearing to consider the
following appeal.
APPLICATION NUMBER: _Conditional Use Permit No. 94-25- Coastal Development Permit
No. 94-10 - Conditional Exception No. 94-33 - Negative Declaration No. 94-12
APPLICANT: City of Huntington Beach, Department of Community Services
LOCATION: 317 Pacific Coast Highway (south of the Municipal Pier at Main Street on the ocean
side of Pacific Coast Highway.)
REQUEST: To demolish the existing Maxwell's building and permit the construction of a new,
31,000 square foot, three (3) story restaurant with banquet facility. The existing building is 28 feet
in height and the request includes maintaining that building height in lieu of a maximum 25 feet as
specified in the Downtown Specific Plan.
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: The initial environmental assessment was processed and
completed in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and it was determined that
the project would not have any significant environmental effect and, therefore, a negative
declaration is warranted.
• •
Page 2 - Statement of Action
COASTAL STATUS: The project is located in the appealable jurisdiction of the Coastal Zone and
includes Coastal Development Permit No. 94-10 which has been filed in conjunction with the
above request.
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Coastal Development hearing consists of a staff report,
public hearing, City Council discussion and action. Under the provisions of the Huntington Beach
Ordinance Code, the action taken by the City Council is final unless an appeal is filed to the
Coastal Commission by the applicant or an aggrieved party. Said appeal must be in writing and
must set forth in detail the actions and grounds by and upon which the applicant or interested
party deems himself aggrieved. Said appeal must be submitted to the Coastal Commission office
within ten (10) working days of the date of the Council's action. There is no fee for the appeal of
a coastal development permit.
An aggrieved person may file an appeal within ten (10) working days, pursuant to Section 30603
of the Public Resources Code, in writing to: California Coastal Commission, 245 W. Broadway,
Suite 380, Long Beach, California 90801-1450 Attn: Theresa Henry, (310) 590-5071.
The Coastal Commission review period will commence after the City appeal period has ended
and no appeals have been filed. Applicants will be notified by the Coastal Commission as to the
date of the conclusion of the Coastal Commission review. Applicants are advised not to begin
construction prior to that date.
The Community Development Director presented a staff report.
The Planning Director presented a staff report using slides regarding the height issue.
The Community Development Director stated that Gary Gorman, Planning Commission Chairman,
is available to answer questions.
The Mayor expressed appreciation to the Planning Commission Chairman for attending the
meeting and being available to answer Council questions.
Councilmember Sullivan, appellant, expressed his views regarding the City Council making the
final decision on this important project.
Legal notice as provided to the City Clerk's Office by staff had been mailed, published and
posted. A communication dated April 2, 1995 in support of the appeal was received form Mark
Porter, President, Huntington Beach Tomorrow.
The Mayor declared the public hearing open.
• •
Page 3 - Statement of Action
Bob Winchell, Huntington Beach Tomorrow Director, presented reasons for concerns and referred
to the letter that had been presented to the City Council and announced by the City Clerk from
Huntington Beach Tomorrow.
Dianne Easterling, Huntington Beach Tomorrow representative, spoke continuing the statement
from Huntington Beach Tomorrow in opposition to the proposed new Maxwell's building height.
Mark Porter, President of Huntington Beach Tomorrow, spoke in support of the appeal. He stated
that the city has not provided good access including ocean view access in the past. He stated
the importance of having public access in perpetuity and to not have access only through the
restaurant. He stated this guarantee is not in the findings or conditions.
Jill Hardy, Huntington Beach Tomorrow representative, spoke regarding potential beach
encroachment and financial considerations and stated that a Measure C vote would be required .
for the proposed new Maxwell's building.
Bob Biddle, Huntington Beach Tomorrow representative, spoke regarding water usage required
by the proposed project.
Jerri Hesprich, Environmental Board representative, informed Council that the Environmental
Board would like additional information to evaluate the Negative Declaration. She stated that she
would like to know the assigned time for demolition because of toxic material and that the
Environmental Board did not receive the Errata information that staff referred to regarding
demolition time and mitigation to beach access. She requested that in the future, Council direct
staff to provide the Environmental Board with any pertinent information so that they may evaluate
all aspects of the Negative Declaration.
Debbie Cook stated that in her opinion, the project does need a Measure C vote. She stated that
the increase in the square footage for the restaurant will increase the parking required and will
require a Measure C vote. Ms. Cook stated that older staff reports show a different square
footage for the restaurant and parking requirements than the current proposal. She stated that
proposed parking on property north of the Municipal Pier area needs to be resolved with the
State; said lands were purchased by Land and Water Conservation funds. She gave reasons
why not rebuilding Maxwell's would benefit the city including Abdelmuti's development and the
vacant buildings. She stated that Council could always build another restaurant on the beach
later if it is needed.
Councilmember Sullivan request that Ms. Cook clarify further regarding the Measure C issue.
Debbie Cook stated that the city would be taking away land that I dedicated for beach use and
beach access use and applying that to a private commercial venture and that would trigger a
measure C vote. If the restaurant is the exact same sign, it has been grandfathered in with the
same parking that exists now but anything larger than that would require a Measure C vote.
James Lane, downtown property owner, addressed Council in support of the demolition of
Maxwell's if the building is not salvageable and is a danger, however he urged Council not to
proceed with building right now. He stated that the new restaurant would be depending on
alcohol sales which he did not believe was compatible with the location.
Page 4 - Statement of Action
Loretta Wolfe stated that if put to a Measure C vote the people would not vote for the rebuilding.
There being no one further present to speak on the matter and there being no further protests
filed, either oral or written, the hearing was closed by the Mayor.
Councilmember Dettloff, requested that Planning Commissioner Gary Gorman report on the
Planning Commission's approval.
Gary Gorman, Planning Commissioner, spoke in response and stated that the Measure C issue
did not come up at the Planning Commission.
The Panning Director spoke regarding the variance for roof height due to the architectural design.
Ron Hagan, Community Services Director spoke regarding lowering the entire building or taking
two feet out of the center and stated that lowering the building would hurt the architectural
features and downsizing could affect proposed revenue. He spoke regarding possible security
problems with the third level deck and stated that the Design Review Board changed the entrance
to be through the restaurant.
Councilmember Dettloff asked the City Attorney if Measure C pertained.
The City Attorney stated that she did not think Measure C applied.
Councilmember Green spoke regarding the Planning Commission's staff report which stated that
no one was present at the Planning commission meeting. He stated that the hearing was on the
appeal and that the subject he was prepared to discuss was the height issue and nothing else.
Councilmember Garofalo questioned financial information such as income stream.
The Community Services Director reported.
Councilmember Garofalo presented other questions.
Considerable discussion was held.
Councilmember Bauer stated that many questions should be referred to the Planning
Commission. He stated that Measure C situation may want to be reviewed by the City Attorney
and the financial aspects by Mr. Franz, Deputy City Administrator.
The City Attorney replied that she had written 28 opinions on the matter.
Discussion was held between Councilmember Harman and the Community Services Director
regarding architectural interior guidelines.
Councilmember Sullivan stated that he agreed with the City Attorney's opinion that if it does not
exceed the footprint it is all right but if it does exceed it will need a Measure C vote.
Page 5 - Statement of Action
The Planning Director clarified that this matter does not automatically go to the Coastal
Commission.
Councilmember Sullivan presented further questions regarding parking.
The Planning Director presented slides.
Councilmember Sullivan stated that if beach land was being used it may require a Measure C
vote.
Councilmember Sullivan asked if the bluff would be cut into.
The Community Services Director stated that it would and indicated the area on a wall chart. The
Community Services Director stated that an archaeologist would be on board.
Councilmember Sullivan outlined on the wall map the area and questioned if the.foot print
exceeded and the Community Services Director responded that in some areas it was less than
the present foot print and in some more but existing and proposed at Pacific Coast Highway level
does not exceed foot print.
Councilmember Sullivan stated that public access was a concern of the public as well as his.
Mayor Leipzig stated that he believed this matter should be approved tonight and that he did not
believe it should be referred back to the Planning Commission.
Councilmember Dettloff stated that the City Attorney had informed Council that this is not a
Measure C item; that if she should review it later and the opinion is changed then so be it. She
stated that she believed some.of the questions were valid and that it is not set in concrete and
that questions of access can be resolved.
Councilmember Green gave reasons why he supported the Planning Commission decision and
that he believed it should not be referred back to the Planning Commission.
Councilmember Garofalo stated that he agreed with Councilmember Dettloff and that he believed
the project should be approved.
Councilmember Sullivan stated that he believed the issue of Measure C must be looked at.
A motion was made by Councilmember Green, seconded by Garofalo, that Council sustain the
decision of the Planning Commission and staff, deny the appeal and uphold the Planning
Commission's action by approving Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 94-12 , Attachment No. 3
to the Request for Council Action dated April 3, 1995, and approve Conditional Use Permit
No. 94-25, Coastal Development Permit No. 94-10 and Conditional Exception No. 94-33 with
findings and conditions of approval, Attachment No. 2 to Request for Council Action dated
April 3, 1995 as follows:
• •
Page 6 - Statement of Action
Findings For Approval - Conditional Use Permit No. 94-25
1. Conditional Use Permit No. 94-25 for the construction of a new 31,000 square foot, three (3)
story restaurant and banquet facility will not be detrimental to:
a. The general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity. The new restaurant
building will operate will similar hours as the existing uses. In addition, the new building
will not exceed the overall height of the existing building.
b. Property and improvements in the vicinity of such use or building. With the conditions
imposed, the new restaurant building will be provided with the necessary infrastructure
and improvements, minimizing impacts of services to surrounding properties.
2. The proposed project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the City's General Plan
and Land Use Map designation of Visitor Serving Commercial by providing beach related
facilities for visitors, while maintaining pedestrian oriented access in and around the pier area.
Findings For Approval - Coastal Development Permit No. 94-10
1. The request for a new 31,000 square foot, three (3) story restaurant and banquet facility
conforms with the plans, policies, requirements and standards of the Coastal Element of the
General Plan. The proposed restaurant and banquet facility will not negatively impact public
views or access. The new restaurant building will provide additional visitor serving commercial
uses in conjunction with the previously approved Pier Plaza improvement project.
2. Coastal Development Permit No. 94-10 is consistent with the CZ suffix zoning requirements,
the Downtown Specific Plan, as well as other provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance
Code applicable to the property, with the exception of the requested height variance. The
proposed restaurant building conforms with the Downtown Specific Plan, District 10, providing
new pier-related commercial uses.
3. The proposed project will be provided with infrastructure in a manner that is consistent with
the Coastal Element of the General Plan. Improvements to public utilities will be provided to
the new restaurant building.
4. The proposed improvements conforms with the public access and public recreation policies of
Chapter 3 of the California Coastal Act. The new restaurant building will enhance commercial
opportunities in conjunction with the pier related activities by providing a larger dining and
banquet facility.
Findings For Approval - Conditional Exception (Variance) No. 94-33
1: The granting of a Conditional Exception (Variance) No. 94-33 for a maximum 28 foot building
height will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent upon other properties in the
vicinity and under the identical zone classification. In order to provide an architectural design
compatible with commercial buildings across Pacific Coast Highway, it is necessary to exceed
the maximum building height.
Page 7 - Statement of Action
2. Because there are special circumstances or conditions applicable to the subject property,
including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, the strict application of the Zoning
Ordinance is found to deprive the subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in
the vicinity and under identical zone classifications. The proposed building will remain in the
same location as the existing restaurant building, and will maintain the same 28 foot height.
3. The granting of a Conditional Exception (Variance) No. 94-33 for a 28 foot building height is
necessary in order to preserve the enjoyment of one or more substantial property rights. The
variance will allow relief in development standards in order to provide a compatible design
with commercial buildings across Pacific Coast Highway.
4. The granting of Conditional Exception (Variance) No. 94-33 will not be materially detrimental
to the public health, safety and welfare, or injurious to the property in the same zone
classification. The 28 foot building height will not reduce public views and access, but will
increase access and view opportunities on the plaza, open patio areas and around the.
building. In addition, the new building will provide additional recreational opportunities in
conjunction with the beach and pier uses.
5. The granting of Conditional Exception No. 94-33 for a 28 foot building height will not adversely
affect the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach. The proposed project is consistent
with the goals and objectives of the City's General Plan and Land Use Map designation of
Visitor Serving Commercial by providing visitor serving uses in and around the pier area, and
improving visitor access to the beach.
Conditions Of Approval - Conditional Use Permit No. 94-25 - Coastal Development Permit
No. 94-10 - Conditional Exception (Variance) No. 94-33'
1. The site plan, floor plans, and elevations received and dated October 13, 1994 shall be the
conceptually approved layout.
2. Prior to submittal for building permits, the applicant/owner shall complete the following:
a. The applicant shall receive final approval of building colors by the Design Review Board.
b. Depict all utility apparatus, such as but not limited to back flow devices and Edison
transforms, on the site plan. They shall be prohibited in the front and exterior yard
setbacks unless properly screened by landscaping or other method as approved by the
Community Development Director. The markings, indicating the size, model number and
serial number shall be permanently affixed to the body of the backflow device and must
remain visible after painting.
c. If foil-type insulation is to be used, a fire retarding type shall be installed as approved by
the Building Department and indicated on the floor plans.
d. All rooftop mechanical equipment shall be screened from any view. Said screening shall
be architecturally compatible with the building in terms of materials and colors. If
screening is not designed specifically into the building, a rooftop mechanical equipment
plan must be submitted showing screening and must be approved.
Page 8 - Statement of Action
e. The site plan shall include (or reference page) all conditional of approval imposed on the
project printed verbatim.
f. The applicant owner shall demonstrate how 35 additional parking spaces will be provided
to offset the proposed floor area for the restaurant. The applicant may take the following
options:
1. Revise plans depicting 35 additional spaces;
2. Joint use of parking;
3. Identify and guarantee use of parking spaces off-site; or
4. Reduce the size of the building or area of intensity of uses within the building.
3. Prior to demolition, the applicant/owner shall complete the following:
a. Historical documentation of the Maxwell's building shall be completed. The documentation
shall include photographs and a written synopsis of the building's history. Copies of all
documentation shall be submitted to the Department of Community Development for
inclusion in the file.
b. Excess soils shall be removed and disposed of at an approved location.
4. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant/owner shall complete the following:
a. A Landscape Construction Set must be submitted to the Departments of Community
Development and Public Works and must be approved. The Landscape Construction Set
shall include a landscape plan prepared and signed by a State Licensed Landscape
Architect and which includes all proposed/existing plan materials (location, type, size,
quantity), an irrigation plan, a grading plan, an approved site plan, and a copy of the
entitlement conditions of approval. The landscape plans shall be in conformance with
Section 9607 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance code. The set much be approved by
both departments prior to issuance of building permits.
b. A grading plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and it
must be approved (by issuance of a grading permit). A plan for silt control for all water
runoff from the property during construction and initial operation of the project may be
required if deemed necessary by the Director of Public Works.
c. The major identification signs shall be removed or altered to comply with Chapter 233.
5. Public Works Department requirements are as follows:
a. The developer shall abandon the existing six inch (6") fire service at the point of
connection on the existing eight inch (8") water main and remove the existing six inch (6")
backflow device and vault. Any new fire service shall be constructed per Water Division
Standard Plan No. 618.
i
I
Page 9 - Statement of Action
b. The proposed building shall have a separate domestic water service, sized per the
Uniform Plumbing Code and Water Division Standard Plans. Backflow protection is
required per Water Division Standard Plan No. 609. The existing domestic water service
shall be abandoned.
6. Fire Department requirements are as follows:
a. An automatic fire sprinkler system shall be approved and installed pursuant to Fire
Department regulations.
b. A Class III wet standpipe system (combination) shall be installed pursuant to Fire
Department and Uniform Building Code standards.
c. A fire alarm system shall be installed to comply with Fire Department and Uniform Fire
Code standards. The system shall provide 1) manual pulls, 2) Water flow, valve tamper
and trouble detection, 3) 24 hour supervision, 4) Annunciation, 5) Audible alarms, and 6)
Voice Communication.
d. Fire extinguishers shall be provided in number and at locations specified by the Fire
Department.
e. Two (2) fire hydrants shall be installed prior to combustible construction at locations
specified by the Fire Department.
f. Service roads and fire lanes, as determined by the Fire Department, shall be posted and
marked.
g. Address numbers shall be installed to comply with City Specification No. 428.
h. Exit signs and exit path markings shall be provided in compliance with the Huntington
Beach Fire Code and Title 24 of the California Administrative Code. These include low
level exit signs.
i. The project shall comply with all provisions of the Huntington Beach Fire Code and City
Specification No. 422 and 431 for the abandonment of oil wells and site restoration.
j. The project shall comply with all provisions of Huntington Beach Municipal Code
Title 17.04.085 and City Specification No. 429 for new construction within the methane
gas overlay districts.
7. All buildings spoils, such a (as) unusable lumber, wire, pipe, and other surplus or unusable
material shall be disposed of at an off-site facility equipped to handle them.
8.' During construction, the applicant shall:
a. Use water trucks or sprinkler systems in all areas where vehicles travel to keep damp
enough to prevent dust raised when leaving the site:
Page 10 - Statement of Action
b. Wet down areas in the late morning and after work is completed for the day;
c. Use low sulfur fuel (.05%) by weight) for construction equipment;
d. Attempt to phase and schedule construction activities to avoid high ozone days (first stage
smog alerts);
e. Discontinue construction during second stage smog alerts.
9. Prior to final building permit approval or issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the following
shall be completed:
a. The applicant shall obtain the necessary permits from the South Coast Air Quality
Management District and submit a copy to Community Development Department.
b. All signs shall be brought into compliance with the Huntington Beach Sign Code
(Chapter 233).
c. All improvements (including landscaping) to the property shall be completed in accordance
with the approved plans and conditions of approval specified herein.
d. Compliance with all conditions of approval specified herein shall be accomplished.
10. The Planning Commission reserves the right to revoke Conditional Use Permit No. 94-25,
Coastal Development Permit No. 94-10 and Conditional Exception No. 94-33 if any violation
of these conditions or the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code occurs.
11. Conditional Use Permit No. 94-25, Coastal Development Permit No. 94-10 and Conditional
Exception No. 94-33 shall become null and void unless exercised within one (1) year of the
date of final approval, or such extension of time as may be granted by the Planning
Commission pursuant to a written request submitted to the Planning Division a minimum 30
days prior to the expiration date.
Code Requirements
1. All applicable Public Works fees shall be paid.
2. The developer shall be responsible for the payment of the Traffic Impact Fees at the time of
final inspection.
3. Construction shall be limited to Monday- Saturday 7:00 AM to 8:00 PM. Construction shall be
prohibited Sundays and Federal holidays.
4. The development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Zoning and Subdivision
Ordinance, Building Division, and Fire Department.
5. The applicant shall meet all applicable local, State and Federal Fire Codes, Ordinances, and
standards.
•a
Page 11 - Statement of Action
6. All signage shall comply with the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance.
The motion carried by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Harman, Leipzig, Dettloff, Green, Garofalo
NOES: Bauer, Sullivan
ABSENT: None
Various Issues Regarding Maxwell's To Be Studied And Reported Back
Councilmember Dettloff stated that she would like staff look into the public access issue and have
the architect make the open spaces available to the public from an outside location.
Councilmember Bauer stated that verbal comment on Measure C does not suffice, the financial
aspect was not answered because the staff member was not present; the access issue not
resolved.
Councilmember Harman stated that he would like staff to take another look at the exterior
stairway. Discussion was held regarding encroachment.
The Police Chief responded that the Police Department had recommended against the outside
stairway.
Councilmember Sullivan requested the following issues be addressed: (1) Does building exceed
footprint; (2) Increase,-in size of building does require additional parking; and (3) Security for
dining areas.
The City Clerk requested clarification of Council's direction relative to whether the additional
directives were a part of the action to be included in the communication her office must forward
within seven (7) days to the Coastal Commission.
Councilmember Garofalo spoke regarding the procedures relating to the issue.
The City Clerk was advised that the directions were not a part of the action.
Mayor Leipzig adjourned the regular meetings of the City Council and the Redevelopment Agency
of the City of Huntington Beach.
/s/ Connie Brockway
City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of
the City Council of the City of
Huntington Beach, California
Page 12 - Statement of Action
ATTEST:
/s/Connie Brockway /s/Victor Leipzig
City Clerk/Clerk Mayor
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
County of Orange ) ss:
City of Huntington Beach )
I, Connie Brockway, the duly elected City Clerk of the City of Huntington Beach, California, do
hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true and correct Statement of Action of the City
Council of said City at their adjourned regular meeting held on the 3rd day of April, 1995.
Witness my hand and seal of the said City of Huntington Beach this the 11th day of April, 1995.
/s/Connie Brockway
City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of
the City Council of the City of
Huntington Beach, California
B
Deputy6City Clerk
jSTATE OF CALIFORNIA—THE RESOURCES AGENCY PETE WILSON, Govemor
CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION
SOUTH COAST AREA
m
245 W. BROADWAY, STE. 380 A r r� 1 7 1995
P.O. BOX 1450
LONG BEACH, CA 90802-44 1 6 u
` ; Date 4-14-95
(310) 590-5071 ' "_ ; ',if p
volafir�
Commission Refereft e # 5—HNB-95-019
y
1�
NOTIFICATION OF -DEFICIENT NOTICE
TO:. City of Huntington Beach
FROM: California Coastal Commission
Please be advised of the following deficiency(ies) in the notice of
local action we have received for Local Permit # CDP94-10
pursuant to 14 Cal . Admin. Code Section 13571 or 13332.
Name of Applicant :City of Huntington Beach. Dept. of Community
Services.
Project Description:
To demolish the existing Maxwell 's building and permit the
construction of a new. 31 .000 square foot. three (3) story
restaurant with banquet faciltiy. The existing building is 28 feet
in hei-ght and the request includes maintaining that building height
in lieu of a maximum 25 feet as specified in the Downtown Specific
Plan.
Location: 317 Pacific Coast Highway (south of the Municipal Pier at
Main Street on the ocean side of Pacific Coast Highway.)
Deficiency noted by check mark below:
1 . _ Project description not included or not clear.
2. _ Conditions for approval and written findings not included.
3. _ Procedures for appeal of the decision to the Coastal
Commission not included.
4. — Notice not given to those who requested it.
5. XX Notice of Action states both that the project was denied and
approved. Please clarify.
6. XX Notice of Action does not state whether the action is the
final action. Please clarify.
As a result of the deficiency(ies) noted above:
Page 2
5-HNB-95-019
Post-Certification LCP Permits
( The effective date of the local government action has been
suspended, and the 10 working day Commission appeal period
will not commence until a sufficient notice of action is
received in this office. 14 Cal . Admin. Code Sections
13570, 13572.
Post-Certification LUP Permits
_ The effective date of the local government action has been
suspended, and the 20 working day Commission appeal period
will not commence until a sufficient notice of action is
received in this office.
If you have any questions, please contact us at the telephone number
listed above.
H1 : 4/88
4222F
MV/lm
I
•
CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
2000 MAIN STREET CALIFORNIA 92648
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
CONNIE BROCKWAY
CITY CLERK
April 18, 1995
NOTICE OF ACTION
COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO 94-10
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 94-25
CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 94-33
NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 94-12
MAXWELL'S BUILDING LOCATED SOUTH OF THE
MUNICIPAL PIER AT MAIN STREET
APPLICATION NUMBER: Conditional Use Permit No. 94-25 - Coastal Development
Permit No. 94-10 - Conditional Exception No. 94-33 - Negative Declaration
No. 94-12
APPLICANT: City of Huntington Beach, Department of Community Services
LOCATION: 317 Pacific Coast Highway (south of the Municipal Pier at Main Street on
the ocean side of Pacific Coast Highway.)
REQUEST: To demolish the existing Maxwell's building and permit the construction of
a new, 31,000 square foot, three (3) story restaurant with banquet facility. The
existing building is 28 feet in height and the request includes maintaining that
building height in lieu of a maximum 25 feet as specified in the Downtown
Specific Plan.
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: The initial environmental assessment was processed
and completed in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and
it was determined that the project would not have any significant environmental
effect and, therefore, a negative declaration is warranted.
COASTAL STATUS: Appealable
On April 3, 1995, the Huntington Beach City Council approved the project with
conditions and findings (see attached).
Approved
Denied
Withdrawn
x Conditionally approved - (Conditions attached)
(Telephone:714-536-5227)
Page 2 - Notice of Action
Under the provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, the action taken by the
City Council is Final.
The City Council action on this Coastal Development is appealable to the Coastal
Commission pursuant to Public Resources Code S.30603 and California Administrative
Code S. 13319, Title 14.
Pursuant to Public Resources Code, S. 30603, an appeal by an aggrieved person must
be filed in writing and addressed to:
California Coastal Commission
245 W. Broadway, Suite 380
POB 1450
Long Beach, California 90801-1450
The appeal period begins when the Commission receives this notice of action and
continues for ten (10) working days. Applicants will be notified by the Coastal
Commission as to the date of the conclusion of the Commission's review period, and as
to whether or not an appeal has_been filed. Applicants are advised not to begin
construction prior to that date.
Provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code are such that an application
becomes null and void one (1) year after the final approval, unless actual construction
has begun.
Sincerely yours,
Connie Brockway, CIVIC
City Clerk
CB:cc
ENCLOSURE: Findings and Conditions for Approval
CC: City Administrator
City Attorney
Community Development Director
Economic Development Director
Community Services Director
7-
<S
STATE OF\CALIFORNIA—THE RESOURCES AGENCY • PETE WILSON, Governor
CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION
SOUTH COAST AREA �� ? m
245 W. BROADWAY, STE. 380 AG
F.O. BOX 1450
APR 7 �995 LONG BEACH, CA 90802-da1e Date 4-14-95
(310) 590.5071 tji _ i�, r/1
Comm ission-Referefi e # 5—HNB-95-019 `
NOTIFICATION OF DEFICIENT NOTICE
TO: City of Huntington Beach
FROM: California Coastal Commission
Please be advised of the following deficiency(ies) in the notice of
local action we have received for Local Permit # CDP94-10
pursuant to 14 Cal . Admin. Code Section 13571 or 13332.
Name of Applicant :City of Huntington Beach. Dept. of Community
Services.
Project Description:
To demolish the existing Maxwell 's building and permit the
construction of a new. 31 .000 square foot. three (3) story
restaurant with banquet faciltiy. The existing building is 28 feet
in height and the request includes maintaining that building height
in lieu of a maximum 25 feet as specified in the Downtown S ecp ific
Plan.
Location: 317 Pacific Coast Highway (south of the Municipal Pier at
Main Street on the ocean side of Pacific Coast Highway.)
(;i
Deficiency noted by check mark below:
1 . _ Project description not included or not clear.
2. _ Conditions for approval and written findings not included.
3. _ Procedures for appeal of the decision to the Coastal
Commission not included.
4. Notice not given to those who requested it.
5. XX Notice of Action states both that the project was denied and
approved. Please clarify.
6. XX Notice of Action does not state whether the action is the
final action. Please clarify.
As a result of the deficiency(ies) noted above:
v
Page 2
5—HNB-95-019
Post—Certification LCP Permits
XY
The effective date of the local government action has been
suspended, and the 10 working day Commission appeal period
will not commence until a sufficient notice of action is
received in this office. 14 Cal . Admin. Code Sections
13570, 13572.
Post—Certification LUP Permits
_ The effective date of the local government action has been
suspended, and the 20 working day Commission appeal period
will not commence until a sufficient notice of action is
received in this office.
If you have any questions, please contact us at the telephone number
listed above.
Hl : 4/SS
4222F
MM M
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING,
BEFORE,THE CITY-COUNCIL,OF THE
:.CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH:
NOTICE IS H: EREBY;GIVEN that:on Ivlond$y;=A pril:3-,-_1995,at-7:0O PM in-the City:Council Chambers;
2000Main Street,Huntington Beach,the City Council will hold a public hearing on the following items:
L2'i.Ma APPEAL OF CONDITIONAL-USE PERMIT NO. 94-25/COASTAL-DEVELOPMENT
PERMIT NO.94-10/CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION(VARIANCE)NO. 94-33/NEGATIVE
DECLARATION NO. 94-12 (DEMOLITION OF THE FORMER MAXWELL'S
RESTAURANT BUILDING): -Applicant: City of Huntington Beach,Department of
Community Services Appellant-Councilmember Dave Sullivan-To permit the demolition of
the former Maxwell's Restaurant building and construction of a new 31,000 square foot,three(3)
story restaurant and banquet facility. The existing building is 28 feet in height and the request
includes maintaining that building height in lieu of a maximum 25 feet as specified in the
Downtown Specific Plan. Location-317 Pacific Coast Highway(south of the Municipal Pier.at
Main Street on the oceanside of Pacific Coast Highway) Planner Assigned: Wayne Carvalho
❑ 2. APPEAL OF SPECIAL SIGN PERMIT NO.93-13-SUPERIOR ELECTRICAL
ADVERTISING,INC. (CONTINUED FROM THE APRIL 4,1994 CITY COUNCIL
MEETING): -Applicant: Superior Electrical Advertising, Inc. Appellant-Former Mayor Pro
Tern Earle Robitaille-To permit an existing,non conforming 45 foot-high,624 square foot
double pole pylon sign to remain in its present location and to allow a 140 square foot sign face
change identifying Cudini and Lucas Jewelers, in lieu of a maximum 15 foot high, 70 square foot
freestanding sign pursuant to Section 9610.7 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code.Location
=9891 Adams Avenue(northwest corner at Brookhurst Street)Planner Assigned; Wayne
Carvalho
3: ` CODE AMENDMENT NO.-94-5/NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO.-94-21 --SEABRIDGE
SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT,CENTERSTONE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY: -
Applicant: Centerstone DevelopmenrCompany. -::To ameridae Seabridge Specific Plan to
allow medium density-residential development'on' 3.95 acres within Area B designated for
Resource Production(01),to create development standards for detached dwellings,to
delete the saltwater marsh requirement and delete the requirement that the area be deeded
to the Homeowner's Association. A 30 lot subdivision for a planned unit development,
consisting of 30 single family residential detached units was conditionally approved by the
Planning Commission on February 28, 1995. Location-East side of Beach Boulevard, 400
feet south of Adams Avenue. Planner Assigned: Scott Hess
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that initial environmental assessments for the above Item(s)41 and 43
were processed and completed in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. It was
determined that Item# 1 and 43 would not have any significant environmental effect and,therefore, a
negative declaration is warranted. The Planning Commission is recommending approval of Negative
Declaration No. 94-12 and Negative Declaration No. 94-21 based on their actions at the January 24, and
February 28, 1995,Planning Commission meeting,respectively.
