HomeMy WebLinkAboutPub Hear-Appeal PC Approval CUP 90-17/CDP 90-18/FEIR 90-2 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION
HUNTINGTON BEACH �i
To Gail Hutton From Connie Brockway v0
City Attorney City Clerk
Subject Copies mailed to Stephanie Date . 7/10/91
Dahl re: Pierside/Chodos
Attached is a copy of the information requested by Stephanie Dahl ,
attorney for Jonathan Chodos in regards to Pierside.
TRANSMISSION REPORT
PHONE/TTI NO. 9164430528
DATE AND TIME 07-10 12:22PM
DURATION 02' 1 7
MODE
PAGE 04
RESULT GOOD
WW#*WWWWW*WWWWWMWWWW*WWWWWk++WW:+A::+:+W:44.4 W 4.4:.V,4:4'+:W V'.il f'B+.:4:f +'kW+k4##WW*I:WWA:W.+RW#WWA**WM*.`KW#WS.k f:Wk
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
2000 MAIN STREET/P. 0. BOX 190
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92648
Multifax Image Mate
(714) 374-1557
***PLEASE DELIVER THE FOLLOWING MATERIAL AS SOON AS POSSIBLE***
FAX NO.
FROM:
NUMBER OF PAGES - I (INCLUDING COVER PAGE)
DATE SENT: -7 l C, 1611 TIME SENT: Z os AM/PM
OPERATOR'S NAME
PLEASE NOTIFY OPERATOR IMMEDIATELY IF NOT RECEIVED PROPERLY
(714) 536-5227
COMMENTS:
CHARGE FOR THIS MATERIAL:
PLEASE REMIT TO THE ADDRESS ABOVE
1038K
from the desk of:
LAURA A. NELSON
DEPUTY CITY CLERK
(714) 374-1559
7/10/91
Stephanie:
Connie did not remember the exact date
that this document was mailed, but as
I explained, her letters are mailed
either the same day or the next day.
Please contact me if I can help you
further.
P.O. BOX 190
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 ,
CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
Z 2000 MAIN STREET CALIFORNIA 92648
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
March 20 , 1991
NOTICE OF ACTION
APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL, OF
COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 90-18
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 90-17
S::FPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 90-2
GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE NO. 90-8
-`-
APPLICANT: Redevelopment Agency/Jonathan Chodos
APPELLANT: Councilwoman Grace Winchell
REQUEST: Appeal of the Planning Commission ' s approval
of 48 , 250 square feet of commercial
development , including up to 5 restaurants
and beach-related concessions with parking
and 78, 250- sq . ft . of publ4c plaza .
LOCATION: Ocean side of Pacific Coast Highway between
Pain Street and First Street (southeast of
the pier)
You application was acted upon iy the Huntington Beach
City Council on March 18, 1991 and your request was :
Approved
Denied
Withdrawn
X Cond-itionally approved
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 tn. PRC 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
(213) 590-5071
1G57
(TC:w P;suov; /14•.r,3G-522- 1
Notice of Action
Coastal Development Permit
Page Two
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.
A- copy of the minutes will be forwarded to you when
completed-.
Connie Brockway, CMC
City Clerk
CB:me
CC: City Attorney
Community. Development Director
Coastal Commission
I
4-
1057K
+----------+-----------------------------------+--------+---+---+--------+
+ Category + Label - CC/MS/PO S +BOX+EXP DATE+
+ Subject + +MF +DES DATE+
+----------+-----------------------------------+--------+---+---+--------+
CH 420 .40 Pub Hear-Appeal PC Approval CUP A
90-17/CDP 90-18/FEIR 90-2/GPC 90-8
Pierside-Alt Action #1 Apprvd-
Res 6260-Adptd-Redev Agency/Chodos
1656 ocean side PCH btwn Main/1st St
+----------+-----------------------------------+--------+---+---+--------+
+-----=----+-----------------------------------+--------+---+---+--------+
[Press any key to continue]
C
CITY OF HUNTINGT'ON BEACH
2000 MAIN STREET CALIFORNIA 92648
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
March 20, 1991
NOTICE OF ACTION
APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF
COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO.90-18
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 90-17
Sr
;rFLE!4ENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 90-2
GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE NO. 90-8
APPLICANT: Redevelopment Agency/Jonathan Chodos
APPELLANT: Councilwoman Grace Winchell
REQUEST: Appeal of the Planning Commission' s approval
of 48, 250 square feet of commercial
development, - including up to 5 restaurants
and beach-related concessions with parking
and 78, 250 sq. ft . of public plaza .
LOCATION: Ocean side of Pacific Coast Highway between
Main Street and First Street (southeast of
the pier)
You application was acted upon by the Huntington Beach
City Council on March 18, 1991 and your request was :
Approved
Denied
Withdrawn
X Conditionally approved
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 PRC 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
(2i3) 590-5071
1057K
(Te!ephonr: 714-536-5227)
Y
Notice of Action
Coastal Development Permit
Page Two
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.
A copy of the minutes will' be forwarded to you when
completed.
Connie Brockway, CMC
City Clerk
CB:me
CC: City Attorney
Community Development Director
Coastal Commission
Sec; Cps
1057K
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
/1d2191—/A ' January 22, 1991
3��9 f Date
Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council M mbers
Submitted by: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrato
Prepared by: Michael Adams, Director of Community Developme
Subject: APPEAL - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 90-17, COASTAL
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 90-18, SUPPLEMENTAL EIR NO. 90-2
GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE NO. 90-8 (PIERSIDE RESTAURANTS)
Consistent with Council Policy? [ ] Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception
Statement of Issue, Recommendation,Analysis, Funding Source,Alternative Actions,Attachments: (94
STATEMENT OF ISSUE:
The above referenced entitlements were approved by the Planning
Commission on November 6, 1990 . On November 16, 1990, Councilwoman
Winchell submitted an appeal . The applicant has requested a
continuance of the hearing for 45 days . Councilwoman Winchell, as
appellant, concurs with this request .
RECOMMENDATION:
Continue the appeal hearing on the above-referenced Pierside
Restaurant project for 45 days (to the Council meeting of March 18,
1991) .
71-0
l�
MTU:MA:LP: lp
(8362d)
Plo 5/85
Publish 1/10/91
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
APPEAL
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 90-17/
COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 90-18
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 90-2
GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE NO. 90-8
(To permit a 48,250 square foot commercial development
with restaurants, beach related concessions and
subterranean parking)
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Huntington Beach City Council will
hold a public hearing in the Council Chamber at the Huntington Beach
Civic Center, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California, on the
date and at the time indicated below to receive and consider the
statements of all persons who wish to be heard relative to the
application described below.
DATE/TIME: Tuesday, January 22, 1991, 7: 00 PM
APPLICATION NUMBER: Conditional Use Permit No. 90-17/Coastal
Development Permit No. 90-18/Final
Environmental Impact Report No. 90-2
General Plan Conformance No. 90-8
APPLICANT: Redevelopment Agency/Jonathan Chodos
APPELLANT: Councilwoman Grace Winchell
LOCATION: Ocean side of Pacific Coast Highway between Main
Street and First Street (southeast of the pier)
ZONE: Downtown Specific Plan District 10 (Pier Related
Commercial)
REQUEST: Appeal of the Planning Commission' s approval of 48,250
square feet of commercial development, including up to
5 restaurants and beach-related concessions with
parking and 78,250 .sq. ft. of public plaza.
ENVIRONMENTAL The project is covered by Final Environmental Impact
STATUS: Report No. 90-2 (supplement to Final Environmental
Impact Report No. 82-2) , which the Council will also
act upon.
(OVER)
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
(Continued)
COASTAL STATUS: This project is. in the appealable portion of the
Coastal Zone. 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 within ten (10)
working days of the date of the City Council ' s
action. There is no fee for the appeal of a coastal
development permit.
An aggrieved person may file an appeal to the
Coastal Commission 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
P. O. Box 1450
Long Beach, CA 90801-1450
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.
PUBLIC HEARING PROCEDURE: (1) Staff Report;
(2) Public Hearing;
(3) City Council Discussion; and
(4) City Council action.
ON FILE: A copy of the proposed request is on file in the
Community Development Department, 2000 Main Street,
Huntington Beach, California 92648, for inspection by the
public.
ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to attend said hearing and
express opinions or submit evidence for or against the application
as outlined above. If there are any further questions please call
Laura Phillips, Associate Planner at 536-5271.
Connie Brockway
City Clerk
(8137d)
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING v
APPEAL
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 90-17/
COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 90-18
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 90-2
GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE NO. 90-8
(To permit a 48, 250 square foot commercial development
with restaurants , beach related concessions and
subterranean parking)
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Huntington Beach City Council will
hold a public hearing in the Council Chamber at the. Huntington Beach
Civic Center, 2000 Main Street , Huntington Beach, California, on the
date and at the time indicated below to receive and consider the
statements of all persons who wish to be heard relative to the
application described below.
DATE/TIME: Monday, December 17, 1990,. 7 : 00 PM
APPLICATION NUMBER: Conditional Use Permit No . 90-17/Coastal
Development Permit No . 90-18/Final
Environmental Impact Report No . 90-2
General Plan Conformance No . 90-8
APPLICANT: Redevelopment Agency/Jonathan Chodos
APPELLANT: Councilwoman Grace Winchell
LOCATION: Ocean side of .Pacific Coast Highway between Main
Street and First Street (southeast of the pier)
ZONE : Downtown Specific Plan District 10 (Pier Related
Commercial)
REQUEST: Appeal of the Planning Commission' s approval of 48, 250
square feet of commercial development, including up to
5 restaurants and beach-related concessions with
parking and 78, 250 sq. ft : of public plaza .
ENVIRONMENTAL - The project is covered" by Final Environmental Impact
STATUS : Report No . 90-2 (supplement to Final Environmental
Impact Report No . 82-2) , .which the Council will also
act upon.
1A
C�
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
(Continued)
COASTAL STATUS: This project is in the appealable portion of the
Coastal Zone . 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 within ten (10)
working days of the date of the City Council ' s
action. There is no fee for the appeal of a coastal
development permit .
An aggrieved person may file an appeal to the
Coastal Commission 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
P. 0. Box 1450
Long Beach, CA 90801-1450
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.
PUBLIC HEARING PROCEDURE: ( 1) Staff Report;
(2) Public Hearing;
(3) City Council Discussion; and
(4) City Council action.
ON FILE: A copy of the proposed request is on file in the
Community Development' Department, 2000 Main Street,
Huntington Beach, California 92648 , for inspection by the
public :
ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to attend said hearing and
express opinions or submit evidence for or against the application
as outlined above. If there are any further questions please call
Laura Phillips , Associate Planner at 536-5271 .
Connie Brockway
City Clerk
(7835d)
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING q5 v¢Y i i-ed. -6
(7848d) 11/20/90 y P I ti
✓n'cl'� � a.SSe$SorS ro lei,
State of California Harvey D. Pease
Real Estate Division 314 Crnation Ave.
650 Howe Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 bah C I� I�Q r'�C�S
�Q
Sacramento, CA 95825 AP# 024-163-14
AP# 024-150-16
Amad H. Abdelmuti Huntington Beach Co.
Jack Surf-N-Sport P. 0. Box 7611
113 Main Street San Francisco, CA 94120
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 AP# 024-271-01
AP# 024-153-08
Eldon W. Bagstad Huntington Beach Co.
901 Catalina Ave. 225 Bush St.
Seal Beach, CA 90740 San Francisco, CA 94120
AP# 024-153-11 AP# 024-281-13
Ahmad Abdelmuti Louise Fiorillo -
113 Main St-. 11721 Vul tee Street Q LA*
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Downey, CA 90241
AP# 024-153-13
Cal Resorts Haseko Ralph Peck !�-
222 5th St. 8565 Farm Street
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Downey, CA 90241
AP# 024-154-04
Beach Resorts Cal Resorts/Haseko
222 5th Street 305 Walnut Ave.
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Huntington Beach, CA 92648
AP# 024-163-08 AP# 024-154-17
Otis W. Peck
8404 Lexington Rd.
Downey, CA 90241
AP# 024-163-09
Allen L. Nelson
8404 Lexington Rd.
Downey, CA 90241
AP# 024-163-09
PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION CHECKLIST
� p MAILING LABELS
(6641d) 8/20/90
H.B. Chamber of Commerce Huntington Beach Co.
2213 Main St. #32 2110 Main St.
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Hunt. Bch., CA 92648-2499
Attn: Kim Barone Attn: William D. Holman
H.B./F.V. Board of Realtors Pres. , H.B. Hist. Society
8101 Slater Ave. C/O Newland House Museum
Huntington Beach, CA 92647 19820 Beach Blvd.
Attn: Board President Hunti.ngton Beach, CA 92648
Historical Resources Bd. CA Coastal Commission
Comm. Services Dept. Theresa Henry
2000 Main St. 245 W. Broadway, Ste 380
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Long Bch, CA 90802
Attn: Chairperson
Friends of the HB Wetlands
21902 Kiowa Lane
Huntington Beach, CA 92646
Attn: Charles Grant
Coastal Conservancy Golden St. Mob. Hm. Owners Leag. S
P.O. Box 66494 11021 Magnolia Blvd.
Los Angeles, CA 90066 Garden Grove, CA 92642
Attn: Ruth Galanter Attn: Edna Littlebury
i
Huntington Beach Tomorrow
411 6th St.
Huntington Beach, CA 92648
Attn: President
SCAG
818 West 7th, 12th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Attn: Richard Spicer
Chairman, Environmental Board
Comm. Dev. Dept.
2000 Main St.
.a,
Huntington Beach, CA 92648
Y •lG
G
4
:fit. s-i,'%•tr'i�.�i���`�4:i"i=i Si:": --�'•mt
.,l"" ..f.: .i' 'i(%s) .!r'•�i=';,.:. _ .t.. `-s,:i`e 3: •9.L-F: _
.J •F:C'• L
.y
•L+ t.... t
.Y
%1 y{
a..:.... ll ,•tom
C.
- i
J
}
5a ••n 1
.it vvYi:'�'• o ri::b• 1...
l 'E
r
•:k: :tl•s
1
5
- - r-
•
l000
_
1-1 B. Community Services Shaved Ice
Beach Division 31.7 Pacific Coast Highway
Attn: Doug D'Arnall , Manager Huntington )')each, CA 92648
103 Pacific Coast Highway
Huntington Beach, CA 92648
Huntington ryes
Dwight 's Beach Concessions 317 Pacific Coast 1-1ighway
201 .1?.acif.ic Coast Highway Huntington Beach, CA 92648
Huntington Beach, CA 92648
The Green Burrito Restaurant Paradise Beach Co.
317 Pacific Coast Iiighway Attn: Scott rinbinder
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 317 Pacific Coast Highway
Huntington Beach, CA 92648
Maxwell 's Restaurant
Attn: Paul h}immer
317 Pacific Coast Highway
Huetingt:on Peach, CA 92648
Maxie's Pizza
319 Pacific Coast Highway
Huntington Beach, CA 92648
The Game Room
317 Pacific Coast Highway
�� Huntington Beach, CA 92648
113 November 16, 1990
City of Huntington Beach
Attn: Connie Brockway, City Clerk
2000 Main Street
Huntington Beach:
SUBJECT: Appeal of Conditional Use Permit(CUP)#90-17, Coastal Development
Permit(CDP)#90-18, and Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR)
90-2; and General Plan Conformance 90-8.
Dear City Clerk:
I hereby appeal the Planning Commission's action to approve CUP#90-17, CDP#90-18,
andSEIR90-4 and General Plan Conformance No. 90-8.
The basis for my appeal is as follows:
1. Failure to address property dedicated to public recreational uses. The property was
impliedly dedicated to public recreational use by the actions of its owners and in 1932
was expressly dedicated to such use by its fee owners. Restaurants do not constitute a
public use.
2. Failure to show that the public interest and necessity require the project.
3. Failure to show the project is compatible with the greatest public good.
4. Inadequate parking. This project does not meet city code parking requirements. Project
does not address valet versus self-parking, beach versus commercial use; how do you
keep beach-goer parking exclusively for the beach-goer so that access will not be
reduced.
5. Outdoor dining space has not been defined and delineated from public walkways.
Outdoor dining further compounds parking shortfalls.
6. Contrary to redevelopment goals,this project does not adequately address goods and
services for low to moderate income levels. The project monopolizes the "view" areas
for upper-income patrons.
7. Inadequate access for fire and safety vehicles.
8. Does not comply with Specific Plan. Sit-down dining is not beach related nor pier
related.
9. Failure to address economic concerns. Planning staff refused to provide commissioners
with financial analysis of project as required by CEQA. Do the risks out-weigh the
benefits; can the city afford to lose$500,000 per year from the general fund. Can the
city afford to subsidize this development by locking in a long-term rate of return.
10. Proposed paving material to stop skateboard use may limit use by handicapped or
senior citizens.
11. Height of parking structure for beach-goer use is inadequate for utility vehicles or vans
and trucks carrying surfboards. Loading docks on lowest level may not accommodate
service vehicles.
12. SEIR failed to address off-site alternatives.
13. Despite the "history lesson" in the SEIR regarding the Pavilion building, a restoration
analysis was not included in the SEIR. The Pavilion building is a significant historic
structure and a restoration alternative was not considered.
13.Project interferes with commercial uses of newly built or redeveloped areas of Main
Street.
14. The development fails to protect public views from PCH.
15. The project is not compatible with the scale of the area.
16. Value of land is undervalued by Redevelopment Agency.
17. Project deserves a complete and separate EIR. Issues which were not considered
significant (and not studied) should be addressed in new EIR: Land Use, Seismic
Safety, Flood Hazard, Tidal Hazard, Natural Resources, Noise,Public Services,
Recreation Resources.
18. SEIR did not study the project's coordination with other projects in the immediate area
such as the Pier and Pier Plaza or the proposed parking structure north of the pier.
19. Consideration of these entitlements should be concurrent with lease and Development
Disposition Agreement to afford opportunity for the Council to make review and
modify conditions of approval.
20. The Redevelopment Agency should obtain surrenders from the lessees and formally
terminate the 1986 lease before giving entitlement for a new project.
Yours Truly, ✓�
til •
Councilwoman Grace Winchell
Authorized to Publish Advertisements of all kinds including
public notices by Decree of the Superior Court of Orange
County, California, Number A-6214, September 29, 1961, and
A-24831 June 11, 19W
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
County of Orange
I am a Citizen of the United States and a
resident of the County aforesaid; I am over the
COASTAL STATUS: This
age of eighteen years, and not a party to or RMB I rrorI- " p�r,�oje., is in the appealable
NOTICE+OF Portion of the Coastal Zone. I
interested in the below entitled matter. [.am a Under the provisions of the
clerk of the ORANGE COAST DAILY PUBLIC HEARING Huntington Beach ordl-
APPEAL: Hance Code, the action principal GONDITIONA_L'`<USE
PILOT a newspaper of general circulation take^by the G�ty eal I fit Is
PERMIT�NO('80-17/ final unless an appeal ISlflled
g 60ASTAL::DEVELOPMENT to the Coastal Commission
printed and published in the City of Costa Mesa, PERMITiN0:80-18 by the applicant or an ag- 1
FINAL ENVIRONMENUA'L grieved party. Saltl appeal
County of Orange, State of California, and that IMP NO.90 R R must be In writing and must
GENERAL PLAN set forth in detail the actions
attached Notice is a true and PY as complete co and grounds by and upon
P CONFORMANCE N0.80-8 which the applicant or
NOTICE. IS .•HE;REBY Interested ply deems.°
was printed and published in the Costa Mesa, GIVEN thatxthe Huntington himself aggrieved. Said ap
Newport Beach Huntington Beach Fountain (Beach Clty Cou�gcil will hold peal must be submitted to
, a pubhcrin In<the Croun- the Coastal Commissslon
cilfChamber at fhe Hunt- within ten(10)working days
Valley, Irvine, the South Coast communities and r gton Beach CrvicCenter, of the date of the Clty Coun-
2000 IMaln4 Street� ........
cil's action. There Is no fee"
Laguna Beach issues of said newspaper to wit Ingto�n Bea.h Cahfom�;o for the appeal of a coastal
tlie�date and�at thg`'iime In; development permit.
the issue(s) of: dlcated below to receive an8 qn aggrieved person may
consitler the statements of -file an appeal to the Coastal
all persons who wish o be Commission within ten (10)
heard'relative�tothe appll- working days, pursuant to
cation described below. Section 30603 of the Public
DATE/TIME:Monday,De- Resources Code, In writing
.ember 17,1990,7:00 PM to: California Coastal Com-
AP,P.LIGAdION NUMBER: i mission, 245 W. Broadway,
December 6 , 19901 nal Use Permit,No:,.' SuiteBox 1450,
w - Long Beach,CA 90801-1450
II$ PU LICNUTICE ,„ )i The Coastal Commission
90`17/Costal De a yelo m n I review period will com-
Perml90-1t3%F,inal En- mence after the City appeal
period has ended and no ap-�
vironmental Impact Report i peals have been filed.Appel4
No.90-2/General Plan Con- 'cants will be notified by the'
formance No590-8;.
�., �Coastal Commission as to,
t APPLICANT: Redevelop- �the date of the conclusion of
ment A enc /Jonathan:
� 9 Y -the Coastal Commission re-
Chodos view.Applicants are advised
�A�PPE-LLANT.; Coun not to begin construction
alwooman Grace Winchell prior to that date.
� LOCATION Ocean side of P U B L I C H E A R I N G
Pac�ifh�c.Frr�+G�oast"'g way.be- PROCEDURE: (1) Staff Re-
Itween�MaiStreet andlFi�st port; (2) Public Hearing;(3)
Street(soYut�heasst of the�ipie) City Council Discussion;and
ZONE:DowntowntSpeciflc (4)Clty Gouncll action.
Plan District 10 (Pier'Re! ON FILE: A copy of the
�Iated Commerciaq -. proposed request is on file In----- --. _ ..
REQUEST: Appeal of the the Community Develop„-_
Planning Commisslon's ap- ment Department, 2000
I declare, under penalty of perjury, that the provalof48,250squarefeet. Main Sieet, Huntington
of commercial development, Beach,California 92648,for
foregoing is true and correct. Including up to 5 restaurants: inspection by the public.
end beach-related con- ALL INTERESTED PER.
essions with parking and- SONS are Invited to attene
78,250 square feet oftpybllc said hearin and ex ress c
December 6 9 P
Executed on � , 199— it evldena
ENVIRONMENTAL
for or against the appllcatlor
at Costa Mesa, California. STATUS:The project Is•cov=• as outlined above. If then
9 are any further questions
Impact Report ''No �90 2 please call Laura PhIlllps
(�sutipphe�m'ent to F�na1, En Associate Planner, a,
vironmental Impac- ReporIt 536-5271.
No.82-2),which the Gouncll Dated:12/3/90
Signature will also act upon. Gonnle Brockway Clt)
Clerk, ;At of Hun of
5t4 ,
W , Beach
Published Orange Coas
Daily Pilot December 81
1990
Th-807.
PROOF OF PUBLICATION
Authorized to Publish Advertisements of all kinds including
public notices by Decree of the Superior Court of Orange
County, California, Number A-6214, September 29, 1961, and
A-24831 June 11, 1963
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
County of Orange
I am a Citizen of the United States and 'a
resident of the County aforesaid; I am over the
age of eighteen years, and not a party to or
COASTALu STATUS: This
interested in the below entitled matter. I am a t protect is In the appealable
;,PUBLIC:NOTICE uportlon of the Coastal Zone
principal clerk of the ORANGE COAST DAILYNgTicE of under the provlsi°ne of the .
PILOT, a newspaper of general circulation, PuBAPPEALRINGHuntington Beach Ordl
nance Code, the action
CONDITIONAL USE �t_ak�en_,�by the Clty Council Is
printed and published in the City of Costa Mesa, I: PERMIT 10.80-17 fin'alu lessenapp�eallsfiled
County of Orange, State of California, and that GOABTAL DEVELOPMENT to the Coastal Commisslon
'7 � PERMIT NO.80-18 ,,by the'applicant or an ag
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL grieved party. Said appeal a
attached Notice is a true and complete copy as IMPAGTdREPORT h,ust be In writing and musty
N0.80-2 ;•set forth In detail the actions was printed and published in the Costa Mesa, GENERAL PLAN and grounds by an upon
CONFORMANCE NO.90 8 which the applicant orr
Newport Beach, Huntington Beach, Fountain (Topermlta Interested ply deems
Valle Irvine the South Coast communities and 48,250-square feet Deal f.eggrieved. Said ape
y, I commerelal development Deal must.be submitted to
with restaurants, the Coastal�C'�mmisslon •
Laguna Beach issues of said newspaper to wit beach-related,coneeaslons within ten(10)working d,� .,
' and subterranean of the date of�the CIiyCoun
the issue(s) Of. parking) cIl's action.There Is no fee ,;
NOTICE IS HEREBY-' ' for the appeal of a coastal
GIVEN that the Huntington development permit.
Beach CISy.Gouncll will h to d An aggrieved person may4
a public hearing;ln the Coun file an appeal to the.Coastal
cll Chamber -at the Hunt _ Commission withlnlen (10) -
Ington ...w Crvlc Center,:_; working -days, pursuant to ,
Section 30603 of the Publlc f
20001t 14In�Street H'u"nt .....
Resources>Code In(wrlting
January 12, 1991 Ington,& h'Gal{f.�._ or ion ..—
the date and at the-time In—,, to: Cellfo[nla Coesfal Com
' ' >dmission, 245 W Broadway,
tllcated TIP receive and
con`slgei toe statements.V Suite 380, P O Boz 1450,
ail pesonstrwho twlsh to 6e Long Beach CA 90801 145A0
1Via Coastal Commisslon-
heard relative to theappll ..F
"`� r review:,.^ erlod will- com-
caUonWscribe- below:. 1P
DA:T9E/TIME: Tuesday, - men after the Clty_'appeal•'
January�22 1991 7 00 PM, pert.-,-- ended and no ap
APPYLI-CATION;NQMBER: Peals h&,Ya Neso�lled;Appll
fCondltlonal�U��sePermli No. cants will be notlfledby�the
9017/.Coastaal>Qevelopment: Costal Commiss'hmas to the -:
date of the conclusion of the
Permlt�no 90�18/Fmel�Ert Coastal�Commissioh�revlew
vlronmental Impacts Repo A Ilcanfs ere advised not
No#90-2/General Plan Con pp
formance No 90=8 to begin construction prior ;:
APPLICANT. 'Redevelop
enc to that date a
m`ent Agy/Jon han ' PUBLIC H E A`R ItN G
[Chodos �. PROCEDURE (1);Steff Re-
APP_ELLASNil a- i n Port; (2) Publlc Hear.Ing (-
lcllwomant,GradeWmchell', City Councll, Dlscussio n
LOCATION'Ocean side of and(4)City Council action
,Pacifla Coast ,Hl hwa tie ON FILE A copy of the
declare, under penalty of perjury, that the t een�MalrrStree`and First PaPosedrequestls[onflleln .'
Street;(ssooutheeaas_tVof the pler) they;Community Develop ;
forppnr1Oln IS true and correct. ONEDowntownSpeclfic merit Department; 2000r ;;
foregoing PlantDistnct 10(Pier related Mal�ri Street, Hunt�ggton
Comme�clal) Beach,Callfornla 92848 for
Jams 12 1 yREQUEST Appeal of the inspection by the Publlc
Executed on 1 gg lanning Commissions apd A'L.,INTERESTED PER
I pr�ovaI df 48 2s0"square feet SONS are Invited to attend
at Costa Mesa, California. of�commerclalre'veldpme tt said hearing and ex as
Including up to 5•restaurants opinioris or submit evidence
land;beach related on for or agains tthe,application ;
fcesslon will p3 kin- ' as outlined above. If there..
78 250 sq ft of public plaza' are any further questions ;I
L please•call Laura..Phillips
STATUS ThepFoJectfisco'- Associate Planner, at
Signature Bred WfInn6 Environmental 535 5271.
Impact',,R�eporf No t90 2 Connie-Brockway, City .
5L4 ,
—� (supplemnt _toy F1nalEr- Glerk CNy of Hu'nlinglon
oL vlronmental Impact Report Beach '
No82 2)ewhlcFi<the Couricll Published Orange Coast
w11I also)ect upon. Daily Pilot Janus, 1.2,1991
--— ="SaTh-011
PROOF OF PUBLICATION \
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
APPEAL
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 90-17/
COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 90-18
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 90-2
GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE NO. 90-8
(To permit a 48 , 250 square foot commercial development
with restaurants, beach related concessions and
subterranean parking)
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Huntington Beach City Council will
hold a public hearing in the Council Chamber at the Huntington Beach
Civic Center, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California on the
date and at the time indicated below to receive and consider the
statements of all persons who wish to be heard relative to the
application described below.
DATE/TIME: Tuesday, January 22, 1991, 7 : 00 PM
APPLICATION NUMBER: Conditional Use Permit No . 90-17/Coastal
Development Permit No . 90-18/Final
Environmental Impact Report No . 90-2
General Plan Conformance No . 90-8
APPLICANT: Redevelopment Agency/Jonathan Chodos
APPELLANT: Councilwoman Grace Winchell
LOCATION: Ocean side of Pacific Coast Highway between Main
Street and First Street (southeast of the pier)
ZONE: Downtown Specific Plan District 10 (Pier Related
Commercial)
REQUEST: Appeal of the Planning Commission' s approval of 48 , 250
square feet of commercial development, including up to
5 restaurants and beach-related concessions with
parking and 78 , 250 sq. ft . .of public plaza .
ENVIRONMENTAL The project is covered by Final Environmental Impact
STATUS: Report No . 90-2 (supplement to Final Environmental
Impact Report No . 82-2) , which the Council will also
act upon.
1
r
i � NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
(Continued)
COASTAL STATUS: This project is in the appealable portion of the
Coastal Zone. 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 within ten (10)
working days of the date of the City Council ' s
action. There is no fee for the appeal of' a coastal
development permit .