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Item#2 is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California.
Environmental Quality Act.
NOTICE IS.HEREBY- GIVEN that Item# 1 is.located in,the appealable jurisdiction of the Coastal Zone
anddricludes:Coastal.Development Permit No.94 10 which has been filed.in conjunction,-vvith the'above
jCCLG0403-1)
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
- _ (Continued):_-`-- ---
NOTICE IS HEREBY,GIVEN that the Coastal Development liearirig`consists of a staff-report,public;i
hearing,City Council discussion and action. `Under the provisions'of tfie-Huritiiigtoii Beach'Ordinance
Code, the action taken by the City Council is final unless an appeal is filed to the Coastal Commissiop,by
the applicant or an aggrieved party. Said appeal must be in writing and must set forth in detail the actions
and grounds by and upon which the applicant or interested party deems himself aggrieved. Said appeal
must be submitted to the Coastal Commission office within ten(10)working days of the date of the
Council's action. There is no fee for the appeal of a coastal development permit.
An aggrieved person may file an appeal within ten(10)working days,pursuant to Section 30603 of the
Public Resources Code,in writing to:
California Coastal Commission
245 W.Broadway, Suite 380
Long Beach, California 90801-1450
Attn: Theresa Henry
(310)590-5071
The Coastal Commission review period will commence after the City appeal period has ended and no
appeals have been filed. Applicants will be notified by the Coastal Commission as to the date of the
conclusion of the Coastal Commission review. Applicants are advised not to begin construction prior to
that date.
ON FELE: A copy of the proposed requests are on file in the Department of Community Development,
2000 Main Street,Huntington Beach, California 92648,for inspection by the public. A copy of the staff
reports will be available to interested parties at the City Clerk's Office after March 30, 1995.
ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to attend said hearing and express opinions or submit evidence
for or against the application as outlined above. If you challenge the City Council's action in court,you
may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in
this notice,or in written correspondence delivered to the City at,or prior to,the public hearing. If there
are any further questions please call the Planning Division at 536-5271 and refer to the above items.
Direct your written communications to the City Clerk.
Connie Brockway, City Clerk
City of Huntington Beach
2000 Main Street, 2nd Floor
Huntington Beach,CA 92648(714)536-5227
(CCLG0403-2)
:. f �7
Y5r, '
r '
' rl
F
y i �
•
• t
1
' ,•fit i !. Si .. � . ..
!
•S y� aQ,
` r F
t{ 4 '
sX...•.......uw�.r..vs.`� / 1 f5. ......... .... ..,.. _.. t,r.l f.... 11✓Y� .., t .. ... .: .. ... -. .. �. - •�. .,w ..._:
Connie Brockway,City'Clerk �,` 4;F r,
City of Huntington Beach
Office of the City Clerk r t P mbi
P.O. Box 190
Huntington Beach,CA 92648 ' 14GLEl• OOD
j I
Thomas SzulgaD
. —/ 414eff S
9018 Muller St.,INGtp Downey,CA 90
', i Q =N�ORPOgq 7Fo �
s URNED FOR
"CAFRIER ENDORSEMENT s
t
ppUNTY cP
I
LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING II7��,p�! + !!,����+����1>'J��� {��I►�1�1;IAr!�Ir!rIr!!U!;��il,►��,I�►I�IIIIIIIiI�,llll�►I
CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
2000 MAIN STREET CALIFORNIA 92648
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
CONNIE BROCKWAY
CITY CLERK
April 21, 1995
California Coastal Commission
245 W. Broadway, Suite 380
Long Beach, California 90801-1450
Attention: Theresa Henry
Regarding: Coastal Development Permit No. 94-10 - Conditional Use Permit No. 94-25 -
Conditional Exception No. 94-33 -Negative Declaration No. 94-12 -
Maxwell's Building Located South Of The Municipal Pier At Main Street
Dear Ms. Henry:
On April 3, 1995 the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach approved Coastal
Development Permit No. 94-10, Conditional Use Permit No. 94-25, Conditional
Exception No. 94-33, and Negative Declaration No. 94-12, regarding the Maxwell's
building located South of the Municipal Pier at Main Street
The action mailed to you previously contained only the City Council motion. We are now
forwarding a statement of action of the entire public hearing.
If you have any questions or require further information, please contact the City Clerk's
Office at (714) 536-5227.
Sincerely,
Connie Brockway
City Clerk
CB:m*
1 Telephone:714-536-5227)
y w
STATEMENT OF ACTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
Council Chamber, Civic Center
Huntington Beach, California
Monday, April 3, 1995
A videotape recording of this meeting
is on file in the City Clerk's Office.
Mayor Pro Tempore Sullivan called the regular meetings of the City Council and the
Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach to order at 5:00 p.m. in Room B-8.
CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOP MENT AGENCY ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Harman, Bauer, Sullivan, Leipzig, Dettloff, Green, Garofalo
ABSENT: None
(City Council) PUBLIC HEARING -APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION'S CONDITIONAL
APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 94-25 - COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
NO. 94-10 - CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 94-33 - NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 94-12 -
MAXWELL'S BUILDING LOCATED SOUTH OF THE MUNICIPAL PIER AT MAIN STREET-
APPROVED (420.40)
The Mayor announced that this was the day and hour set for a public hearing to consider the
following appeal.
APPLICATION NUMBER: Conditional Use Permit No. 94-25 - Coastal Development Permit
No. 94-10 - Conditional Exception No. 94-33 - Negative Declaration No. 94-12
APPLICANT: City of Huntington Beach, Department of Community Services
LOCATION: 317 Pacific Coast Highway (south of the Municipal Pier at Main Street on the ocean
side of Pacific Coast Highway.)
REQUEST: To demolish the existing Maxwell's building and permit the construction of a new,
31,000 square foot, three (3) story restaurant with banquet facility. The existing building is 28 feet
in height and the request includes maintaining that building height in lieu of a maximum 25 feet as
specified in the Downtown Specific Plan.
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: The initial environmental assessment was processed and
completed in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and it was determined that
the project would not have any significant environmental effect and, therefore, a negative
declaration is warranted.
w
Page 2 - Statement of Action
COASTAL STATUS: The project is located in the appealable jurisdiction of the Coastal Zone and
includes Coastal Development Permit No. 94-10 which has been filed in conjunction with the
above request.
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Coastal Development hearing consists of a staff report,
public hearing, City Council discussion and action. Under the provisions of the Huntington Beach
Ordinance Code, the action taken by the City Council is final unless an appeal is filed to the
Coastal Commission by the applicant or an aggrieved party. Said appeal must be in writing and
must set forth in detail the actions and grounds by and upon which the applicant or interested
party deems himself aggrieved. Said appeal must be submitted to the Coastal Commission office
within ten (10) working days of the date of the Council's action. There is no fee for the appeal of
a coastal development permit.
An aggrieved person may file an appeal within ten (10) working days, pursuant to Section 30603
of the Public Resources Code, in writing to: California Coastal Commission, 245 W. Broadway,
Suite 380, Long Beach, California 90801-1450 Attn: Theresa Henry, (310) 590-5071.
The Coastal Commission review period will commence after the City appeal period has ended
and no appeals have been filed. Applicants will be notified by the Coastal Commission as to the
date of the conclusion of the Coastal Commission review. Applicants are advised not to begin
construction prior to that date.
The Community Development Director presented a staff report.
The Planning Director presented a staff report using slides regarding the height issue.
The Community Development Director stated that Gary Gorman, Planning Commission Chairman,
is available to answer questions.
The Mayor expressed appreciation to the Planning Commission Chairman for attending the
meeting and being available to answer Council questions.
Councilmember Sullivan, appellant, expressed his views regarding the City Council making the
final decision on this important project.
Legal notice as provided to the City Clerk's Office by staff had been mailed, published and
posted. A communication dated April 2, 1995 in support of the appeal was received form Mark
Porter, President, Huntington Beach Tomorrow.
The Mayor declared the public hearing open.
t-
Page 3 - Statement of Action
Bob Winchell, Huntington Beach Tomorrow Director, presented reasons for concerns and referred
to the letter that had been presented to the City Council and announced by the City Clerk from
Huntington Beach Tomorrow.
Dianne Easterling, Huntington Beach Tomorrow representative, spoke continuing the statement
from Huntington Beach Tomorrow in opposition to the proposed new Maxwell's building height.
Mark Porter, President of Huntington Beach Tomorrow, spoke in support of the appeal. He stated
that the city has not provided good access including ocean view access in the past. He stated
the importance of having public access in perpetuity and to not have access only through the
restaurant. He stated this guarantee is not in the findings or conditions.
Jill Hardy, Huntington Beach Tomorrow representative, spoke regarding potential beach
encroachment and financial considerations and stated that a Measure C vote would be required
for the proposed new Maxwell's building.
Bob Biddle, Huntington Beach Tomorrow representative, spoke regarding water usage required
by the proposed project.
Jerri Hesprich, Environmental Board representative, informed Council that the Environmental
Board would like additional information to evaluate the Negative Declaration. She stated that she
would like to know the assigned time for demolition because of toxic material and that the
Environmental Board did not receive the Errata information that staff referred to regarding
demolition time and mitigation to beach access. She requested that in the future, Council direct
staff to provide the Environmental Board with any pertinent information so that they may evaluate
all aspects of the Negative Declaration.
Debbie Cook stated that in her opinion, the project does need a Measure C vote. She stated that
the increase in the square footage for the restaurant will increase the parking required and will
require a Measure C vote. Ms. Cook stated that older staff reports show a different square
footage for the restaurant and parking requirements than the current proposal. She stated that
proposed parking on property north of the Municipal Pier area needs to be resolved with the
State; said lands were purchased by Land and Water Conservation funds. She gave reasons
why not rebuilding Maxwell's would benefit the city including Abdelmuti's development and the
vacant buildings. She stated that Council could always build another restaurant on the beach
later if it is needed.
Councilmember Sullivan request that Ms. Cook clarify further regarding the Measure C issue.
Debbie Cook stated that the city would be taking away land that I dedicated for beach use and
beach access use and applying that to a private commercial venture and that would trigger a
measure C vote. If the restaurant is the exact same sign, it has been grandfathered in with the
same parking that exists now but anything larger than that would require a Measure C vote.
James Lane, downtown property owner, addressed Council in support of the demolition of
Maxwell's if the building is not salvageable and is a danger, however he urged Council not to
proceed with building right now. He stated that the new restaurant would be depending on
alcohol sales which he did not believe was compatible with the location.
Page 4 - Statement of Action
i
Loretta Wolfe stated that if put to a Measure C vote the people would not vote for the rebuilding.
There being no one further present to speak on the matter and there being no further protests
filed, either oral or written, the hearing was closed by the Mayor.
Councilmember Dettloff, requested that Planning Commissioner Gary Gorman report on the
Planning Commission's approval.
Gary Gorman, Planning Commissioner, spoke in response and stated that the Measure C issue
did not come up at the Planning Commission.
The Panning Director spoke regarding the variance for roof height due to the architectural design.
Ron Hagan, Community Services Director spoke regarding lowering the entire building or taking
two feet out of the center and stated that lowering the building would hurt the architectural
features and downsizing could affect proposed revenue. He spoke regarding possible security
problems with the third level deck and stated that the Design Review Board changed the entrance
to be through the restaurant.
Councilmember Dettloff asked the City Attorney if Measure C pertained.
The City Attorney stated that she did not think Measure C applied.
Councilmember Green spoke regarding the Planning Commission's staff report which stated that
no one was present at the Planning commission meeting. He stated that the hearing was on the
appeal and that the subject he was prepared to discuss was the height issue and nothing else.
Councilmember Garofalo questioned financial information such as income stream.
The Community Services Director reported.
Councilmember Garofalo presented other questions.
Considerable discussion was held.
Councilmember Bauer stated that many questions should be referred to the Planning
Commission. He stated that Measure C situation may want to be reviewed by the City Attorney
and the financial aspects by Mr. Franz, Deputy City Administrator.
The City Attorney replied that she had written 28 opinions on the matter.
Discussion was held between Councilmember Harman and the Community Services Director
regarding architectural interior guidelines.
Councilmember Sullivan stated that he agreed with the City Attorney's opinion that if it does not
exceed the footprint it is all right but if it does exceed it will need a Measure C vote.
Page 5 - Statement of Action
The Planning Director clarified that this matter does not automatically go to the Coastal
Commission.
Councilmember Sullivan presented further questions regarding parking.
The Planning Director presented slides.
Councilmember Sullivan stated that if beach land was being used it may require a Measure C
vote.
Councilmember Sullivan asked if the bluff would be cut into.
The Community Services Director stated that it would and indicated the area on a wall chart. The
Community Services Director stated that an archaeologist would be on board.
Councilmember Sullivan outlined on the wall map the area and questioned if the foot print
exceeded and the Community Services Director responded that in some areas it was less than
the present foot print and in some more but existing and proposed at Pacific Coast Highway level
does not exceed foot print.
Councilmember Sullivan stated that public access was a concern of the public as well as his.
Mayor Leipzig stated that he believed this matter should be approved tonight and that he did not
believe it should be referred back to the Planning Commission.
Councilmember Dettloff stated that the City Attorney had informed Council that this is not a
Measure C item; that if she should review it later and the opinion is changed then so be it. She
stated that she believed some of the questions were valid and that it is not set in concrete and
that questions of access can be resolved.
Councilmember Green gave reasons why he supported the Planning Commission decision and
that he believed it should not be referred back to the Planning Commission.
Councilmember Garofalo stated that he agreed with Councilmember Dettloff and that he believed
the project should be approved.
Councilmember Sullivan stated that he believed the issue of Measure C must be looked at.
A motion was made by Councilmember Green, seconded by Garofalo, that Council sustain the
decision of the Planning Commission and staff, deny the appeal and uphold the Planning
Commission's action by approving Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 94-12 , Attachment No. 3
to the Request for Council Action dated April 3, 1995, and approve Conditional Use Permit
No. 94-25, Coastal Development Permit No. 94-10 and Conditional Exception No. 94-33 with
findings and conditions of approval, Attachment No. 2 to Request for Council Action dated
April 3, 1995 as follows:
• A
• •
Page 6 - Statement of Action
Findings For Approval -Conditional Use Permit No. 94-25
1. Conditional Use Permit No. 94-25 for the construction of a new 31,000 square foot, three (3)
story restaurant and banquet facility will not be.detrimental to:
a. The general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity. The new restaurant
building will operate will similar hours as the existing uses. In addition, the new building
will not exceed the overall height of the existing building.
b. Property and improvements in the vicinity of such use or building. With the conditions
imposed, the new restaurant building will be provided with the necessary infrastructure
and improvements, minimizing impacts of services to surrounding properties.
2. The proposed project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the City's General Plan
and Land Use Map designation of Visitor Serving Commercial by providing beach related
facilities for visitors, while maintaining pedestrian oriented access in and around the pier area.
Findings For Approval -Coastal Development Permit No. 94-10
1. The request for a new 31,000 square foot, three (3) story restaurant and banquet facility
conforms with the plans, policies, requirements and standards of the Coastal Element of the
General Plan. The proposed restaurant and banquet facility will not negatively impact public
views or access. The new restaurant building will provide additional visitor serving commercial
uses in conjunction with the previously approved Pier Plaza improvement project.
2. Coastal Development Permit No. 94-10 is consistent with the CZ suffix zoning requirements,
the Downtown Specific Plan, as well as other provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance
Code applicable to the property, with the exception of the requested height variance. The
proposed restaurant building conforms with the Downtown Specific Plan, District 10, providing
new pier-related commercial uses.
3. The proposed project will be provided with infrastructure in a manner that is consistent with
the Coastal Element of the General Plan. Improvements to public utilities will be provided to
the new restaurant building.
4. The proposed improvements conforms with the public access and public recreation policies of
Chapter 3 of the California Coastal Act. The new restaurant building will enhance commercial
opportunities in conjunction with the pier related activities by providing a larger dining and
banquet facility.
Findings For Approval - Conditional Exception (Variance) No. 94-33
1. The granting of a Conditional Exception (Variance) No. 94-33 for a maximum 28 foot building
height will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent upon other properties in the
vicinity and under the identical zone classification. In order to provide an architectural design
compatible with commercial buildings across Pacific Coast Highway, it is necessary to exceed
the maximum building height.
Page 7 - Statement of Action
2. Because there are special circumstances or conditions applicable to the subject property,
including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, the strict application of the Zoning
Ordinance is found to deprive the subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in
the vicinity and under identical zone classifications. The proposed building will remain in the
same location as the existing restaurant building, and will maintain the same 28 foot height.
3. The granting of a Conditional Exception (Variance) No. 94-33 for a 28 foot building height is
necessary in order to preserve the enjoyment of one or more substantial property rights. The
variance will allow relief in development standards in order to provide a compatible design
with commercial buildings across Pacific Coast Highway.
4. The granting of Conditional Exception (Variance) No. 94-33 will not be materially detrimental
to the public health, safety and welfare, or injurious to the property in the same zone
classification. The 28 foot building height will not reduce public views and access, but will
increase access and view opportunities on the plaza, open patio areas and around the
building. In addition, the new building will provide additional recreational opportunities in
conjunction with the beach and pier uses.
5. The granting of Conditional Exception No. 94-33 for a 28 foot building height will not adversely
affect the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach. The proposed project is consistent
with the goals and objectives of the City's General Plan and Land Use Map designation of
Visitor Serving Commercial by providing visitor serving uses in and around the pier area, and
improving visitor access to the beach.
Conditions Of Approval - Conditional Use Permit No. 94-25 - Coastal Development Permit
No..94-10 - Conditional Exception (Variance) No. 94-33
1. The site plan, floor plans, and elevations received and dated October 13, 1994 shall be the
conceptually approved layout.
2. Prior to submittal for building permits, the applicant/owner shall complete the following:
a. The applicant shall receive final approval of building colors by the Design Review Board.
b. Depict all utility apparatus, such as but not limited to back flow devices and Edison
transforms, on the site plan.. They shall be prohibited in the front and exterior yard
setbacks unless properly screened by landscaping or other method as approved by the
Community Development Director. The markings, indicating the size, model number and
serial number shall be permanently affixed to the body of the backflow device and must
remain visible after painting.
c. If foil-type insulation is to be used, a fire retarding type shall be installed as approved by
the Building Department and indicated on the floor plans.
d. All rooftop mechanical equipment shall be screened from any view. Said screening shall
be architecturally compatible with the building in terms of materials and colors. If
screening is not designed specifically into the building, a rooftop mechanical equipment
plan must be submitted showing screening and must be approved.
Page 8 - Statement of Action
e. The site plan shall include (or reference page) all conditional of approval imposed on the
project printed verbatim.
f. The applicant owner shall demonstrate how 35 additional parking spaces will be provided
to offset the proposed floor area for the restaurant. The applicant may take the following
options:
1. Revise plans depicting 35 additional spaces;
2. Joint use of parking;
3. Identify and guarantee use of parking spaces off-site; or
4. Reduce the size of the building or area of intensity of uses within the building.
3. Prior to demolition, the applicant/owner shall complete the following:
a. Historical documentation of the Maxwell's building shall be completed. The documentation
shall include photographs and a written synopsis of the building's history. Copies of all
documentation shall be submitted to the Department of Community Development for
inclusion in the file.
b. Excess soils shall be removed and disposed of at an approved location.
4. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant/owner shall complete the following:
a. A Landscape Construction Set must be submitted to the Departments of Community
Development and Public Works and must be approved. The Landscape Construction Set
shall include a landscape plan prepared and signed by a State Licensed Landscape
Architect and which includes all proposed/existing plan materials (location, type, size,
quantity), an irrigation plan, a grading plan, an approved site plan, and a copy of the
entitlement conditions of approval. The landscape plans shall be in conformance with
Section 9607 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance code. The set much be approved by
both departments prior to issuance of building permits.
b. A grading plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and it
must be approved (by issuance of a grading permit). A plan for silt control for all water
runoff from the property during construction and initial operation of the project may be
required if deemed necessary by the Director of Public Works.
c. The major identification signs shall be removed or altered to comply with Chapter 233.
5. Public Works Department requirements are as follows:
a. The developer shall abandon the existing six inch (6") fire service at the point of
connection on the existing eight inch (8") water main and remove the existing six inch (6")
backflow device and vault. Any new fire service shall be constructed per Water Division
Standard Plan No. 618.
I
Page 9 - Statement of Action
b. The proposed building shall have a separate domestic water service, sized per the
Uniform Plumbing Code and Water Division Standard Plans. Backflow protection is
required per Water Division Standard Plan No. 609. The existing domestic water service
shall be abandoned.
6. Fire Department requirements are as follows:
a. An automatic fire sprinkler system shall be approved and installed pursuant to Fire
Department regulations.
b. A Class III wet standpipe system (combination) shall be installed pursuant to Fire
Department and Uniform Building Code standards.
c. A fire alarm system shall be installed to comply with Fire Department and Uniform Fire
Code standards. The system shall provide 1) manual pulls, 2) Water flow, valve tamper
and trouble detection, 3) 24 hour supervision, 4) Annunciation, 5)Audible alarms, and 6)
Voice Communication.
d. Fire extinguishers shall be provided in number and at locations specified by the Fire
Department.
e. Two (2) fire hydrants shall be installed prior to combustible construction at locations
specified by the Fire Department.
f. Service roads and fire lanes, as determined by the Fire Department, shall be posted and
marked.
g. Address numbers shall be installed to comply with City Specification No. 428.
h. Exit signs and exit path markings shall be provided in compliance with the Huntington
Beach Fire Code and Title 24 of the California Administrative Code. These include low
level exit signs.
i. The project shall comply with all provisions of the Huntington Beach Fire Code and City
Specification No. 422 and 431 for the abandonment of oil wells and site restoration.
j. The project shall comply with all provisions of Huntington Beach Municipal Code
Title 17.04.085 and City Specification No. 429 for new construction within the methane
gas overlay districts.
7. All buildings spoils, such a (as) unusable lumber, wire, pipe, and other surplus or unusable
material shall be disposed of at an off-site facility equipped to handle them.
8. During construction, the applicant shall:
a. Use water trucks or sprinkler systems in all areas where vehicles travel to keep damp
enough to prevent dust raised when leaving the site:
y
Page 10 - Statement of Action
b. Wet down areas in the late morning and after work is completed for the day;
c. Use low sulfur fuel (.05%) by weight) for construction equipment;
d. Attempt to phase and schedule construction activities to avoid high ozone days (first stage
smog alerts);
e. Discontinue construction during second stage smog alerts.
9. Prior to final building permit approval or issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the following
shall be completed:
a. The applicant shall obtain the necessary permits from the South Coast Air Quality
Management District and submit a copy to Community Development Department.
b. All signs shall be brought into compliance with the Huntington Beach Sign Code
(Chapter 233).
c. All improvements (including landscaping) to the property shall be completed in accordance
with the approved plans and conditions of approval specified herein.
d. Compliance with all conditions of approval specified herein shall be accomplished.
10. The Planning Commission reserves the right to revoke Conditional Use Permit No. 94-25,
Coastal Development Permit No. 94-10 and Conditional Exception No. 94-33 if any violation
of these conditions or the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code occurs.
11. Conditional Use Permit No. 94-25, Coastal Development Permit No. 94-10 and Conditional
Exception No. 94-33 shall become null and void unless exercised within one (1) year of the
date of final approval, or such extension of time as may be granted by the Planning
Commission pursuant to a written request submitted to the Planning Division a minimum 30
days prior to the expiration date.
Code Requirements
1. All applicable Public Works fees shall be paid.
2. The developer shall be responsible for the payment of the Traffic Impact Fees at the time of
final inspection.
3. Construction shall be limited to Monday- Saturday 7:00 AM to 8:00 PM. Construction shall be
prohibited Sundays and Federal holidays.
4. The development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Zoning and Subdivision
Ordinance, Building Division, and Fire Department.
5. The applicant shall meet all applicable local, State and Federal Fire Codes, Ordinances, and
standards.
t
Page 11 - Statement of Action
6. All signage shall comply with the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance.
The motion carried by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Harman, Leipzig, Dettloff, Green, Garofalo
NOES: Bauer, Sullivan
ABSENT: None
Various Issues Regarding Maxwell's To Be Studied And Reported Back
Councilmember Dettloff stated that she would like staff look into the public access issue and have
the architect make the open spaces available to the public from an outside location.
Councilmember Bauer stated that verbal comment on Measure C does not suffice, the financial
aspect was not answered because the staff member was not present; the access issue not
resolved.
Councilmember Harman stated that he would like staff to take another look at the exterior
stairway. Discussion was held regarding encroachment.
The Police Chief responded that the Police Department had recommended against the outside
stairway.
Councilmember Sullivan requested the following issues be addressed: (1) Does building exceed
footprint; (2) Increase in size of building does require additional parking; and (3) Security for
dining areas.
The City Clerk requested clarification of Council's direction relative to whether the additional
directives were a part of the action to be included in the communication her office must forward
within seven (7) days to the Coastal Commission.
Councilmember Garofalo spoke regarding the procedures relating to the issue.
The City Clerk was advised that the directions were not a part of the action.
Mayor Leipzig adjourned the regular meetings of the City Council and the Redevelopment Agency
of the City of Huntington Beach.
/s/ Connie Brockway
City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of
the City Council of the City of
Huntington Beach, California
Page 12 - Statement of Action
ATTEST:
/s/Connie Brockway /s/Victor Leipzig
City Clerk/Clerk Mayor
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
County of Orange ) ss:
City of Huntington Beach )
I, Connie Brockway, the duly elected City Clerk of the City of Huntington Beach, California, do
hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true and correct Statement of Action of the City
Council of said City at their adjourned regular meeting held on the 3rd day of April, 1995.
Witness my hand and seal of the said City of Huntington Beach this the 11th day of April, 1995.
/s/Connie Brockway
City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of
the City Council of the City of
Huntington Beach, California
By Waj,14,a.) 01-10 91L,4�
Deputy 64y Clerk
•
CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
2000 MAIN STREET CALIFORNIA 92648
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
CONNIE BROCKWAY
CITY CLERK
April 18, 1995
NOTICE OF ACTION
COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO 94-10
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 94-25
CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 94-33
NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 94-12
MAXWELL'S BUILDING LOCATED SOUTH OF THE
MUNICIPAL PIER AT MAIN STREET
APPLICATION NUMBER: Conditional Use Permit No. 94-25 - Coastal Development
Permit No. 94-10 - Conditional Exception No. 94-33 - Negative Declaration
No. 94-12
APPLICANT: City of Huntington Beach, Department of Community Services
LOCATION: 317 Pacific Coast Highway (south of the Municipal Pier at Main Street on
the ocean side of Pacific Coast Highway.)
REQUEST: To demolish the existing Maxwell's building and permit the construction of
a new, 31,000 square foot, three (3) story restaurant with banquet facility. The
existing building is 28 feet in height and the request includes maintaining that
building height in lieu of a maximum 25 feet as specified in the Downtown
Specific Plan.
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: The initial environmental assessment was processed
and completed in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and
it was determined that the project would not have any significant environmental
effect and, therefore, a negative declaration is warranted.
COASTAL STATUS: Appealable
On April 3, 1995, the Huntington Beach City Council approved the project with
conditions and findings (see attached).
Approved
Denied
Withdrawn
x Conditionally approved - (Conditions attached)
(Telephone:714536-5227)
Page 2 - Notice of Action
Under the provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, the action taken by the
City Council is Final.
The City Council action on this Coastal Development is appealable to the Coastal
Commission pursuant to Public Resources Code S.30603 and California Administrative
Code S. 13319, Title 14.
Pursuant to Public Resources Code, S. 30603, an appeal by an aggrieved person must
be filed in writing and addressed to:
California Coastal Commission
245 W. Broadway, Suite 380
POB 1450
Long Beach, California 90801-1450
The appeal period begins when the Commission receives this notice of action and
continues for ten (10) working days. Applicants will be notified by the Coastal
Commission as to the date of the conclusion of the Commission's review period, and as
to whether or not an appeal has been filed. Applicants are advised not to begin
construction prior to that date.
Provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code are such that an application
becomes null and void one (1) year after the final approval, unless actual construction
has begun.
Sincerely yours,
Connie Brockway, CIVIC
City Clerk
CB:cc
ENCLOSURE: Findings and Conditions for Approval
CC: City Administrator
City Attorney
Community Development Director
Economic Development Director
Community Services Director
Council/Agency Meeting Held:
Deferred/Continued to:
❑ Approved ❑ Conditionally Approved ❑ Denied City Clerk's Signature
Council Meeting Date: April 3, 1995 Department ID Number: CD 95-10
._.,,. a
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
r
j n m
SUBMITTED TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBE
R T
SUBMITTED BY: MICHAEL T. UBERUAGA, City Admi
PREPARED BY: MELANIE S. FALCON, Community Development DirectSr
SUBJECT: APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S CONDITIONAL
APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 94-25, COASTAL
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 94-10, CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION
NO. 94-33, AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 94-12
Statement of Issue,Funding Source,Recommended Action,Alternative Action,Analysis,Environmental Status, ttachment(s)
ji
Statement of Issue:
Transmitted for your consideration is an appeal by Councilmember Dave Sullivan of the
Planning Commission's conditional approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 94-25, Coastal
Development Permit No. 94-10, Conditional Exception No. 94-33 and Negative Declaration
No. 94-12. They represent a request to construct a new 31,000 square foot, three (3) story
restaurant building with a variance to allow a 28 foot building height in lieu of 25 feet, at 317
Pacific Coast Highway (former Maxwell's site). The appeal was based on concerns over the
building's height, and that Councilmember Sullivan requests the Council analyze the full
impact of the approved height variance.