An aggrieved person may file an appeal to the
Coastal Commission 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
P. 0. Box 1450
Long Beach, CA 90801-1450
The. Coast-wl Comm-ission remiew_p.ex_iied=w �1—aommence af-treT--t-h.e-C-!-t-Y
apial Tr-@-� ha.s - ende�n no annaaI S have.obee-.n -f!-I-ed-:--
sdi11- -be-notif- ed--by-the C�a�tap-G'ommisson�-as�to the d`atotxhe-�
co.n.c,l u.s.i.o.n-o f the=C=o:a-st a=l--Commi s-s--kon-r--ev ew-: Appp 1 i c,a-nt,s_a r_e advised
n&t to=beg-in-co°n's'tru�ct'ion prig tr o that-date.
PUBLIC HEARING PROCEDURE: (1) Staff Report;
(2) Public Hearing;
(3) City Council Discussion; and
(4) City Council action.
ON FILE: A copy of the proposed request is on file in the
Community Development Department, 2000 Main Street,
Huntington Beach, California 92648, for inspection by the
public .
ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to attend said hearing and
express opinions or submit evidence for or against the application
as outlined above . . If there are any- further questions please call
Laura Phillips, Associate Planner at 536-5271.
Connie Brockway
City. Clerk
(8137d)
..- e.iwr.n _ _ _ - ...:+.c..� •.a—r"�' yay',. .swya.•.i�s^ _—„'YM".
.� iJi�l+4�r Y^.
1 ) _ 4 �J-y��'�Q'T�"•ZS��`�Atll (" ,vl
' r r� _s >-- L � it ran.
-
_ r -- t t s,Y- .+ t t,�2w9r ill •:�l"•1�'.:
ON
R.
/ u
H.B. Community Services J Shaved Ice
Beach Division 31.7 Pacific Coast Highway
Attn: Doug D'Arnall, Manager Huntington Beach, CA 92648
103 Pacific Coast Highway ,
Huntington Beach, CA 92648
}
Huntington Eyes
Dwight's Beach Concessions 317 Pacific Coast Highway
201 .Pacific Coast Highway Huntington Beach, CA 92648
Huntington Beach, CA 92648
The Green Burrito Restaurant Paradise Beach Co.
317 Pacific Coast Highway Attn: Scott Einbinder
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 317 Pacific Coast Highway
/ s7r Huntington Beach, CA 92648
Maxwell's Restaurant
Attn: - Paul Wimmer
317 Pacific Coast Highway
Huntington P aach, CA 92648
Maxie's Pizza
319 Pacific Coast Highway
Huntington Beach, CA 92648
•
The Game Room
317 Pacific. Coast Highway
Huntington Beach, CA 92648
1 �
�Ies�L' " "� PUBLIC BEARING NOTIFICATION CHECKLIST
� p Q MAILING LABELS
(6641d) 8/20/90
o ,
H.B. Chamber of Commerce Huntington Beach Co.
2213 Main St. #32 2110, Main St.
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Hunt. Bch., CA 92648-2499
Attn: Kim Barone Attn: William D. Holman
H.B./F.V. Board of Realtors Pres., H.B. Hist. Society
8101 Slater Ave. C/O Newland House Museum
Huntington Beach, CA 92647 19820 Beach Blvd.,
Attn: Board President Huntington Beach, CA 92648
Historical Resources Bd. CA Coastal Commission
Comm. Services Dept. Theresa Henry
2000 Main St. 245 W. Broadway, Ste 380
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Long Bch, CA 90802
Attn: Chairperson
Friends of the HB Wetlands
21902 Kiowa Lane
Huntington Beach, CA 92646 '
Attn: Charles Grant
Coastal Conservancy Golden St. Mob. Hm. Owners Leag.
P.O. Box 66494 11021 Magnolia Blvd.
Los Angeles, CA 90066 Garden Grove, CA 92642 +"
Attn: Ruth Galanter Attn: Edna Littlebury
Huntington Beach Tomorrow
411 6th St.
Huntington Beach, CA 92648
Attn: President
SCAG
818.West 7th, 12th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Attn: Richard Spicer
Chairman, Environmental Board
Comm. Dev. Dept. _
2000 Main St.
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 `r-
cub cle�
♦ NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING q5 V2Y iX(,e-d. -6 y p1,i,��i >^
(7848d) 11/20/90 o n ►��p��0 Lti�t n 9 5.
ICILIC
►�� .� a.sse S SorS r� le�.
State of California Harvey D. Pease LVO�—� DuP�iGCX{�S �qUZ
Real Estate Division 314 Crnation Ave.
650 Howe Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 bCdh C li n��na r'CG15
�Q
�J�-'h�f3 ��t� t �� e / � G►�y
Sacramento, CA 95825 AP# 024-163-14 J
AP# 024-150-16 �'"��'�' 6tt n e,�.i,'A ,-vim e_-k
Amad H. Abdelmuti Huntington Beach Co.
Jack Surf—N—Sport P. 0. Box 7611
113 Main Street San Francisco, CA 94120
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 AP# 024-271-01
AP# 024-153-08
Eldon W. Bagstad Huntington Beach Co.
901 Catalina Ave. 225 Bush St.
Seal Beach, CA 90740 San Francisco, CA 94120
AP# 024-153-11 AP# 024-281-13
Ahmad Abdelmuti Louise Fiorillo -
113 Main St. .11721 Vul tee Street P t-�
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Downey, CA 90241 /
AP# 024-153-13
Cal Resorts Haseko Ralph Peck
222 5th St. 8565 Farm Street
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Downey, CA 90241
AP# 024-154-04
Beach Resorts Cal Resorts/Haseko
222 5th Street 305 Walnut Ave.
-Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Huntington Beach, CA 92648
AP# 024-163-08 AP# 024-154-17
Otis W. Peck
8404 Lexington Rd.
Downey, CA 90241
AP# 024-163=09
Allen L. Nelson
8404 Lexington Rd.
Downey, CA 90241
AP# 024-163-09
NOTICE OF JOINT PUBLIC HEARING
OF THE CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOMENT AGENCY
MAIN—PIER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA V
FIRST AMENDED PIERSIDE LEASE AGREEMENT
On Monday, March 18, at 7:00 PM, or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, in
the City Council Chambers, Huntington Beach City Hall located at 2000 Main Street,
Huntington Beach, California, the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach and the
Redevelopment Agency ("Agency") of the City of Huntington Beach, will hold a joint
public hearing to consider the lease of certain real property, located within the Main—Pier
Redevelopment Project Area on the west side of Pacific Coast Highway, between First
and Main Streets, (Legal Description on file in the City Clerk's office), to Stanley Bloom,
pursuant to a proposed First Amended Pierside Lease Agreement by and between the
Redevelopment Agency and Stanley M. Bloom. The proposed Agreement and financial
report required by California Health & Safety Code Section 33433 are available for public
inspection at the office of the City Clerk at 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach,
California. Further information concerning this matter may also be obtained by
contacting Keith Bohr, Redevelopment Specialist, at (714) 374-1529.
By: Connie Brockway
City Clerk/Redevelopment Agency Clerk
City of Huntington Beach
Publish: March 1, & 11, 1991
v,
l
SUMMARY REPORT PURSUANT TO
SECTION 33433
of the
CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT LAW
on a
LEASE AGREEMENT
by and between the
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
and.
STANLEY M. BLOOM, AN INDIVIDUAL
I. INTRODUCTION
The California Health and Safety Code, Section 33433, provides that
if a redevelopment agency wishes to sell or lease property to which
it holds title and if that property was acquired in whole or in
part with tax increment funds, the agency must first secure ap-
proval of the proposed sale or lease agreement from its local
legislative body (City Council) after a public hearing. A copy of
the proposed sale or lease agreement and a summary report that
describes and contains specific financing elements of the proposed
transaction shall be available for public inspection prior to the
public hearing. As contained in the Code, the following informa-
tion shall be included in the summary report:
1. The cost of the agreement to the agency, including land
acquisition costs, clearance costs, relocation costs, the
costs of any improvements to be provided by the agency,
plus the expected interest on any loans or bonds to
finance the agreements;
2. The estimated value of the interest to be conveyed or
leased, determined at the highest uses permitted under
the plan; and
1
r
3. The purchase price or sum of the lease payments which the
lessee will be required to make during the term of the
lease. If the sale price or total rental amount is less
than the fair market value of the interest to be conveyed
or leased, determined at the highest and best use consis-
tent with the redevelopment plan, then the agency shall
provide as part of the summary an explanation of the
reasons for the difference.
This report outlines the salient parts of the Pierside Lease Agree-
ment (the "Agreement'.) which provides for the leasing of property
owned by the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
( "Agency" ) to Stanley M. Bloom ( "Developer" ) for the purpose of
constructing a restaurant development.
This report is based upon information contained in a proposed Lease
Agreement and is organized into the following four sections:
1. Description of the Proposed Agreement - This section in-
cludes a description of the site and interests to be
Teased, the proposed development and the major respon-
sibilities of the Agency and the Developer.
2. - Cost of the Agreement to the Agency - This section out-
lines the cost of the Agreement to the Agency. In addi-
tion, it discusses the ground lease payments to be paid
by the Developer to the Agency, provides a projection of
tax increment revenues resulting from the new development
and sets forth the net cost of the Agreement to the
Agency. The net cost to the Agency equals Agency expen-
ditures minus the present value of the lease payments and
the value of the tax increment generated by the new
development, plus any other resources pledged to the-pay-
ment of related expenses.
I
2
3. Estimated Value of the Interests to be Leased - This
section summarizes the Agency appraisal of the value of
the parcel to be leased to the Developer.
4 . Purchase Price and Reasons Therefore - This section
describes the purchase price, which is equal to the
present value of the anticipated lease payments, to be
paid by the Developer to the Agency. It also contains a
comparison of the purchase price ( lease value) and the
fair market value at the highest and best use consistent
with the Downtown Specific Plan 10 for the interests con-
veyed.
II. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED AGREEMENT
A. Site and Interest to be Leased
The site consists of 3 .5 acres of land immediately south of the
Huntington Beach Pier, on the ocean side of the Pacific Coast High-
way. Currently, 'the site is improved with a 17 , 800 square foot
commercial structure with miscellaneous retail on the first level,
"Maxwell's" Restaurant on the second level, a freestanding struc-
ture containing "Dwight' s" hamburger stand, and a public parking
lot.
B. The Proposed Development
The proposed development for the site is a 48, 500 square foot res-
taurant complex. The restaurants will be built on an elevated deck
with 611 structured parking spaces provided. Public access to the
beach will be provided by two central staircases leading to the
beach level.
3
C. Agency Responsibilities
The Agency responsibilities can be summarized as follows:
1 . Purchase the subject site from the City of Huntington
Beach.
2. Provide the site in a reasonable time period free and
clear of all recorded encumbrances , assessments ,
leases/subleases, possesory rights, franchises, license
and. taxes, except as set forth in the Agreement.
3. Reimburse to the developer the total construction cost of
250 parking spaces being built to replace the existing
public parking plus an additional 11 spaces.
4. Finance the difference in construction costs between the
structured parking and surface parking for the remaining
361 parking spaces . The Agency will amortize the cost
differential in 30 annual payments.
D. Developer's Responsibilities
The developer's responsibilities are as follows:
1. Ground lease the site from the Agency for an original
term of 55 years.
2. Finance all off-site costs, except as specifically set
forth in the agreement.
4 /-
3 . Construct a 48,500 square foot restaurant complex on a
raised deck at the quality level implied in the eleva-
tions and developer pro forma.
4 . Develop 611 on-site structured parking spaces.
5. Provide public beach access from the project:
III. COST OF THE AGREEMENT TO THE AGENCY
The total cost of the Lease Agreement to the Agency, and the net
costs of the project after consideration of project revenues are
presented herein. Both the total and net costs of the Lease Agree-
ment are presented in terms of absolute dollar amounts generated
over the 55-year lease and in terms of the present value (PV) of
expenditures and receipts resulting from implementation of the
Lease Agreement. The PV of expenditures and receipts has been com-
puted using an assumed discount rate of i0%. The difference be-
tween the PV of expenditures and the PV of receipts constitutes the
net present value cost of the Lease Agreement to the Agefidy. This
net cost can be either an actual cost (where expenditures exceed
receipts) or a net gain (where revenues created by--implementation
of the Lease Agreement exceed expenditures) .
A. Total Costs to the Agency
Table 1 contains a listing of the Agency's estimated expenditures,
by major category, relating to its obligations under the Lease
Agreement. Per Table 1, total implementation expenditures by the
Agency over the 55 year original term of the lease are estimated at
approximately $53.61 million, which equates to $14 . 82 million in
present value terms. The basis of this estimate is presented
below.
5
1 . Site Acquisition Costs
The Agency must acquire the .subject parcel from the City
of Huntington Beach at a price equal to the current fair
market value at the highest and best use allowed by the
zoning codes and general plan of the City, as well as the
Downtown Specific Plan District 10 . The value of this
property is estimated at $5 .86 million. The Agency will
acquire the property subject to a note from the City,
bearing interest at 10% per annum.
2. Site Preparation/Relocation Expense
In order to prepare the site for the proposed develop-
ment, the existing tenants must be relocated at the ex-
pense of the Agency, there could be legal expenses as-
sociated with any potential condemnation actions taken,
the Agency is responsible for $50, 000 of toxic clean-up
costs and the Agency must ensure adequate utilities are `
available to the site. These costs have been capped in
the Lease Agreement at $1 .0 million.
3. Parking Costs
The Agency parking costs consist of two components:
a. An upfront payment of $4 . 0 million to cover the to-
tal construction cost for the 250 replacement public
parking spaces.
b. An upfront payment of $1 .0 million, plus thirty an-
nual payments of $325,500 to amortize the difference
in construction costs between structured parking and
surface parking for the 361 spaces serving the
r
6
private development. The rationale for this payment
is that in a typical ground lease where the lessor
is receiving 2.00% to 3. 25% of gross sales as rent,
the lessor has provided enough land to allow for the
building improvements and surface parking. In the
proposed Lease Agreement the Agency has not provided
enough land to develop a sufficient amount of sur-
face parking and, thus, must make up the difference
in parking costs to justify the lease terms . These
parking payments total nearly $10.76 million, with a
present value of $3. 96--million.
B. Agency Revenues
Table 2 shows the nominal and present values of the Agency revenues
created as a result of implementation of the lease.
1. Ground Lease Payments
{
The Pierside Lease Agreement is structured so that the
amount of ground rent paid is directly related to 'the
project's performance. The ground rent schedule is as
•follows:
Percent of Total Sales
Gross Restaurant Sales Applied to Ground Lease
$0 - 35 million 2.00%
$35 - $55 million 2 .50%
$55 - 100 million 3 . 00%
$100 million + 3. 25%
7
In no event can the percentage of gross sales applied to
the ground lease payment decrease from year to year. Ad-
ditionally, in Years 30, 40 and 50, a base rent equal to
75% of the average of the preceding 3 years of lease pay-
ments will be applied. After Year 30, through the ter-
mination of the lease, in no event can the annual lease
payment decrease from year to year. Over the original
term, Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. has estimated that
the lease will generate nearly $124 million in revenues,
with a present value of $8. 07 million when discounted at
10% annually.. In addition, the property will revert to..
the Agency at the termination of the lease. The revers-
ionary value is projected at nearly $145 million. This
equates to $764,000 in present value terms.
2 . Guaranteed Parking Payment
Currently, the City is receiving net revenues after ex-
penses of $110,000 from the site annually. The developer
must guarantee this parking income, with upward adjust-
ments commensurate with increases in other City parking
revenues, over the life of the lease. This provides to-
tal revenues of $21 . 03 million, which have a present
value of $1.75 million.