Funding Source: Not applicable.
r-
Recommended Action:
Planning Commission and Staff Recommendation:
Motion to:
1. "Uphold the Planning Commission's action by approving Mitigated Negative
Declaration No. 94-12 (Attachment No. 3); and"
2. "Approve Conditional Use Permit No. 94-25, Coastal Development Permit No. 94-1.0
and Conditional Exception No. 94-33 with findings and conditions of approval .,
(Attachment No. 2);"
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTIO
N
O
MEETING DATE: April 3, 1995 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: CD 95-10
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION ON JANUARY 24, 1995:
THE MOTION MADE BY LIVENGOOD, SECONDED BY SPEAKER, TO APPROVE CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT NO. 94-25, COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 94-10, AND CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION
NO. 94-33 WITH FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS (ATTACHMENT NO. 9) CARRIED BY THE FOLLOWING
ROLL CALL VOTE:
AYES: GORMAN, LIVENGOOD, SPEAKER, INGLEE, TILLOTSON
NOES: KERINS, BIDDLE
ABSTAIN: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
Alternative Action(s):
The City Council may take the following alternative actions:
Motion to:
1. "Approve Conditional Use Permit No. 94-25, Coastal Development Permit No. 94-10
and Negative Declaration No. 94-12 with revised elevations (Attachment No. 7) with
findings and conditions of approval, and deny Conditional Exception No. 94-33 with
findings for denial (Attachment No. 8);" or
2. "Deny Conditional Use Permit No. 94-25, Coastal Development Permit No. 94-10 and
Conditional Exception No. 94-33 with findings for denial."
Analysis:
Project Proposal
Conditional Use Permit No. 94-25 and Coastal Development Permit No. 94-10 represent a
request to demolish the existing 19,000 square foot, two (2) story Maxwell's building and
construct a new 31,000 square foot, three (3) story restaurant and banquet facility pursuant
to Chapter 243 of the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Code and
Section 4.12 of the Downtown Specific Plan.
The proposed restaurant includes approximately 10,000 square feet of floor area on the
lower (beach) level, 16,000 square feet on the second (PCH) level, and 5000 square feet on
the new third level. The lower level consists of a 7,000 square foot banquet room, 2200
square foot kitchen, ancillary offices, a wine cellar, and public restrooms, which are
accessible from outside the building. The second (PCH) level consists entirely of kitchen,
dining room and bar/lounge area with approximately 3300 square feet of outdoor patio area.
The upper floor includes a 1000 square foot bar, restaurant offices, mechanical room, and
rooftop deck (Attachment No. 4).
CD95-10.DOC -2- 03/21/95 11:04 AM
1
•
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTIOR
MEETING DATE: April 3, 1995 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: CD 95-10
The existing individual concessions located on the beach level will be replaced with
additional banquet area and public restrooms. The main dining room and lounge for the
restaurant will remain on the second level, with an additional lounge (Crow's Nest) on the
third level. The additional floor area will remain within the leased area, avoiding a Measure
C vote (Huntington Beach City Charter Section 612) by the citizens of Huntington Beach.
The new restaurant will maintain an 85 foot setback from Pacific Coast Highway and 27 feet
from the sand line.
Conditional Exception (Variance) No. 94-33 is requested for a 28 foot building height, in lieu
of the maximum 25 foot height limit as measured from the pier pursuant to Section 4.12.04
of the Downtown Specific Plan (Attachment No. 5).
I'
The maximum height of the new building will not exceed the height of the existing Maxwell's
Restaurant building (Attachment No. 6). Currently, the peak of the existing building is 28
feet high, measured from the top side of the pier adjacent to the building. The proposed
building has an approximate 30 foot portion of its roofline at 28 feet in height as viewed from
Pacific Coast Highway. The majority of the roofline however, is no higher than 25.5 feet.
The primary difference between the two buildings is the new building includes a third level,
and is designed with a flat roof.
The applicant states that during the design of the new building, an attempt was made by the
architect to comply with the 25 foot height limit. However, the three (3) additional feet is
essential to provide a building design compatible with other commercial buildings in the
vicinity, specifically, across Pacific Coast Highway. The applicant further states that the
proposed 28 foot height provides the necessary flexibility for the new building's design. A
height of 35 feet would be permitted by code if the area above 25 feet were to be used to
house mechanical equipment.
The restaurant building is the final component of the Pier Plaza improvement project. On
August 11, 1994 the California Coastal Commission conditionally approved the "Pier Plaza"
project which consisted of a new public plaza area, an amphitheater, a restroom and
concession building north of the pier, redesign of the parking areas north and south of the
pier, new bicycle parking, and improved vehicular, bicycle, pedestrian and handicap access
in and around the pier area. A footprint of the restaurant building was identified on the plan,
but because the final design was not available during the Pier Plaza review, separate review
and approval by the City is required.
The Design Review Board and Historical Resources Board have reviewed the elevations
and are supporting the development.
CD95-10.DOC -3- 03/21/95 11:04 AM
•
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTI04P
MEETING DATE: April 3, 1995 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: CD 95-10
Land Use Compatibility
The new building will provide additional visitor serving facilities including a larger restaurant,
banquet facilities for conferences, weddings, etc., and new public restrooms. The use is
consistent with the Huntington Beach General Plan and Zoning by providing visitor serving
commercial uses in conjunction with the other pier related activities, and recreational
Opportunities. Pedestrian oriented access will be improved with the removal of the existing
outdoor dining areas north of the building, resulting in a secondary stairway from Pacific
Coast Highway down to the beach.
The design of the new building will be constructed within the same building envelop as the
existing building, minimizing any impact to views and access to the beach. In fact, the
design will improve view opportunities of the ocean, and access from the beach, on the open
patio areas, within the plaza, and around the building.
Planning Commission Meeting
At the January 24, 1995 Planning Commission meeting, the Commissioners discussed the
height of the building and the exact points of measurement. Staff explained that the
maximum height was measured from the top of the pier adjacent to the building, to the top of
the roof treatment toward the center of the building. There was no one who spoke for or
against the request at the public hearing (see Attachment No. 9).
Reasons for Appeal
Councilmember Dave Sullivan appealed Conditional Exception No. 94-33 due to concerns
over the 28 foot building height (Attachment No. 1). He requests that the Council evaluate
the full impact of the approved building height, and determine whether there is an adequate
hardship to grant the variance.
The architect has indicated that the three (3) additional feet will provide for a more attractive
design element on the roof of the building, and a higher ceiling for the banquet level (beach
level). Without the variance, the lower (beach) level ceiling height will be lowered, reducing
view opportunities from the banquet rooms, thus impacting the overall ambiance of the
banquet room. The applicant further notes that because the existing building is 28 feet in
height, views resulting from the proposed building should not be impacted.
It should also be noted that the Downtown Specific Plan .allows height exceptions for
architectural features provided the air space above the maximum height limits are not
habitable. The vaulted entry at the center of the building exceeds the height limit, however,
provides the main design element for the building. Although the glass entry structure does
not meet the strict interpretation of the code, it provides a unique design element for this
building on the oceanside of Pacific Coast Highway, while remaining compatible with the
buildings across Pacific Coast Highway.
CD95-10.DOC -4- 03/21/95 11:04 AM
�y
•
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTI04F
MEETING DATE: April 3, 1995 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: CD 95-10
The Downtown Specific Plan would allow the same roofline if the portion exceeding 25 feet
in height were designed to house mechanical equipment. In fact, if the restaurant was
designed with a pitched roof, the peak could extend up to 35 feet in height. It was however,
designed with a flat roof for building compatibility reasons. A height variance (45 feet in lieu
of 35 feet) was approved for the restaurant at the end of the pier.
Revised Elevations
For comparison purposes, the applicant has submitted revised plans that reflect compliance
with the 25 foot height limit. The plan depicts a modification to a roof design element, by
removing approximately one foot, and reducing the beach level floor height by
approximately 2 feet (see Attachment No. 7). Staff does not support the revised elevations
because of the reduced view opportunities from the banquet level and the change in roof
treatment on the building.
Summary
Staff supports the proposed restaurant and banquet facility, and the variance for exceeding
the 25 foot height limit based upon the following:
The use is compatible with surrounding land uses and is consistent with the goals and
policies contained in the Land Use and Coastal Elements of the General Plan, and
Downtown Specific Plan.
The proposed 28 foot building height is only 30 feet in width as viewed from Pacific
Coast Highway and will not impact public views. The existing restaurant building had a
height of 28 feet for a greater distance.
The proposed restaurant building will not impact public views or access to the beach.
The parking and access to the proposed restaurant building has been reviewed during
processing of the Pier Plaza improvement project (Coastal Development Permit No. 93-
24 and Conditional Use Permit No. 93-40), which found that adequate parking would be
provided for the proposed uses, including the new Maxwell's building.
The design of the proposed building and roofline will be architecturally compatible with
structures in the immediate vicinity, including Pierside Pavilion and Oceanview
Promenade. The building could be designed with a different roof design at a greater
height.
Environmental Status:
On January 24, 1995, the Planning Commission approved Negative Declaration No. 94-12
for the project itself. Since the project was appealed, the Negative Declaration must be
acted upon first by the City Council before taking action on Conditional Use Permit No. 94-
25, Coastal Development Permit No. 94-10 and Conditional Exception No. 94-33.
CD95-10.DOC -5- 03/21/95 11:04 AM
i �
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTIOR
MEETING DATE: April 3, 1995 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: CD 95-10
Attachment(s):
City Clerk's
Page Number
..... - ......
- ..... ..............
........ ............
.......... ...............
........._.............__..................
.. ......_.... ............ ..............
......... ..... ........
........... _............. ...............
.; 1. Appeal letter dated February 3, 199
2. Findings and Conditions of Approval as approved by the Planning
Commission.
3: Negative Declaration No. 94-12
4.
S floor and Ian Site P plans received and dated October 13 1994
5. Elevations received and dated October 13, 1994
...... ........
6. Elevation comparison of former Maxwell's Restaurant building and
..............................-
..................................
proposed restaurant building
7. Revised elevations received and dated March 10, 1995
_... __ _ 8. Findings and Conditions of Approval for Conditional Use Permit No.
......... .....
_......._..................._................
94-25, Coastal Development Permit No. 94-10 for revised elevations,
and Findings for Denial of Conditional Exception No. 94-33
(Alternative Action No. 1)
9. Planning Commission Minutes dated January 24, 1995
10. Planning Commission Staff Report dated January 24, 1995
CD95-10.DOC -6- 03/21/95 11:04 AM
ATTACHMENT 1
NOTICE OF SEAL TO PLANNING COMMISON ACTION
OF
1/24/95
Date of Planning Commission Action
TO: Planning Dept (2 copies) DATE: 2/3/95
City Attorney (1 copy)
FILED BY Dave Sullivan
REGARDING: CUP 94-25/CDP 94-10/CE 94-33/ND 94-12 (Maxwell's Restaurant Building)
Tentative Date for Public Hearing: 3/6/9 5 ??
Copy of Appeal Letter attached.
LEGAL NOTICE AND A.P.MAILING LIST MUST BE RECEIVED IN THE CITY CLERK'S
OFFICE 15 DAYS PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING DATE
Connie Brockway
City Clerk
x5227
�4"fe CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
•� INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION
HUNTINGTON BEACH
TO: Connie Brockway
City Clerk
FROM: Dave Sullivan 7�5
City Councilmember
DATE: February 3, 1995
SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit No. 94-25/Coastal Development Permit No. 94-10/
Conditional Exception No. 94-33/Negative Declaration No. 94-12
(Maxwell's Restaurant Building)
Please accept this memo as a request to appeal the Planning Commission's conditional approval of
the subject entitlements above, for the new Maxwell's restaurant building. I have concerns over
the approved 28 foot height of the building, and would like Council to analyze the full impact of
the height variance. In addition, Council should address whether there is adequate hardship to
justify the approval of the height variance.
DS VC
(appeal.doc)
—ry x
c
z
� 2 C.,^
ix�-t t7 DTI
n
A
+ r
CG �
C.J'1
ATTACHMENT 2
G
J.
Huntington Beach Planning Commission
P.O. BOX 190 CALIFORNIA 92648
January 27, 1995
City of Huntington Beach
Community Services Department
2000 Main Street
Huntington Beach, CA 92648
SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 94-25/COASTAL DEVELOPMENT
PERMIT NO. 94-10/CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION (VARIANCE)NO. 94-
33/NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 94-12:
REQUEST: T6 permit the demolition of the existing Maxwell's Restaurant building and
construction of a new 31,000 square foot, three (3) story restaurant and banquet
facility. The request includes maintaining the 28 foot building height in lieu of a
maximum 25 feet as measured from the Pier.
LOCATION: 317 Pacific Coast Highway (Maxwell's Restaurant Building)
DATE OF
ACTION: January 24, 1995
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL- CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 94-25:
1. Conditional Use Permit No. 94-25 for the construction of a new 31,000 square foot,three(3)
story restaurant and banquet facility will not be detrimental to:
a. The general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity. The new restaurant
building will operate with similar hours as the existing uses. In addition, the new building
will not exceed the overall height of the existing building.
b. Property and improvements in the vicinity of such use or building. With the conditions
imposed, the new restaurant building will be provided with the necessary infrastructure
and improvements, minimizing impacts of services to surrounding properties.
2. The pfoposed project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the City's General Plan and
Land Use Map designation of Visitor Serving Commercial by providing beach related facilities
for visitors, while maintaining pedestrian oriented access in and around the pier area.
1v (pcc1021-1)
� M
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL- COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 94-10:
1. The request for a new 31,000 square foot, three (3) story restaurant and banquet
facility conforms with the plans, policies, requirements and standards of the Coastal
Element of the General Plan. The proposed restaurant and banquet facility will not
negatively impact public views or access. The new restaurant building will provide
additional visitor serving commercial uses in conjunction with the previously approved
Pier Plaza improvement project.
2. Coastal Development Permit No. 94-10 is consistent with the CZ suffix zoning
requirements, the Downtown Specific Plan, as well as other provisions of the
Huntington Beach Ordinance Code applicable to the property, with the exception of
the requested height variance. The proposed restaurant building conforms with the
Downtown Specific Plan, District 10, providing new pier-related commercial uses.
3. The proposed project will be provided with infrastructure in a manner that is
consistent with the Coastal Element of the General Plan. Improvements to public
utilities will be provided to the new restaurant building.
4. The proposed improvements conforms with the public access and public recreation policies of
Chapter 3 of the California Coastal Act. The new restaurant building will enhance commercial
opportunities in conjunction with the pier related activities by providing a larger dining and
banquet facility.
FMUID GS FOR APPROVAL- CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION (VARIANCE) NO. 94-33:
1. The granting of a Conditional Exception (Variance) No. 94-33 for a maximum 28 foot
building height will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent upon other
properties in the vicinity and under the identical zone classification. In order to provide an
architectural design compatible with commercial buildings across Pacific Coast Highway, it is
necessary to exceed the maximum building height.
2. Because there are special circumstances or conditions applicable to the subject property,
including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, the strict application of the
Zoning Ordinance is found to deprive the subject property of privileges enjoyed by other
properties in the vicinity and under identical zone classifications. The proposed building will
remain in the same location as the existing restaurant building, and will maintain the same 28
foot height.
3. The granting of a Conditional Exception(Variance)No. 94-33 for a 28 foot building height is
necessary in order to preserve the enjoyment of one or more substantial property rights. The
variance will allow relief in development standards in order to provide a compatible design
with commercial buildings across Pacific Coast Highway.
l ,
(pec1021-2)
M M
4. The granting of Conditional Exception (Variance)No. 94-33 will not be materially detrimental
to the public health, safety and welfare, or injurious to the property in the same zone
classification. The 28 foot building height will not reduce public views and access, but will
increase access and view opportunities on the plaza, open patio areas and around the building.
In addition, the new building will provide additional recreational opportunities in conjunction
with the beach and pier uses.
5. The granting of Conditional Exception No. 94-33 for a 28 foot building height will not
adversely affect the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach. The proposed project is
consistent with the goals and objectives of the City's General Plan and Land Use Map
designation of Visitor Serving Commercial by providing visitor serving uses in and around the
pier area, and improving visitor access to the beach.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL- CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 94-25/COASTAL
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 94-10 /CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION (VARIANCE)
NO. 94-33:
1. The site plan, floor plans, and elevations received and dated October 13, 1994 shall be the
conceptually approved layout.
2. Prior to submittal for building permits, the applicant/owner shall complete the following:
a. The applicant shall receive final approval of building colors by the Design Review Board.
b. Depict all utility apparatus, such as but not limited to back flow devices and Edison
transforms, on the site plan. They shall be prohibited in the front and exterior yard
setbacks unless properly screened by landscaping or other method as approved by the
Community Development Director. The markings, indicating the size, model number and
serial number shall be permanently affixed to the body of the backflow device and must
remain visible after painting.
c. If foil-type insulation is to be used, a fire retarding type shall be installed as approved by
the Building Department and indicated on the floor plans.
d. All rooftop mechanical equipment shall be screened from any view. Said screening shall
be architecturally compatible with the building in terms of materials and colors. If
screening is not designed specifically into the building, a rooftop mechanical equipment
plan must be submitted showing screening and must be approved.
e. The site plan shall include (or reference page) all conditions of approval imposed on the
project printed verbatim.
0-
(pcc1021-3)
M M
f. The applicant owner shall demonstrate how 35 additional parking spaces will be provided
to offset the proposed floor area for the restaurant. The applicant may take the following
options:
1. Revise plans depicting 35 additional spaces;
2. Joint use of parking;
3. Identify and guarantee use of parking spaces off-site; or
4. Reduce the size of the building or area of intensity of uses within the building.
3. Prior to demolition, the applicant/owner shall complete the following:
a. Historical documentation of the Maxwell's building shall be completed. The
documentation shall include photographs and a written synopsis of the building's history.
Copies of all documentation shall be submitted to the Department of Community
Development for inclusion in the file.
b. Excess soils shall be removed and disposed of at an approved location.
4. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant/owner shall complete the following: _.
a. A Landscape Construction Set must be submitted to the Departments of Community
Development and Public Works and must be approved. The Landscape Construction Set
shall include a landscape plan prepared and signed by a State Licensed Landscape
Architect and which includes all proposed/existing plan materials (location, type, size,
quantity), an irrigation plan, a grading plan, an approved site plan, and a copy of the
entitlement conditions of approval. The landscape plans shall be in conformance with
Section 9607 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance code. The set must be approved by
both departments prior to issuance of building permits.
b. A grading plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and it
must be approved (by issuance of a grading permit). A plan for silt control for all water
runoff from the property during construction and initial operation of the project may be
required if deemed necessary by the Director of Public Works.
c. The major identification sign shall be removed or altered to comply with Chapter 233.
5. Public Works Department requirements are as follows:
a. The developer shall abandon the existing six inch (6") fire service at the point of
connection on the existing eight inch(8")water main and remove the existing six inch(6")
backflow device and vault. Any new fire service shall be constructed per Water Division
Standard Plan No. 618.
b. The proposed building shall have a separate domestic water service, sized per the Uniform
Plumbing Code and Water Division Standard Plans. Backflow protection is required per
Water Division Standard Plan No. 609. The existing domestic water service shall be
abandoned.
i
(pcc1021-4)
M M
6. Fire Department requirements are as follows:
a. An automatic fire sprinkler system shall be approved and installed pursuant to Fire
Department regulations.
b. A Class III wet standpipe system (combination) shall be installed pursuant to Fire
Department and Uniform Building Code standards.
c. A fire alarm system shall be installed to comply with Fire Department and Uniform Fire
Code standards. The system shall provide 1) manual pulls, 2) Water flow, valve tamper
and trouble detection, 3) 24 hour supervision, 4) Annunciation, 5) Audible alarms, and 6)
Voice Communication.
d. Fire extinguishers shall be provided in number and at locations specified by the Fire
Department.
e. Two (2) fire hydrants shall be installed prior to combustible construction at locations
specified by the Fire Department.
f Service roads and fire lanes, as determined by the Fire Department, shall be posted and
marked.
g. Address numbers shall be installed to comply with City Specification No. 428.
h. Exit signs and exit path markings shall be provided in compliance with the Huntington
Beach Fire Code and Title 24 of the California Administrative Code. These include low
level exit signs.
i. The project shall comply with all provisions of the Huntington Beach Fire Code and City
Specification No. 422 and 431 for the abandonment of oil wells and site restoration.
j. The project shall comply with all provisions of Huntington Beach Municipal Code Title
17.04.085 and City Specification No. 429 for new construction within the methane gas
overlay districts.
7. All building spoils, such a unusable lumber, wire, pipe, and other surplus or unusable material,
shall be disposed of at an off-site facility equipped to handle them.
8. During construction, the applicant shall:
a. Use water trucks or sprinkler systems in all areas where vehicles travel to keep damp
enough to prevent dust raised when leaving the site;
b. Wet down areas in the late morning and after work is completed for the day;
l c. Use low sulfur fuel (.05%) by weight) for construction equipment;
(pcc1021-5)
. � s
d. Attempt to phase and schedule construction activities to avoid high ozone days (first stage
smog alerts);
e. Discontinue construction during second stage smog alerts.
9. Prior to final building permit approval or issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the following
shall be completed:
a. The applicant shall obtain the necessary permits from the South Coast Air Quality
Management District and submit a copy to Community Development Department.
b. All signs shall be brought into compliance with the Huntington Beach Sign Code(Chapter
233).
c. All improvements (including landscaping) to the property shall be completed in
accordance with the approved plans and conditions of approval specified herein.
d Compliance with all conditions of approval specified herein shall be accomplished.
10. The Planning Commission reserves the right to revoke Conditional Use Permit No. 94-25,
Coastal Development Permit No. 94-10 and Conditional Exception No. 94-33 if any violation _.
of these conditions or the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code occurs.
11. Conditional Use Permit No. 94-25, Coastal Development Permit No. 94-10 and Conditional
Exception No. 94-33 shall become null and void unless exercised within one(1) year of the
date of final approval, or such extension of time as may be granted by the Planning
Commission pursuant to a written request submitted to the Planning Division a minimum 30
days prior to the expiration date.
CODE REOUIREMENTS:
1. All applicable Public Works fees shall be paid.
2. The developer shall be responsible for the payment of the Traffic Impact Fees at the time of
final inspection.
3. Construction shall be limited to Monday - Saturday 7:00 AM to 8:00 PM. Construction shall
be prohibited Sundays and Federal holidays.
4. The development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Zoning and Subdivision
Ordinance, Building Division, and Fire Department.
5. The applicant shall meet all applicable local, State and Federal Fire Codes, Ordinances, and
standards.
6. All signage shall comply with the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance.
(pcc1021-6)
•
I hereby certify that Conditional Use Permit No. 94-25, Coastal Development Permit No. 94-10,
Conditional Exception (Variance)No. 94-33 and Negative Declaration No. 94-12 were approved
by the Planning Commission of the City of Huntington Beach on January 24, 1995 upon the
foregoing findings and conditions. This approval represents conceptual approval only; detailed
plans must be submitted for review and the aforementioned conditions completed prior to final
approval.
Sincerely,
Howard Zelefsky, Secretary
Planning Commission
by: ,
Scott Hess
Senior Planner
Reviewed by:
Tanning mmissioner
l�
(pcc1021-7)
ATTACHMENT 3
n
:>:t::;:.>.>::>::>::<::<::<:>:::> >:.;:.;:{.:{:..}:±.}�}:�;�.;}}: {.:;::>ii:.:;{.:::;{.}:.}::;i:.i:.ii:is{.;Y:.i;::: <:;;;:.;::<::;;:>.}:-{{.}}i::.;:{:>::;;;Y}Y:.;:.;ii}:.::;i:.i>:<.}::.}>;::;i•};:.},;<.}:.:;.}:.};::>::{::<<}«::::<:>:<:::;«>::;:: :.
'�:?:>zx:>::>:':;;hz:;si:<:::`'•>` ??...........
^.> >?` �>'::>::":> <':<:::»::::>>::s::::::::n::<::z:::<:::::>::::::::::::>:::::»::::::::::? : :::y:E::;:z:::::::>::::::::<::::::::y:::::::<:
•} x:\::::.....r.....:.r...r}:::::.}:i':}Yrr•:3Y..... ..........::::::....r:.:::}::v:•}}*ii',: :.... .:: {{•Y .. �: is?. {•: }} •.
v.n•::::::::::: •:•.::::...............{.:....n.:.. !•}:•i .. :::ii :r?. .. .... ..... .. .. .. ::...::: is i •. :::i: :: :y[. .:: :i`::i :::iiiiiii:�iiiiiiiiiiii?i:>isiti:isL:iiiiiiiiiiii':[:iiijiiiiijiii:
M•}^�.•$i}:}:::::}:•::::::.v:•:.v:,v,•::::.v::::::. ::: :: w: :w. :. :. ..:::. :• •.::: :: .:. .:. v, .:: : ...:. •::. ..... .. .:: •:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::nv:nv.vx:::::::.
i n:ii:{ir {ti 5:.
...............................
.................:............}...............n.................................................... ..•w:::{vv::•::•.{•:::.v:::n•:::::::..:::v:::::::•: :::::::::::::nw:::::::::::::::}:::::::w::•:._.v:::::v::::::::::::::::v::::::.
• :•}:•:+r:?^:.......4.�:iY:•YY:{^:+.{^:h:•Y:{^:•}:?•}:{•ii}:•}:LY}:•}:•}}}}}:{4:^}!{htt{{{f:•. .' ::{•YY:4. '•. ... '.i.. .}i. ., :
nv yy,;;+•}}Y:•YYT:G}:{G};{{•}YY:•Y}:O:•Y}YY}i:.}}}}:{{{^:•Y;{•v,{{{0i}}:{^-
v+tr}:-•i}:•:ii}}:•:isti4:•+Y:GY:•}}}Y::.}'•:ti•}iYb}}}:4Y:•:i}:•Y'r.{•:{4:^i:{•}}:•
:::.'•T::{:{{?4:•Y:4:•}'4}:?{.Y:4}:•{ini}:{':-:i:.}:4}i:{4:4:•i:^:{{{^}}Y!
............}...........................:....� ii;:jQ;;..}:.y;:'i':)�:is�!::{(:•::�XL•{:;{<:!}}:r}ti}}i::i:}}may?}:;{}::{:�:k�.+•:�iiiy:i
':i;<iii:}i;:'r:iiii:,v,{•Y:•}:4Y;{x+f.6::C;i}Y}Y}}Y%?{•};{{•Y};{•}}}Y:•}}:{?:^:J;.}:{>.4:•}}}'
L'4Y:•Y;{x:iiYv�:ni v..::v................ 'r+•!:•Y}ii:}}:4:•}ii�iiii}}jijiiiiiiiiiiii::ti:S}�;ri} ii:}ijiiiiiijiiii
:•:•i:??{^iii:::}r. v:iv•+ryY:;.}••{+v,}...:n•::,{{•::::{::::::::n}::::{.n:;.:::'{ii::;::::r::{;;::n•:::{•ii''::'•+'':ii:>iiY'•Y:::.+;Y':;.;...•.;..:}.•v:•'•}r.v....;...}.........}::..::...:...:.}}}}}.:.:{.:..:4:::}}••'•y;{•is4:•YYY}}}:•i:?{•Y}Y:•Y:•}}Y}}}:•Y}}Y%?}:
+:::jiLy;:;Yr'�:vk'•:fj+':{'{i}h}C}}:�:Y.:}}i}: ..} '.: '•i: .. .. :} y {. .:. .. ` : ...}' {•i :}}}:{{:•.}' ....... .. } .} .y •. .. ...}:. •.:':. }}}:: '.Y' .}YY. ? }i}i}}}}YYYY:ti Y:�}}Y}}?•}}}ii}}}}}}}Y}
:. :•}-ii.'
"`.. �:. �': ::. ':. ':. ?: is.. :!; :i`:i:i. ::i iiii: '�/'�.:y�:•:: :i:':iiii:::iisL:::ijjiiiii}iiiiii:{:iii::i::i ii
1. Name of Proponent: City of Huntington Beach
Department of Community Services
Address: 2000 Main Street
Huntington Beach, CA 92648
Phone Number: (714) 536-5291
2. Date Checklist Submitted for Review: November 2, 1994
3. Concurrent Entitlement(s): Conditional Use Permit No. 94-25,
Coastal Development Permit No. 94-10,
Conditional Exception (Variance) No. 94-33
Design Review Board No. 94-24
4. Proiect Location: 317 Pacific Coast Highwav
(Maxwell's Restaurant building, south of the
Huntington Beach Municipal Pier at Main Street)
5. Proiect Description: To permit the demolition of the existing 19,000 square foot,
28 foot high, two (2) story Maxwell's Restaurant building and construction of a new
31,000 square foot, three (3) story building for restaurant/concessionaire purposes.
The request includes a variance to exceed the 25 foot building height limit by three
(3) feet (Max. 28 foot height from the pier level) specified in the Downtown Specific
Plan. The existing Maxwell's building is 28 feet high, measured from the pier level.
The Maxwell's building was not included as part of the recently approved Pier Plaza
improvement project, and therefore requires separate review and approval. The
proposed building will be expanded to provide greater floor area on the lower
(beach) level by cutting into the bluff. The lower level will consist of a new 7200
square foot banquet facility. The P.C.H. level will be comprised of approximately
16,000 square feet of restaurant floor area, with 4500 square feet on the third level
for a bar and restaurant offices.
1 —
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
(Explanations of answers are included after each subsection.)
�. Earth. .
Yes Mavbe No
Will the proposal result in:
a. Unstable earth conditions or changes in geologic substructures? _ _ X
b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of the soil? X
c. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? _ _ X
d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic
or physical features? _ — X
e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? — — X
f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition
or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean
or any bay, inlet or lake? _ _ X
g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides,
mudslides, ground failure, or similar hazards? _ _ X
Discussion: The project consists of the construction of anew 31,000 square foot, three (3) story
building for restaurant and concessionaire purposes. Approximately 2100 cubic yards of soil will be
removed as part of the project to provide for additional floor area on the beach level. With standard
conditions of approval requiring disposal of the excess soil at approved sites, no significant adverse impacts
are anticipated.
2. Air.
Yes Mavbe No
Will the proposal result in:
a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? _ X _
b. The creation of objectionable odors? _ _ X
c. Alteration of air movement, moisture, or temperature,or any change in climate, either
locally or regionally? _ _ X
Discussion: The project consists of a new 31,000 square foot, three story restaurant building, which is
an approximate 12,000 square foot expansion from the existing restaurant building. Some emissions may
be generated during the project's 8-12 month construction phase, however, emissions resulting from
construction equipment are not considered significant.
Long-term operations emissions may increase slightly as a result of the overall increase in floor area. will be
potentially the banquet room located on the lower level will not be utilized in the same fashion as the
existing retail concessionaire. The banquet room will be utilized for weddings, smaller conferences, etc.,
and not a daily basis. Into adverse air quality impacts are anticipated as a result of the new building.
3. Water.
Yes Maybe No
Will the proposal result in:
a. Changes in currents,or the course of direction of water movements, in either marine or
fresh waters? X
b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns,or the rate
and amount of surface runoff? X
c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? X
d. Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? _ _ X
e. Discharge into surface waters,or in any alteration of surface water quality, including
but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? _ _ X
f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? _ _ X
g. Change in the quantity of ground waters,either through direct additions or withdrawals,
or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? _ _ X
h. Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water
supplies? _ _ X
i. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such
as flooding or tidal waves? _ _ X
Discussion: There will be no increase in the amount surface runoff as a result of the proposed
building. The proposed project will require the installation of ate r lines in conjunction with the new
construction. The new building is anticipated to use approximately}8500 gallons of water per day,
compared with the existing use of approximately 12,000 gallons per day. The reduced amount of water is
attributed to the removal of the lower level concessionaires, and the proposed conservation measures.
With the proposed conservation measures, including the use of water saver toilets, and infrared switching at
lavatories, no significant adverse impacts to the existing water supply are anticipated.
The project area is located with Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) Zone X which does not require flood
insurance nor floodproofing. No adverse impacts resulting from flooding or tidal waves are anticipated
4. Plant Life.
Yes Mavbe No
Will the proposal result in:
a. Change in the diversity of species,or number of any species of plants(including trees,
shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants)? _ _ X
b. Reduction of the numbers of any mature,unique, rare or
endangered species of plants? _ _ X
c. Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a barrier to the normal
replenishment of existing species? _ _ X
d. Reduction in acreage of an agricultural crop? _ _ X
,ao
EnVironmental Checklist Page 4 EA 94-12
Discussion: Landscaping for the project area has been addressed in the previously approved Pier
Plaza improvement project. The new Maxwell's building will provide potted planting which will be located
around the outdoor dining area and inside the building. No adverse impacts to plant life are anticipated.
S. Animal Life.
Yes Mavbe No
Will the proposal result in:
a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals(birds, land
animals including reptiles,fish and shellfish,benthic organisms or insects)? _ _ X
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? _ _ X
c. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the
migration or movement of animals? _ _ X
d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? _ _ X
Discussion: According to the U.S. Department of Fish and Wildlife (1993), animals found within the
project area are the California ground squirrel, the side blotched lizard, shorebirds and seagulls. None of
the species are considered to be endangered. No significant impacts to animal wildlife are anticipated.
16. Noise.
Yes Mavbe No
Will the proposal result in:
a. Increases in existing noise levels? _ X _
b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? X
Discussion: The project will generate short-term noise impacts during construction with the use of
heavy construction equipment, including jack hammers, graders, backhoes, cement and dump trucks. The
Pier Colony Condominium complex located across P.C.H. could potentially be impacted by the noise
generated by construction and day to day operations.
Long-term noise impacts may occur as a result of parking of vehicles, and live entertainment within the
restaurant building. However, these activities already occur as part of the existing restaurant. All
construction noise will be required to comply with Chapter 8.40 Noise of the Huntington Beach Municipal
Code, and through the implementation and compliance of standard conditions of approval, no significant
noise impacts during construction or the restaurant's daily operation are anticipated.
7. Li ht and Glare.
Yes Maybe No
Will the proposal produce new light or glare? X
Discussion: Lighting will be provided in and around the new restaurant building, however, the
majority of the outside lighting will be provided within the Pier Plaza parking lots. The review of the light
and glare impacts from the parking lot light standards have been addressed during the environmental review
for the Pier Plaza improvement project. Most of the lighting in the area is proposed in the area of the pier,
directly across the commercial uses which will minimize any light and glare impacts to residential properties
across Pacific Coast Highway, as well as to motorists on Pacific Coast Highway. The stucco and glass
design of the building may generate additional light and glare impacts to the area. However, with standard
Environmental Checklist Page 5 EA 94-12
conditions of approval requiring the directing of lights in a manner to prevent "spillage" onto adjacent
properties, no adverse impacts are anticipated.
$. Land Use.
Yes Mavbe No
Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or planned
land use of an area? X
Discussion: The project consists of the demolition of the existing Maxwell's building and construction
of a new 31,000 square foot, three (3) story restaurant building. The proposed project is consistent with
the Open Space-Recreation General Plan land use designation and Downtown Specific Plan District 10
(Pier related commercial) zoning classification. Furthermore, the project will be compatible with the Pier
Plaza improvements and other uses on the pier by providing restaurant and concessionaire services while
remaining pedestrian oriented for visitors. Into significant adverse impacts are anticipated.
9. Natural Resources.
Yes Mavbe No
Will the proposal result in:
a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? _ _ X
b. Substantial depletion of any non-renewable natural resource? _ _ X
Discussion: The project does not involve any activities and will not create any situation that will result
in a significant increase in the rate of use of any natural or non-renewable energy resource.
10.- Risk of Upset.
Yes Mavbe No
Will the proposal involve:
a. A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances(including,but not
limited to oil, pesticides,chemicals or radiation)in the event of an accident or
upset conditions? _ X
b. Possible interference writh an emergency response plan or
an emergency evacuation plan? _ _ X
Discussion: The proposed construction of a new restaurant building does not involve the use of any
hazardous materials and will not result in any impediments to emergency response or evacuation plans.
The existing vehicular access into the Maxwell's valet area and parking lot will be restricted to emergency
and maintenance vehicles only. Two (2) new driveways off Pacific Coast Highway will be provided into
the parking lots north and south of the pier which will also have access to the beach. No significant adverse
hazardous material or emergency access impacts are anticipated.
11. Population.
Yes Mavbe No
Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density,or growth rate of
the human population of an area? _ X _
Environmental Checklist Page 6 EA 94-12
Discussion: The proposed reconstruction of the Maxwell's building.together with previously
approved Pier Plaza improvement project is part of a long-range effort on behalf of the City's
Redevelopment Agency to revitalize the Main Street/Pier area to encourage both visitors and citizens to
the pier area. The project involves an expansion of the existing restaurant use from a 19,000 square foot
building to a 31,000 square foot building. The project is consistent with the Open Space-Recreation
General Plan land use designation and the Downtown Specific Plan District 10 (Pier related commercial) .
zoning classification by providing visitor-serving commercial uses near the pier. No significant adverse
impacts are anticipated.
12. Housing.
Yes Maybe No
Will proposal affect existing housing,or create a demand for additional housing? _ _ X
Discussion: Although the Maxwell's building and Pier Plaza improvements are anticipated to increase
visitors to the area (also see discussion item# 11), it will not result in an increase in the demand for
additional housing. No significant adverse impacts are anticipated.
13. Trans ortation/Circulation.
Yes Mavbe No
Will the proposal result in:
a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? X
b. Effects on existing parking facilities,or demand for new off-site parking? X
c. Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? _ X _
d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? X
e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? _ _ X
f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles,bicyclists or pedestrians? _ X _
Discussion: The proposed restaurant building will generate approximately 300 vehicular trips to the
downtown/pier area, which is approximately 50 trips greater than what the current restaurant generates.
The redesigned parking lots north and south of the pier, approved as part of Pier Plaza, will provide 27
additional parking spaces for the Pier Plaza uses.
Vehicular access to the restaurant and valet service will be relocated to the new driveway south of the pier.
The existing valet service for Maxwell's Restaurant will continue to operate with a portion of the upper two
(2) rows of parking, south of the pier designated for valet use only. The existing Maxwell's driveway
directly across Main Street will be equipped with a rolled curb restricting vehicular access except for
emergency and maintenance vehicles.
A total of 634 parking spaces will be provided for the Pier Plaza and Maxwell's building, which is a net
increase of 27 parking spaces from the existing parking layout. No significant adverse traffic or circulation
impacts are anticipated.
14. Public Services.
Yes Mavbe No
Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or
altered governmental services in any of the following areas:
a. Fire protection?
ta3
Em•ironmcntal Checklist Page 7 EA 94-12
b. Police protection? _ _ X
c. Schools? X
d. Parks or other recreational facilities? X
e. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? _ _ X
f. Other governmental services? _ _ X
Discussion: The new restaurant building will not result an increase in additional manpower or
services. The proposal has been reviewed by all City departments, including Police, Fire, Public Works,
Community Development and Community Services, and Economic Development, who have collectively
arrived at the project's conceptual design. No demand on the additional public services is expected, and no
adverse impacts to public services are anticipated.
15. Ener2y.
Yes Mavbe No
Will the proposal result in:
a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? _ _ X
b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing source of energy,or require the
development of sources of energy? _ _ X
Discussion: Please refer to the discussion under 49 (a-b).
16. Utilities.
Yes Mavbe No
Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations
to the follo"7ng utilities:
a. Power or natural gas? _ _ X
b. Communication systems? _ _ X
c. Water? X
d. Sewer or septic tanks? _ _ X
e. Storm„pater drainage? _ _ X
f. Solid .vaste and disposal? _ _ X
Discussion: The project will require the installation of new water lines and will utilize approximately
3750 gallons of water per day. In addition, approximately 12 cubic yards of solid waste will be generated
per day, which will be collected by the Rainbow Disposal Company. With the proposed conservation
measures, including the use of water saver toilets, infrared switching at lavatories, photocell and timed
lighting at exterior, and low voltage at interior, no adverse impacts to utilities are anticipated.
Environmental Checklist Page 8 - :A 94-12
17. Human Health.
Yes Mavbe No
Will the proposal result in:
a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard(excluding mental health)? _ _ X
b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? X
Discussion: No hazards to human health will result from the project.
18. Aesthetics.
Yes Mavbe No
Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic N ista or view open to
the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site
open to public'%zew? _ X _
Discussion: The proposed building will be constructed primarily out of stucco materials with a
mission tile roof, which is compatible with the buildings across P.C.H. (Pierside Pavilion, Pier Colony and
Oceanview Promenade). The height of the proposed building (28 feet as measured from the Pier) is the
same height as the existing restaurant building. However, the design of the new building will reduce the
buildings bulk which will minimize view impacts to the beach. The size of the building will increase from
an approximate 19,000 sq. ft., two (2) story building to an approximate 31,000 sq. ft., three (3) story
building. Because the majority of the additional floor area will be provided on the lower level (beach level),
no adverse aesthetic impacts are anticipated.
19. Recreation.
Yes Mavbe No
Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing
recreational opportunities? _ _ X
Discussion: The proposed restaurant building will compliment the recreational opportunities offered in
the vicinity of the pier. With the proposed plaza improvements, including an amphitheater, bicycle parking
areas, and redesigned parking lots north and south of the pier, no significant adverse impacts are
anticipated.
20. Cultural Resources.
Yes Mavbe No
a. Will the proposal result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or
historic archaeological site? _ _ X
b. Will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric
or historic building, structure,or object? _ _ X
c. Does the proposal have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect
unique ethnic cultural values? _ _ X
d. Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential
impact area? _ _ X
1
Environmental Checklist Paee 9 - ' EA 94-12
Discussion: The project site is located at the foot of the Huntington Beach Municipal Pier which is
listed on the National Register of Historical Places. The Historical Resources Board has reviewed the
proposal to demolish the existing restaurant building and has recommended that the proper documentation,
including photographs be completed prior to demolition. The Board has not recommended retaining and or
relocating the structure. With implementation of mitigation requiring historical documentation with
photographs prior to demolition, no adverse impacts are anticipated.
Mitigation:
1. Historical documentation of the Maxwell's building shall be prepared prior to demolition. The
documentation shall include photographs and a written synopsis of the building's history.
21. Mandatory Findings of Significance.
Yes Mavbe No
a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, sub-
stantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self sustaining levels,threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or
animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or
prehistory? _ _ X
b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term,to the disadvantage of
long-term,environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which
occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long-term impacts will
endure well into the future.) _ _ X
c. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited,but cumulatively consid-
erable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on
each resource is relatively small,but where the effect of the total of those impacts
on the environment is significant.) _ _ X
d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? _ _ X
DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
❑ I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the
environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
10 I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the
mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the
project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED.
❑ I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment,
and an E ONNIENTAL ACT REPORT is required.
/� - 3 ,1
Signature Date
For: City o ntington Beach. Community Development
f\� Format Reviscd: September, 1993
Environmental Checklist Page 10 EA 94-12
Mitigation Measures
1_Historical documentation of the Maxwell's building shall be prepared prior to demolition. The
documentation shall include photographs and a written synopsis of the buildings history.
Environmental Checklist Page 11 EA 94-12
Responses to Comments
Negative Declaration No. 94-12
I. INTRODUCTION
This document serves as the Response to Comments on the Negative Declaration No. 94-12.
This document contains all information available in the public record related to the Negative
Declaration as of Wednesday, December 28, 1994 and responds to comments in accordance with
Section 15088 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.
This document contains six sections. In addition to this Introduction, these sections are Public
Participation and Review, Comments, Responses to Comments, Errata to the Draft Negative
Declaration, and Appendix.
The Public Participation section outlines the methods the City of Huntington Beach has used to
provide public review and solicit input on the Negative Declaration. The Comments section
contains those written comments received from agencies, groups, organizations, and individuals
as of Wednesday, December 28, 1994. The Response to Comments section contains individual
responses to each comment.
It is the intent of the City of Huntington Beach to include this document in the official public
record related to the Negative Declaration. Based on the information contained in the public
record the decision makers will be provided with an accurate and complete record of all
information related to the environmental consequences of the project.
II. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION AND REVIEW
The City of Huntington Beach notified all responsible and interested agencies and interested
groups, organizations, and individuals that a Negative Declaration had been prepared for the
proposed project. The City also used several methods to solicit input during the review period for
the preparation of the Negative Declaration. The following is a list of actions taken during the
preparation, distribution, and review of the Negative Declaration.
l. A cover letter and copies of the Negative Declaration were filed with the State Clearinghouse on
December 5, 1994. The State Clearinghouse assigned Clearinghouse Number 94121005 to the
proposed project. A copy of the cover letter and the State Clearinghouse distribution list is
available for review and inspection at the City of Huntington Beach, Planning Department, 2000
Main Street, Huntington Beach, California 92648.
2. An official thirty (30) day public review period for the Negative Declaration was established by
the State Clearinghouse. It began on Monday, December 5, 1994 and ended on Wednesday,
January 4, 1995. Public comment letters were accepted by the City of Huntington Beach through
Wednesday, January 11, 1995.
f�D
3. Notice of the Negative Declaration was published in the Huntington Beach Independent on
Thursday, November 24, 1994. Upon request, copies of the document were distributed to
agencies, groups, organizations, and individuals.
III. COMMENTS
Copies of all written comments received as of Wednesday, January 11, 1994 are contained in
Appendix A of this document. All comments have been numbered and are listed on the following
pages. All comments from letters received have been retyped verbatim in a comment-response
format for clarity. Responses to Comments for each comment which raised an environmental
issue are contained in this document.
IV. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
The Negative Declaration No. 94-12 was distributed to responsible agencies, interested groups,
organizations, and individuals. The report was made available for public review and comment for
a period of thirty (30) days. The public review period for the Negative Declaration established by
the City commenced on November 28, 1994.
Copies of all documents received as of January 11, 1995 are contained in Appendix A of this
report. Comments have been numbered with responses correspondingly numbered. Responses
are presented for each comment which raised a significant environmental issue.
Several comments to not address the completeness or adequacy of the Negative Declaration, do
not raise significant environmental issues, or request additional information. A substantive
response to such comments is not appropriate within the context of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA). Such comments are responded to with a "comment acknowledged"
reference. This indicates that the comment will be forwarded to all appropriate decision makers
for their review and consideration.
HBEB-1
Comment:
Environmental assessment form no. 94-12 pertains to the demolishing of the 19,000 square foot
two story existing Maxwell's building and the construction of a 31,000 square foot three story
building. The City of Huntington Beach Environmental Board has received and reviewed the
above referenced project.
Response:
Comment states project description for project identification purposes and does not require any
substantive response.
HBEB-2
Comment:
The Environmental Board concurs that a negative declaration may be the appropriate level of
environmental review for this project when the hazardous material is addressed. In addition to the
areas of concern addressed in the environmental assessment form, the Board feels that the
following issues need to be addressed further and clarified:
Response:
Comment states Environmental Board's concurrence that a Negative Declaration is the
appropriate level of environmental review for the project, provided several issues are addressed.
Comment acknowledged and will be forwarded to decision makers prior to action on the
proposed project.
HBEB-3
Comment:
1. This project is asking for a variance for three feet. Although the existing building is the same
as the request, that is, 28 feet, the problem of setting precedent for variances is established.
Response:
Comment states granting of the height variance may set a precedent for future development.
Comment acknowledged and will be forwarded to decision makers prior to action on the
proposed project.
HBEB-4
Comment:
2. No mention was given to the amount of time needed for demolition or construction of the new
Maxwell's. Because of the location, that is the limitation of the access of the beach,
mitigation measures should be in place.
Response:
The project's 8-12 month construction phase, was identified in Section 2, however was not
addressed in the circulation section. The recommendation that mitigation to assure access to the
beach has been included in the errata.
HBEB-5
Comment:
3. The existing Maxwell's was built before the concern of hazardous materials. No mention of
how these materials, especially asbestos, were to be handled during the demolition.
Response:
The removal of any hazardous material shall comply with Federal, State and local standards.
Removal of asbestos will be required to comply with South Coast Air Quality Management
District requirements and Huntington Beach Building Division standards. With implementation of
standard conditions of approval regarding the removal of hazardous materials, no adverse impact
is anticipated.
HBEB-6
Comment:
4. References made to page 9 on aesthetics states that the new design will reduce.the bulk of the
building, a real plus, but at the cost of cutting into the bluff. There is no mention of how this
will be done or the affect on the stability of the area.
Response:
The comment implies a relationship between building bulk and cutting into the bluff. Building
bulk is not impacted as a result of the increased floor area on the lower level. The bulk of the
proposed building involves the primary design element located at the center (entry) of the
building. The construction of the retaining wall on the lower level will be required to comply with
Building Division and Public Works Department standards. Comment acknowledged and will be
forwarded to decision makers prior to action on the proposed project.
HBEB-7
Comment:
5. No mention was given to water runoff from the new building and surrounding area and its
mitigation.
Response:
Water runoff from the proposed building will either sheet-flow across the bike/ped path onto the
sand or into the existing storm drain system in the parking lots which empties onto the sand at
First and Sixth Streets. No mitigation has been recommended. Comment acknowledged and will
be forwarded to decision makers prior to action on the proposed project.
HBEB-8
Comment:
6. Reference on page 3 of earth states that the excess soil will be disposed "at approved sites."
The connotation is at paid facilities that well take the soil. Has any thought been given to
areas within the city that need soil or the sale of the soil itself.
Response:
The City requires applicant's to comply with soil disposal at approved locations. However, the
City has not established a purchase/sale program with property owners potentially requesting to
buy or sell soil. Comment acknowledged and will be forwarded to decision makers prior to action
on the.proposed project.
HBEB-9
Comment:
7. Reference on page 4 of water states that flood insurance nor floodproofing is required, but
does not state if there is any other type of insurance that is required, especially with having
part of the building into the bluff.
Response:
The initial study indicates the property is not within the floodzone and therefore, does not require
flood insurance nor floodproofing. However, the applicant will have the option to obtain flood or
any other insurance desired. Comment acknowledged and will be forwarded to decision makers
prior to action on the proposed project.
HBEB-10
Comment:
8. Reference on page 7 of transportation/circulation states that 27 additional parking spaces have
been added for the plaza with a total of 634 parking spaces for the Plaza and Maxwell's. It
was not stated if this is adequate for the enlargement of Maxwell's or how many spaces are
required by code for a restaurant. There is a concern of traffic and congestion, particularly
when there is an event, being the location of the beach and end of Main Street, the flow of
traffic is imperative.
Response:
The restaurant requires 234 parking spaces be provided where 634 are available in parking lots
north and south of the pier. With the combination of uses in the downtown area, and the fact that
the Maxwell's building may not be the primary destination, adequate parking will be provided.
The existing driveway into the Maxwell's parking lot directly across Main Street will be closed to
emergency vehicles only. Access to the Maxwell's parking lot will be provided from a new
driveway south of Maxwell's. The new access was reviewed and approved as part of the Pier
Plaza improvement project. Comment acknowledged and will be forwarded to decision makers
prior to action on the proposed project.
HBEB-11
Comment:
9. Reference on the last page to 78 lights at 15 feet in height. This type of lighting creates a
highly commercial atmosphere and a concern for safety. A consideration for flood lights
should be considered.
Response:
The comment refers to 78 lights within the Plaza area. Plaza lighting was reviewed and approved
as part of the Pier Plaza improvement project. The concern was to minimize light and glare
impacts to adjacent properties, residences, and to motorist driving on Pacific Coast Highway.
Flood lighting was considered, but decided against. Comment acknowledged and will be
forwarded to decision makers prior to action on the proposed project.
HBEB-12
Comment:
General Comment: The Environmental Board believes No. 94-12 is superficial and is inadequate
as presented to make a determination and requests a new neg. dec. It is possible that an EIR may
be required eg. based on hazardous material, there is not enough material to make an assessment.
There should be a date specified as to when this action may take place. Please report this
response to the Environmental Board directly.
Response.
The comments received by the Environmental Board have been addressed in the errata, or by
implementation of standard conditions of approval on the project. The amendments to the
environmental checklist will not result in any significant environmental impacts that could not be
mitigated to a level of insignificance. Therefore, circulation of an amended Draft Negative
Declaration is not necessary. Comment acknowledged and will be forwarded to decision makers
prior to action on the proposed project.
HBEB-13
Comment:
If you have any questions or concerns regarding our comments, please contact Jerri Hesprich,
Chairperson or the Review Subcommittee.
Response:
Comment acknowledged and will be forwarded to decision makers prior to action on the
proposed project.
DOT-1
Comment:
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed project located at 317 Pacific Coast
Highway. Caltrans District 12 is a responsible agency and has the following comments
concerning the proposed project along Pacific Coast Highway:
Response:
Comment acknowledged and will be forwarded to decision makers prior to action on the
proposed project.
DOT-2
Comment:
1. No road work that interferes with public traffic shall be performed from 6 AM to 9 AM and
from 3 PM to 6 PM, Monday through Friday;
2. Applicant is responsible to keep Pacific Coast Highway free from dirt and debris caused by
construction and hauling material from and/or to the project site;
3. Applicant is responsible to maintain the existing road-side signs along Pacific Coast Highway
during construction;-and
4. Any work in State right of way will require an encroachment permit.
Please continue to keep us informed on this project. If you have any questions, please don not
hesitate to contact Tony Malayeri at (714) 756-4924.
Response:
Comments state various Caltrans requirements which have been incorporated into the suggested
conditions of approval. Comment acknowledged and will be forwarded to decision makers prior
to action on the proposed project.
�S`
V. ERRATA TO DRAFT NEGATIVE DECLARATION
The following changes to the Draft Negative Declaration and Initial Study Checklist are as noted
below. The changes to the Draft Negative Declaration as they relate to issues contained within
this errata sheet do not affect the overall conclusions of the environmental document. The
changes are identified by the comment reference.
Subsequent to completion and circulation of the Draft Negative Declaration, the applicant
informed staff that the proposed water usage for the new building will be approximately 18,000
gallons per day, which is a 6000 gallon per day increase from the 12,000 gallons utilized by the
existing building per day.
In addition, comments received from the Huntington Beach Environmental Board, specifically
involving runoff from the building, access to the beach during construction, and the removal of
hazardous materials, have all been addressed in the errata.
The following revisions to the original checklist were completed to address the modified water
usage and Huntington Beach Environmental Board comments:
0 Water, pg. 4 (item 3h):
Yes Maybe NO
Will the proposal result in:
h. Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? X
Discussion:
There will be no increase in the amount surface runoff as a result of the proposed building. All
runoff will either sheet-flow across the bike/ped path and onto the sand, or discharge into the
storm drain system which empties onto the sand at First and Sixth Streets.
The proposed project will require the installation of new water lines.in conjunction with the new
construction. The new building is anticipated to use approximately 18,000 gallons of water per
day, compared with the existing use of approximately 12,000 gallons per day. The increase in the
amount of water is attributed to the increased restaurant and bar area and the new public
restrooms. With the proposed conservation measures, including the use of water saver toilets,
and infrared switching at lavatories, no significant adverse impacts to the existing water supply are
anticipated. -
The project area is located with Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) Zone X which does not
require flood insurance nor floodproofing. No adverse impacts resulting from flooding or tidal
waves are anticipated
i
Transportation, page 7 (item 13d):
Discussion:
The proposed restaurant building will generate approximately 300 vehicular trips to the
downtown/pier area, which is approximately 50 trips greater than what the current restaurant
generates. The redesigned parking lots north and south of the pier, approved as part of Pier
Plaza, will provide a total of 634 parking spaces for the Pier Plaza and Maxwell's building, which
is a net increase of 27 parking spaces from the existing parking layout.
Vehicular access to the restaurant and valet service will be relocated to the new driveway south of
the pier. The existing valet service for Maxwell's Restaurant will continue to operate with a
portion of the upper two (2) rows of parking, south of the pier designated for valet use only. The
existing Maxwell's driveway directly across Main Street will be equipped with a rolled curb
restricting vehicular access except for emergency and maintenance vehicles.
Bicycle and pedestrian access to the beach will remain open during construction. The phasing of
the entire Pier Plaza project will assure adequate parking and access to the beach remain available.
No significant adverse traffic or circulation impacts are anticipated.
Human Health, page 9 (item 17b):
Yes Mavbe " No
Will the proposal result in:
a- Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard(excluding mental health)? _ _ X
b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? X
Discussion:
The removal of any hazardous substance such as asbestos will be required to be removed and
disposed of at an approved location. With implementation of standard conditions of approval, no
impacts to human health are anticipated.
► 37
DATE: Dec. 25, 1994 "
TO: Mary Beth Ormsby DEC 2
Assistant Planner
FROM: City of Huntington Beach
Environmental Board
SUBJECT: ENTV]RONIMENTAL ASSESSI`1E\'T FORM NO. 94-12
Environmental assessment form no. 94-12 penains to the demolishing of the 19,000 square foot
iwo story existing Maxwell's building and the construct of a 31,000 square foot three story
building.
The City of Huntington Beach Environmental Board has received and reviewed the above
referenced project.
The Environmental Board concurs that a negative declaration maybe the appropriate level of
environmental review for this project when the hazardous material is address. In addition to the
areas of concern addressed in the environmental assessment form, the Board feels that the
following issues need to be addressed further and clarified:
1. This project is asking for a variance for three feet. Althouoh the existing building is the
sarne as the request, that is, 28 feet the problem of setting president for variances is established.
2. No mention \vas given to the amount of time needed for demolition or construction of the
new Maxwells. Because of the location, that is the limitation of the access of the beach,
mitigation measures should be in place. .
3. The existing \4ax\vell's was built before the concern of hazardous materials. No mention
of hoxv these materials, especially asbestos, were to be handled during the demolition.
4. References made to page 9 on aesthetics states that the new design will reduce the bulk of
the building, a real plus, but at the cost of cutting into the bluff. There is no mention of how
this will be done or the affect on the stability of the area.
5. No mention was given to water runoff from the new building and surrounding area and
its mitigation.
6. Reference on page 3 of earth states that the excess soil will be disposed "at approved
sites". The connotation is at paid facilities that will take the soil. Has any thought been given to
areas within the city that need soil or the sale of the soil itself.
7. Reference on page 4 of water states that flood insurance nor flood proofing is required,
but does not state if there is any other type of insurance that is required, especially with having
part of the building into the bluff.
e. Reference on page 7 of transportation;circulaiion states that 27 additional parking spaces
have been added for the plaza with a total of 634 parking spaces for the Plaza and Maxvvell's. It
was not stated if this is adequate for the enlargement of Maxwell's or how many spaces are
required by code for a restaurant. There is a concern of traffic and congestion, particularly when
there is an event, being the location of the beach and end of Main Street the flow of traffic is
imperative.
9. Reference on the last page to 78 lights at 15 feet in height. This type of lighting creates a
highly commercial atmosphere and a concern for safety. A consideration for flood lights should
be considered .
General Comment: The Environmental Board believes No. 94-12 is superficial and is
inadequate as presented to make a determination and requests a new neg. dec. It is possible that
an EIR may be required eg. based on hazardous material, there is not enough material to make
an assessment. There should be date specified as to when this action may take place. Please
report this response to the Environmental Board directly.
If you have any questions or concerns regarding our comments, please contact Jerri Hesprich,
Chairperson of the Review Subcommittee. y
Members of the Review Subcommittee
Jerri Hesprich, Chair
Theresa Rey
Paul Mount
William Linehan
�9
STATE OF CALIFORNIA....BUSINESS AND TRANSPORTATION AGENCY PETE WILSON,Governor
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DISTRICT 12
-a
2501 PULLMAN ST. ,•,:,
SANTA ANA, CA 92705 � ,
FAX AND MAIL
January 9, 1995
Mr. Wayne Carvalho File: IGR\CEQA
City of Huntington Beach Negative Dec.
Department of Community Services SCH # 94121005
2000 Main Street
Huntington Beach, California 92648
Subject: Negative Declaration for 317 Pacific Coast Highway Maxwell's Restaurant
building
Dear Mr. Carvalho:
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed project located at 317 Pacific
Coast Highway. Caltrans District 12 is a responsible agency and has the following comments
concerning the proposed project along Pacific Coast Highway:
1. No road work that interferes with public traffic shall be performed from 6 AM to
9 AM and from 3 PM to 6 PM, Monday through Friday;
2. Applicant is responsible to keep Pacific Coast Highway free from dirt and debris
caused by construction and hauling material from and/or to the project site.