3. Tax Increment Revenue
It is currently estimated that the proposed project will
have an assessed value of $14. 19 million upon completion.
When this is reduced by the current assessed value of
$1 . 06 million, the incremental value is approximately
$13. 13 million. Assuming a first year tax rate of 1 . 077%
and set-asides equal to 20%, this results in property
tax increment of +$113 , 000 in the first full year of
8
operation. Assuming the assessed value increases at 2%
annually, and the project area ends in 2018, the project
should produce tax increments of approximately $4.04 mil-
lion over the remaining life of the project area. The
present value of the tax increments generated by the
project is $1 .20 million.
A summary of anticipated revenues is shown in Table 2 .
C. Comparison of Expenditures and Revenues
A comparison of the present value of the expenditures and revenues
discussed above results in the following tabulation:
Total Dollars Present Value
Over a 55-year Over a 55-year
Lease Lease
f -------------- --------------
t
Total Agency Revenues $293,241, 000 $11, 783, 000
Less: Agency Costs (53, 605,000) (14,818, 000)
Net Gain (loss) $239, 636,000'- ($3,035, 000)
The analysis above indicates that as a result of implementation of
the Lease, the Agency can expect to realize a gain over the lease
period of almost $240 million in actual dollars. On a present
value basis, project costs exceed project revenues by approximately
$3. 04 million.
9
IV. ESTIMATED VALUE OF INTEREST TO BE LEASED
t
The value of the interest to be leased has been computed at its
highest and best use allowable under the zoning codes and general
plan of the City, as well as the Downtown Specific Plan District
10 . Under these constraints, Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. has
estimated that the proposed use is the highest and best use. Thus,
the present value of the ground lease and parking revenues to the
Agency, less the present value of the amortized parking costs, is
the estimated value of the site. The amortized parking payments
- - are --subtracted to reflect the extraordinary.- site costs that must_ be
borne by the lessor in order to make the site developable at the
proposed intensity. The present value of the ground lease and
parking revenues has been estimated to be $9 . 82 million and the
present value of the amortized parking costs is $3 . 96 million,
therefore, the estimated value of the site is $5. 86 million.
V. LEASE PAYMENTS AND REASONS THEREFOR
Based upon an analysis df the ground lease payments to the Agency
conducted by Keyser Marston Associates, the present value of the
developer's ground lease payments is $5.86 million. This amount is
estimated to be the market value of the property and, thus, the
Agency is receiving the fair market value for the site.
10
t _
EXHIBIT A.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
Beginning at the centerline intersection of Pacific
Coast Highway and Lake Street, shown as Ocean Avenue
and First Street respectively, on said mentioned map;
thence along the centerline of Pacific Coast Highway
south 48021/42/1 east 37.50 feet to the intersection
with the southwesterly extension of the southeast
right-of-way line of Lake Street; thence south
41038/18/1 west 50.00 feet to the true -point of
beginning; thence north 48021/42/1 west 1,020.00
feet; thence south .41038118" west 200.00 feet;
thence south 48021/42/1 east 1020.00 feet; thence
north 41038/18/1 east 200.00 feet to the true point
of beginning.
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
March 18, 1991
Date
Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
Submitted by: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrato��
Prepared by: Michael Adams, Director of Community Development
Subject: APPEAL - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 90-17, COASTAL
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 90-18, SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT NO. 90-2, GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE NO. 90-8
(PIERSIDE RESTAURANTS)
Consistent with Council Policy? [df Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception 6 Ito 0
Statement of Issue, Recommendation,Analysis, Funding Source,Alternative Actions,Attachments-311 V/
STATEMENT OF ISSUE: 4f /�afla/t
Transmitted for your consideration is an appeal submitted by
Councilwoman Winchell, of the Pierside Restaurants project. The
project as approved by the Planning Commission consists of 48, 500
sq. ft. of commercial development, including up to five new
restaurants and beach related concessions, with project related
parking and beach user parking. The Redevelopment Agency is the
co-applicant for the project.
Subsequent to the appeal, the applicant developed a project
alternative which addresses some of the concerns raised at Planning
Commission. This report will address the points of the appeal
submitted by Councilwoman Winchell for the original project, and-
discuss the applicant' s revised plan as an alternate action.
RECOMMENDATION•
Planning Commission Recommendation:
Motion to, "Adopt and certify as adequate Final Environmental Impact
Report No. 90-2 by adopting City Council Resolution No . 49A60 with
Mitigation Measures, Statement of Overriding Considerations, and
Findings and Facts in Support of Findings; Approve Coastal
Development Permit No. 90-18, Conditional Use Permit No. 90-17,
General Plan Conformance No. 90-8 with findings and conditions of
approval as outlined in Attachment 1 to the report dated
March 18, 1991 . "
03A13�3>:
Plo 5/85
i
The Planning Commission made the above stated recommendations on
November 6, 1990, by the following votes :
To approve Environmental Impact Report No. 90-2:
AYES: Kirkland, Bourguignon, Shoemaker, Mountford
NOES: Williams, Ortega, Leipzig
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
To approve Coastal Development Permit No. 90-18:
AYES: Kirkland, Bourguignon, Shoemaker, Mountford
NOES: Williams, Ortega, Leipzig
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
To approve Conditional Use Permit No. 90-17:
AYES: Kirkland, Bourguignon, Shoemaker, Mountford
NOES: Williams, Ortega, Leipzig
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
To approve General Plan Conformance No. 90-8 :
AYES: Kirkland, Bourguignon, Shoemaker, Mountford
NOES: Ortega, Leipzig
ABSENT: Williams
ABSTAIN: None
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the City Council approve Alternative Action
No. 1, to adopt and-certify as adequatae Final EIR No. 90-2 by
adopting City Council Resolution No. .ZLO with Mitigation Measures,
Statement of Overriding Considerations, and Findings, and Facts in
Support of Findings; Approve Coastal Development Permit No. 90-18,
Conditional Use Permit No. 90-17 as modified by the applicant, and
General Plan Conformance No. 90-8 with findings and conditions of
approval as outlined in Attachment 2 to the report dated March 18,
1991.
ANALYSIS:
Applicant: Johathan Chodos/ Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency.
Appellant: Councilwoman Grace Winchell .
Project Description:
The proposed project as approved by the Planning Commission includes
48, 500 sq. ft . of -commercial -development, including up to five new
restaurants and beach related concessions . A total of 629 surface
and subterranean parking spaces
RCA 3/18/91 -2- (7946d)
will be provided, including 250 spaces for beach users. Public
access to the beach will be provided by two large central
staircases, three smaller stairways, and three handicapped
accessible elevators, for a total of eight accessways leading to the
beach. The project will also provide two major public plazas on the
upper level and a series of plazas and promenades on the lower
level, for a total of 78,258 sq. ft. of public plaza area (48% of
the net site area) . Relocation of Maxwell ' s Restaurant to the south
will allow for the development of the Pier Plaza as conceptually
approved by the City Council .
A thorough analysis of the project and its relationship to the
City' s General Plan, Coastal policies, Downtown Specific Plan,
Downtown Design Guidelines, the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) and other issues, is contained in the attached Planning
Commission staff reports .
The following is a general summary of issues discussed by the
Planning Commission:
1. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts
Supplemental EIR No. 90-2 identifies unavoidable adverse
impacts to historic structures. (demolition of Maxwell ' s) and to
views from PCH, should the project be implemented. The impacts
have been reduced to the extent feasible by requiring
appropriate memorialization of Maxwell ' s and low profile
design of the buildings .
2 . Alternative Project Sites .
Several speakers and Planning Commissioners requested- that an
alternative project site be analyzed. Staff feels, however,
that such an alternative analysis is not appropriate, as
detailed under Appeal Issues, below.
3 . Allowable Land Use
Several questions were raised with regard to easements on the
site and allowable land uses. The proposed plazas, parking
facilities, restaurants and beach concessions are compatible
with the General Plan designation of Visitor Serving
Commercial, permitted by the Downtown Specific Plan, Disrict 10
(Pier-Related Commercial) , and consistent with the adopted
local coastal program. The commercial portions of the project
are a continuation of historical and existing uses on the site.
4 . Parkina
A combination of 629 valet .(tandem) and self-parking spaces
will be available in the surface parking lot and in two
subterranean parking levels. A total of 250 self parked spaces
will be reserved for beach-goers on the lower level .
RCA 3/18/91 -3- (7946d)
5 . Plaza Areas/Open Space
Currently, there are no public plaza amenities on the site.
The project as approved by Planning Commission will incorporate
a series of: plazas "and promenades totalling 78,258 sq. ft . , or
48% of the net site area. Building coverage will total
approximately 28,200 sq. ft. , or 18 . 5% of the net site area.
All plaza levels will be handicapped accessible.
Revised Proposal :
The applicant has recently submitted a revised plan that addresses
some of the issues raised by the Planning Commission (see Proposed
Site Plan - Attachment 8) . The primary modification involves
Bulding B (middle restaurant) , which has been significantly reduced
in area at the plaza level . The majority of the restaurant area in
Building B has been located at the beach access level. The result
is the opening of a much wider view corridor from PCH. A 60 foot
wide building projection for building B rises 18 feet above the
level of PCH (one story) . All other portions of Building B rise
only 4 feet above the plaza, or 1 foot above PCH. This is a
significant reduction from the previous bulding mass . The building
separation is now 215 feet between Buildings A and B, and 145 feet
between Buildings B and C.
The total restaurant square footage would still total 40, 000 sq. ft .
for Buildings A, B and C. However, the reconfiguration results in
an increase in the plaza area to 88, 000 sq. ft. (54% of the net site
area) as compared to 78,258 sq. .ft. for the original plan (48% of
the net site area) .
The proposed parking for the revised plan will still include both
valet (tandem) spaces- and single loaded, self parking spaces . All
spaces are open to the public, with 251 single loaded spaces on the
lower level reserved for beach parking. The restaurants will have
access to 390 tandem and self parking spaces, for an overall project
total of 641 spaces provided. As outlined in Appeal Issue No. 4,
below, a total of 611 spaces are required.
The revised plan shows a total of 6,250 sq. ft. of beach concession
area on the lower level, in addition to Dwight ' s . Staff is
recommending, however, that the concession square footage be limited
to 5, 750 sq. ft. , in addition to Dwight ' s. This is the amount of
existing beach concession area and the amount approved by the
Planning Commission for replacement of the existing area .
Appeal Issues •
In her appeal of the Planning Commission' s approval of the project,
Councilwoman Winchell has identified 21 points as the basis for her
appeal. The following Section provides a response to each of the
points contained in the attached letter (Attachment No. 4) .
1. Fail re to address property dedicated to public recreational
uses . The property was impliedly dedicated to public
RCA 3/18/91 -4- (7946d)
recreational use by the actions of its owners and in 1932 was
expressly dedicated to such use by its fee owners Restaurants
do not constitute a public use.
The primary purpose_.and focus of the proposed project is
improvement of public recreational opportunities . The project
will increase available beach parking, provide public plaza
areas and vista points where none currently exist, and improve
pedestrian and vehicular access. (For a detailed site plan
analysis, refer to Staff Reports dated October 23, and October
2, 1990 . ) . The proposed commercial portions of the project are
a continuation of historical and existing uses, and are
permitted pursuant to the Local Coastal Program, Huntington
Beach General Plan, and Downtown Specific Plan.
Commercial recreation uses have existed on the site since
construction of the Pavilion in the 1930 ' s . The Pavilion was
operated as a dance hall, convention center, roller rink and
finally, as. a restaurant. It has remained a municipally owned
building, leased to various operators for different commercial
uses. It is staff ' s assessment that this type of commercial
use, in combination with the public plazas and vista points,
public accessways, and public beach parking, is a valid,
permitted recreational use of the site. The proposal will
allow a wider cross section of people to enjoy the beach
atmosphere, and to engage in passive recreational pursuits on
the site such as strolling, observing, and dining.
2 . Failure to show that the Public interest and necessity require
the project :
Public interest and public good are subjective values . A
number of speakers and letter writers have expressed support
for the project and a desire to see quality restaurants,
expanded parking, and upgraded beach concessions on the site.
The plan as proposed is compatible with the Huntington Beach
General Plan, Downtown Specific Plan and Local Coastal Plan.
One of the primary purposes of these plans is to provide
guidelines for development which protect the health, safety,
general welfare, property values, and improvement values in the
City.
3 . Failure to show the project is compatible with the greatest
Public good.
Please refer to Response 2, above.
4 . Inadequate Parking . The project does not meet City parking
Code requirements. Project does not address valet versus self
Parking, beach versus commercial use: how do you keep
beach-goer parking exclusively for the beach-goer so that
access will not be reduced.
--The proposed- parking plan for - the- project incorporates single
loaded self-parking spaces for beach users, and a combination
RCA 3/18/91 -5- (7946d)
i
of single loaded self-parking and tandem valet parking for the
major (plaza level) restaurants . The beach level concessions,
which will consist of beach related retail and casual dining,
will be used primarily by beach goers. . It is assumed that
users of these facilities will use the public beach parking as
is currently the case. The following table presents the
proposed parking scenario:
USE SO, FT./SPACES REQUIRED PARKING
Maxwells 15, 000 llla
New Major Restaurants 25,000 250
Subtotal Commercial 361
Casual Restaurant 5,750 Ob
Dwight ' s 2, 500 Ob
Beach Parking 250 250
Subtotal Beach 250
Total Required 611
a. Maxwell ' s Restaurant currently has 11, 600 s. f . , with 77
parking spaces. The new structure will add 3,400 s . f . and
34 spaces, for a total of 15-, 000 s.f . and 111 spaces .
b. The Casual Restaurant and Dwight ' s square footage are equal
to the existing Dwight ' s, plus other various existing
retail . Therefore, no additional parking is required
beyond beach parking.
Pursuant to staff ' s recommendations in the attached Planning
Commission Staff Report dated 10/23/90, the parking provided on-site
is as follows :
Level Tyne of Space Total Provided
Surface 31 tandem valet
30 single loaded
61 Total 61
1st Subteran. 149 tandem valet
Level 147 single loaded
296 Total 296
2nd Subteran. 272 single loaded 272
Level
629
RCA 3/18/91 -6- (7946d)
It should be noted that all spaces will be available to the public.
A minimum of 250 spaces shall be for the exclusive use of beach
goers . With regard to the logistics of maintaining beach versus
commercial parking, operation of the valet plan, etc. , suggested
condition of approval No. 3 h. requires as follows :
3h. -The developer shall submit a parking management and
control plan for review and approval by the Departments of
Community Development and Public Works, prior to the issuance
of building permits . This plan should address hours and
operation of valet service, plans for attended parking and
amount and time . of availability of self-parking facilities . A
minimum of 250 beach parking spaces shall be available for self
parking at all times at rates set by the City Council . The
Plan shall delineate these spaces and describe the
accessibility of the spaces during valet parking hours . All
required parking shall be provided on-site.
5 . Outdoor dining space has not been defined and delineated from
Public walkways . Outdoor dining further compounds parking
short falls .