3. Applicant is responsible to maintain the existing road-side signs along Pacific
Coast Highway during construction; and
4. Any work in State right of way will require an encroachment permit.
Mr. Wayne Carvalho
January 9, 1995
Page 2
Please continue to keep us informed on this project. If you have any
questions, please do not hesitate to contact Tony Malayeri on 714 -756-4924.
Thank you.
*Roberte , hief
Advance Planning Branch
cc: Tom Loftus, OPR.
Ron Helgeson, HDQTRS Planning
Tom Persons, HDQTRS Traffic Op.
Pat 011ervides, Traffic Op.
Dorothy Uyehara, Transp. Analysis
Judy Heyer, SP&PT.
Keith Myers, Permit
/ 7
STATE OF CALIFORNIA PETE WILSON, Governor
GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH '
1400TENTH STREET + 2, , .s� o� �-
SACRAMENTO, CA 95814 '`Y
JAN 0 9 1995
January 4 1995�
WAYNE CARVALHO
CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
2000 MAIN STREET
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648
Subject: CUP #94-25, CDP #94-10, CE #94-33-MAXWELLL'S BUILDING SCH
#: 94121005
Dear WAYNE CARVALHO:
The State Clearinghouse submitted the above named environmental
document to selected state agencies for review. The review period
is closed and none of the state agencies have comments. This
letter acknowledges that you have complied with the State
Clearinghouse review requirements for draft environmental
documents, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act.
Please call Mark Goss at (916) 445-0613 if you have any questions
regarding the environmental review process. When contacting the
Clearinghouse in this matter, please use the eight-digit State
Clearinghouse number so that we may respond promptly.
Sin er ly,
Michael Chiriatti, Jr.
Chief, State Clearinghouse
1
.%,O-TICE OF COMPLETION/TRANSMITTAL FORM See NOTEheln.•
.11ni/to: State Clearinghouse, 1400 Tenth Street,Sacramento,CA 95814 916/445-0613 SCH# 9 4 1 2 1 0 0 S
Project Title:Conditional Use Permit No.94-25,Coastal Development Permit No.94-10,Conditional Exception No 94-33
Lead.Agency: City of Huntington Beach Contact Person:Wayne Car\alho
Street Address: 2000 Main Street Phone: (714)536.5271
�Ciq: Hundrizion Beach Zip: 92648 County: Orange
,Project Location
County: Orange Cily/Ncarest Community: Huntington Beach
Cross Streets:Pacific Coast Highway and Main Street Zip:92648 Total Acres:0.39 _
�APN.:024.150-06.16 Section: 1 I Twp.:6 Range: ]1 Base:
Within 2 Miles: State Hwy-t: 1 and 39 Waterways:Pacific Ocean
Airports: N/A Railways:N/A Schools:N/A
Document Type
CEQ.A: ❑SOP ❑Supplcment'Suhscqucnt NEPA: ONO] OTHER: ❑Joint D wumrnt
❑t:arty Ceps. ❑EIR(Prior SCH-) ❑EA ❑Final Document
,K::eg Dec. ❑Other ❑Iran EIS ❑Other
❑Drat EIR ❑FONSI
Local Action Type
❑ikrrnl Plug 1pdale ❑Spwfic Plan ❑Rczonc ❑,Vutcaation
❑Gcn.-a1 Plan.Vmndmrnl ❑Master Plan ❑Prezone ❑Redecclopmcn(
❑Gwen'Pfau Elcment ❑Planned Unit Dcvelopmcnt AL9c Permit 9COasW Permit
❑COmmur.;n. Plan Mile Plan 01r d Division(Subdivision, 1900er BAR/Ahr4
Pucet Map,Traci Map,etc.)
Dctclopmcnt Type 1
I❑Residential: Units :icres ❑Water Facilities: e: D
❑Office: Sgfr._ .acres Employees ❑Transportation: pe: t0
$(Commercial: Sq.fr.Jlc7 ,cres , 1 Employees ❑Mining: line J
i/❑Induslrial: Sq.jr._ :icres Employees ❑Power: ype:!'•=' 1 s_
❑Educational: ❑Waste Treatment: vpe: S Fri
❑Recreational: ❑Hazardous Waste: e: C-E
❑Other:
Project Issues Discussed in Document
i
�L\es:hni; isual li:�lood Plain'Flooding ❑sehools'Univasitia ❑Wner Quality -
❑DAgricultural Land ❑Forst Land'Tire Huud ❑Septic S%stem C2Wata Supply,Grnundwner
W.1ir l�.:ality �Geningic/Seismic ITS crCapacity ❑R•etland Riparian
iMv' hu lovcal Him.6cal ❑\lincrals Soils Iirnstnn'Compaaion:Grading ;Rw'ildlife
Wnuu:Ztmt g\oisc WSOlid\Maxie 4(34outh inducing
erica ge AbsoMim R Population:Housing Balance 13�Toxic,-Iiazwdous ,MA d U,.
❑FCOwtnic 1OM ErFlublic SmicesTacilitics lgTratlivCirculatim )MCumulative F.trens
I❑Fiscal WeaeationTarks \'cgeution ❑oac,
Present Land Usc/Zoning/Gcneral Plan
Land Use-Existing Max%%ell's Restaurant building
Zoning- Downtown Specific Plan.District 10-FP3
General Plan-Visitor Serving Commercial
Project Description
To permit the demolition of the existing 19,000 square foot Maxwell's building,and construction of a new 31,000 square foot,three(3)
stony building for restaurant and concessionaire purposes.The request includes a variance to maintain a 28 foot height limit in lieu of
the 25 foot height limit specified under the Downtown Specific Plan(zoning).
CLEARINGHM9E CORThCTt Mark Goss -
(916) 445-0613
CXT SIR C4T SILT
ltaeourcro■ State/Oonsummar Svcs
STATE REVIYM BEGAN: I.?- - -7r-Boating —General Services
. ^l J coaxial Corr _OLA (Schools)
DEPT REV TO AGENCY: 1;L- a T r Coastal Consv Cal/EPA
Colorado Rvr Sd ARB
AGENCY R8V TO SCH I - 3c7 M _Conservation _i_CA waste Kgst Bd
LI Fish i Game — —SMRCBt--Crants
SCH COMPLIANCE I —Forestry — —SMRCBt--Delta
*AMlMMk Parks G Rec/OHP — —SWRCB:--wtr Quality
— —Reclamation SMRCB:--wtr Rights
fit!— —SCDC Reg- wQCB c
/ U
— —DMR — _DTSC/CTC -
Tth/Adlt Corrections !�
PLEASE NOTE SCH KIMM OR AL COMMINTS Bus Tranep Hous _ _Corrections
— _Aeronautics Independant Coaar
PLEA E POltRABA LATE CX7sU XT3 DIRBCTL7 _CHP ^^77 _ _Energy Comm
TO 2� IZAD AGENCY ON1Y ! Caltrans i Ire _ _NAHC
— —Trans Planning — —PUC
_ _ —Housing L Deval Santa Kn Mtn■
A(jMD/APCD: 33 (Resources: 1, —Bealth r welfare �State Lands Cci=
_ —Drinking H2O _Tahoe Rgl Plan
Kedical Waste Other: -
NOTICE OF COMPLETION/TRANSMITTAL FORM See!.'OTEbelow,
Moil lo: State Clearinghouse, 1400 Tenth Street, Sacramento, CA 95814 916/445-0613 S C H #
Project Title: Conditional Use Permit No. 94-25 Coastal Development Permit No. 94-10, Conditional Exception No. 94-33
Lead Agency: City of Huntington Beach Contact Person: Wavne Carvalho
Street Address: 2000 Main Street Phone: (714) 536-5271
City: Huntington Beach Zip: 92648 Countv: Orange
Project Location
County: Orange City/Nearest Community: Huntington Beach
Cross Streets: Pacific Coast Highwav and Main Street Zip: 92648 Total Acres: 0.39
APN.: 024-150-06.16 Section: II T%%p.: 6 Range: 11 Base:
Within 2 Miles: State Hwy*: 1 and 39 1 Waterways: Pacific Ocean
Airports: N/A Railways: N/A Schools: N/A
Document Type
CEQA: ❑NOP ❑Supplement Subsequent NEPA: ❑N•OI OTHER: ❑Joint Document
❑Earl}Cons. ❑EIR(Prior SCH=) ❑EA ❑Final Document
AN-g Dec. ❑Other ❑Draft EIS ❑Other
❑Draft EIR ❑FONSI
Local Action Type
❑General Plan Update ❑Specific Plan ❑Rezone ❑Annexation
❑General Plan Amendment ❑%1=cr Plan ❑Prezone ❑Redevelopment
❑General Plan Element ❑Planned Unit Development gUse Permit gCo&qal Permit
❑Community Plan ❑Site Plan ❑Land Division(subdivision, IROiher VAP'IAN4
Parcel Map,Tract Map,etc.)
Development Type
❑Residential: Units` Acres ❑Water Facilities: Tvpe: ?t1GD
❑Office: Sq.ft._ acres Employees ❑Transportation: Type:
Comercial: Sq ft.31 XOAcresf}%;� Employees ❑Mining: Minerol:
❑ mIndustrial: Sq.ft._ Acres Employees ❑Power: Tvpe: Notts
❑Educational: ❑Waste Treatment: Type:
❑Recreational: ❑Hazardous Waste: Type:
DOther:
Project Issues Discussed in Document
ErAestheticfVisual Flood Plain/Flooding ❑Schools/Universities ❑Water Quality
❑Agricultural Land []Forest Land/Fire Hazard ❑Septic System PWata Supply/Groundwater
1RAir Quality gGeologic)Seismic WSewer Capacity ❑Wetland/Riparian
tkchaeological/Historical ❑Minerals 1aSoils Erosion/Compaction/Grading ;R\Vildlife
1, Coastal Zone IRNoise Solid Waste 4Grow,th Inducing
PfiTainage/Absorption D??opulation/Housing Balance eToxie/Hazardous ,®,Land Use
❑Economie/Jobs IWPublic Services/Facilities 14Traffic/Circulation OCumulative Effects
❑Fiscal Mecreation/Parks gVegetation ❑Other
Present Land Use/Zoning/General Plan
Land Use-Existing Maavvell's Restaurant building
Zoning- Dowmto%Nm Specific Plan, District 10-FP3
General Plan -Visitor Serving Commercial
Project Description
To permit the demolition of the existing 19.000 square foot Ma_well's building and construction of a nets 31,000 square foot, three(3)
�1 slon,building for restaurant and concessionaire purposes. The request includes a variance to maintain a 28 foot height limit in lieu of
."� the 25 foot height limit specified under the Doa mown Specific Plan (Zoning).
i Clearinghouse Will assignidenrficonon numbers for oil neu-projecis. Ifo SC.'number alreooti-exists fora pro
;:rz•:ous dre,5 documem)Piecse fi:7 12:n.
KEY
REVIEWING AGENCIES CHECKLIST S =Document sent by lead agency
X =Document sent by SCH
✓= Suggested distribution
Resources Agencies
Boating and Watenvays State and Consumer Services
Coastal Commission General Services
V✓ Coastal Conservancy OLA(Schools)
Colorado River Board
Conservation Environmental Affairs
Fish and Game Air Resouces Board
Forestry APCD/AQMD
V Office of Historic Preservation Califonia Waste Managment Board
Parks and Recreation SWRCB: Clean Water Creants
Reclamation SWRCB: Delta Unit
S.F. Bay Conservation and
Development Commission SWRCB: Water Quality
W SRCB: Water Rights
Water Resources (DWR) Regional WQCB 4
Business. Transportation and Housing
Aeronautics. Youth and Adult Corrections
California Highway Patrol Corrections
✓ CALTRANS District 4
Department of Independent Commissions and Offices
Transportation Planning(headquarters) Energy Commission
Housing and Community Development Native American Heritage Commission
Public Utilities Commission
Food and Agriculture Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy
✓ State Lands Commission
Health and WelfareTahoe Regional Planning Agency
Health Senrices Other
Public Review Period (to be filled in by lead agency)
Staring Date 2 8� /qq v _ Ending Date D&r—E 06--R ,
Signature Date
Lead Agency (Complete if applicable): For SCH Use Only:
Consulting Firm: Date Received at SCH:
Address: Date Review Starts:
City/State/Zip Date Sent to Agencies:
Contact: Date to SCH:
Phone: Clearance Date:
Applicant: .Voles:
Address:
City/Statc/Zip:
Phonc: --1 -
LEGAL ADVERTISEMENT
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
PLANNUgG DIVISION
CITY OF HUNTPI GTON BEACH
I Notice is hereby given by the Department of Community Development, Planning Division
of the City of Huntington Beach that the following Draft Negative Declaration request has
been prepared and will be submitted to the City of Huntington Beach Planning
Commission for consideration. The Draft Negative Declaration will be available for public
review and comment for thirty (30) days commencing Monday, November 28, 1994.
Draft Negative Declaration No. 94-12 in conjunction with Conditional Use Permit No.
94-25 and Coastal Development Permit No. 94-10 analyzes the potential environmental
impacts associated with a proposal by the City of Huntington Beach, to demolish the
existing Maxwell's building located at 317 Pacific Coast Highway (@ Main Street), and
construct a•new 31,000, three story building for restaurant/concessionaire purposes.
Because the proposed Maxwell's building was not included as part of the recently
approved Pier Plaza improvement project, separate environmental review is required.
A copy of the request is on file with the Department of Community Development, City of
Huntington Beach City Hall, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California. Any
person wishing to comment of the request may do so in writing within thirty (30) days of
this notice by providing written comments to Wayne Carvalho, Assistant Planner, City of
Huntington Beach Department of Community Development, Planning Division, P.O. Box
190, Huntington Beach, CA 92648.
ATTACHMENT 4
, y9
aI-lq-1995 01:36PM YATES ASSOCIATES 1 310 4384031 P.02
----------------------- ----- ----------- -
l
I
I
I
V )
I
I
I � rn;I
I '
I
ru !
I �
_w_ I
i
i I I
;
CtNG od L443E7 FAQlTY
•. R�r�OI MLMI
Q Prae tcm Nawnr
K^lnooa MOCK exF4aN
W -�-6F'I1 YATES' HJSUIIIAT 1 310 4384031 P.63
I IL
J=T
74
:--i P%.nmus
a NORWAY
.� A ■ A MA Ta4 x �
m
c
J p
Q
F—
O
F-
+ n
_ w+ u
FWAWA%MLAW
cm
Far g
wa0r 0MLOW C� (
Oran t o s r s rlr yi�irr�VV
MOM
I
❑ Q ❑ 1
i
1 1
1 � �M bx •r j
t
roo4 �.o1c Erv�E
TNf AZ C, L-
ATTACHMENT 5
s�
1 ,
�' .,wl•,' .'�'1 •r y: I:Y,•+• �� m�'wilt �i' '�f' ---�fi1•L. ��.L�J,
14
����
S �.._ -•� Imo. �•f. n., �I' f .11. 'I/ I I l 1 may`:fii i�� \' j �' .
rye ,�� �.� � u. �■■o■ :S I►► �.+�." '. .i 3 e j - .. �....•.. -f II®,� =��\'/+ �r
In 1 `�� 11�1 11 � '�� �tNwl � �►a`'!-'.�-� •1. ,
T ' w� L ►iwnrw■ ■ua= y� F `•a!� �y� '"a► .. ,er ��l
1'J �' \■� �i'{ � I`���� S R' W u�` fll tom,-•1n .U� k 9 I'.aa'r �I� Irl' r� �iY"_.'n L.. �� 1: ..'�'':.�,�\I /.. ..
!'i u::. 1 Ilwr' C-;
9 ��►+ '� - �.. �_._I ' 1J�1 la:r.,l � 11►li to%�y �1 t 1, i (�f��,ia�� �.�� .� I •rG- •�. 1 ;.
�I / •y, +, �K . '�' a) Y'. �4,tj �� i •I 1h�.,� r .�_` 1� '��1nn 1' �' 1 t"I !t���' _ cI' 1_ y1 r .�y,�,II ■ .''• �d�� 1',v ,
i� 'I �!�"• 1.', ,���;,.; �1 �•, Za•1'1'I:: � i.e,�■+1 �1��■ .�l -MR
'ti_ ,. � / 1 �,�o'+�-�!; /'� R' Via► _! f � "}GIs .• d,
•',` ,ri '�'•.aY�"^.tLL�—•.�1 r9-'.,. .1 ..�./r ��tr �'A --r.—..�_r �%�I�i.•citq17,
w -
-�ca *---;'... _ —'_,�. _ ��.�r- -=�_ s D�� r'.G�_. ■.:ems ' ; ,y ._,� �j� `
4f".dr��l".."'�:,�.o;;,,,,���� ���'w��Hay. �`"` ".,y;,:.;::�� Tr•' �rp� '+Y ,��,,'� ?`y'�■+.'r_,�.�,��'�' �I 1,11i1•+I OI:.S','h"�', 'y V4.�-=A��!� r�Utr�.��:i� .--����
„yule.��yy� � � �,'�u�.My61� ti�`� �"�.sA �..• ��29r +,.w4`.�ia 1 .�`++, � 1 i4"i�l�.�, _ .4� ��,,
a'!w��"'�'��=�"l..r:u;•�.`�''{�tntp •. 4'' ^� -w1�.M'. it ZT ��✓" - '�-�iC1-;...� .� -t,1y�-,-'�y: i'r.t'�``� �`' �(1� > r -i7.e�'`.�_ '1,`;�`�/,�+h\�`�r:
• �•_...�. � � :'•�.. 2 .4 '��1 +'S'r�1". �` J�� •�.w�'y...'^� i•4•rJ.'�+(�� � �4{: L�ItV '����/�� L�:"7 / 1
v J
i
J
a' u .
n
YAT E S'
R
ASSOC.
a on m
............ .........
Z6Magbmz6;im-
t3l-
13,
r-,
_.WOW
a
MATERIALUGEND
..
02 � QJ cam.,.. �.,...,,....,.,, ,.......
: . .. -
��o�egs�' �IeYa1Zr.�n�
ATTACHMENT 6
ro
YAT E S'
ASSOC.
- _ .�iiri r„� ��p���Ma•r��T '^fit i��i 1•.:N'�"'iM 1,• iyyY�:Y� _
Ll=
• WpP�• �jypi•Ji•�:M;;%i•r..1!J�.�_':1A � 8 _ __
��:■� .s,. .�..
■■If !�—ffjlI RAII- �cu■■■ ■■■npg� ® 11'■I'�I'h■,��I�,��, ]s
i4c k
V-WrWA
J
J-
Imay. vAebhtVwf.
X
i MeAt
_ -
• / + _ - _ _
p��■��■�is,Ba■�rrrr��.. B■■a�///a ia��pa B_�_BB�r__r�■_rar�_,I
�I 'e0�■■i��'1�'��I�■■1�1 �7���iiii��iv� ��j �1li■■I11�I�i1��l�l��ll,I"Ilili
�IE:11I�ii:��ILJi�ii�i�i'�Ii�B�� ii ..■�...■ * �i�s-------
YAT
Il fi-a_if_tJs:DJ�I r P�i'l1dLl�ai�l �l U Inu<+i1�n d n,� V'u�i uat ILIt l ��ll a u u 1 1 �-
■i �ii' ii� Til��1�� ES.
---- _- - - ASSOC.
ATTACHMENT 7
�9
b
d
ASSOC.
BEACH = _ _ PCH
G
t TTIo pM�N6 IKM NI,i- rJ
1 CIl9I1Ni�IR'�M11 G.25T �L4.,v
fro.n,n y.v,.� (•) .— IrLL r
�7 u
- 'DAW�m 2 TL CTRI GRdA+b ent�G Qm
n,rs+aa a,n �C �
�T.,.A O
VIEW SOUTH OF BUILDING FACING NORTH TOWARD PIER
K
CnEWIf NCR �IIt ❑ El El R-�-
MnIN [A'rROY
CI�M1
Btl-OWVGRADE %
To,fl,.nLLR. IL,.4
®�E.J+y IhJNy� LONbINDIN/L VIEW STANDING ON PCH FACING THE OCEAN - •
���O r , • _W (� MAR 0 8 1995
i
ASSOC.
77 .
__- --_ __O_ _ O d
® �
�i ie ♦2.� ® ® -
MAR 0 8 M5
ATTACHMENT 8
ATTACHMENT NO. 8
FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 94-25/
COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 94-10
AND
FINDINGS FOR DENIAL FOR
CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 94-33
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL- CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 94-25:
1. Conditional Use Permit No. 94-25 for the construction of a new 31,000 square foot, three (3) story
restaurant and banquet facility will not be detrimental to:
a. The general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity. The new restaurant building will
operate with similar hours as the existing uses. In addition, the new building will comply with all
provisions of the Downtown Specific Plan, including the 25 foot height limit measured from the top
of the pier.
b. Property and improvements in the vicinity of such use or building. With the conditions imposed,
the new restaurant building will be provided with the necessary infrastructure and improvements,
minimizing impacts of services to surrounding properties.
2. The proposed project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the City's General Plan and Land
Use Map designation of Visitor Serving Commercial by providing beach related facilities for visitors,
while maintaining pedestrian oriented access in and around the pier area.
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL- COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 94-10:
1. The request for a new 31,000 square foot, three (3) story restaurant and banquet facility
conforms with the plans, policies, requirements and standards of the Coastal Element of the
General Plan. The proposed restaurant and banquet facility will not negatively impact public
views or access. The height of the restaurant building will be reduced to the 25 foot height
limit for District 10 of the Downtown Specific Plan. In addition, the new restaurant building
will provide additional visitor serving commercial uses in conjunction with the previously
approved Pier Plaza improvement project
2. Coastal Development Permit No. 94-10 is consistent with the CZ suffix zoning requirements,
the Downtown Specific Plan, as well as other provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance
Code applicable to the property, with the exception of the requested height variance. The
proposed restaurant building conforms with the Downtown Specific Plan, District 10, by
providing new pier-related commercial uses.
Attachment-9/25/95 (PCSR113-1)
• •
3. The proposed project will be provided with infrastructure in a manner that is consistent with the
Coastal Element of the General Plan. Improvements to public utilities will be provided to the
new restaurant building.
4. The proposed improvements conforms with the public access and public recreation policies of Chapter
3 of the California Coastal Act. The new restaurant building will enhance commercial opportunities in
conjunction with the pier related activities by providing a larger dining and banquet facility.
FINDINGS FOR DENIAL-CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION (VARIANCE) NO. 94-33
1. The granting of a Conditional Exception (Variance)No. 94-33 for a maximum 28 foot building height
will constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent upon other properties in the vicinity and under
the identical zone classification. There are no height variances granted for habitable floor area within
District No. 10 of the Downtown Specific Plan.
2. There are no special circumstances or conditions applicable to the subject property, including size,
shape, topography, location or surroundings, which are found to deprive the subject property of
privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under identical zone classifications. The
proposed building does not warrant a height variance based on the size, location or surroundings of the
property.
3. The granting of a Conditional Exception(Variance)No. 94-33 for a 28 foot building height is not
necessary in order to preserve the enjoyment of one or more substantial property rights. The building
can be constructed under the height limit without compromising design.
4. The granting of Conditional Exception (Variance)No. 94-33 will be materially detrimental to the
public health, safety and welfare, or injurious to the property in the same zone classification. A 28 foot
building further impact public views than a 25 foot high building.
5. The granting of Conditional Exception No. 94-33 for a 28 foot building height will adversely affect the
General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach. The proposed project is not consistent with the goals
and objectives of the City's General Plan and Downtown Specific Plan.
SUGGESTED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL- CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 94-25/
COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 94-10:
1. The site plan and floor plans received and dated October 13, 1994, and the revised elevations received
and dated March 10, 1995 shall be the conceptually approved layout.
2. Prior to submittal for building permits, the applicant/owner shall complete the following:
a. The applicant shall receive final approval of building colors by the Design Review Board.
Attachment-9/25/95 (PCSR113-2)
b. Depict all utility apparatus, such as but not limited to back flow devices and Edison transforms, on
the site plan. They shall be prohibited in the front and exterior yard setbacks unless properly
screened by landscaping or other method as approved by the Community Development Director.
The markings, indicating the size, model number and serial number shall be permanently affixed to
the body of the backflow device and must remain visible after painting.
c. If foil-type insulation is to be used, a fire retarding type shall be installed as approved by the
Building Department and indicated on the floor plans.
d. All rooftop mechanical equipment shall be screened from any view. Said screening shall be
architecturally compatible with the building in terms of materials and colors. If screening is not
designed specifically into the building, a rooftop mechanical equipment plan must be submitted
showing screening and must be approved.
e. The site plan shall include (or reference page) all conditions of approval imposed on the project
printed verbatim.
3. Prior to demolition, the applicant/owner shall complete the following:
a. Historical documentation of the Maxwell's building shall be completed. The documentation shall
include photographs and a written synopsis of the building's history. Copies of all documentation
shall be submitted to the Department of Community Development for inclusion in the file.
b. Excess soils shall be removed and disposed of at an approved location.
4. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant/owner shall complete the following:
a. A Landscape Construction Set must be submitted to the Departments of Community Development
and Public Works and must be approved. The Landscape Construction Set shall include a
landscape plan prepared and signed by a State Licensed Landscape Architect and which includes all
proposed/existing plan materials (location, type, size, quantity), an irrigation plan, a grading plan,
an approved site plan, and a copy of the entitlement conditions of approval. The landscape plans
shall be in conformance with Section 9607 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance code. The set must
be approved by both departments prior to issuance of building permits.
b. A grading plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and it must be
approved (by issuance of a grading permit). A plan for silt control for all water runoff from the
property during construction and initial operation of the project may be required if deemed
necessary by the Director of Public Works.
c. The major identification sign shall be removed or altered to comply with Chapter 233.
Attachment-9/25/95 (PCSR113-3)
5. Public Works Department requirements are as follows:
a. The developer shall abandon the existing six inch (6") fire service at the point of connection on the
existing eight inch (8")water main and remove the existing six inch(6")backflow device and vault.
Any new fire service shall be constructed per Water Division Standard Plan No. 618.
b. The proposed building shall have a separate domestic water service, sized per the Uniform
Plumbing Code and Water Division Standard Plans. Backflow protection is required per Water
Division Standard Plan No. 609. The existing domestic water service shall be abandoned.
6. Fire Department requirements are as follows:
a. An automatic fire sprinkler system shall be approved and installed pursuant to Fire Department
regulations.
b. A Class III wet standpipe system(combination) shall be installed pursuant to Fire Department and
Uniform Building Code standards.
c. A fire alarm system shall be installed to comply with Fire Department and Uniform Fire Code
standards. The system shall provide 1) manual pulls, 2)Water flow, valve tamper and trouble
detection, 3) 24 hour supervision, 4) Annunciation, 5) Audible alarms, and 6) Voice
Communication.
d. Fire extinguishers shall be provided in number and at locations specified by the Fire Department.
e. Two (2) fire hydrants shall be installed prior to combustible construction at locations specified by
the Fire Department.
f. Service roads and fire lanes, as determined by the Fire Department, shall be posted and marked.
g. Address numbers shall be installed to comply with City Specification No. 428.
h. Exit signs and exit path markings shall be provided in compliance with the Huntington Beach Fire
Code and Title 24 of the California Administrative Code. These include low level exit signs.
i. The project shall comply with all provisions of the Huntington Beach Fire Code and City
Specification No. 422 and 431 for the abandonment of oil wells and site restoration.
j. The project shall comply with all provisions of Huntington Beach Municipal Code Title 17.04.085
and City Specification No. 429 for new construction within the methane gas overlay districts.
7. All building spoils, such a unusable lumber, wire, pipe, and other surplus or unusable material, shall be
disposed of at an off-site facility equipped to handle them.
i v7
Attachment-9/25/95 (PCSR113-4)
8. During construction, the applicant shall:
a. Use water trucks or sprinkler systems in all areas where vehicles travel to keep damp enough to
prevent dust raised when leaving the site;
b. Wet down areas in the late morning and after work is completed for the day;
c. Use low sulfur fuel (.05%) by weight) for construction equipment;
d. .Attempt to phase and schedule construction activities to avoid high ozone days (first stage smog
alerts);
e. Discontinue construction during second stage smog alerts.
9. Prior to final building permit approval or issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the following shall be
completed:
a. The applicant shall obtain the necessary permits from the South Coast Air Quality Management
District and submit a copy to Community Development Department.
b. All signs shall be brought into compliance with the Huntington Beach Sign Code (Chapter 233).
c. All improvements (including landscaping) to the property shall be completed in accordance with the
approved plans and conditions of approval specified herein.
d Compliance with all conditions of approval specified herein shall be accomplished.
10. The Planning Commission reserves the right to revoke Conditional Use Permit No. 94-25, Coastal
Development Permit No. 94-10 and Conditional Exception No. 94-33 if any violation of these
conditions or the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code occurs.
11. Conditional Use Permit No. 94-25, Coastal Development Permit No. 94-10 and Conditional Exception
No. 94-33 shall become null and void unless exercised within one (1)year of the date of final approval,
or such extension of time as may be granted by the Planning Commission pursuant to a written request
submitted to the Planning Division a minimum 30 days prior to the expiration date.
CODE REOUHZEMENTS:
1. All applicable Public Works fees shall be paid.
2. The developer shall be responsible for the payment of the Traffic Impact Fees at the time of final
inspection.
3. Construction shall be limited to Monday- Saturday 7:00 AM to 8:00 PM. Construction shall be
prohibited Sundays and Federal holidays.
l
t
Attachment-9/25/95 (PCSR113-5)
• •
4. The development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance,
Building Division, and Fire Department.