It will be necessary for the ultimate restaurant tenants to
further define outdoor dining areas . An outdoor dining plan
may be required in order to assess impacts on parking and
pedestrian areas . If parking cannot be provided, then the
dining plan may include a depiction of which indoor dining area
will be closed off during hours when outdoor dining is
provided. Each restaurant will be required to submit a
Restaurant Operation Plan for review and approval by the
Planning Commission pursuant to- condition of approval No. 29 .
This will include specific plans for outdoor dining.
. 6 . Contrary to redevelopment goals, this project does not
adequately address goods and services for low to moderate
income levels . The project monopolizes the "view" areas for
upper income patrons.
The proposed project provides commercial and recreational
opportunities for persons of all income levels, including low
and moderate. The upper, or "view" level plazas are open and
accessible to the public, and walkways and plaza areas are
provided along the ocean side of all the restaurants . A wide
array of commercial opportunities will be available, ranging
from upscale dining, to casual, inexpensive beach oriented
dining adjacent to the pier, and at Dwight ' s on the beach
access level .
7. Inadequate access for fire and safety vehicles .
The Fire Department, Police Department and Community Services
Department, Marine Safety Division have reviewed the proposed
plans, and are satisfied that -adequate emergency access is
provided. The following suggested conditions of approval
assure that such access shall be provided and maintained:
RCA 3/18/91 -7- (7946d)
6K. Full access to the structures for emergency vehicles
shall be maintained from the beach access road and from
the parking lot adjacent to Pacific Coast Highway.
6L. The access ways designated as fire lanes over the
subterranean parking area are to be reinforced to
sustain the weight of fire apparatus.
19 . The beach access roadway south of the pier must be a
minimum 24 feet and must loop with the beach access
road on the north side of the pier. This roadway must
also be a minimum 24 feet. The roadway must be
designed to accommodate beach service vehicles,
bicycles and pedestrian access, subject to City review
and approval . The access road shall be completed prior
to issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy for the
project.
8 . Does not comply with Specific Plan. Sit-down dining is not
beach related nor pier related.
The proposed uses do comply with the adopted Downtown Specific
Plan, District 10. Section 4 . 12 .01 - Permitted Uses allows
Restaurants, Retail Sales, and Parking Structures in this
District. These uses are consistent with the intent of the
District, which is, "to provide for commercial uses on and
alongside the pier which will enhance and expand the public' s
use and enjoyment of this area. "
9 . Failure to address economic concerns Planning Staff refused
to provide commissioners with financial analysis of the project -
as required by CEOA. Do the risks out-weigh the benefits; can.
the City afford to lose $500. 000 per year from the general
fund. Can the City afford to subsidize this development by
locking in a long-term rate of return.
Economic concerns related to the project are not required to be
reviewed by the Planning Commission and are not required to be
analyzed by CEQA. Section 15131 of the CEQA Guidelines states
that, "Economic or social information may be presented in
whatever form the agency desires" (emphasis added) . Section
15131(a) also states, "Economic or social effects of a project
shall not be treated as significant effects on the
environment. " Economic factors may be discussed as part of a
chain of cause and effect from a decision on a project to the
ultimate physical changes to the environment. Section 15131(a)
states, "The intermediate economic and social changes need not
be analyzed in any detail greater than necessary to trace the
chain of cause and effect. The focus of the analysis shall be
on the physical changes" .
It is staff ' s assessment that the physical changes to the
environment that result from the project can be identified and
discussed without relying on economic data. There is no need
to analyze a chain of cause and effect involving economic
factors when a direct connection can be made from the decision
RCA 3/18/91 -8- (7946d)
i
to implement the project to adverse physical effects on the
environment, i .e. , loss of views and loss of an historic
structure. The analysis of these physical changes is the
purpose and focus of -CEQA.
It is also not necessary to review financial data in order to
adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations for a project.
Section 15093(b) of the CEQA Guidelines states, "Where the
decision of the public agency allows the occurrence of
significant effects which are identified in the final EIR but
are not at least substantially mitigated, the agency shall
state in writing the specific reasons to support its action'
based on the final EIR and/or other information in the
record" . The Guidelines do not require that this information
be economic. This is further supported by Section 15091 (a) (3)
- Findings, which specifies one of the possible findings for
approval of a project with remaining significant impacts:
"Specific economic, social. or other considerations make
infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives
identified in the final EIR" (emphasis added) . The Statement
of Overriding Considerations adopted by the Planning Commission
found that such social and other considerations outweighed the
remaining significant adverse impacts of the project. These
considerations included improved access to coastal amenities,
creation of additional visitor-serving activities at the
pierhead, and impelmentation of the adopted Coastal Land Use
Plan.
With regard to the economic questions, please refer to
Attachment 5 entitled "Pierside Lease"
10 . Proposed paving material to stop skateboard use may- limit use
by handicapped or senior citizens... ..
The proposed paving materials will be reviewed by the Design
Review Board as part of the final design package. This is
required prior to issuance of building permits. The Board will
review the suitability of the proposed materials for providing
a surface that is both safe, and aesthetically pleasing.
11. Height of parking structure for beach goer use is inadequate
for utility vehicles or vans and trucks carrying surfboards .
Loading docks on lowest level may not accommodate service
vehicles .
The ceiling heights in the parking structure will be a minimum
of 7 ' 0" , in accordance with the Uniform Building Code. Taller
vehicles will need to park on the surface level or in
alternative lots . Service vehicles will be able to access the
buildings from the surface level.
12 . SEIR failed to address off-site alternatives .
The California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines state that
an agency must examine "a range of reasonable alternatives to
the project or to the location of the project. . . " (Section
RCA 3/18/91 -9- (7946d)
15126d) . It does not require that off-site alternatives be
analyzed. Although recent court cases have indicated that such
analysis may, at times, be appropriate, the Court in Goleta
states :
"We find no authority or rationale for an inflexible rule
that the availability of other sites always must be
considered or that it never need be considered. Situations
differ; what is reasonable in one case may be unreasonable
in another. It is necessary to examine the particular
situation presented to determine whether the availability
of other feasible sites must be considered in the
Environmental Impact Report. "
(197 Cal . App. 3d at 1179 [243 Cal. Rptr. 339, 3461 . )
Staff maintains that an alternative site would not meet the
basic objective of the project, which is to provide
pier-related open space amenities and pier-related commercial
development. As such, the project is inherently related to the
subject site. No other site is adjacent to the pier and
designated for pier related commercial, except for the site
northwest of the pier, which is under the jurisdiction of the
State Department of Parks and Recreation and has been approved
for a parking structure. Staff has determined that a
reasonable range of project alternatives has been presented in
the Draft Environmental Impact Report and response to comments,
which serve to lessen or avoid identified impacts .
13 .A Despite the "history lesson" in the SEIR regarding the Pavilion
building a restoration analysis was not included in the SEIR
The Pavilion building- is a significant historic structure and a
restoration alternative was not considered.
The EIR, in Section 4 . 1.2 - Impacts, does acknowledge that the
Pavilion structure is a significant historic structure, and
that its removal as a result of project implementation would
have a significant adverse environmental impact. The EIR also
acknowledges that, although the impacts can be lessened by the
mitigation measures outlined, they cannot be reduced to a level
of insignificance.
A project alternative which considered the restoration of
Maxwell ' s Restaurant (Pavilion building) was included in
Section 5 .3 of the EIR - Preservation of Maxwell ' s Restaurant
Alternative. This option was developed in order to preserve
and rehabilitate the structure due to its historic significance
to the community. The EIR acknowledged that this alternative
would eliminate the impacts to historic resources, and was
therefore, environmentally superior to the project.
13 .B Project interferes with commercial uses of newly built or
redeveloped areas of Main Street .
The proposed uses will not conflict with existing and future
uses along Main Street, because they are fundamentally
different in nature. The proposed Pierside restaurants will
RCA 3/18/91 -10- (7946d)
i
take advantage of a unique type of ambiance and dining
experience afforded by the ocean view location, and are
expected to serve a more regional population base than the Main
Street core. The proposed project retail will be strictly
beach related, and -will not include other visitor serving and
resident serving goods and services as found on Main Street.
The Pierside project is designed to complement the uses on Main
Street and enhance the overall viability of downtown, rather
than compete with or detract from Main Street .
14 . The development fails to protect public views from PCH.
The EIR, in Section 4 .3 .2 - Impacts, acknowledges that the
project will block some public views from PCH, and that this is
considered a significant adverse impact of the project. The
EIR acknowledges that there are no mitigation measures that can
reduce this impact to a level of insignificance.
15 . The project is not compatible with the scale of the area.
The site is currently developed with 17, 800 square feet of
commercial buildings, including Maxwell ' s, Dwight ' s, and
miscellaneous retail . Maxwell ' s is one story as seen from
PCH. The proposed use is an expansion of these existing
commercial uses on the site. The project is 48,250 square feet
in area, and a maximum of 25 feet in height above pier level,
as allowed by the Downtown Specific Plan. The portion of the
structures visible from PCH will be primarily one story with
smaller two story elements.
Although the proposal involves an increase in height and square
footage over. what is existing, it is within the allowable
envelope specified in the Downtown Specific Plan, and is much
less intense than the 4 story visitor serving commercial and
residential uses inland of PCH. Staff feels that 'the project
is compatible with the scale of the area.
16 . Value of land is undervalued by Redevelopment Agency
Please refer to Attachment 5, entitled "Pierside Lease" .
17. Project deserves a complete and separate EIR. Issues which
were not considered significant (and not studied) should be
addressed in a new EIR: Land Use. Seismic Safety, Flood
Hazard, Tidal Hazard, Natural Resources, Noise, Public
Services, Recreation Resources.
The issues outlined above were addressed in the initial study
for the project and were "focused out" of the Supplemental EIR
because they were found either to be insignificant, mitigable
to a level of insignificance, and/or adequately covered by the
adopted EIR 82-2 . Please refer to the environmental checklist
form contained in Appendix A of the EIR.
RCA 3/18/91 -11- (7946d)
18 . SEIR did not study the project ' s coordination with other
projects in the immediate area such as the pier and pier plaza,
or the proposed parking structure north of the pier.
The EIR, in Section 7.0 Cumulative Impacts, analyzed the
Pierside project as part of a larger effort to rehabilitate and
revitalize downtown Huntington Beach. The Pier Plaza, as the
link that ties the pier and the proposed restaurants together,
was not specifically analyzed because there is currently no
approved project .description. Although conceptual perimeters
have been approved by the Council, there are currently no plans
which are detailed enough to permit a. reasonable environmental
analysis . The Pierside Restaurants plan did provide a location
for a "punch through" under the pier plaza to connect the
parking structure with the North of the Pier Structure, should
such connection be deemed desireable in the future. The
project has been conditioned to be architecturally compatible
with the Lifeguard Headquarters.
19 . Consideration of these entitlements should be concurrent with
lease and Development Disposition Agreement to afford
opportunity for the Council to make review and modify
conditions of approval.
The entitlements. will be presented to the City Council on
appeal prior to consideration of the lease and DDA. The
Council may review and modify conditions of approval as they
see fit.
20 . The Redevelopment Agency should obtain .surrenders from the
lessees and formally terminate the 1986 lease before giving
entitlement for a new project .
The Agency has obtained releases from previous parties to the
lease. The proposed new lease will supersede the previous one.
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS
The project is covered by Supplemental EIR 90-2, which supplements
Final EIR 82-2 for the Downtown Specific Plan. Final SEIR 90-2 was
certified as adequate by the Planning Commission. In their action,
the Planning Commission adopted Mitigation Measures to reduce
identified impacts to the extent feasible, made findings as required
by CEQA, and adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations which
addressed the remaining unavoidable adverse impacts . Prior to any
action on Conditional Use Permit No. 90-17, Coastal Development
Permit No. 90-18, or General Plan Conformance No. 90-8, the City
Council must review and act on SEIR 90-2.
FUNDING SOURCE'
Not applicable
RCA 3/18/91 -12- (7946d)
ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
The City Council may:
1) Adopt and certify as ,adequate EIR 90-2 by adopting City
Council Resolution No. 6,260 , approve Coastal Development
Permit No. 90-18, with findings, and approve Conditional
Use Permit No. 90-17 with findings and conditions of
approval and approve General Plan Conformance No. 90-8 with
findings, with modifications to preserve the existing
Maxwell ' s building and construct two additional restaurant
buildings and beach concessions . This alternative would
eliminate impacts to historic resources and reduce parking
demand by 34 spaces .
2) Adopt and certify as adequate EIR No. 90-2 by adopting City
Council Resolution 00 and deny Coastal Development
Permit No. 90-18 and Conditional Use Permit No. 90-17 and
General Plan Conformance No. 90-8 with findings.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Findings and suggested Conditions of Approval as approved by
the Planning Commission
2 . Findings an Conditions of Approval as recommended by staff.
3 . Resolution V3 including Mitigation Measures, Findings, and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
4 . Letter of Appeal dated November 16, 1990
5 . Pierside Lease (summary)
6 . Planning Commission Staff Reports dated November 6, 1990, and
October 23, 1990, and October 2, 1990
7. Supplemental EIR 90-2, with Response to Comments (under
separate cover distributed to Council on January 22, 1991) *
8 . Applicant ' s revised Proposal
RCA 3/18/91 -13- (7946d)
s
s
* Copies of SEIR 90-2 are available for review at Huntington
Beach Central Library, the City Clerk' s Office, and the
Department of Community Development. Copies may be purchased
in the Department of Community Development Planning Division, .
for $9 .00 .
MTU:MA:LP: lp
I
RCA 3/18/91 -14- (7946d)
November 16, 1990
City of Huntington Beach
Attn: Connie Brockway, City Clerk
2000 Main Street -
Huntington Beach: "Q
SUBJECT: Appeal of Conditional Use Permit (CUP) #90-17, Coastal Development
Permit (CDP) #90-18, and Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR)
90-2r and General Plan Conformance 90-8.
t
Dear City Clerk:
I hereby appeal the Planning Commission's action to approve CUP#90-17, CDP#90-18,
andSEIR90-4 and General Plan Conformance No . 90-8 .
The basis for my appeal is as follows:
1. Failure to address property dedicated to public recreational uses. The property was
irnpliedly dedicated to public recreational use by the actions of its owners and in 1932
was expressly dedicated to such use by its fee owners. Restaurants do not constitute a
public use.
2. Failure to show that the public interest and necessity require the project.
3. Failure to show the project is compatible with the greatest public good.
4. Inadequate parking. This project does not meet city code parking requirements. Project
does not address valet versus self-parking, beach versus commercial use; how do you
keep beach-goer parking exclusively for the beach-goer so that access will not be
reduced.
5. Outdoor dining space has not been defined and delineated from public walkways.
Outdoor dining further compounds parking shortfalls.
6. Contrary to redevelopment goals, this project does not adequately address goods and
services for low to moderate income levels. The project monopolizes the "view" areas
for upper-income patrons.
7. Inadequate access for fire and safety vehicles.
8. Does not comply with Specific Plan. Sit-down dining is not beach related nor pier
related.
9. Failure to address economic concerns. Planning staff refused to provide commissioners
with financial analysis of project as required by CEQA. Do the risks out-weigh the
benefits; can the city afford to lose$500,000 per year from the general fund. Can the
city afford to subsidize this development by locking in a long-term rate of return.
10. Proposed paving material to stop skateboard use may limit use by handicapped or
senior citizens.