5. The applicant shall meet all applicable local, State and Federal Fire Codes, Ordinances, and standards.
6. All signage shall comply with the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance.
I
J
Attachment-9/25/95 (PCSR113-6)
ATTACHMENT 9
B-2 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 94-25/COASTAL DEVELOPMENT
PERMIT NO. 94-10/CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION (VARIANCE) NO. 94-
33/NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 94-12:
APPLICANT: City of Huntington Beach, Department of Community Services,
2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, CA 92648
LOCATION: 317 Pacific Coast Highway(Maxwell's Restaurant Building)
Conditional Use Permit No. 94-25, Coastal Development Permit No. 94-10, Conditional
Exception (Variance)No. 94-33 and Negative Declaration No. 94-12 represent a request
by the City of Huntington Beach Department of Community Services, to demolish the
existing Maxwell's building and permit the construction of a new, 31,000 square foot,
three (3) story restaurant with banquet facility. The proposal includes a variance to
maintain the overall 28 foot building height in lieu of the code required 25 foot height limit
measured from the top of pier. Because the proposed Maxwell's building was not
submitted in conjunction with the review and approval of the Pier Plaza improvement
project, the proposed building requires separate review and approval.
The proposed Maxwell's building is designed to be compatible with the other commercial
structures across Pacific Coast Highway. The size of the proposed building will increase
from approximately 19,000 to 31,000 square feet (63%). The footprint of the building
will remain within the site description of the lease premises, and therefore will not require
a Measure C vote (Huntington Beach City Charter Section 612).
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve the new restaurant with banquet
facility, and the variance for exceeding the 25 foot height limit based upon the following:
The use is compatible with surrounding land uses and is consistent with the goals and
policies contained in the Land Use and Coastal Elements of the General Plan, and
Downtown Specific Plan.
The proposed 28 foot building height will not impact public views as the proposed
building will be constructed at the same 28 foot building height as the existing
restaurant building.
The proposed restaurant building will not impact public views or access to the beach.
The parking and access to the proposed restaurant building has been reviewed during
processing of the Pier Plaza improvement project (Coastal Development Permit No.
93-24 and Conditional Use Permit No. 93-40), which found that adequate parking
would be provided for the proposed uses, including the new Maxwell's building.
The design of the proposed building will be architecturally compatible with structures
in the immediate vicinity, including Pierside Pavilion and Oceanview Promenade.
1 PC Minutes- 1/24/95 3 (PCM022)
Ron Hagan, Director of Community Services and Jim Engle, Community Services, gave a
brief presentation to Commission.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED.
THERE WERE NO PERSONS PRESENT TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE
REQUEST AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
Discussion ensued regarding the height of the buildings and the exact points of
measurement. Commissioners Biddle and Kerins stated that could not support the height
variance for the project.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD, SECOND BY TILLOTSON, TO
APPROVE NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 94-12, BY THE FOLLOWING
VOTE:
AYES: Biddle, Livengood, Gorman, Inglee, Kerins, Tillotson, Speaker
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
MOTION PASSED
A MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD, SECOND BY SPEAKER TO
APPROVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 94-25, COASTAL
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 94-10 AND CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION
(VARIANCE) NO. 94-33 WITH FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL,
BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Livengood, Gorman, Inglee, Tillotson, Speaker
NOES: Biddle, Kerins
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
MOTION PASSED
PC Minutes- 1/24/95 4 (PCM022) ^
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL- CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 94-25:
1. Conditional Use Permit No. 94-25 for the construction of a new 31,000 square foot,
three (3) story restaurant and banquet facility will not be detrimental to:
a. The general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity. The new
restaurant building will operate with similar hours as the existing uses. In addition,
the new building will not exceed the overall height of the existing building.
b. Property and improvements in the vicinity of such use or building. With the
conditions imposed, the new restaurant building will be provided with the
necessary infrastructure and improvements, minimizing impacts of services to
surrounding properties.
2. The proposed project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the City's General
Plan and Land Use Map designation of Visitor Serving Commercial by providing
beach related facilities for visitors, while maintaining pedestrian oriented access in and
around the pier area.
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL- COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 94-10:
1. The request for a new 31,000 square foot, three (3) story restaurant and
banquet facility conforms with the plans, policies, requirements and standards
of the Coastal Element of the General Plan. The proposed restaurant and
banquet facility will not negatively impact public views or access. The new
restaurant building will provide additional visitor serving commercial uses in
conjunction with the previously approved Pier Plaza improvement project.
2. Coastal Development Permit No. 94-10 is consistent with the CZ suffix zoning
requirements, the Downtown Specific Plan, as well as other provisions of the
Huntington Beach Ordinance Code applicable to the property, with the
exception of the requested height variance. The proposed restaurant building
conforms with the Downtown Specific Plan, District 10, providing new pier-
related commercial uses.
3. The proposed project will be provided with infrastructure in a manner that is
consistent with the Coastal Element of the General Plan. Improvements to
public utilities will be provided to the new restaurant building.
4. The proposed improvements conforms with the public access and public recreation
policies of Chapter 3 of the California Coastal Act. The new restaurant building will
enhance commercial opportunities in conjunction with the pier related activities by
providing a larger dining and banquet facility.
PC Minutes- 1/24/95 5 (PCM022)
y
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL- CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION (VARIANCE)
NO. 94-33:
1. The granting of a Conditional Exception(Variance)No. 94-33 for a maximum 28 foot
building height will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent upon other
properties in the vicinity and under the identical zone classification. In order to
provide an architectural design compatible with commercial buildings across Pacific
Coast Highway, it is necessary to exceed the maximum building height.
2. Because there are special circumstances or conditions applicable to the subject
property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, the strict
application of the Zoning Ordinance is found to deprive the subject property of
privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under identical zone
classifications. The proposed building will remain in the same location as the existing
restaurant building, and will maintain the same 28 foot height.
3. The granting of a Conditional Exception (Variance)No. 94-33 for a 28 foot building
height is necessary in order to preserve the enjoyment of one or more substantial
property rights. The variance will allow relief in development standards in order to
provide a compatible design with commercial buildings across Pacific Coast Highway.
4. The granting of Conditional Exception (Variance)No. 94-33 will not be materially
detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare, or injurious to the property in the
same zone classification. The 28 foot building height will not reduce public views and
access, but will increase access and view opportunities on the plaza, open patio areas
and around the building. In addition, the new building will provide additional
recreational opportunities in conjunction with the beach and pier uses.
5. 'The granting of Conditional Exception No. 94-33 for a 28 foot building height will not
adversely affect the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach. The proposed
project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the City's General Plan and Land
Use Map designation of Visitor Serving Commercial by providing visitor serving uses
in and around the pier area, and improving visitor access to the beach.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL- CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 94-25/
COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 94-10 /CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION
(VARIANCE) NO. 94-33:
1. The site plan, floor plans, and elevations received and dated October 13, 1994 shall be
the conceptually approved layout.
PC Minutes- 1/24/95 6 (PCM022)
v �
2. Prior to submittal for building permits, the applicant/owner shall complete the
following:
a. The applicant shall receive final approval of building colors by the Design Review
Board.
b. Depict all utility apparatus, such as but not limited to back flow devices and
Edison transforms, on the site plan. They shall be prohibited in the front and
exterior yard setbacks unless properly screened by landscaping or other method as
approved by the Community Development Director. The markings, indicating the "
size, model number and serial number shall be permanently affixed to the body of
the backflow device and must remain visible after painting.
c. If foil-type insulation is to be used, a fire retarding type shall be installed as
approved by the Building Department and indicated on the floor plans.
d. All rooftop mechanical equipment shall be screened from any view. Said screening
shall be architecturally compatible with the building in terms of materials and
colors. If screening is not designed specifically into the building, a rooftop
mechanical equipment plan must be submitted showing screening and must be
approved.
e. The site plan shall include (or reference page) all conditions of approval imposed
on the project printed verbatim.
f. The applicant owner shall demonstrate how 35 additional parking spaces-will be
provided to offset the proposed floor area for the restaurant. The applicant may
take the following options:
1. Revise plans depicting 35 additional spaces;
2. Joint use of parking;
3. Identify and guarantee use of parking spaces off-site; or
4. Reduce the size of the building or area of intensity of uses within the building.
3. Prior to demolition, the applicant/owner shall complete the following:
a. Historical documentation of the Maxwell's building shall be completed. The
documentation shall include photographs and a written synopsis of the building's
history. Copies of all documentation shall be submitted to the Department of
Community Development for inclusion in the file.
b. Excess soils shall be removed and disposed of at an approved location.
\ PC Minutes- 1/24/95 7 (PCM022)
r;
4. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant/owner shall complete the following:
a. A Landscape Construction Set must be submitted to the Departments of
Community Development and Public Works and must be approved. The
Landscape Construction Set shall include a landscape plan prepared and signed by
a State Licensed Landscape Architect and which includes all proposed/existing
plan materials (location, type, size, quantity), an irrigation plan, a grading plan, an
approved site.plan, and a copy of the entitlement conditions of approval. The
landscape plans shall be in conformance with Section 9607 of the Huntington
Beach Ordinance code. The set must be approved by both departments prior to
issuance of building permits.
b. A grading plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review
and it must be approved (by issuance of a grading permit). A plan for silt control
for all water runoff from the property during construction and initial operation of
the project may be required if deemed necessary by the Director of Public Works.
c. The major identification sign shall be removed or altered to comply with Chapter
233.
5. Public Works Department requirements are as follows:
a. The developer shall abandon the existing six inch (6") fire service at the point of
connection on the existing eight inch (8") water main and remove the existing six
inch (6") backflow device and vault. Any new fire service shall be constructed per
Water Division Standard Plan No. 618.
-b. The proposed building shall have a separate domestic water service, sized per the
Uniform Plumbing Code and Water Division Standard Plans. Backflow protection
is required per Water Division Standard Plan No. 609. The existing domestic
water service shall be abandoned.
6. Fire Department requirements are as follows:
a. An automatic fire sprinkler system shall be approved and installed pursuant to Fire
Department regulations.
b. A Class III wet standpipe system (combination) shall be installed pursuant to Fire
Department and Uniform Building Code standards.
c. A fire alarm system shall be installed to comply with Fire Department and Uniform
Fire Code standards. The system shall provide 1) manual pulls, 2)Water flow,
valve tamper and trouble detection, 3) 24 hour supervision, 4) Annunciation, 5)
Audible alarms, and 6) Voice Communication.
PC Minutes- 1/24/95 8 (PCM022)
d. Fire extinguishers shall be provided in number and at locations specified by the Fire
Department.
e. Two (2) fire hydrants shall be installed prior to combustible construction at
locations specified by the Fire Department.
f Service roads and fire lanes, as determined by the Fire Department, shall be posted
and marked.
g. Address numbers shall be installed to comply with City Specification No. 428.
h. Exit signs and exit path markings shall be provided in compliance with the
Huntington Beach Fire Code and Title 24 of the California Administrative Code.
These include low level exit signs.
i. The project shall comply with all provisions of the Huntington Beach Fire Code
and City Specification No. 422 and 431 for the abandonment of oil wells and site
restoration.
j. The project shall comply with all provisions of Huntington Beach Municipal Code
Title 17.04.085 and City Specification No. 429 for new construction within the
methane gas overlay districts.
7. All building spoils, such a unusable lumber, wire, pipe, and other surplus or unusable
material, shall be disposed of at an off-site facility equipped to handle them.
8. During construction, the applicant shall:
a. Use water trucks or sprinkler systems in all areas where vehicles travel to keep
damp enough to prevent dust raised when leaving the site;
b. Wet down areas in the late morning and after work is completed for the day;
c. Use low sulfur fuel (.05%) by weight) for construction equipment;
d. Attempt to phase and schedule construction activities to avoid high ozone days
(first stage smog alerts);
e. Discontinue construction during second stage smog alerts.
9. Prior to final building permit approval or issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the
following shall be completed:
a. The applicant shall obtain the necessary permits from the South Coast Air Quality
Management District and submit a copy to Community Development Department.
I PC Minutes- 1/24/95 9 (PCM022)
b. All signs shall be brought into compliance with the Huntington Beach Sign Code
(Chapter 233).
c. All improvements (including landscaping)to the property shall be completed in
accordance with the approved plans and conditions of approval specified herein.
d Compliance with all conditions of approval specified herein shall be accomplished.
10. The Planning Commission reserves the right to revoke Conditional Use Permit No. 94-
25, Coastal Development Permit No. 94-10 and Conditional Exception No. 94-33 if
any violation of these conditions or the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code occurs.
11. Conditional Use Permit No. 94-25, Coastal Development Permit No. 94-10 and
Conditional Exception No. 94-33 shall become null and void unless exercised within
one (1) year of the date of final approval, or such extension of time as may be granted
by the Planning Commission pursuant to a written request submitted to the Planning
Division a minimum 30 days prior to the expiration date.
CODE REOUIREMENTS:
1. All applicable Public Works fees shall be paid.
2. The developer shall be responsible for the payment of the Traffic Impact Fees at the
time of final inspection.
3. Construction shall be limited to Monday - Saturday 7:00 AM to 8:00 PM.
Construction shall be prohibited Sundays and Federal holidays.
4. The development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Zoning and
Subdivision Ordinance, Building Division, and Fire Department.
5. The applicant shall meet all applicable local, State and Federal Fire Codes, Ordinances,
and standards.
6. All signage shall comply with the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision
Ordinance.
PC Minutes - 1/24/95 10 (PCM022)
ATTACHMENT 10
8f
:.>::::; :.......>:::::::::>:.;::.
Hunan _6 Bea�h;De ar men#.�f.: ommixni Develfl mend::::. ::::.......
:::: :::< ::: ::::::........:.............. .............: .......:::... :::::::::::::.....:::.:...::::::::: .:::...:.::::.......... ...... .......::.: .:.:..........:......... .....
::::::::::: : ..:..:.::.:..........:::::...:::::::::::::::::: ......:: ...... :P:....:.......................... ..............::::......... :..:.:.....::::::._:P.::::..:::::::. :::::::::::
CEP.
TO: Planning Commission
Akom: Howard Zelefsky, Planning Director
BY: Wayne Carvalho, Assistant Planner
DATE: January 24, 1995
SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 94-25/COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
NO. 94-10/CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION (VARIANCE)NO. 94-3VNEGATIVE
DECLARATION NO. 94-12
LOCATION: 317 Pacific Coast Highway (Maxwell's Restaurant Building)
STATEMENT OF ISSUE:
Conditional Use Permit No. 94-25, Coastal Development Permit No. 94-10, Conditional Exception
(Variance)No. 94-33 and Negative Declaration No. 94-12 represent a request by the City of Huntington
Beach Department of Community Services, to demolish the existing Maxwell's building and permit the
construction of a new, 31,000 square foot, three (3) story restaurant with banquet facility. The proposal
includes a variance to maintain the overall 28 foot building height in lieu of the code required 25 foot
height limit measured from the top of pier. Because the proposed Maxwell's building was not submitted in
conjunction with the review and approval of the Pier Plaza improvement project, the proposed building
requires separate review and approval.
The proposed Maxwell's building is designed to be compatible with the other commercial structures
across Pacific Coast Highway. The size of the proposed building will increase from approximately 19,000
to 31,000 square feet (63%). The footprint of the building will remain within the site description of the
lease premises, and therefore will not require a Measure C vote (Huntington Beach City Charter Section
612).
-Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve the new restaurant with banquet facility, and the
variance for exceeding the 25 foot height limit based upon the following:
The use is compatible with surrounding land uses and is consistent with the goals and policies
contained in the Land Use and Coastal Elements of the General Plan, and Downtown Specific Plan.
The proposed 28 foot building height will not impact public views as the proposed building will be
constructed at the same 28 foot building height as the existing restaurant building.
The proposed restaurant building will not impact public views or access to the beach.
The parking and access to the proposed restaurant building has been reviewed during processing of the
Pier Plaza improvement project (Coastal Development Permit No. 93-24 and Conditional Use Permit
No. 93-40), which found that adequate parking would be provided for the proposed uses, including the
new Maxwell's building.
The design of the proposed building will be architecturally compatible with structures in the immediate
vicinity, including Pierside Pavilion and Oceanview Promenade.
1
.l y
< Ga
g O m MC FAD EN —
CENTER
EDINGER
I
\ HEM
WARNER
\ \ SLATER
(+ TALBERT
• 1 � c x 3
GARFTELLD
SITE
/ YORKTOWN
• ADAMSS
INDIANAPOLIS
� b
? ATLANTA
LHAIMTC HAMI TON
J
BANNING
/
,e4c'�'c �t�� •
I
1 R�
CUP 94-25/CDP 94- 10/CE 94-33
gs
HUNIINGTON BEACH PLANNING DIVISION
RECOMMENDATION:
Motion to:
"Approve Negative Declaration No. 94-12, Conditional Use Permit No. 94-25, Coastal Development
Permit No. 94-10 and Conditional Exception No. 94-33 with findings and suggested conditions of
approval."
GENERAL INFORMATION:
APPLICANT: City of Huntington Beach, Department of Community Services, 2000 Main Street
Huntington Beach, CA 92648
PROPERTY
OWNER: City of Huntington Beach, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, CA 92648
REQUEST: To permit the demolition of the existing Maxwell's Restaurant building and construction
of a new 31,000 square foot, three (3) story restaurant and banquet facility. The request
includes maintaining the 28 foot building height in lieu of a maximum 25 feet as measured
from the Pier.
DATE
ACCEPTED: November 28, 1994
SUBJECT PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING LAND USE, ZONING AND GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATIONS:
Subject Property:
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Visitor Serving Commercial
ZONE: Downtown Specific Plan - District 10
LAND USE: Maxwell's Restaurant building
North of Subject Property (across Pacific Coast Highway and Main Street):
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Visitor Serving Commercial
ZONE: Downtown Specific Plan -District 3
LAND USE: Oceanview Promenade (Commercial)
East of Subject Property (across Pacific Coast Highway):
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Visitor Serving Commercial
ZONE: Downtown Specific Plan - District 3
LAND USE: Pierside Pavilion (Commercial)
1
Staff Report- 1/24/95 2 (pcsr113)
South and West of Subiect Property:
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Recreational Open Space
ZONE: Downtown Specific Plan - District 11
LAND USE: Huntington City Beach and Municipal Pier
PROJECT PROPOSAL:
Conditional Use Permit No. 94-25 and Coastal Development Permit No. 94-10 represent a request to
demolish the existing 19,000 square foot, two (2) story Maxwell's building and construct a new 31,000
square foot, three (3) story restaurant and banquet facility pursuant to Chapter 243 of the Huntington
Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Code and Section 4.12 of the Downtown Specific Plan.
The proposed restaurant includes approximately 10,000 square feet of floor area on the lower (beach)
level, 16,000 square feet on the second(PCH) level, and 5000 square feet on the new third level. The
lower level consists of a 7,000 square foot banquet room, 2200 square foot kitchen, ancillary offices, a
wine cellar, and public restrooms, which are accessible from outside the building. The second level (PCH)
consists entirely of kitchen, dining room and bar/lounge area with approximately 3300 square feet of
outdoor patio area. The upper floor includes a 1000 square foot bar, restaurant offices, mechanical room,
and rooftop deck.
The existing individual concessions located on the beach level will be replaced with additional banquet area
and public restrooms. The main dining room and lounge for the restaurant will remain on the second level,
with an additional lounge (Crow's Nest) on the third level. The additional floor area will remain within the
leased area, avoiding a Measure C vote (Huntington Beach City Charter Section 612) by the citizens of
Huntington Beach. The new restaurant will maintain an 85 foot setback from Pacific Coast Highway and
27 feet from the sand line.
Conditional Exception (Variance) No. 94-33 is requested for a 28 foot building height, in lieu of the
maximum 25 foot height limit as measured from the pier pursuant to Section 4.12.04 of the Downtown
Specific Plan.
The maximum height of the new building will not exceed the height of the existing Maxwell's Restaurant
building. Currently, the peak of the existing building is 28 feet high, measured from the pier. The
proposed building will also be a maximum 28 feet high, measured from the pier level. However, the
primary difference is the new building includes a third level, and is designed with a flat roof. The applicant
states that during the design of the new building, an attempt was made by the architect to comply with the
25 foot height limit. However, the three (3) additional feet is essential to provide a building design
compatible with other commercial buildings across Pacific Coast Highway. The applicant further states
that the proposed 28 foot height provides the necessary flexibility for the new building's design.
The restaurant building is the final component of the Pier Plaza improvement project. On August 11, 1994
the California Coastal Commission conditionally approved the"Pier Plaza" project which consisted of a
new public plaza area, an amphitheater, a restroom and concession building north of the pier, redesign of
the parking areas north and south of the pier, new bicycle parking, and improved vehicular, bicycle,
pedestrian and handicap access in and around the pier area. A footprint of the restaurant building was
J
Staff Report- 1/24/95 3 (pcsrl13)
identified on the plan, but because the final design was not available during the Pier Plaza review, separate
review and approval by the City is required.
Zoning Compliance
This project is located in the Downtown Specific Plan -District 10 (Pier-Related Commercial) and
complies with the requirements of that zone, with the exception of the requested height variance.
The following is a zoning conformance matrix which compares the proposed project with the development
standards of Section 4.12 District 10 (Pier-Related Commercial) and Chapter 231 Off-Street Parking &
Loading Provisions of the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance:
Section Issue Existing Code Proposed Code Proposed
Requirement Requirement
4.12.02 Min. parcel size None required None required A rox. 1 acre leased
4.12.03 Max. density None None Not applicable
4.12.04 Building height Max. 25 ft. and 2 Max. 25 ft. and 2 28 ft. *, maximum 2
stories above pier stories above pier stories above pier level
level level
4.12.05 Max. site coverage None required None required Not applicable
4.12.06 Front setback None required None required 85 ft. from P.C.H.
4.12.07 Side setback None required None required 20 ft. from pier
4.12.08 Rear setback None required None required 27 ft. from sand
4.12.09 Upper story setback None required None required None
4.12.10 Open space Public access shall Public access shall Provided
be provided on and be provided on and
around pier around pier
231 (ZSO) Parking Spaces 252 252 634 (Pier Plaza total)
restaurant, banquet, includes
bar (1/100 sq. ft.) 226 (22,609 sq.ft.) 226 (22,609 sq.ft.) 62 valet spaces for
outdoor patio Maxwell's south of pier
(1/200 sq.ft.) 21 (4270 sq.ft.) 21 (4270 sq.ft.)
offices (1/250 s . ft.) 1 5 1071 s . ft. 5 1071 s . ft.
*Variance Request
ISSUES: _
General Plan Conformance:
The proposed restaurant building conforms with the General Plan Land Use Element designation of Visitor
Serving Commercial on the subject property. In addition, the proposed facility is consistent with policies
contained in the Coastal Element of the General Plan.
DT
Staff Report- 1/24/95 4 (pcsr113)
The General Plan Advisory Committee (GPAC) has recommended that the existing Visitor Serving
Commercial land use designation remain on the property, and that development provide a downtown/beach
landmark, with visitor serving commercial uses.
Environmental Status:
Pursuant to the environmental regulations in effect at this time, the Department of Community
Development advertised draft Negative Declaration No. 94-12 for a thirty (30) day period, during which
time written comments were received and responded to (see Attachment No. 4). The staff, in its initial
study of the project, has recommended that a negative declaration be issued.
During the environmental review, staff contacted the Historical Resources Board for a recommendation on
the demolition of the Maxwell's building. The Board recommended that proper documentation, including
photographs be completed prior to demolition. The Board has not recommended retaining and or
relocating the structure. The mitigation measure has been incorporated into the conditions of approval.
Prior to any action on Conditional Use Permit No. 94-25, Coastal Development Permit No. 94-10 and
Conditional Exception No. 94-33, it is necessary for the Planning Commission to review and act on
Negative Declaration No. 94-12.
Coastal Status:
The proposed project is within the appealable portion of the Coastal Zone. Coastal Development Permit
No. 94-10 is being processed concurrently with Conditional Use Permit No. 94-25 and Conditional
Exception No. 94-33 pursuant to Chapter 245 of the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision
Ordinance.
The proposed project complies with the Downtown Specific Plan and Coastal Zone requirements, and will
implement the following policies of the Coastal Element of the General Plan:
• Protect, encourage and, where feasible, provide visitor-serving facilities in the Coastal Zone that are
varied in type and price.
• Improve the appearance of visually degraded areas.
Redevelopment Status:
The project is located within the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area. The Economic Development
Department has reviewed the proposal and supports the proposed request.
Desi-en Review Board:
On August 11, 1994, the Design Review Board reviewed the design of the project as presented. The
Board recommended the Planning Commission approve the project, subject to final review of the colors by
the Design Review Board.
Subdivision Committee: Not applicable.
I � J
Staff Report- 1/24/95 5 (pcsr113)
Other Departments Concerns:
The Departments of Public Works, Police, Community Services, Economic Development and Fire, and
Building Division have reviewed the proposed project and have recommended conditions which are
incorporated into the conditions of approval.
ANALYSIS:
Land Use Compatibility
The new building will provide additional visitor serving facilities including a larger restaurant, banquet
facilities for conferences, weddings, etc., and new public bathrooms. The use is consistent with the
Huntington Beach General Plan and Zoning by providing visitor serving commercial uses in conjunction
with the other pier related activities, and recreational opportunities. Pedestrian oriented access will be
improved with the removal of the existing outdoor dining areas north of the building, resulting in a
secondary stairway from Pacific Coast Highway down to the beach.
The design of the new building will be constructed within the same building envelop as the existing
building, minimizing any impact to views and access to the beach. In fact, the design will improve view
opportunities of the ocean, and access from the beach, on the open patio areas, within the plaza, and
around the building.
The project site is located within the FIRM Zone X, not within the 100-year flood zone, thereby not
requiring elevation or floodproofing of the proposed building.
ParkinaJCirculation
The design of the new parking lots north and south of the pier provide 634 spaces for the Pier Plaza and
associated uses. The parking and access to the proposed restaurant building was previously reviewed
during the processing of Coastal Development Permit No. 93-24 and Conditional Use Permit No. 93-40
(Pier Plaza). A total of 286 spaces will be located south of the restaurant with 348 spaces north of the
pier. Parking for the restaurant is available from either of the parking lots or from the City's parking
structure on Main and Walnut. Maxwell's will continue to provide valet service in the south parking lot
with 62 designated valet spaces. The remainder of the lot will be self-parking on a first come-first serve
basis.
By code, the restaurant building is required to provide a total of 252 parking spaces. The applicant has
indicated that the building will not generate the same number of vehicle trips as the existing facility because
the concessions on both the beach and pier levels will be removed. In addition, the banquet facility on the
lower level will not be used on a daily basis. The banquet room(s) will be used for a variety of functions
including weddings, parties, art exhibits, card shows, and small meetings/conferences. The applicant
anticipates the banquet facility will be used approximately 150 days per year, either in part or entirely.
Staff feels adequate parking is provided for not only the restaurant building, but for all uses on the pier, and
within the pier plaza.
1
D
Staff Report- 1/24/95 6 (pcsr113)
It should also be noted that due to the mix of downtown uses, the Maxwell's building may not be the
primary point of destination. Rather than park in the Pier Plaza parking lots, visitors may park in the City's
parking structure on Main Street, or in the Pierside Pavilion structure, or on the public streets, further
reducing the parking demand adjacent to Maxwell's.
SUMMARY:
Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve the new restaurant and banquet facility, and the
variance for exceeding the 25 foot height limit based upon the following:
. The use is compatible with surrounding land uses and is consistent with the goals and policies
contained in the Land Use and Coastal Elements of the General Plan, and Downtown Specific Plan.
. The proposed 28 foot building height will not impact public views as the proposed building will be
constructed at the same 28 foot building height as the existing restaurant building.
. The proposed restaurant building will not impact public views or access to the beach.
. The parking and access to the proposed restaurant building has been reviewed during processing of the
Pier Plaza improvement project (Coastal Development Permit No. 93-24 and Conditional Use Permit
No. 93-40), which found that adequate parking would be provided for the proposed uses, including the
new Maxwell's building.
. The design of the proposed building will be architecturally compatible with structures in the immediate
vicinity, including Pierside Pavilion and Oceanview Promenade.
ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
The Planning Commission may deny Negative Declaration No. 94-12, Conditional Use Permit No. 94-25,
Coastal Development Permit No. 94-10 and Conditional Exception (Variance)No. 94-33 with findings for
denial.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Findings and suggested conditions of approval
-2. S
SH:WC:kjl
Staff Report- 1/24/95 7 (pcsr113)
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 94-25/
COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 94-10/
CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION (VARIANCE) NO. 94-33
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL- CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 94-25:
1. Conditional Use Permit No. 94-25 for the construction of a new 31,000 square foot, three (3) story
restaurant and banquet facility will not be detrimental to:
a. The general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity. The new restaurant building will
operate with similar hours as the existing uses. In addition, the new building will not exceed the
overall height of the existing building.
b. Property and improvements in the vicinity of such use or building. With the conditions imposed,
the new restaurant building will be provided with the necessary infrastructure and improvements,
minimizing impacts of services to surrounding properties.
2. The proposed project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the City's General Plan and Land
Use Map designation of Visitor Serving Commercial by providing beach related facilities for visitors,
while maintaining pedestrian oriented access in and around the pier area.
-FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL- COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 94-10:
1. The request for a new 31,000 square foot, three (3) story restaurant and banquet facility
conforms with the plans, policies, requirements and standards of the Coastal Element of the
General Plan. The proposed restaurant and banquet facility will not negatively impact public
views or access. The new restaurant building will provide additional visitor serving commercial.
uses in conjunction with the previously approved Pier Plaza improvement project.
2. Coastal Development Permit No. 94-10 is consistent with the CZ suffix zoning requirements,
the Downtown Specific Plan, as well as other provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance
Code applicable to the property, with the exception of the requested height variance. The
proposed restaurant building conforms with the Downtown Specific Plan, District 10, providing
new pier-related commercial uses.
3. The proposed project will be provided with infrastructure in a manner that is consistent with the
Coastal Element of the General Plan. Improvements to public utilities will be provided to the
new restaurant building.
1
Attachment-9/25/95 (PCSR113-8)
4. The proposed improvements conforms with the public access and public recreation policies of Chapter
3 of the California Coastal Act. The new restaurant building will enhance commercial opportunities in
conjunction with the pier related activities by providing a larger dining and banquet facility.
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL- CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION (VARIANCE) NO. 94-33:
1. The granting of a Conditional Exception (Variance)No. 94-33 for a maximum 28 foot building height
will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent upon other properties in the vicinity and
under the identical zone classification. In order to provide an architectural design compatible with
commercial buildings across Pacific Coast Highway, it is necessary to exceed the maximum building
height.
2. Because there are special circumstances or conditions applicable to the subject property, including size,
shape, topography, location or surroundings, the strict application of the Zoning Ordinance is found to
deprive the subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under identical
zone classifications. The proposed building will remain in the same location as the existing restaurant
building, and will maintain the same 28 foot height.
3. The granting of a Conditional Exception (Variance)No. 94-33 for a 28 foot building height is
necessary in order to preserve the enjoyment of one or more substantial property rights. The variance
will allow relief in development standards in order to provide a compatible design with commercial
buildings across Pacific Coast Highway.
4. The granting of Conditional Exception (Variance) No. 94-33 will not be materially detrimental to the
public health, safety and welfare, or injurious to the property in the same zone classification. The 28
foot building height will not reduce public views and access, but will increase access and view
opportunities on the plaza, open patio areas and around the building. In addition, the new building will
provide additional recreational opportunities in conjunction with the beach and pier uses.
5. The granting of Conditional Exception No. 94-33 for a 28 foot building height will not adversely affect
the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach. The proposed project is consistent with the goals
and objectives of the City's General Plan and Land Use Map designation of Visitor Serving Commercial
by providing visitor serving uses in and around the pier area, and improving visitor access to the beach.
SUGGESTED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL- CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 94-25/
COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 94-10 /CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION (VARIANCE)
NO. 94-33:
1. The site plan, floor plans, and elevations received and dated October 13, 1994 shall be the conceptually
approved layout.
2. Prior to submittal for building permits, the applicant/owner shall complete the following:
a. The applicant shall receive final approval of building colors by the Design Review Board.
�J
Attachment-9/25/95 (PC SR113-9)
b. Depict all utility apparatus, such as but not limited to back flow devices and Edison transforms, on
the site plan. They shall be prohibited in the front and exterior yard setbacks unless properly
screened by landscaping or other method as approved by the Community Development Director.
The markings, indicating the size, model number and serial number shall be permanently affixed to
the body of the backflow device and must remain visible after painting.
c. If foil-type insulation is to be used, a fire retarding type shall be installed as approved by the
Building Department and indicated on the floor plans.
d. All rooftop mechanical equipment shall be screened from any view. Said screening shall be
architecturally compatible with the building in terms of materials and colors. If screening is not
designed specifically into the building, a rooftop mechanical equipment plan must be submitted
showing screening and must be approved.
e. The site plan shall include (or reference page) all conditions of approval imposed on the project
printed verbatim.
3. Prior to demolition, the applicant/owner shall complete the following:
a. Historical documentation of the Maxwell's building shall be completed. The documentation shall
include photographs and a written synopsis of the building's history. Copies of all documentation
shall be submitted to the Department of Community Development for inclusion in the file.
b. Excess soils shall be removed and disposed of at an approved location.
4. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant/owner shall complete the following:
a. A Landscape Construction Set must be submitted to the Departments of Community Development
and Public Works and must be approved. The Landscape Construction Set shall include a
landscape plan prepared and signed by a State Licensed Landscape Architect and which includes all
proposed/existing plan materials (location, type, size, quantity), an irrigation plan, a grading.plan,
an approved site plan, and a copy of the entitlement conditions of approval. The landscape plans
shall be in conformance with Section 9607 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance code. The set must
be approved by both departments prior to issuance of building permits.
b. A grading plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and it must be
approved (by issuance of a grading permit), A plan for silt control for all water runoff from the
property during construction and initial operation of the project may be required if deemed
necessary by the Director of Public Works.
c. The major identification sign shall be removed or altered to comply with Chapter 233.
5. Public Works Department requirements are as follows:
1
Attachment-9/25/95 (PCSR113-10)
a. The developer shall abandon the existing six inch (6") fire service at the point of connection on the
existing eight inch (8") water main and remove the existing six inch (6")backflow device and vault.
Any new fire service shall be constructed per Water Division Standard Plan No. 618.
b. The proposed building shall have a separate domestic water service, sized per the Uniform
Plumbing Code and Water Division Standard Plans. Backflow protection is required per Water
Division Standard Plan No. 609. The existing domestic water service shall be abandoned.
6. Fire Department requirements are as follows:
a. An automatic fire sprinkler system shall be approved and installed pursuant to Fire Department
regulations.
b. A Class III wet standpipe system (combination) shall be installed pursuant to Fire Department and
Uniform Building Code standards.
c. A fire alarm system shall be installed to comply with Fire Department and Uniform Fire Code
standards. The system shall provide 1) manual pulls, 2) Water flow, valve tamper and trouble
detection, 3) 24 hour supervision, 4) Annunciation, 5) Audible alarms, and 6) Voice
Communication.
d. Fire extinguishers shall be provided in number and at locations specified by the Fire Department.
e. Two (2) fire hydrants shall be installed prior to combustible construction at locations specified by
the Fire Department.
f. Service roads and fire lanes, as determined by the Fire Department, shall be posted and marked.
g. Address numbers shall be installed to comply with City Specification No. 428.
h. Exit signs and exit path markings shall be provided in compliance with the Huntington Beach Fire
Code and Title 24 of the California Administrative Code. These include low level exit signs.
i. The project shall comply with all provisions of the Huntington Beach Fire Code and City
Specification No. 422 and 431 for the abandonment of oil wells and site restoration.
j. The project shall comply with all provisions of Huntington Beach Municipal Code Title 17.04.085
and City Specification No. 429 for new construction within the methane gas overlay districts.
7. All building spoils, such a unusable lumber, wire, pipe, and other surplus or unusable material, shall be
disposed of at an off-site facility equipped to handle them.
8. During construction, the applicant shall:
F
Attachment-9/25/95 (PCSR113-11)
a. Use water trucks or sprinkler systems in all areas where vehicles travel to keep damp enough to
prevent dust-raised when leaving the site-,
b. Wet down areas in the late morning and after work is completed for the day;
c. Use low sulfur fuel (.05%) by weight) for construction equipment;
d. Attempt to phase and schedule construction activities to avoid high ozone days (first stage smog
alerts);
e. Discontinue construction during second stage smog alerts.
9. Prior to final building permit approval or issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the following shall be
completed:
a. The applicant shall obtain the necessary permits from the South Coast Air Quality Management
District and submit a copy to Community Development Department.
b. All signs shall be brought into compliance with the Huntington Beach Sign Code (Chapter 233).
c. All improvements (including landscaping) to the property shall be completed in accordance with the
approved plans and conditions of approval specified herein.
d Compliance with all conditions of approval specified herein shall be accomplished.
10. The Planning Commission reserves the right to revoke Conditional Use Permit No. 94-25, Coastal
Development Permit No. 94-10 and Conditional Exception No. 94-33 if any violation of these
conditions or the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code occurs.
11. Conditional Use Permit No. 94-25, Coastal Development Permit No. 94-10 and Conditional Exception
No. 94-33 shall become null and void unless exercised within one (1) year of the date of final approval,
or such extension of time as may be granted by the Planning Commission pursuant to a written request
submitted to the Planning Division a minimum 30 days prior to the expiration date.
CODE REQUIREMENTS:
1. All applicable Public Works fees shall be paid.
2. The developer shall be responsible for the payment of the Traffic Impact Fees at the time of final
inspection.
3. Construction shall be limited to Monday - Saturday 7:00 AM to 8:00 PM. Construction shall be
prohibited Sundays and Federal holidays.
1 �
Attachment-9/25/95 (PCSR113-12)
4. The development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance,
Building Division, and Fire Department.
5. The applicant shall meet all applicable local, State and Federal Fire Codes, Ordinances, and standards.
6. All.signage shall comply with the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance.
Attachment-9125/95 (PCSR113-13)
-:RE•CEsVEO
Huntin06 n Beach omorrow ;,(y .3=
.,
HUNTINU I un
Box 865 r v
Huntington Beach CA 92648 APR 3
April 2 , 1995
Huntington Beach City Council RECEIVEDFROM _&&6LJ ""
2000 Main Street AND MADE A PART OF THE RECORD AT
THE COUNCIL MEETING OF q-3-45
Huntington Beach , CA 92648 OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
CONNIE 8ROOKWAY,CITY CLERK
Dear Mayor Leipzig and City Councilmembers:
Huntington Beach Tomorrow wishes to make the following comments
concerning Item D-3 , Appeal of Planning Commission 's Conditional
Use Permit #92-25/Coastal Development Permit #94-10/Conditional
Exception #94-33/Negative Declaration #94-12-Maxwell 's Building
on the April 3 , 1995 City Council Agenda .
Huntington Beach Tomorrow supports the appeal of this item and
asks that it be continued or denied until and unless a number of
significant issues indicated below are resolved .
We apologize at the outset for this rather lengthy comment on
this item . We had originally expected to comment only on the
height variance , but as we reviewed the 95 pages of material ,
other significant problems with this item emerged and required
at least some comment .
The following are the primary issues which we believe remain
unresolved .
1 . BUILDING HEIGHT
We have the following concerns with regard to the proposed 28-
foot high section of the new building:
a . There is no hardship involved in the request to exceed the
current 25-foot height limitations on construction set out in the
Downtown Specific Plan . That plan has just received final
approval from the Coastal Commission after years of
consideration . The Plan 's height limitation is oriented toward
retaining what is left of the village concept and atmosphere
downtown . This is not the time to turn around and allow a
variance without any semblance of hardship and for supposedly
aesthetic reasons on the part of the architect . If this variance
is allowed , what do we say , in fairness , to the next person who
comes along and wants a variance without any attendant hardship .
b . The Downtown Specific plan clearly prohibits height exceptions
where the added are will be habitable. That provision was
specifically written into the Plan to control attempts to add
height just to increase habitable space at the expense of
consistent standards and the desired village atro-o.sphere . Again ,
if a variance is given without any hardship being involved and
1 T) -3
anytime one asks , what is the purpose of a specific plan and
its standards in the first place?
C . The view may not be impacted as noted , since the current
structure is 28 feet in height . However , it is the clear desire
of the residents of this city that structure height should be
minimized as much as possible on the beach side of Pacific Coast
Highway . This is an opportunity to do so with an increase in
ambiance for both resident and visitor outside the restaurant
without significantly reducing the ambiance inside the
restaurant . We believe any reduction possible in height on the
beach side of Pacific Coast Highway adds to the quality of life
in Huntington Beach . We request , therefore , that you apply the
standard set out in the Specific Plan to accomplish this end .
2 . PUBLIC ACCESS AND USE
It is our understanding that the Coastal Commission placed a
requirement on this project that it include public open space ,
access and coastal view opportunities .
That requirement is apparently to be met by including a public
area on the third floor of the new building . This area appears
to be the area labeled "roof deck" on the third level floor plan
( RCA , P . .50 ) and possibly could be accessed by what may be an
external stairway near the northeasterly corner of the building
as well as interior stairs in the building .
Public access areas were supposed to be included as part of the
approval of Louise 's Restaurant and the Studio Cafe . It is our
understanding that these access areas are now inaccessible to the
public . Further , there was supposed to be a public view corridor
between the Edwards theater and the Colony Condominiums northeast
of the corner of Main and Pacific Coast Highway . This view
corridor is now obscured by stairwells and other obstructions .
This city has a very poor record of preserving public access and
view areas .
In view of the preceding considerations , it is clear that , if
this project is to go forward , there must be some very strict
conditions applied which will absolutely protect the associated
public access and view area .
Questions which are still outstanding in this regard are the
following:
a . Will this public access area be available to the public in
perpetuity and is the project so conditioned? If so , this
protection does not appear in the findings or conditions of
approval included in the RCA .
b . Is the public area going to be accessible on a continual basis
from the outside without going through the restaurant? If not ,
the area must be . If the public has to pass through the
restaurant to access the area there will be attempts to close it
off to access as has been done elsewhere? Even so , if the
project is approved as proposed with dining and facilities on the
2
same floor as publ access will there be an tempt in the
future to cut off or otherwise inordinately limit this access?
C . During what hours and under what circumstances will this
public access area be available to the public? This is not
spelled out in the RCA and needs to be .
d . What level of security and safety has been designed into and
will be available for the area , since , because of its elevation ,
it could pose a problem for people below? How will any necessary
security and safety be supplied and maintained during public
access and who will be responsible for this?
2 . POTENTIAL BEACH ENCROACHMENT
Currently , Maxwell 's has a balcony overhang on the beach side at
the street level . The question has been posed - previously and
never definitively answered as to whether this overhang is being
considered part of the current Maxwell 's footprint or is , like
the dining on the northerly side of the building , an add-on .
This question needs to be answered so it is clear as to whether
or not he project will include this balcony and the new structure
will extend vertically from the outer edge of this balcony to the
beach level . It is not clear from the plans provided , e.g . p .
If the balcony is included in the present structure and this
structure extends vertically , as it seems to do in the elevation
illustrations provided , it is seems that the new structure will
take beach area currently unoccupied by any existing structure .
If such is actually the case , not only will new beach be taken , a
situation clearly opposed by more than 75% of the residents of
this city , but it would seem that the construction would come
under Measure C .
3 . FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS
There is no financial analysis of the potential associated with
this project . In view of the financial position of this city ,
now exacerbated by the County bankruptcy , there should be some
financial analysis of this project included . Such an analysis
should consider not only this project but possible alternatives ,
in order to determine the fiscal implications of this and
alternatives for the city .
Some of the questions which remain unanswered in this regard are
the following:
a . Where is the money going to come from for this project?
b . What and when is the return to be expected from this project
or any alternatives? Basically , is this project a good deal for
the city or are there others that are just as attractive or would
enhance the potential open space amenity of this location?
C . Who will operate this project and what is their track record?
3
Considering the city 's ,-ack record in terms of rc ,velopment and
the financial benefits it was said the city would accrue from
redevelopment , we need to be very careful with projects like
this . We must be sure they will indeed provide a • significant ,
assured financial return in the relatively short range . We do
not have the luxury at present of planning twenty years into the
future for a return from current projects when we can not meet
our financial needs in the short range . Perhaps another use of
this land might provide better short range returns .
4 . WATER
This project will require an additional 6000 gallons of water ,
and increase of more than 33% above the current demand . While
there will be attempts to mitigate the impact ( p . .36 ), this is
still a projected increased demand of 6000 gallons which must
come from current supplies . The capital cost and potential
associated reduced availability of this water must be born by
residents of the city . The RCA does not make it clear whether
this is a net or total increased use and what part will be
mitigated by the indicated measures and what part will not be .
As you are aware , this city currently has a significant shortfall
in it ability to meet potential water demands and at least two
large developments which will add increased have yet to come on
to line .
There must , therefore , be safeguards written into this project
and any associated lease that will guarantee that the financial
returns to this city will offset and mitigate any impact on
existing water resources in this city and still provide
significantly positive financial return to the city .
Conservation measures , water-saver toilets and infrared switching
alone can not be expected to provide the necessary mitigation and
positive returns necessary for the city . The RCA seems to take
the point that these measures can. We do not believe the
question is that simply answered .
In closing , we would agree that Huntington Beach can probably use
increased banquet and conference facilities . As the concerns
above indicate , we remain unconvinced that this is the project or
the place for such facilities , since we believe many significant
questions remain unanswered with regard .
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this matter .
Sincerely ,
Mark Porter
President , Huntington Beach Tomorrow
mp/rew
4
PUBLIC NOTICE
NOTICE OF
PUBLIC HEARING
BEFORE THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF
HUNTINGTON BEACH
NOTICE IS HEREBY.
GIVEN that on Monday
April 3, 1995,at 7:00 PM in
the City Council Chambers,
2000 Main Street, Hunting-
ton Beach,the City Council
PROOF OF PUBLICATION wilonl hold a thefollowngItems:aring
1. APPEAL OF CONDI-
TIONAL USE PERMIT NO.
94-25 COASTAL DEVELOP-
MENT PERMIT NO. 94-101
STATE O F CALIFORNIA) (VARIANCE)CONDITIONAL NO.EXCEPTION94- 3/
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
` NO. 94-12(DEMOLITION
J SS. OF THE FORMER MAX-
WELL'S RESTAURANT
County of Orange ) BUILDING) -Applicant: City
of Huntington Beach, De-
partment of Community
Services Appellant - Coun- NOTICE IS HEREBY
cilmember Dave Sullivan . GIVEN that Initial environ. Coastal Commission, 245
1 am a Citizen of the United States and a To permit the demolition of mental assessments for the W. Broadway, Suite 380;
the former Maxwell's Res- above item(s) #1 and #3 Long Beach' California
resident of the County aforesaid; I am taurant building and con. were processed and com= i90801-1450, Attn: Theresa
struction of a new 31,000 pleted in accordance with Henry,(310)590.5071
over the age of eighteen years, and not a
square foot, three (3) story the California Environ- The Coastal Commission
restaurant and banquet fa- mental Quality Act. it was review period will com-
cility. The existing building determined that. Item #1 mence after the City appeal
party to or i nterested i n the below is 28 feet in height and the and#3 would not have any period has ended and no
request Includes maintain- significant environmental appeals have been filed.
entitled matter. I am a principal clerk �f ing that building height In effect and, therefore, a Applicants will be notified
lieu of a maximum 25 feet negative declaration Is war- by the Coastal Commission
the H U NT I N GTO N BEACH INDEPENDENT, a as specified in the Down- ranted.The Planning Com- as to the date of the con-
town Specific Plan. Loca- mission Is recommending clusion of the Coastal
newspa er of general circulation printed tion - 317 Pacific Coast approval of Negative Dec- Commission review. Ap-
r Highway (south of the Mu- laration No.94-12 and Neg- plicants are advised not to
and pu lished )n the Clty of Huntington nicipal Pier at Main Street ative Declaration No. 94-21 begin construction prior to
on the Oceanside of Pacific based on their actions at that date.
Coast Highway) Planner the January 24,and Febru- ON FILE: A copy of the
Beach, mmi
County of Orange, State of Assigned:Wayne Carvalho ary 28, 1995, Planning proposed requests are on
2. APPEAL OF SPECIAL Co
ssion meeting, re- file I. the Department of
California, and that attached Notice is a SIGN PERMIT NO. 93-13 - spectively. Community Development,
SUPERIOR ELECTRICAL NOTICE IS HEREBY 2000 Main Street, Hunting-
true and complete copy as was printed ADVERTISING, INC. (CON- GIVEN that Item #2 Is cat- ton Beach, California
TINUED FROM THE APRIL egorically exempt from the 92648, for Inspection by
provisions of the California the public. A copy of the
and published in the Huntington Beach 4, 1994 CITY COUNCIL Environmental Quality Act. staff reports will be avalr-
MEETING) -Applicant: Su- NOTICE IS HEREBY able to interested parties at
and Fountain Valley Issues of said perior Electrical Advertis- GIVEN that Item #1 is lo- the City Clerk's Office after
ing, Inc.Appellant-Former, cated in the appealable ju- March 30,1995.
newspaper to wit the issue(s) of: Mayor Pro Tern Earle Robin risdiction of the Coastal ALL INTERESTED PER-
faille - To permit an exist- Zone and Includes Coastal SONS are Invited to attend
ing, non conforming 45 Development Permit No. said hearing and express
foot high, 624 square foot 94-10 which has been filed opinions or submit evi-
double pole pylon sign to in conjunction with the dance for or against the
remain in its present Iota- above request. application as outlined
tion and to allow a 140 NOTICE IS HEREBY above.If you challenge the
March 23 , 1995 square foot sign face GIVEN that the Coastal De- City Council's action in
rchange identifying Cudini velopment hearing consists court, you may be limited
and Lucas Jewelers,in lieu of a staff report, public to raising only those Issues
of a maximum 15 foot high, hearing, City Council dis- you or someone else
70 square foot freestanding cussion and Action. Under ralsed at the public hearing
sign pursuant to Section the provisions of the Hun- described In this notice,or
9610.7 of the Huntington tington Beach Ordinance in written"correspondence
Beach Ordinance Code; Code, the action taken by delivered to the City at, or
Location-9891 Adams Av the City Council is final un- prior to,the public hearing.
I declare, under penalty of perjury, that enue (northwest corner at less an appeal Is filed to It there are any further
Brookhurst Street) Planner the Coastal Commission by questions, please call the
the fore oln is true and correct. Assigned:Wayne Carvalho the applicant or an ag- Planning Division at 536-
g g 3. CODE AMENDMENT grieved party. Said appeal 5271 and refer to the
NO 94-5/NEGATIVE DEC- must be In writing and above Items. Direct your
LARATION NO. 94-2.1 - must set forth in detail the written communications to
SEABRIDGE SPECIFIC actions and grounds by the City Clerk.
PLAN AMENDMENT, CEN- and upon which the ap- Connie Brockway,'
199 5 TERSTONE DEVELOP- plicant on Interested party City Clerk, City of Hun.
Executed on March 24
, MENT COMPANY;- Ap- deems himself aggrieved
plicant: Centerstone Devel- Said appeal must be sub- tington Beach, 2000
at Costa Mesa, California. opment Company - To miffed to the Coastal Cam- Main Street 2nd Floor,
amend the Seabridge Spec mission office within ten Huntington Beach, CA
cific Plan to allow medium (10) working days of the 92648(714)5384227
density residential develop., date of the Council's ac- Published Huntington
ment on 3.95 acres with tion.There is no fee for the Beach-Fountain Valley In-
Area B designated for Re• appeal of a coastal devel- dependent March 23,1995.
source Production (01), tc opment permit.
create development stand. An aggrieved person my
'1�
ards for detached dwell. Me an appeal within tan
n r ings,to delete the saltwatei (10) working days, pursu-
/�— marsh requirement and do. ant to Section 30603 of the
lets the requirement that Public Resources Code, in
the area be deeded to the writing to: California
Homeowner's Associations
Signature A 30 lot subdivision for a
planned unit development,
consisting of 30 single fam-
ily residential detached
units was conditionally ap-
proved by the 1
Commission on February
28, 1995. Location - East
side of Beach Boulevard,
400 feet south of Adams
Avenue. Planner Assigned;
Scott Hess
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE �I�
CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on Monday,April 3, 1995,at 7:00 PM in the City Council Chambers,.
2000 Main Street,Huntington Beach,the City Council will hold a public hearing on the following items:
L2< APPEAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.94-25/COASTAL DEVELOPMENT
PERMIT NO. 94-10/CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION(VARIANCE)NO. 94-33/NEGATIVE
DECLARATION NO.94-12(DEMOLITION OF THE FORMER MAXWELL'S
RESTAURANT BUILDING): -Applicant: City of Huntington Beach,Department of
Community Services Appellant-Councilmember Dave Sullivan-To permit the demolition of
the former Maxwell's Restaurant building and construction of a new 31,000 square foot, three(3)
story restaurant and banquet facility. The existing building is 28 feet in height and the request
includes maintaining that building height in lieu of a maximum 25 feet as specified in the
Downtown Specific Plan. Location-317 Pacific Coast Highway(south of the Municipal Pier at
Main Street on the oceanside of Pacific Coast Highway) Planner Assigned: Wayne Carvalho
❑2. APPEAL OF SPECIAL SIGN PERMIT NO. 93-13-SUPERIOR ELECTRICAL
ADVERTISING,INC. (CONTINUED FROM THE APRIL 4,1994 CITY COUNCIL
MEETING): -Applicant: Superior Electrical Advertising, Inc. Appellant-Former Mayor Pro
Tem Earle Robitaille-To permit an existing, non conforming 45 foot high, 624 square foot
double pole pylon sign to remain in its present location and to allow a 140 square foot sign face
change identifying Cudini and Lucas Jewelers,in lieu of a maximum 15 foot high, 70 square foot
freestanding sign pursuant to Section 9610.7 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. Location
-9891 Adams Avenue(northwest corner at Brookhurst Street) Planner Assigned: Wayne
Carvalho
❑ 3. CODE AMENDMENT NO. 94-5/NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 94-21 -SEABRIDGE
SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT,CENTERSTONE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY: -
Applicant: Centerstone Development Company. -To amend the Seabridge Specific Plan to
allow medium density residential development on 3.95 acres within Area B designated for
Resource Production(01), to create development standards for detached dwellings,to
delete the saltwater marsh requirement and delete the requirement that the area be deeded
to the Homeowner's Association. A 30 lot subdivision for a planned unit development,
consisting of 30 single family residential detached units was conditionally approved by the
Planning Commission on February 28, 1995. Location-East side of Beach Boulevard, 400
feet south of Adams Avenue. Planner Assigned: Scott Hess
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that initial environmental assessments for the above Items)41 and 43
were processed and completed in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. It was
determined that Item# 1 and 43 would not have any significant environmental effect and,therefore,a
negative declaration is warranted. The Planning Commission is recommending approval of Negative
Declaration No. 94-12 and Negative Declaration No. 94-21 based on their actions at the January 24,and
February 28, 1995,Planning Commission meeting, respectively.
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Item#2 is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act.
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Item# 1 is located in the appealable jurisdiction of the Coastal Zone
and includes Coastal Development Permit No. 94-10 which has been filed in conjunction with the above
request.
jCCLG0403-1) /Dv l /
J �
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
(Continued)
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Coastal Development hearing consists of a staff report,public
hearing, City Council discussion and action. Under the provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance
Code,the action taken by the City Council is final unless an appeal is filed to the Coastal Commission by
the applicant or an aggrieved party. Said appeal must be in writing and must set forth in detail the actions
and grounds by and upon which the applicant or interested party deems himself aggrieved. Said appeal
must be submitted to the Coastal Commission office within ten(10)workin days of the date of the
Council's action. There is no fee for the appeal of a coastal development permit.
An aggrieved person may file an appeal within ten(10)working days,pursuant to Section 30603 of the
Public Resources Code,in writing to:
California Coastal Commission
245 W.Broadway, Suite 380
Long Beach, California 90801-1450
Attn: Theresa Henry
(310)590-5071
The Coastal Commission review period will commence after the City appeal period has ended and no
appeals have been filed. Applicants will be notified by the Coastal Commission as to the date of the
conclusion of the Coastal Commission review. Applicants are advised not to begin construction prior to
that date.
ON FILE: A copy of the proposed requests are on file in the Department of Community Development,
2000 Main Street,Huntington Beach, California 92648,for inspection by the public. A copy of the staff
reports will be available to interested parties at the City Clerk's Office after March 30, 1995.
ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to attend said hearing and express opinions or submit evidence
for or against the application as outlined above. If you challenge the City Council's action in court,you
may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in
this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City at,or prior to,the public hearing. If there
are any further questions please call the Planning Division at 536-5271 and refer to the above items.
Direct your written communications to the City Clerk.
Connie Brockway, City Clerk
City of Huntington Beach
2000 Main Street,2nd Floor
Huntington Beach, CA 92648(714) 536-5227
(CCLG0403-2)
i
City of Huntington Beach State of California Dept of Ge Blanche A. Wood
City Hall 650 Howe Ave. 201 5th St.
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Sacramento, CA 95825 Huntington Beach, CA 92648
- I
Redevelopment Agency City of HB Victoria Jean Lane Ann L. Mase
2000 Main St. 637 Frankfort Ave. 123 Main St.
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Huntington Beach, CA 92648
Gary V.Mulligan Eldon Willard Bagstad Abdelmuti Development Co.
221 Main St.,#6 901 Catalina Ave. 113 Main St.
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Seal Beach, CA 90740 Huntington Beach, CA 92648
George E.Draper Frank Alfonso Adel Mustafa Zeidan
121 Main St. 6630 Vickiview.Dr. 200 Pacific Coast Hwy,#443
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Canoga Park, CA 91307 Huntington Beach,CA 92648
Morning Jade Corporation Morning Jade Corporation Wm./SandrArett Enright
120 Main St. 11642 Pine St. 3419 Via Lido,#287
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Los Alamitos,CA 90720 Newport Bea h; CA 92663
Ox Pierside Corporation Ox Pierside Corporation Thomas Holtverda -
300 Pacific Coast Hwy %Haseko Mgmt. 6736 Hillpark.Dr.,#401
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 350 S.Figueroa St.,#601 Los Angeles CA 90068
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Thomas'Holwerda Ralph Peck Beach Resorts;Inc.
200 Pacific Coast Hwy,#422 8404 Lexington Rd. 222 Sth St.
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Downey, CA 90241 Huntington Beach, CA 92648
Beach Resorts,Inc. Allen L.Nelson Iowa Sage Limited Partnership
315-3rd. St.,#M 8404 Lexington Rd. 102 Ocean Ale.