� l
11. Height of parking structure for beach-goer use is inadequate for utility vehicles or vans
and trucks carrying surfboards. Loading docks on lowest level may not accommodate
service vehicles.
12. SEIR failed to address off-site alternatives.
13. Despite the "history lesson" in the SEIR regarding the Pavilion building, a restoration
analysis was not included in the SEIR. The Pavilion building is a significant historic
stricture and a restoration alternative was not considered.
13. Project interferes with commercial uses of newly built or redeveloped areas of Main
Street.
14. The development fails to protect public views from PCH.
15. The project is not compatible with the scale of the area.
16. Value of land is undervalued by Redevelopment Agency.
17. Project deserves a complete and separate EIR. Issues which were not considered
significant (and not studied) should be addressed in new EIR: Land Use, Seismic
Safety, Flood Hazard, Tidal Hazard, Natural Resources, Noise, Public Services,
Recreation Resources.
18. SEIR did not study the project's coordination with other projects in the immediate area
such as the Pier and Pier Plaza or the proposed parking structure north of the pier.
19. Consideration of these entitlements should be concurrent with lease and Development
Disposition Agreement to afford opportunity for the Council to make review and
modify conditions of approval.
20. The Redevelopment Agency should obtain surrenders from the lessees and formally
terminate the 1986 lease before giving entitlement for a new project.
Yours Truly, ✓� I�
Councilwoman Grace Winchell
Huntington Beach Planning Commission
P.O. BOX 190 CALIFORNIA 92648
November 8 , 1990
City of Huntington Beach
Department of Administrative Services
2000 Main Street
Huntington Beach, CA 92648
SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE NO. 90-8
REQUEST: Determine that the conveyance of 5 . 9 acres of real
property from the City of Huntington Beach to the
Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency is in conformance
with the General Plan.
LOCATION: Ocean side of Pacific Coast Highway between main Street
and First Street (southeast of the pier)
DATE OF
APPROVAL: November 6, 1990
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL:
1. Conveying the subject site to the Redevelopment Agency to allow
Visitor-Serving Commercial development is consistent with the
Visitor-Serving Commercial General Plan Designation for the
property.
2 . The conveyance of property for the visitor-serving commercial
project is consistent with the following policies contained in the
General Plan:
3 . 6 . 2 . 1(2) Protect, encourage, and where feasible, provide a
variety of recreation facilities which provide
opportunities for all income groups (Coastal Element) .
3 . 6 . 2 . 2(1) Protect, encourage, and where feasible, provide
visitor-serving facilities in the Coastal Zone which
are varied in type and price (Coastal Element) .
(a) Encourage the provision of additional restaurants and
hotel/motel accomodations in keeping with the
alternative chosen by the City Council (Coastal
Element) .
General Plan Conform _+:e No . 90-8
Page Two
3 .4 . 2 . 4 (_2) Provide parking for residents and .beach users (Land
Use Element-Shoreline) .
3 . 4 . 2 . 8 To promote the development of services and facilities
necessary to support a tourist industry and insure
commercial development that is economically viable,
attractive, well related to other land uses , and satisfies
the needs of the City' s residents. by:
( 1) Encouraging planned commercial development that will
coincide with residential growth;
(2) Continuing to diversify the economic base of the City
and increasing the tax base;
(3) Promoting the revitalization of the Downtown area; and
(4) Promoting hotel and tourist-oriented retail
development in appropriate locations (Land Use
Element) .
I hereby certify that General Plan Conformance No . 90-8 was approved
by the Planning Commission of the City of Huntington Beach on November
6, 1990 ,. upon the foregoing findings .
Sincerely,
Mike Adams , Secretary
Planning Commission
by:
Hal Simmons
Senior Planner
(7745d-50 , 51)
11 g "4
i •+:' -tax 'r- w.i. - a _ 2 l g -- .�., _i
J "" ? `' x1° zW t9€r--' r k.."•_ x .i 2 :r F2 ,, .., y+C„w. - m' � -iat :gig r a' h, P
-
>
i-• €`, vrc
4Y
Huntington Beach Planning Comm:iss:ion
P.O. BOX 190 CALIFORNIA .92648
November 8 , 1990
City of Huntington Redevelopment .Agency/
Pierside. Restaurant Development
306 Third Street
Huntington Beach, CA-.92648
SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit No. 90-17/Coastal Development
Permit No . 90-18/Final Environmental Impact Report No .
90-2
REQUEST: To allow 48, 522 _ square feet of commercial development,
including up to five (5) new restaurants and beach
related concessions with parking and 78 , 250 square feet
of public plaza .
LOCATION: Oceanside of Pacific Coast Highway between Main Street
and First Street (southeast of the pier)
DATE OF
APPROVAL.: November 6, 1990
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 90-18 :
1. The proposed_ Pierside . Restaurant development conforms with the
plans , ' polici•es, requirements. and standards of the Huntington
Beach Coastal Elementiof the General Plan, because it implements
the adopted • Coastal Land Use Plan and Downtown Specific Plan by
.preserving existing visitor serving opportunities and providing
additional"-visitor-serving commercial opportunities which are
varied in -type`.'. and price. The proposal also improves public
access .to .the .beach .by providing handicap ..access , public plazas
w and. alkways` � and wide. fairways to the beach..";;
2 . Coast-al , Development Permit No. 90-18 is consistent with the CZ
(Coastal Zone) suffix, the Downtown Specific- Plan District 10
and other . provi.sions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code
applicable tb -the property, because all zoning code requirements
can be met, -including building height, project parking,
replace.ment. of, b a h parking, and public plazas and open *space.
X-
U.
Conciitional Use Pert No ,r 90 17/�; _� 1 t
Coast=al Development Permit` No 90 :18/
FinaE l nvironmental Impact Report :No 90 2 Y a. tt
Page .;Two. .. +
3'. At the time of occupancy, the proposed Pierside Restaurant
development can'.be provided -•with infrastructure in a manner.:Yth�at'a
is consistent with the Huntington Beach Coastal Element and- .=:;';:.:'•` 3 :_
Coastal Land Use Plan of the General Plan. All services and
utilities are available to the site, and the project will not
over burden any public services or facilities .
4 . The proposed Pierside Restaurant development conforms with the
public access and public recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the - ''
California Coastal Act, because it provides .for improved public
access through the site to the shore line, including handicap
access, allowing for public access to recreational, opportunities .
on the City _Beach.
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 90-17:
1 . The proposed restaurant development will have a beneficial
effect upon the general health welfare, safety, and convenience
of-- persons residing or working in the area due to the type and
quality of the activities proposed, and the improvement of
accerss and , parking opportunities, and will contribute to an
increase in the value of the property and improvements in' ,the
neighborhood.
2 . The proposed Pierside Restaurant Development is designed to be
in conformance with the City' s adopted General Plan (including
f the State Certified Coastal Element) , the Downtown Specific
Plan, and the Downtown Design Guidelines , because it implements
. the visitor-serving designation on the Coastal Land Use Plan and
General Plan Land Use Map, and provides for pier related
commercial activities and public open space in accordance with
the Downtown Specific Plan, District 10 .
3 . . The proposed location, . site layout, and design will properly
adapt the proposed structures to streets, driveways, and other
adjacent structures to - streets, driveways, and other adjacent
structures and uses _in' a—harmonious manner, because a footprint
for the pier plaza, view corridors and public plazas will. be
provided. In addition, the pedestrian and vehicular circulation
has been designed to avoid conflicts, and to utilize a
signalized intersection.
o F:%
Q g
3F
go'na ipf.off a*1-,-'--.'U Be"; T-8-
e 0"6'�i-:��t Ci 1:".11S, ,Permit ;,N.o . -%-9 velopment
Final En"
;i
" 9 0_ -i-ronment-a1,;Tm ad' v Report
Page Three
4 . The proposed combination and relationship of uses to one another
-site ..ar'e properly integrated . The proposed pro i -1.
on the je ..........ct
provides commercial activities designed to suit the open publdd
recreational use of the site .
5 . The proposed 'access to and parking for the Pierside Resta Urahts--.-
will not adversely impact, traffic and parking in the vicinity
because a traffic study by LSA, Inc. has shown that the
surrounding street system can adequately accommodate the demand
generated, and all users of the parking structure can be
accommodated on-site.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. The site plan, floor plans and elevations received .and dated
October 19, 1990 shall be the conceptually approved layout with
the following modifications :
a . Windows shall be shaded and/or recessed to the extent
feasible to reduce glare.
b. Roof heights shall be lowered to comply with maximums stated
in the Downtown Specific Plan, i .e . , 25 feet to the highest
point of the coping of a flat roof or to the deck line of a
mansard roof or the average height of the highest gable of a
pitched or hipped roof . An additional ten (10) feet will be
allowed only for roof line treatment, chimneys, solar energy
equipment and mechanical
al equipment . An additional 14 feet
may be allowed forelevator equipment where necessary. The
height is to be measured from the height of the pier deck.
c. The plaza area between building A and B shall be a minimum of
150 feet in width
d.- The plaza area between building B and C shall be a minimum
100 feet in width..
e. Lifeguard Headquart.erzrparking shall be located southeast of
the Headquarter building and the current parking area heavily
landscaped.
f . Building C shall be reconfigured if necessary to the
satisfaction of marine safety so that a direct line of sight
is available from the windows of the lifeguard headquarters
to the point at-which. the water meets the sand at the pier .
This is required for marine safety purposes .
q,s s�;.a. -_a f„ f t ..tsr i.s. _ _ a _ •,yt'Yn. .. �- .'sb'.'3J'_
-, ,, '7. - ' s t-:F. x •-rt -_.zr s- i. r fa ! i -•4L 7'
i:t-
r-
Condi'tio'n'a1tT;iJse Perc �No 90
:Goas,tal Development Permit No
Final: Envir`o'riment'al 'Impact Report No
Page `Four ' •„
g . Any modifications as required by. Design Review Board .and''`
Planning Commission pursuant to condition 3h. .
h. The project shall incorporate public restrooms in the
following'. manner : Minimum of 6 ladies stalls, 2 Mens '
stalls, 2 urinals; Handicap access shall be provided.
i . A total of 8% of the site area shall be landscaped.
j . A stairway from the plaza to the beach shall be provided . in '
the vicinity of Building A.
k. No tandem spaces shall -be located on the lower (beach
parking) level .
1 . Relocate Buildings A and C toward Pacific Coast Highway and
show additional public open space on the ocean side of the
buildings .
m. Remove six (6) surface level spaces near building A.
n. The casual restaurant -shall be relocated adjacent to the pier
plaza on the lower ,leve, to maintain the approximately 1, 000:
foot spacing between concessions .
2 . Prior to submittal for building permits, the applicant/owner
shall complete the following :
a .. Depict all utility apparatus, such as but not limited to
backflow devices and Edison transformers, on the site plan
and on the landscape plan. They shall be properly screened
by landscaping or other method' as approved by the Community
Development Director.
b. Floor"plans shall depict natural gas stubbed in at the
locations of cooking facilities, water heaters, and central
heating units; .and .laW volume- heads '. shall be used on all
spigots and water faucets .
c. If ' foil-type insulation is to be used, a fire retardant type
shall be installed as approved by the Building Department and Y
indicated on the floor plans .
�l
-
' *.sf ,•T s s1 Y"� I I - 7
zYJ
:Conditiona`1a User Pe
Coasbal� Development _P.ermit 'No
Final Environmental Impact `Re-port.`No 90 2. ` `t i
Page Five - - �
d. All rooftop mechanical equipment shaTl, 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 .. sc reening.
and must be approved by the - Director of Community Development_:_ ' ,
e. Outdoor lighting shall utilize energy
g g savings lamps . All • .
outside lighting shall be directed to prevent "spillage" 'onto �
the beach and Pacific Coast Highway, and shall be noted . on •the
site plan and elevations .
f . A detailed soils analysis shall be prepared by a registered
Soils Engineer. This- analysis shall include on-site soil
sampling and laboratory testing of materials to provide
detailed recommendations regarding grading, chemical and fill
properties , foundations , retaining walls, streets , and
utilities .
g . The Design Review Board and the Planning Commission shall
review and approve the following:
a) The final building form, elevations, colors , and materials
for each building .
b) The conceptual public plaza lighting, street furniture and
landscape plan for the development, in compliance with. the
Downtown Design Guidelines .
h. An engineering geologist shall be engaged to submit a report
indicating the ground surface acceleration from earth movement
for the subject property. All structures within this
development shall be constructed in compliance with the
g-factors as indicated by the geologist '.s report. Calculations
for footings and structural members to withstand anticipated
g-factors shall be submitted to the City, for review prior to
the issuance of build+hg permits .
i . The site plan. (or reference page) shall.:-.include all conditions
of approval imposed on the project printed verbatim.
j . Elevations shall depict colors and building materials as
approved by the, Design Review Board.
N
KR
. CoasIta
N
C on
Ila
15
^
.,,-. ,. , Devi�16prften' & 4
t' 0
. ;_..�-E_n v. N'
t por- o'�-.,
Final
Page Six
3 . Prior to issuance- of building permits, the applicant/owner-�shall
complete the following:
a . Submit copy of the revised site plan, floor plans and
elevations pursuant to condition no . Land 3h for review and
approval and inclusion in the entitlement file.
b. A tract. map delineating leaseable areas and public ar 6 as'.-:s h'cai 1-11","....,
be prepared and approved.
c. A final Landscape Construction Set must be submitted to the
Departments of Community Development and -Public 'Works - and must
be approved. The Landscape Construction Set sha'll include a.
landscape plan prepared and signed by a State Licensed
Landscape Architect and which includes all proposed/exii.sting.
plant 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 9608 and the Downtown .Specific .
Plan of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. The set must be
approved by both departments prior to issuance of building
permits . The existing mature palm trees on-site shall be
stored and returned to the site, and incorporated into the
project ' s landscape plan.
d. 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 .
e. Hydrology and hydraulic studies shall be submitted . for Public
Works approval . Drainage facilities and flow, direction shall
be approved.
f . All applicable Public—.Works fees shall be paid.
g. An interim parking and/or building materials storage plan shall
be submitted to the Department of Community Development to
assure adequate parking is available for employees, customers,
contractors, etc. , during the project ' s construction phase.
F 1- j,Yr„-'�-Nrr i_ t!�"` 'SR_ - -•ter -. ir"r �. 'f`i h xk k -1a- yf3 -
f "-.-`
_. _f, _r"c t x ✓GFa r<i" r9 4j; t _ �t -.E'f -a.t '' "' g d+7 �l,' i- }�'"�` Er -y.. 4
•., .._-* L• � 0.-:.7 K, y'k
Eonditional Uses Pe J;t�No. 90 '17/xr 3�
,Coastal °Development Eermi't No 3 9�0 '18%4 .�: ..:
Final EnvironmentalImpact Report _No 90 2'
Page._Seven l -
h. The developer shall submit 'a. parking management and conttrol.
-plan for review and approval by the Departments of Community; :;
Development and Public ,.Works, prior to issuance of building
permits . This plan should address hours and operation.of-.valet -
service, plans for attended parking and amount and time of
availability: of ' self-parking facilities . A minimum 'of 250 ,
beach parking spaces shall be available .for. self parking- at 'all ::::'
times at rates set by the City Council . The Plan shal.l ..
delineate these spaces, and describe the accessibility of the
spaces during valet parking hours . All required parking shall
be provided on-site.
i . The developer shall submit plans to refacade the Lifeguard
Headquarters to be compatible with the project . The -plans
shall be approved by the Director of Community Services, the
Director of Community Development, and the Design Review Board.
4 . A Planned Sign Program for the development shall be reviewed and
approved by the Design Review Board and Planning Commission prior
to the first sign request.
5 . The Public Works Department requirements are as follows :
a. Remove the water system on-site and construct' a 12 inch water
main in Pacific .Coast Highway, to Lake (First) Street and Beach
parking lot water mains .
b. All restaurants shall have grease interceptors .
c. Construct Pacific Coast Highway improvements .as required by the
City and Caltrans, including right turn lanes .
d. No landscaping shall be permitted within the Pacific Coast
Highway right-.of-way unless approved .by the ,.Department of
Public Works and. Caltrans .
e. ..Design and -location ems. parking• control devices shall be subject
to -final review by the Director of Public works -and Director of
Community Development : •
f . The applicant shall be responsible for paying Traffic Impact"
Fees .adopted by the City Council prior to issuance of building
permits .
P
WNW. si Z-1
VA�'i�
� 7 K
d' -0
65�
Zi ConditlonalUse PeMS%' 4
e*
tPermit- No 90'��d";8
C-oas't-
Final Eronment
-ImpactReport i I Environmental
age. Eight
g 'The applicant' shall be responsible for payment of Water Master
Plan Fees if' adopted by the .City Council prior to i§su6n
building permits . .
6 . Fire Department Requirements are as follows :
a . An automatic fire sprinkler system shall be approved and-,
installed pursuant to Fire Department regulations .
b. Fire access lanes shall be designated, posted, and maintained.--. ..
If fire lane violations occur and the services of the 'Fire
Department are required, the applicant will be liable for
expenses incurred.
c . Two fire hydrants shall be installed prior to combustible
construction.
d. The applicant shall meet all applicable local, State and
Federal Fire Codes, ordinances, and standards .
e. A Class III wet standpipe system (combination) will be
installed to comply with Huntington Beach Fire Department and
Uniform Building code standards .
f . -A fire alarm system will be installed to comply with Huntington
Beach Fire Department and Uniform Fire Code Standards . The .
system will provide manual pulls, 24-hour supervision, audible
alarms, and water flow, valve tamper, and trouble detection. . - .
g . Fire extinguishers will be installed and located in areas to
comply with the Huntington Beach Fire code Standards .
h. Elevators will be sized to accommodate an ambulance gurney
(minimum 6 f*oot 8 inches wide by 4 foot 3 inches deep with
minimum 42 inch opening) .
i . Address numbersvill -lyo,: installed to comply with the Huntington
Beach. Fire Code Standards .
j . . A Fire Protection Plan containing requirements of Fire
Department Specification No. 426 shall be submitted to the Fire,
Department for approval .
F5
. ' - ... .
-itM E
r,a ' V. "t"
tdhaitT6n&1 VU§e . v
Development;'. . .,_
. ....
.Environment=al Impact epgK . .....
Page Nixie:
k. Full access to
6 -the structures for emergency: vehicles" shall- : t.�e,
0 h Par iv--_-maintained:-fr -m' the beach access road and -f rom t I ek� nc l
adjacent to Pacific Coast Highway.
1 . The access ways designated as fire lanes over the ..s I ubt'e)rX'an 64,n',
parking area are to ' be reinforced to sustain the
weight ,of fire-
apparatus
m. Should any
y abandoned oil wells or tanks. be encount 'ered,':-th6- ,.,.-,:.-.:.,'
Fire Department shall be notified and current standards mdt.. as.
required 'by Article 15 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code.
Any abandonment of existing wells must be to current standards
as well .
7 . The development .shall comply with all applicable provisions of the. .
Ordinance Code, Building Division, and Fire Department .
8 . Al-1 building spoils, such as unusable lumber, wire, pipe, and
other surplus -or unusable material, shall be disposed of at an
off-site facility equipped to handle them.
9 . Installation of required landscaping and irrigation systems shall
be completed prior to final inspection.
10 . 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:.
-t-zstage smog alerts) ;
high ozone days (firs
e. Discontinue construction during second' stage smog alerts .
11. Construction shall be limited to Monday - Saturday 7 : 00 AM to 8 : 00N:
PM. Construction shall be prohibited Sundays and Federal holidays
f � ��yt �r +J _-t r z - c$ ��• L t+- ) - Fi f--q? z.i--.• . `5.,T—
Li
d _ L_N sy'l�'����.� 7 _ ''�. t _,�-'=• y�' � _r t.- ��_,}f�.t }y -. � ,5. r �- -: t i
- _ r i t 5_ - h {-
` h ;Conditional Use' aPen` t `No �90=17/ Y�
Coas`tyal tDevelo.pment` £P,ermit} No : 90
..
:Fina',lr Environmental Impact Report -.No
-Page-Ten a<
_L Y
12 . Prior to issuance of demolition permits for+ Maxwell.' s;' >t'he.t:h4i-tort'.,
and architecture of the building shall be recorded to -:the
standards of the Historic American Buildings . Survey. (HABS.).: ;.,;.This. _.
includes the preparation of a detailed historical narrative;'.`-and`
complete graphic documentation of the building through large
format photography. Historic photographs and building plans. .,are..-
also reproduced for the HABS record, which ultimately is ciirated.
in the Library of Congress . Since the significance of- the` `'.
structure is historical rather than architectural, .oral. history_ in-
addition to archival records are required. The completion.-.of .the .
HABS documentation shall be verified by the Director of Community
Development prior to issuance of demolition permits :
13 . The plans for the project shall incorporate a means of
memorializing the existing Maxwell ' s structure. Such measures
could include placement of a commemorative plaque on or near the
site, development of an exhibit either on or off site (e. g . at a
local historical museum, public library or City Hall) , and/or
development of a publication interpreting the role of the Pavilion
in the history of the City, prepared by a qualified historian.
The proposed measure(s) shall be reviewed and approved by the
Director of Community Development prior to issuance of building
permits .
14 . Prior to initiation of construction, police and fire departments
shall be notified and the departments shall be kept informed about
duration and extent of construction throughout the process . -
15 . The applicant shall provide a plan to be approved by the Public
Works Department which depicts alternate routes for traffic during
the construction phase, if necessary. Adequate signage shall be
provided to warn motor vehicles, bicyclists and pedestrians of
construction. The beach access road shall remain open during
construction, or a safe.- alternate .route shall be approved by the
Departments of Public Works, Community Services, and Community
Development .
16 . Signs shall be -posted within the project informing patrons that
the public beach closes at 12 : 00 midnight .
17 . During construction of the project, the developer, in conjunction
with the City, shall provide parking spaces within a reasonable
distance to accommodate beach access .
a
.-41 1.
y a.
Conclitionarl, User Peri 't "Nor 90` 17/� ' { aw, f �rt 4 Z
Coastal* Development Permit No 90 - `
Final* Env-i-ronmental _Impact Report No 90
Page •Eleven
18 . Prior to' occupancy of any building, . the developer, Agency, and the
City shall execute a landscape maintenance agreement=with
provisions determined by the City for maintenance of landscg'
along the street frontages .
19 . The beach access roadway south of the pier must be a. mi4imum: .2,4.,;-. '
feet and must loop with the beach access road on the , north :side` 'o'f "_
the pier . This roadway must also be a minimum 24 feet . The`
roadway must be designed to accommodate . beach service vehicles
bicycles and pedestrian access, subject to City review and
approval . The access road shall be completed prior to issuance '-bf
any Certificate of Occupancy for the project .
20 . The developer shall provide the City with a detailed description
of the projects- proposed security systems for review and approval
by all affected departments prior to issuance of any Certificate ' - ,
of Occupancy for the project .
21 . Handicap access to all levels of the project shall be provided
from .all elevator locations .
22 . If it is determined by the Department of Public Works that
dewatering will be required, the applicant shall provide the
Department of Community Development with an assessment of impacts
on groundwater and underground storage tanks in the vicinity.
This assessment along with any necessary mitigation measures shall
be .reviewed and approved prior to issuance of dewatering permits .
23 . Any asbestos identified prior to or during removal of the existing
structures shall be removed in accordance with City and State
regulations .
24 : The project owner/applicant shall provide for additional - trash
cans along the- beach and bike path along the project frontage.
The type 'and* locations shall be approved by the Department of
CommunityJ'Services
25 . The lower level of , the parking structure shall be closed when high
tides coincide with severe storm conditions .
26 . An encroachment permit from Caltrans shall be required should the
project infringe on Pacific Coast Highway.
i
;AQ
'�-q T-`'k Conditional .? --.U
Coastal. _ -
Development
6 i;�9 0��8 V:t N
hd1.'-EhV A' 6h tR
Final' 1rb c 'k - No 04
Page.:-Twelve,
27. Bicycle racks shall be provided within the project area . ;
-
28 . After building completion., the applicant shall cause 't o' -e, erected
-
-a historical monument memorializing the location, of the -Pacifi ,
Electric Line terminus .
29 . Prior to Occupancy of, each restaurant, the Planning Commi'ssib n
shall review and approve a Restaurant Operation - Plan. The'.:Plan--
shall include, at minimum:
a . The final architectural form, colors , materials , and
landscaping as recommended by the Design Review Board.
b. The proposed hours of' operation.
c. F1 oor plans, including floor area devoted to restaurant versus
bar/lounge.
d. Proposed types and hours of entertainment, and location of
entertainment .
e. Plans for outdoor service.
f . Operational plans which discourage patrons from entering the
beach after. its 12 : 00 midnight closure.
30 . A safe pedestrian walkway shall be provided from the parking
structure to the lifeguard headquarters .
31. No compact parking spaces shall be allowed in the parking
structure. If necessaryl the size of the retail spaces shall be
reduced to accommodate both full -'size parking spaces and adequate
pedestrian/service walkways .
32 . A total of eight (8) handicap parking spaces .shall be provided on
the surface level, in- accordanc02'. with State law.
33 . Construction shall comply with the Floodplain Standards for . FP3
Zones, as outlined in Article 940-Floodplain Suffix, Huntington
Beach Ordinance Code.
34 . The project architecture may be subject to redesign to achieve .
compatibility with the proposed pier plaza project .
l e r _ _3 r r r r - •r- :4y -T 4 �`Y -r x r-�;,'i ft r•' ,_..i.. F uy -wz
1 y = e..- - „ctt-. � "� - r y c tl '-t p - f r ;Sry �E -�•, t iy i Y,,• < -?� 2 Lr
57
- - • ti L- A Z7.. J Stiy 44'"{rr� y h t ta. � t t�� TL��c - 4 _ _ _ { __s , ,� ��- -f-
ondivti'onal LTse�;Perf �; No}Ty .
Coastal D'eve`1°opment PermityI�o 90 4,18/ 'k�f '4
�'j y
Fina1 Environmental Impact Report No 90 2 , t
Page '.Thi:rteen' y
35.. This :conditional use permit shall not become effecti.ve`,for any '
purpose until. an "Acceptance of Conditions" --form has been properly
executed by the 'applicant and an authorized, represent atdve.-:-of .tYie' _,�_':•.
.. ..
owner of the property, recorded with County Recorder ' s Off.i'ce '.and`
returned to the Planning Division; and until the teri`-day ap.peal., .; .;::
period has elapsed.
36 . This conditional use permit shall become null and- void unle'ss.".".'
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
Department a minimum 30 days prior to the expiration date.
RESOLUTION NO. 1437
A RESOLUTION OF THE HUNTINGTON BEACH
PLANNING COMMISSION ADOPTING AND CERTIFYING
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 90-2 :
PIERSIDE RESTAURANT DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, Environmental Impact Report No. '90-2 and related
entitlements have been prepared; and
The City of . Huntington Beach was the lead agency in the
preparation of the environmental impact report; and
All persons and agencies wishing to respond to notice duly
given have been heard by the Planning Commission, either through
written notice or during- public hearings held on August 21, 1990 ,.
October 2, 1990, October 23 , 1990 and November 6, 1990, and such
comments were duly noted and responded to .
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of
the City of Huntington Beach as . follows :
SECTION 1: .The Planning Commission does hereby find that
Final Environmental Impact Report .No. 90-2 was prepared in
accordance .wkt-h the California Environmental Quality Act and all
State , and ;local guidelines .
SECTION 2: The Planning Commission has considered all
significant effects detailed in Environmental Impact Report- No.
90-2, together with proposed_ mitigation measures to mitigate such
effects (see Exhibit A) .
SECTION -3.: The Planning Commission finds that through the .
implementation of the aforementioned mitigation measures, that some
of the potentially adverse impacts associated with the proposed
project can be eliminated or reduced to a level .of insignificance,
and has made- a.ppr.opriate, findings (see Exhibit. B) .,
'Ar
4
--nXi% .�F
ff
- -Conditional -0
........
d Cioh,41 Per iNiA:.�,No :.9 1:7
63.
P
Coastal -opmen ermi N6%--,�19 0-'11-87-" -
-�E V-ii�onm6nt Repp r N
Fin 'n'Final
.....
Page Fourteen
lv!
4
.:i Yj!'
The Planning Commission �f b r'-t 'r.,.f ind's ', h t
SECTION- 4 : he
e
benefits accruing -to the City by virtue of Implembnting ,'tthe '3 3D6-Do'
Specific Plan, override the uhmitigable effects :outlined--in'
Environmental .Impact Report No . 90-2, as detailed in the 'Statemen
of overriding Considerations (see Exhibit C) ..
SECTION 5 :_ The Planning Commission of - the - City -of.- Hunti'ngton ;
Beach does hereby adopt' and certify as adequate Environmelntal. Im' P'6
Report No . 90-2 .
SECTION 6 : The Planning Director is hereby authorized and
directed to file with the Office of the County Clerk and the State"
Office of Planning and Research a notice of determination for
Environmental Impact Report No . 90-2, as required by Section 15094..
of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines .
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of .
Huntington Beach at a regular meeting thereof held on the sixth day
of November, 1990 .
Michael C. Adams, Secretary Planning Commission Chairwoman
By Minute Action.-the Commission requested staff and the applicant to
i.
consider mod fications to .the- project, and reflect a series of ' - .
alternatives to present to the City Council for their- review. The
motion passed' 6-o', Commissioner Williams was out of the room.
I hereby certify that Conditional Use Permit No. 90-17, Coastal
Development PermitNo . 90-18 and Final Environmental Impact Report
No . 90-2 were approved by the Planning Commission of the City of
Huntington Beach on November 6, 1990, 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,
Mike Adams, Secretary
Planning Commission
by:
Ha SimmonsSmmc
Senior Planner ,
(7745d-1,'14)
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL-GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE NO. 90-8 :
1. Conveying the subject site to the Redevelopment Agency to allow
Visitor-Serving Commercial development is consistent with the
Visitor-Serving Commercial General Plan Designation for the
property.
2 . The conveyance of property for the visitor-serving commercial
project is consistent with the following policies contained in the
General Plan:
3 . 6 .2 . 1(2) Protect, encourage, and where feasible, provide a
variety of recreation facilities which provide
opportunities for all income groups (Coastal Element) .
3 . 6 .2 .2(1) Protect, encourage, and where feasible, provide
visitor-serving facilities in the Coastal Zone which
are varied in type and price (Coastal Element) .