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Downey, CA 90241 Huntington Beach,"CA 92648
Iowa Sage Limited Partnership Huntington Beach Company Carol Ann Grosz
Carolyn Bomell P. O. Box 7611 200 Pacific Coast Hwy, #101
25258 Cabot Rd.,#229 San Francisco, CA 94120 Huntington Beach, CA 92648
Laguna Hills,CA 92653
Setsuko Nogami Setsuko Nogami Michael M. &Pi Zu Tsai
200 Pacific Coast HANy,#102 %Niji Corp. 1878 S. Calle La Paz
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 61 N. Golden West Ave. Rowland Heights, CA 91748
Arcadia, CA 91007
'-.3 UJ 1' �S
3
i
Louis&Maria Nemeth Jaime&Joanne Bohnke Wolfgang&Mary Haubold
19721 Waterbury Lane 200 Pacific Coast Hwy,#10 2640 E.Harmon Ave.
Huntington Beach, CA 92646 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Las Vegas,NV 89121
Wolfgang&Mary Haubold Rudy Sanchez ! Francisco&Norma Fabrregas
200 Pacific Coast Hwy,4106 200 Pacific Coast Hwy,4107 200 Pacific Coast Hwy,4108
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Huntington Beach, CA 92648
Francisco&Norma Fabrregas Jeffrey D. Smith Peter J. Cagney
18401 Hampton Ct. California Federal Bank 200 Pacific Coast Hwy,#110
Northridge,CA 91326 5700 Wilshire Blvd.,#227 Huntington Beach, CA 92648
Los Angeles, CA 90036
Peter J. Cagney Mario Ricciardi Gorgen&Barbara Youssefian
%Office of the District Attorney 6210 Moonshadow Pl. 2530 Union.-Ave. -
210 W. Temple St. Alta Loma, CA 91737 La Habra, CA.90631
Los Angeles, CA 90012
David&Kathy Bartlett Robert A.Drew Elizabeth/William/El Schonfeld
607 7th St. 200 Pacific Coast Hwy,#114 200 Pacific Coast Hwy,4115
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Huntington Beach, CA 92648
Alfonso&Elenita Obciana Alfonso&Elenita Obciana _ William&Jackie Griffith
21515 Dunrobin Way P. O.Box 4822 200- 117 Pacific Coast Hwy
Yorba Linda, CA 92687 Diamond Bar, CA 91765 / Huntington Beach, CA 92648
r`
William&Jackie Griffigi- Thomas Cincotta Daniel Obrien
806 S. Sapphire Lane 200 Pacific Coast Hwy,4118 200 Pacific Coast Hwy,4119
Anaheim, CA 92807 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Huntington Bewft�eA 92648
Richard Charles Michalik Mariano Cruz Donald Galitzen
200 Pacific Coast Hwy,4120 200 Pacific Coast Hwy,1"121 9770 James River Cr.
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Fountain Valley, CA 92708
Fred&Amalia Salazar Thomas Pollard Vidal&Melinda Espeleta
200 Pacific Coast Hwy, #123 829 Beach Dr. 200 Pacific Coast Hwy,4125
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Needles, CA 92363 Huntington Beach, CA 92648
Manouc&Maria Simsian Manouc&Maria Simsian Jeffery M. Martin
927 Crescent Dr. 200 Pack Coast Hwy,4126 200 Pacific Coast Hwy,4127
Monrovia, CA 91016 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Huntington Beach, CA 92648
i
i
Paul&Deborah Byrne III Paul&Deborah Byrne III I De Ette Pier, Inc.
8282 Kingsdale Dr. . 6732 Alamitos Cr. 2612 Nakakaigan Chigas
Huntington Beach, CA 92646 Huntington Beach,CA 92648 Kanagawa, Japan
De Ette Pier,Inc. Robert&Patricia Redfeam Robert&Patricia Redfearn
%Niji Corp. 11241 Vista Del Lago 200 Pacific Coast Hwy, #303
61 N. Golden West Ave. Santa Ana,CA 92705 Huntington Beach, CA 92648
Arcadia, CA 91007
Leonard&Nancy Bailey Timothy Kiyoshi&Naoe Ogawa Mitsuru Maemori
1377 E. Citrus Ave., #157 1519 Sandcastle Dr. 200 Main St.
Redlands, CA 92374 Corona Del Mar,CA 92625 Box 104-515
Huntington Beach, CA 92648
Randolph Payne Shin Ei,Inc. Shin Ei, Inc:,..
200 Pacific Coast Hwy, #335 200- 136 Pac Coast Hwy %Niji Corp.
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Huntington Beach,CA 92648 61 N. Golden West Ave.
Arcadia,CA 91007
Steven&Margaret Chideste Thomas Szulga Thomas Szulga
9932 Saint Marys Cr. 200 Pacific Coast Hwy,#138 9018 Muller St.,#2
Santa Ana, CA 92705 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Downey, CA 90241
Michael&Linda Womack Sebastian Calabro Kenji Koishi
200 Pacific Coast Hwy,#139 200 Pacific Coast Hwy,#140 350 S.Figueroa St.,Fl. 127
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Huntington Beach,CA 92648 Los Angeles, CA 90071
Kenji Koishi J.E. &Dolores Ash Shu Mei Tsai.
%Niji Corp. 200 Pacific Coast Hwy,#144 200 Pacific.Coast Hwy,#145
61 N. Golden West Ave. Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Huntington Beach, CA 92648
Arcadia, CA 91007
Marilyn Christensen Marilyn Christensen Fred&Mary Felix
200 Pacific Coast Hwy, #146 3140 Oak Rd.,#208 200- 147 Pacific Coast Hwy
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Huntington Beach, CA 92648
i
i
Fred&Mary Felix Checherng&Lishung Lee Checherng&Lishung Lee
914 Reno Ridge Lane 200 Pacific Coast Hwy,#148 4116 N.Rosemead Blvd.
Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Rosemead, CA 91770
Janet Outlaw Harold Yada Anthony&Sheila Lee
200 Pack Coast Hwy, #149 8855 Atlanta Ave. 9802 Ryan Cr.
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Huntington Beach, CA 92646 Villa Park, CA 92667
I
LAb ,5 FOR MAXWELL'S PUBLIC HEARIN JTICES
1/9/95 1
Anthony&Sheila Lee Y&Y Soichiro Kawase
18422 Villa Dr, 350 S.Figueroa St.,F1601 61 N. Golden West Ave.
Villa Park, CA 92667 Los Angeles, CA 90071 Arcadia, CA 91007
Ross&Beryl Amspoker Ross&Beryl Amspoker Arlen Pantel
200 Pacific Coast Hwy, #211 36449 Tierra Subida 200 Pacific Coast Hwy, #216
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Palmdale, CA 93551 Huntington Beach, CA 92648
William Lally E. Robert Heggtveit Emma Niznik
200 Pacific Coast Hwy, #217 200 Pacific Coast Hwy, #218 343 South Ave.,#52
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Los Angeles, CA 90045
Eric&Christina Yao Guilherme Farjalla Takis&Joanne Stathoulis
25 Warmspring 21776 Tahoe Lane 200 Pacific Coast Hwy,#230
Irvine, CA 92714 Lake Forest; CA 92630 Huntington Beach, CA 92648
Alfonso Llacuna Walter&Betty Winterstein Walter&Betty Winterstein
321 N. Oakhurst Dr.,Penthouse 703 200 Pacific Coast Hwy, #233 2126 Monterey Peninsula
Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Corona, CA 91720
Marcel&Elisabeth Blatter Shin Ei,Inc. Abigail Lubliner
930 N. Rainbow Dr. 200-240 Pacific Coast Hwy 200 Pacific Coast Hwy, 4245
Glendora, CA 91740 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Huntington Beach, CA 92648
Abigail Lubliner Jacqueline Johnson Hazem Sabry
16390 Tudor Dr. 200 Pacific Coast Hwy,#250 200 Pacific Coast Hwy, #300
Encino, CA 91436 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Huntington Beach, CA 92648
Richard Miller Richard Miller James Lim
200 Pacific Coast Hwy,#301 7956 Painter Ave. 200 Pacific Coast Hwy,#302
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Whittier, CA 90602 Huntington Beach, CA 92648
James Lim Hung Thai Tran Chet&Karla Cox
1762 Sombrero Dr. 9842 Bolsa Ave., #201b 2232 Chatsworth Ct.
Monterey Park, CA 91754 Westminster, Ca 92683 Henderson,NV 89014
Rosalie Sher Brian Salerno Lyla Bowen
200 Pacific Coast Hwy, #306 200 Pacific Coast Hwy, #307 200 Pacific Coast Hwy,#309
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Huntington Beach, CA 92648
Maurice Gerard Craig Smith Laura Stout
•200 Pacific Coast Hwy,#311 200 Pacific Coast Hwy,#312 �, 200 Pacific Coast Hwy,#313
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Huntington Beach,CA 92648 Huntington Beach,CA 92648
} Edward Hahn Takeshi Kono Kathryn Biederman
242 S.Kathleen Lane 200-315 Pacific Coast Hwy 200 Pacific Coast Hwy,#316
Orange,CA 92669 Huntington Beach,CA 92648 Huntington Beach, CA 92648
i
a
Mark Miller Scott Granger Jeffrey&Kathleen Holmes
200 Pacific Coast Hwy,#317 206 Pacific Coast Hwy,#319 200 Pacific Coast Hwy,#320
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Huntington Beach,CA 92648
t
i Jeffrey&Kathleen Holmes Clay Griffin Epperson Hidetaka Nakamura
17000 Saman Dr. P.0.Box 11927 200 -323 Pacific Coast Hwy
Costa Mesa,CA 92626 Costa Mesa, CA 92627 Huntington Beach, CA 92648
?, Hidetaka Nakamura Manhough&Ebtesam Khaled Manhough&Ebtesam Khaled
%Niji Corp. 200 Pacific Coast Hwy,#324 612 N. 1st. Ave.
61 N. Golden West Ave. Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Arcadia,CA..91006
Arcadia, CA 91007
Scott&Budio Thomas Richard Takahashi Justin Branson
200 Pacific Coast Hwy,#325 3020 Java Rd. 200 Pacific Coast Hwy,#328
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Huntington Beach,CA 92648
i Michael Nestor James Mohundro Ernest&Ruth Feld
200 Pacific Coast Hwy,#332 200 Pacific Coast Hwy,#334 200 Pacific Coast Hwy,#336
Huntington Beach,CA 92648 Huntington Beach,CA 92648 Huntington Beach,CA 92648
` Roger&Lynne Wilhelm Koji Okachi Koji Okachi
2584 N.Fountain Arbor Way 200-339 Pacific Coast Hwy %Niji Corp.
Orange, CA 92667 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 61 Golden West Ave.
Arcadia,CA 91007
Jack Parks Gary Lewis Jack Braman.
200 Pacific Coast Hwy,#341 200 Pacific Coast Hwy,#342 200 Pacific Coast Hwy,.#343
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Huntington Beach, CA 92648
Patrick&Anna Walsh Bernard Senkowski,Jr. Swaminathan Ramanathan
6212 Oakbrook Cr. 1116 Kendal Ct. 200 Pacific Coast Hwy,#347
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 San Jose, CA 95120 Huntington Beach, CA 9264E
H. Steven&Cathy Gilbert H. Steven&Cathy Gilbert Paul&Letha Strain
18820 Cordata St. 9167 McBride River Ave. 5029 Pedley Rd.
Fountain Valley, CA 92708 Fountain Valley, CA 92708 Riverside, CA 92509
Donald Peterson, Jr. Mohammed Zeidan Mohammed Zeidan
20G Pacific Coast Hwy,#350 301 17th St. 200 Pacific Coast Hwy, #402
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Huntington Beach, CA 92648
Jeffrey Droessler Kotaro&Bridget Suzuki Louis&Margaret Chavez
200 Pacific Coast Hwy, #404 1812 Alpha St. 1267 W.Kildare St.
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 South Pasadena, CA 91030 Lancaster, CA 93534
Gene Iansiti Jean Perrin Janice&Colin Wittke
200 Pacific Coast Hwy, #413 200 Pacific Coast Hwy,#415 200 Pacific Coast Hwy,#416
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Huntington Beach, CA 92648
Hien Duc Tran James Nugent Bianca Holwerda
200 Pacific Coast Hwy,#418 200 Pacific Coast Hwy,#420 200 Pacific Coast Hwy,#422
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Huntington Beach, CA 92648
Thomas&Carol McCann Gamin&Shirani Gunawardane Gamini&Shirani Gunawardane
200 Pacific Coast Hwy, #424 200 Pacific Coast Hwy,4426 937 Finnell Way
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Placentia, CA_92670
Mike&Mary Seif Mike&Mary Seif Roy&Gladys Harris
200 Pacific Coast Hwy, 9436 1702 Winding Way 200 Pacific Coast Hay,#439
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Pasadena, CA 91107 Huntington Beach, CA 92648
Adel Zeidan Adel Zeidan Leslie&Judith Pinchuk
301 17th St. 200 Pacific Coast Hwy,4443 11425 Dona Evita Dr.
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Studio City, CA 91604
Robert&Lin Wu Lan Joy.Emiko Mark John Montague
200 Pacific Coast HNvy, #447 200 Pacific Coast Hwy,#449 200 Pacific Coast Hwy,#M9
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Huntington Beach, CA 92648
Samuel Reyes,Jr. Theresa McKinnon Roger Gruen
200 Pacific Coast HN y,#M 17 200 Pacific Coast Hwy, #M29 30 Galleon St.
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Marina Del Rey, CA 90292
Roger Gruen Norman&Miriam Rosenblatt Evedna Threinen
1933 S. Broadway, Ste 944 • 4808 La Villa Marina,#G P. O. Box 90070
Los Angeles, CA 90007 Marina Del Rey,CA 90292 Henderson,NV 89009
Evedna Threinen {-apf U-AK14
200 Pacific Coast Hwy,#M50 q CD PAS Oi G COAST 1w, 3�3
Huntington Beach,CA 92648 MX TI 7w brq t Col-9a6�8
i
OCCUPANT �CCUPANT CCUPANT
200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#101 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#102 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#103
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648
OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT
200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#104 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#105 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY 4106
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648
OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT
200 PACIFIC COAST HWY 4107 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#108 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#109
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648
OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT
200 PACIFIC COAST HWY 4110 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY 4111 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY 4112
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648
OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT
200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#113 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#114 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#115
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648
OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT
200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#116 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#117 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#118
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH,CA 92648
OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT
200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#119 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#120 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#121
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH,CA 92648
OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT
200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#122 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#123 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#124
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH,CA 92648
OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT
200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#125 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#126 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#127
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648
OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT
200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#128 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#129 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#130
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH,CA 92648
i
OCCUPANT �CCUPANT �CCUPANT
200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#131 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#132 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#133
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648
i
OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT
200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#134 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#135 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#136
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648
OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT
200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#137 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#138 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#139
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648
OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT
200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#140 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#141 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#142
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH,CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648
OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT
200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#143 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#144 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#145
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648
OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT
200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#146 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#147 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#148
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648
OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT
200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#149 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#150 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#206
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648
OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT
200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#207 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY.#208 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#209
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648
OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT
200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#211 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#216 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#217
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648
OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT
200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#218 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#220 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#226
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648
OY��
OCCUPANT .00CUPANT OCCUPANT
200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#229 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#230 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#231
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648
OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT
200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#233 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#239 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#240
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648
OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT
200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#245 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#250 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#301
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648
OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT
200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#302 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#303 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#304
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648
OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT
200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#306 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#307 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#309
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648
i
OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT
200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#311 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#312 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#313
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648
OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT
200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#314 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#315 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#316
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648
OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT
200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#317 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#319 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#320
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH,CA 92648
OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT
200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#322 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#323 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#324
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648
OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT
200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#325 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#326 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#328
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648
OCCUPANT *OCCUPANT :OCCUPANT
200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#329 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#332 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#334
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648
OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT
200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#335 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#336 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#337
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648
OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT
200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#339 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#341 200 PACIFIC COAST.HWY#342
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648
OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT
200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#343 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#345 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#346
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648
OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT
200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#347 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#348 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#349
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH,CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648
i
OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT
200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#350 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#402 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#404
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH,CA 92648
OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT
200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#406 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#408 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#411
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648
OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT
200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#413 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#415 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#416
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH,CA 92648
OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT
200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#418 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#420 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#422
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648
OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT
200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#424 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#426 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#436
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648
I '
OCCUPANT •OCCUPANT •OCCUPANT
200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#439 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#443 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#445
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH,CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648
OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT
200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#447 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#449 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#M17
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648
OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT
200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#M29 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#M30 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#M40
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648
OCCUPANT OCCUPANT i OCCUPANT
200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#M50 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#M9 200 PACIFIC COAST HWY#M109
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648
I
I
r/��u�
PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION CHECKLIST
MAILING LABELS
(LPH01) 3/2/93 -----
President ! William D. Holman Planning Di ctor
H.B. Chamber of Commerce Pacific Coast Homes City of Wes inster
2210 Main Street,Suite 200 23 Corporate Plaza,Suite 250 8200 West inster Blvd.
Huntington Beach,CA 92648 Newport Beach CA 92660-7912 Westminst ,CA 92683
Judy Legan Pres.,H.B. H t. Society Planning Di ctor
H.B./F.V. Boa of Realtors C/O Newla House Museum City of Seal each
8101 Slater Av . 19820 Beac Blvd. 211 Eight S
Huntington Be ch,CA 92647 Huntington ach,CA 92648 Seal Beach, A 90740
President Chairperso CA Coastal mmission
Amigos De Bo a Chica Historical sources Bd. j Theresa He
P. O. Box 374 Comm. Se ces Dept. 245 W. Bro way,Ste 380
Huntington Be Lch,CA 92605 2000 Main t. Long Bch,C 90802
Huntington each,CA 92648 -
Charles Grant Robert Jose
Friends of the B Wetlands Council on ing Caltrans Di rict 12
21902 Kiowa ane 1706 Oran g Ave. 2501 Pullm n St.
Huntington B ch,CA 92646 Huntington each,CA 92648 Santa Ana, A 92705
Edna Littleb ry Director
Golden St. ob. Hm. Owners Leag. Local Solid aste Enf.Agy.
11021 Ma olia Blvd. O.C. Health Care Agency
Garden G e,CA 92642 P.O. Box 35
Santa-Ana,TA 92702
President County of O nge/EMA Dominick maino
Huntington each Tomorrow Michael M. ane,Dir. Seacliff Ho eowners Assoc.
411 6th St. P.O. Box 404 6812 Sceni Bay Lane
Huntington each,CA 92648 Santa Ana,C 92702-4048 Huntingto Beach,CA 92648
Julie VandeLost
BIA-OC County of O ange/EMA Huntingtoi Harbor HOA
9 Executive Circle#100 Thomas Ma ews,Dir,Planning P. O. Box 91
Irvine Ca 9 714-6734 P. O. Box 4 48 Sunset Bea h,CA 90742
Santa Ana, A 92702-4048
Richard Sp er
SCAG County of range/EMA Bill Lilly
818 West .th, 12th Floor Bob Fisher, ir. HHHOA C
Los Angel ,CA 90017 P.O. Box 4 8 16835 Al nquin St. #119
Santa Ana, A 92702-4048 Huntingto Beach, CA 92649
E.T.I. Corr 1 100 Planning Di . New Gro th Coordinator
Mary Bell City of Cost Mesa Huntingt Beach Post Office
20292 Eas vood Cir. P. O. Box 1 0 6771 Wa er Ave.
Huntingto Beach,CA 92646 Costa Mesa CA 92628-1200 Huntingt Beach,CA 92647
i
PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION CHECKLIST Pg. 2
(1211D)
i
Catherine Stipe,Environmental Planning D' . Mr.Tom Zanic
Board Chairman City of Fou ain Valley Seacliff Partners
16391 Fairway Lane 10200 Slat Ave. 520 Broadway Ste. 100
Huntington Beach, CA 92649 Fountain V ley,CA 92708 Santa Monica,CA
Pacific Coast Archaeological Planning D artment OC County Harbors,Beach
Society Tnr --- — Orange Co ty EMA and Parks Dept.
P.O. Box 10926 P. 0. Box 48 P. 0. Box 4048
Costa Mesa,CA 92627 Santa Ana, 9270Z-4048 Santa Ana,CA 92702-4048
Attn:Jane Gothold
JERRY BUCHANAN California Coastal Commission
HB City Elementary School District South District Office
P. 0. Box 71 245 W. Broadway No. 380
Huntington Beach,CA 92648 Long Beach,CA 92802-4458
964-8888
GARY BURGNER Dr. Duane Dishno
HB Union High School Disrict HB City Elementary School District
10251 Yorktown Avenue PO Box 71
Huntington Beach,CA 92646 Huntington Beach,CA 92626
964-3339 964-8888
,MARC EC)treet
David Hagen
Fountain ey HB Union High School district
Elementachool District 10251 Yorktown
17210 Oa Huntington Beach,CA 92646
Fountain ey CA 92 708 964-3339
JAMES JONE
Ocean view lementary
School distri t
17200 Pine rst Lane
Huntington each CA 92647
RON FRAZI
Westminste school district
14121 Ceda vood Avenue
Westminster A 92683
CSA
730 El Cami Way #200
Tustin, CA 9680
Connie Brockway, City Clerk
City of Huntington Beach 1
Office of the City Clerk '
P.O.Box 190 ✓A x
Huntington Beach,CA 92648 yI _
William&Jackie Griffith
�pNt INGTpy 200- 117 Pacific Coast HNvy
p� `M(ORPORgrfO BF Huntington Beach,CA 92648 :
LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING
' . .."•i�, ''..":'� . ! lltititfltltllflfltfl4ttltttFlll
i
... :cars. _...., .. rt,•_.'i..H...,.., ,.,f,, .•w,; ... '
Connie Brockway,City Clerk
City of Huntington Beach
Office of the City Clerk
P.O.BOX 190
1"3' 24 r•J ` ~ ,~ y'
Huntington Beach, CA 92648
Shin Ei,Inc.
M INGTpy 200-240 Pacific Coast Hwy
p� `N17
IRq�Fo dF Huntington Beach, CA 92648
�pUNTY �a LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING {
, ,t„ ffFIFFfFftltfl:ttlFtllttlFFtt[ll IFI„ai,Flt�lf)ftFF1lJf�f1L�FFiFJ1iF�fFFiF1l 4 '
i
1 Connie Brockway,City Clerk
City of Huntington Beach
Office of the City Clerk f I y P.O. Box 190 ,`.Il r
�.. ;,•
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 `.
j
j ;2, L
"! Ann L.Mase
INGTpy 123 Main St.
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 ? ,
Q =hGOHPORq<F
Ile
2�F �F@ 1j 1g09•' \
cpUNTY Cp`
LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING
Connie Brockway,City Clerk p�J�
City of Huntington Beach
Office of the City Clerk T A n / / -• `�-` /(. / g
P.O. Box 190 V 1�/ (�
Huntington Beach,CA 92648
Alfonso&.Elenita Obciana
P. 0.Box 4g22
0 TING Tpy� Diamond Bax,CA 91765
Q =h�OBPORq�FO FA �•1 _ .. .. .
F-•S 1 -yam
�i.lri;��}_f R111IN�� i.i.!''{C�-!"r.i',3.F•�.t.=IF
201b 1 _•�••� .l��.�.�1r� •`..CH.:•� U,•ter �•t n �t— .-!r�s_-`-•��'yV Z 1�11'i i Lf'it_ ui'{ L:�ri-i.-I—i i •+..0 ,u Lam]
cpUNTY cps LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING �II1��t�, ,��►��,���ll��,l��„.II.,1I111111��I�I1111I,1,If1111
Connie Brockway,City Clerk
City of Huntington Beach `
Office of the City Clerk
P.O. Box 190 ";'.�2t 05 " I
Huntington Beach,CA 92648 t t. t' N 1
i.
3(0
Theresa McKinnon
200 Pacific Coast Hwy,#M29I�g�
INGTpy� Huntington Beach, CA 92648
e•q ] j`
`FB /j 1909•�" 0
FppUNTY cP�
LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING ill11iiilllil!!liliili!!itiilitiiilii!iililliiliilillililliEi!
r....�....... _ 1 __... .J:WYr.:w:J'.lT�t!+7iK%-a :.]? .:C%ti.4�.i'Jdma4MwT•�w14 .. «—.. —� —�� _ —_._ ,,.,
Connie Brockway,City Clerk --
City of Huntington Beach U.S1i• 7, F C
Office of the City Clerk
P.O. Box 190 rr;i+24 i� •i
Huntington h,CA
__... ..
lSetsuko Nogami
200 Pacific Coast Hwy,#102
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 C 1�
�pNT I NGTpy
RPOR47F0
s
�puiYTY cP LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING
Connie Brockway,City Clerk
City of Huntington Beach
Office of the City Clerk \
P.O. Box 190
Huntington Beach,CA 92648
-
<. Rudy Sanchez \`r
INGTpy
200 Pacific Coast Hwy, #1107
dF Huntington Beach, CA 92648
C'
1 ,
ppUNTY cps LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING
'•`�' ''''',i IISI!!lllS�t�IIlSliil�131ti�i�SlllI�F3�iltlllFl�M II I iili till
r
Connie Brockway,City Clerk
City of Huntington Beach
Office of the City Clerk
P.O. Box 190 }` f..i}7.4 05
Huntington Beach,CA 92648
Fred&Mary Felix
200 - 147 Pacific Coast Hwy
Huntington Beach, CA 92648
�NTINGTpy
6` \M ORPOBq
7 a'
Q
9?G, FFQ,—'�,;o �p
F�puNrY PUBLIC HEARING
LEGAL NOTICE U
Ililliilllfll�iilliillilli!!il'I .
Connie Brockway,City Clerk C) v
' City of Huntington Beach
Office of the City Clerk
P.O. Box 190 \ / (• �;..,�+
! 4r �5
Huntington Beach,CA 92648
Thom Hohi erda _
+c Vth
ptJTING'r l' 6736 i Dr.,;#40l -•�ailf,,r� t itr�trtu
ti0R PO Los el
�� MAIL LOX
LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING
it I
Connie Brockway,City Clerk
City of Huntington Beach < `'
Office of the City Clerk
P.O. Box 190
Huntington Beach,CA 92648 �
(
r: r
•
•
Kenji Koi
CIO
I NGTpy 350 S. Fi eroa St., Fl. 127
O� `MGORPRR�lFO �F9 Los Ange s, CA 90071
I �
Q
�pUNTY �P LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING l- IimII11:
Connie Brockway, City Clerk
City of Huntington Beach
Office of the City Clerk
P.O.Box 190
Huntington B
each/CA 92648 ;
p >Ir
Gamillj&S 1
UNTING jOy� N00 paciiic c H(u asjIa,dne
.. ,i iNCO9 POgq IF �tJn '•J, 94•1
° gton 6
_ q� Beach, CA 92648
Q
f G.0
• C� 6/7, I909.0'6 ��0� „NJA- Odtio 448gOY,3
OOONTY UPS Z� Z. RN" To SENDER O3/z7/9S
ORDER III �' UN BRE OR O FIL
LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING �`ruRN To SENDARn E
bE
• - _ rr r
I'r t I
l
CITY18UNCIL PUBLIC HEARING REQUE
SUBJECT: AkIT-tC), '?q-2_G7/Cn4-S7-A (�
DEPARTMENT:
MEETING: 3 I q'TS
...........
Q 0 MR
..... ............... ..
-1X
... . ......
.............
. .....................................
X........... ...........
..................
N/A YES NO
/n Does Heading and Closing of Notice Reflect City Council.Hearing (Not PC)
Is a Map attached and/or is a quarter page legal ad required?
If appeal, is appellant's name shown on legal notice?
IYV
( ) ( ) If housing is involved, is"legal challenge paragraph" included?
If Coastal Development Permit, are the RESIDENT labels attached and is the Coastal
Commission Office on the labels?
If Coastal Development Permit, has the Master Legal Notice Document been used?
O Is Title Company verification letter attached?
Were the latest Assessor's Parcel Rolls h verification of Title Co.or indicate
that rolls used were derived frqff Assessor's Rolls in Planning Dept.,>hichever.-applicable)
Is the-appellant's name and address part of the labels?
Is day of public hearing correct -Monday/Tuesday?
Has the City Administrator's Office authorized the public hearing to be set?
Is day of public hearing correct -Monday/Tuesday?
Is there an Environmental Status to be approved by Council?
Are the appellant/applicant's names and addresses on mailing labels?
For Public Hearings at the City Council level, please insert the below paragraph of the public hearing
notice
"ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to attend said hearing and express.opinions*or submit to the
City Clerk written evidence for or against the application as outlined above. If there are any further
questions, please call (insert name of Planner) at 536-5271
CONNIE BROCKWAY,CITY CLERK
CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
2000 MAIN STREET-2ND FLOOR
HUNTINGTON BEACH,CALIFORNIA 92648
(714)A�-s2W(.:;1, 71qq 0C16,tjf A-c-,
c®G�Z? y
G:/es/PUBHER ut
Connie Brockway,City Clerk
City of Huntington Beach
Office of the City Clerk �.
P.O. Box 190 A& 5
Huntington Beach, CA 92648
D 9
1 F
i
B %+
OHO yJ, �} o !✓
9
Steven&Cathy Gilbert p
�NTINGTp ° J, 9167 McBride River Ave.
Fountain Valley,CA 92708
O =NCRRPRRq,FO P�
cpUNTY cP�
LEGAL NOTICE
0 CE — PUBLIC HEARING t j s jj t
` •. '• t �141ti1l1?I�it3'��!1k11i1??1111!�?il!?I�illil!!�1?i�!'.S�IIliil
1
: Connie Brockway,City Clerk T_., .•, E
City of Huntington Beach �� .-±r��r w .,., �� i{ f
Office of the City Clerk '
... � �•�. (
n s" I —r,
P.O. Box 190 r. It:ftM <<I :a
l
Huntington Beach,CA 92648
. 1DIhC30ADLItE1;.14NIU -• .. ... ... �` I''� i` ., ,. y.
Robert&Patriclal ?►
11241ago
IN6TpyA S '"`r CA 92705 I
Q� =MGRRPRg4IF q7/� � '
LINTY LEGAL NOTICE — PUBLIC HEARING 1
t,?� 11.1 _le f rt s'Aifift
RCA ROUTING SHEET
INITIATING DEPARTMENT: Community Develo ent
SUBJECT: Appeal CUP94-25/CDP94-10/CE94-33/ND94-12
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: April 3, 1995
RCA ATTACHMENTS STATUS
Ordinance (w/exhibits & legislative draft if applicable) Not Applicable
Resolution (w/exhibits & legislative draft if applicable) Not Applicable
Tract Map, Location Map and/or other Exhibits Attached
Contract/Agreement (w/exhibits if applicable)
(Signed in full by the City Attorney) Not Applicable
Subleases, Third Party Agreements, etc.
(Appoved as to form by City Attorney) Not Applicable
Certificates of Insurance (Approved by the City Attorney) Not Applicable
Financial Impact Statement (Unbudget, over $5,000) Not Applicable
Bonds (If applicable) Not Applicable
Staff Report (If applicable) Attached
Commission, Board or Committee Report (If applicable) Attached
Findings/Conditions for Approval and/or Denial Attached
EXPLANATION FOR MISSING ATTACHMENTS
...
REVIEWED RETURNED FO RDED
Administrative Staff
Assistant City Administrator (Initial) -
City Administrator Initial
City Clerk
.. ...... ... ..... ......... .... . . ......... ......... ........ . ........ ... .. ... .
.... .... ........ . ......... ...... ......... . .......
EXPLANATI N F R RETURN F ITEM.
. . . Only)