(a) Encourage the provision of additional restaurants and
hotel/motel accomodations in keeping with the
alternative chosen by the City Council (Coastal
Element) .
3 .4 .2.4(2) Provide parking for residents and beach users (Land
Use Element-Shoreline) .
3 .4 .2 . 8 To promote the development of services and facilities
necessary to support a tourist industry and insure
commercial development that is economically viable,
attractive, well related to other land uses, and satisfies
the needs of the City' s residents by:
(1) Encouraging planned commercial development that will
coincide with residential growth;
(2) Continuing to diversify the economic base of the City
and increasing the tax base;
(3) Promoting the revitalization of the Downtown area; and
(4) Promoting hotel and tourist-oriented retail
development in appropriate locations (Land Use
Element) .
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 90-18 :
1. The proposed Pierside Restaurant development conforms with the
plans, policies, requirements and standards of the Huntington
Beach Coastal Element of the General Plan, because it implements
the adopted Coastal Land Use Plan and Downtown Specific Plan by
preserving existing visitor serving opportunities and providing
additional visitor-serving commercial opportunities which are
varied in type and price. The proposal also improves public
access to the beach by providing handicap access, public plazas
and walkways, and wide stairways to the beach.
2 . Coastal Development Permit No. 90-18 is consistent with the CZ
(Coastal Zone) suffix, the Downtown Specific Plan District 10 and
other provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code applicable
to the property, because all zoning code requirements can be met,
including building height, project parking, replacement of beach
parking, and public plazas and open space.
3 . At the time of occupancy, the proposed Pierside Restaurant
development can be provided with infrastructure in a manner that
is consistent with the Huntington Beach Coastal Element and
Coastal Land Use. Plan of the General Plan. All services and
utilities are available to the site, and the project will not
over burden any public services or facilities .
4 . The proposed Pierside Restaurant development conforms with the
public access and public recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the
California Coastal Act, because it provides for improved public
access through the site to the shore line, including handicap
access, allowing for public access to recreational opportunities
on the City Beach.
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO, 90-17:
1. The proposed restaurant development will have a beneficial
effect upon the general health welfare, safety, and convenience
of persons residing or working in the area due to the type and
quality of the activities proposed, and the improvement of
accerss and parking opportunities, and will contribute to an
increase in the value of the property and improvements in the
neighborhood.
2 . The proposed Pierside Restaurant Development is designed to be
in conformance with the City' s adopted General Plan (including
the State Certified Coastal Element) , the Downtown Specific
Plan, and the Downtown Design Guidelines, because it implements
the visitor-serving designation on the Coastal Land Use Plan and
General Plan Land Use Map, and provides for pier related
commercial activities and public open space in accordance with
the Downtown Specific Plan, District 10.
Attachment 2 -2- (8900d)
3 . The proposed location, site layout, and design will properly
adapt the proposed structures to streets, driveways, and other
adjacent structures to streets, driveways, and other adjacent
structures and uses in a harmonious manner, because a footprint
for the pier plaza, view corridors and public plazas will be
provided. In addition, the pedestrian and vehicular circulation
has been designed to avoid conflicts, and to utilize a
signalized intersection.
4 . The proposed combination and relationship of uses to one another
on the site are properly integrated. The proposed project will
provide commercial activities designed to suit the open public
recreational use of the site.
5 . The proposed access to and parking for the Pierside Restaurants
will not adversely impact traffic and parking in the vicinity,
because a traffic study by LSA, Inc. has shown that the
surrounding street system can adequately accommodate the demand
generated, and all users of the parking structure can be
accommodated on-site.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. The site plan, floor plans and elevations received and dated
March 4, 1991 shall be the conceptually approved layout with the
following modifications:
a. Maximum square footage of concessions (excluding Dwight ' s)
shall be 5, 750 sq. ft.
b. Windows shall be shaded and/or recessed to the extent
feasible to reduce glare.
c. Roof heights shall be lowered to comply with maximums stated
in the Downtown Specific Plan, i .e. , 25 feet to the highest
point of the coping of a flat roof or to the deck line of a
mansard roof or the average height of the highest gable of a
pitched or hipped roof . An additional ten (10) feet will be
allowed only for roof line treatment, chimneys, solar energy
equipment and mechanical equipment. An additional 14 feet
may be allowed for elevator equipment where necessary. The
height is to be measured from the height of the pier deck.
d. Lifeguard Headquarters parking shall be located southeast of
the Headquarter building and the current parking area heavily
landscaped.
e. Building C shall be reconfigured if necessary to the
satisfaction of marine safety so that a direct line of sight
is available from the windows of the lifeguard headquarters
to the point at which the water meets the sand at the pier.
This is required for marine safety purposes .
Attachment 2 . -3- (8900d)
f . Any modifications as required by Design Review Board and
Planning Commission pursuant to condition 3h.
g. The project shall incorporate public restrooms in the
following manner: Minimum of 6 ladies stalls, 2 Mens '
stalls, 2 urinals; Handicap access shall be provided.
h. A total of 8% of the site area shall be landscaped.
i . A stairway from the plaza to the beach shall be provided in
the vicinity of Building A.
j . No tandem spaces shall be located on the lower (beach
parking) level.
k. Relocate Buildings A and C toward Pacific Coast Highway and
show additional public open space on the ocean side of the
buildings .
1. The casual restaurant shall be located adjacent to the pier
plaza on the lower leve, to maintain the approximately 1, 000
foot spacing between concessions.
2 . Prior to submittal for building permits, the applicant/owner
shall complete the following:
a. Depict all utility apparatus, such as but not limited to
backflow devices and Edison transformers, on the site plan
and on the landscape plan. They shall be properly screened
by landscaping or other method as approved 'by the Community
Development Director.
b. Floor plans shall depict natural gas stubbed in at the
locations of cooking facilities, water heaters, and central
heating units; and low-volume heads shall be used on all
spigots and water faucets .
c. If foil-type insulation is to be used, a fire retardant type
shall be installed as approved by the Building Department and
indicated on the floor plans .
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 by the Director of Community
Development.
e. Outdoor lighting shall utilize energy savings lamps . All
outside lighting shall be directed to prevent "spillage" onto
the beach and Pacific Coast Highway, and shall be noted on
the site plan and elevations.
Attachment 2 -4- (8900d)
f. A detailed soils analysis shall be prepared by a registered
Soils Engineer. This analysis shall include on-site soil
sampling and laboratory testing of materials to provide
detailed recommendations regarding grading, chemical and fill
properties, foundations, . retaining walls, streets, and
utilities.
g. The Design Review Board and the Planning Commission shall
review and approve the following:
a) The final building form, elevations, colors, and materials
for each building.
b) The conceptual public plaza lighting, street furniture and
landscape plan for the development, in compliance with the
Downtown Design Guidelines.
h. An engineering geologist shall be engaged to submit a report.
indicating the ground surface acceleration from earth
movement for the subject property. All structures within
this development shall be constructed in compliance with the
g-factors as indicated by the geologist' s report.
Calculations for footings and structural members to withstand
anticipated g-factors shall be submitted to the City for
review prior to the issuance of building permits.
i . The site plan (or reference page) shall include all
conditions of approval imposed on the project printed
verbatim.
j . Elevations shall depict colors and building materials as
approved by the Design Review Board.
3 . Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant/owner shall
complete the following:
a . Submit copy of the revised site plan, floor plans and
elevations pursuant to condition no. 1 and 3h for review and
approval and inclusion in the entitlement file.
b. A tract map delineating leaseable areas and public areas
shall be prepared and approved.
c. A final 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 plant 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 9608 and the Downtown Specific Plan of the Huntington
Beach Ordinance Code. The set must be approved by both
Attachment 2 -5- (8900d)
departments prior to issuance of building permits. The
existing mature palm trees on-site shall be stored and
returned to the site, and incorporated into the project ' s
landscape plan.
d. 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.
e. Hydrology and hydraulic studies shall be submitted for Public
Works approval . Drainage facilities and flow direction shall
be approved.
f . All applicable Public Works fees shall be paid.
g. An interim parking and/or building materials storage plan
shall be submitted to the Department of Community Development
to assure adequate parking is available for employees,
customers, contractors, etc. , during the project ' s
construction phase.
h. The developer shall submit a parking management and control
plan for review and approval by the Departments of Community
Development and Public Works, prior to issuance of building
permits. This plan should address hours and operation of
valet service, plans for attended parking and amount and time
of availability of self-parking facilities . A minimum of 250
beach parking spaces shall be available for self parking at
all times at rates set by the City Council. The Plan shall
delineate these spaces, and describe the accessibility of the
spaces during valet parking hours. All required parking
shall be provided on-site.
i . The developer shall submit plans to refacade the Lifeguard
Headquarters to be compatible with the project . The plans
shall be approved by the Director of Community Services, the
Director of Community Development, 'and the Design Review
Board.
4 . A Planned Sign Program for the development shall be reviewed and
approved by the Design Review Board and Planning Commission
prior to the first sign request.
5 . The Public Works Department requirements are as follows :
a. Remove the water system on-site and construct a 12 inch water
main in Pacific Coast Highway, to Lake (First) Street and
Beach parking lot water mains .
b. All restaurants shall have grease interceptors .
c. Construct Pacific Coast Highway improvements as required by
the City and Caltrans, including right turn lanes .
Attachment 2 -6- (8900d)
d. No landscaping shall be permitted within the Pacific Coast
Highway right-of-way unless approved by the Department of
Public Works and Caltrans.
e. Design and location of parking control devices shall be
subject to final review by the Director of Public works and
Director of Community Development.
f . The applicant shall be responsible for paying Traffic Impact
Fees adopted by the City Council prior to issuance of
building permits .
g. The applicant shall be responsible for payment of Water
Master Plan Fees prior to issuance of building permits .
6 . Fire Department Requirements are as follows :
a. An automatic fire sprinkler system shall be approved and
installed pursuant to Fire Department regulations.
b. Fire access lanes shall be designated, posted, and
maintained. If fire lane violations occur and the services
of the Fire Department are required, the applicant will be
liable for expenses incurred.
c. Two fire hydrants shall be installed prior to combustible
construction.
d. The applicant shall meet all applicable local, State and
Federal Fire Codes, Ordinances, and standards .
e. A Class III wet standpipe system (combination) will be
installed to comply with Huntington Beach Fire Department and
Uniform Building code standards.
f . A fire alarm system will be installed to comply with
Huntington Beach Fire Department and Uniform Fire Code
Standards . The system will provide manual pulls, 24-hour
supervision, audible alarms, and water flow, valve tamper,
and trouble detection.
g. Fire extinguishers will be installed and located in areas to
comply with the Huntington Beach Fire code Standards .
h. Elevators will be sized to accommodate an ambulance gurney
(minimum 6 foot 8 inches wide by 4 foot 3 inches deep with
minimum 42 inch opening) .
i . Address numbers will be installed to comply with the
Huntington Beach Fire Code Standards .
j . A Fire Protection Plan containing requirements of Fire '
Department Specification No. 426 shall be submitted to the
Fire Department for approval .
Attachment 2 -7- (89ood)
k. Full access to the structures for emergency vehicles shall be
maintained from the beach access road and from the parking
lot adjacent to Pacific Coast Highway.
1 . The access ways designated as fire lanes over the
subterranean parking area are to be reinforced to sustain the
weight of fire apparatus.
m. Should any abandoned oil wells or tanks be encountered, the
Fire Department shall be notified and current standards met
as required by Article 15 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance
Code. Any abandonment of existing wells must be to current
standards as well .
7. The development shall comply with all applicable provisions of
the Ordinance Code, Building Division, and Fire Department .
8 . All building spoils, such as unusable lumber, wire, pipe, and
other surplus or unusable material, shall be disposed of at an
off-site facility equipped to handle them.
9 . Installation of required landscaping and irrigation systems
shall be completed prior to final inspection.
10 . 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 .
11. Construction shall be limited to Monday - Saturday 7: 00 AM to
.8 : 00 PM. Construction shall be prohibited Sundays and Federal
holidays .
12 . Prior to issuance of demolition permits for Maxwells, the
history and architecture of the building shall be recorded to
the standards of the Historic American Buildings Survey (NABS) .
This includes the preparation of a detailed historical
narrative, and complete graphic documentation of the building
through large format photography. Historic photographs and
building plans are also reproduced for the HABS record, which
ultimately is curated in the Library of Congress . Since the
significance of the structure is historical rather than
Attachment 2 -8- (8900d)
architectural, oral history in addition to archival records are
required. The completion of the HABS documentation shall be
verified by the Director of Community Development prior to
issuance of demolition permits.
13 . The plans for the project shall incorporate a means of
memorializing the existing Maxwell ' s structure. Such measures
could include placement of a commemorative plaque on or near the
site, development of an exhibit either on or off site (e.g. at a
local historical museum, public library or City Hall) , and/or
development of a publication interpreting the role of the
Pavilion in the history of the City, prepared by a qualified
historian. The proposed measure(s) shall be reviewed and
approved by the Director of Community Development prior to
issuance of building permits.
14 . Prior to initiation of construction, police and fire departments
shall be notified and the departments shall be kept informed
about duration and extent of construction throughout the process .
15 . The applicant shall provide a plan to be approved by the Public
Works Department which depicts alternate routes for traffic
during the construction phase, if necessary. Adequate signage
shall be provided to warn motor vehicles, bicyclists and
pedestrians of construction. The beach access road shall remain
open during construction, or a safe alternate route shall be
approved by the Departments of Public Works, Community Services,
and Community Development.
16 . Signs shall be posted within the project informing patrons that
the public beach closes at 12 :00 midnight.
17 . During construction of the project, the developer, in
conjunction with the City, shall provide parking spaces within a
reasonable distance to accommodate beach access .
18 . Prior to occupancy of any building, the developer, Agency, and
the City shall execute a landscape maintenance agreement with
provisions determined by the City for maintenance of landscaping
along the street frontages.
19 . The beach access roadway south of the pier must be a minimum 24
feet and must loop with the beach access road on the north side
of the pier. This roadway must also be a minimum 24 feet. The
roadway must be designed to accommodate beach service vehicles,
bicycles and pedestrian access, subject to City review and
approval . The access road shall be completed prior to issuance
of any Certificate of Occupancy for the project.
20 . The developer shall provide the City with a detailed description
of the project ' s proposed security systems for review and
approval by all affected departments prior to issuance of any
Certificate of Occupancy for the project.
21. Handicap access to all levels of the project shall be provided
from all elevator locations .
Attachment 2 -9- (8900d)
22 . If it is determined by the Department of Public Works that
dewatering will be required, the applicant shall provide the
Department of Community Development with an assessment of
impacts on groundwater and underground storage tanks in the
vicinity. This assessment along with any necessary mitigation
measures shall be reviewed and approved prior to issuance of
dewatering permits.
23 . Any asbestos identified prior to or during removal of the
existing structures shall be removed in accordance with City and
State regulations .
24 . The project owner/applicant shall provide for additional trash
cans along the beach and bike path along the project frontage.
The type and locations shall be approved by the Department of
Community Services .
25 . The lower level of the parking structure shall be closed when
high tides coincide with severe storm conditions.
26. An encroachment permit from Caltrans shall be required should
the project infringe on Pacific Coast Highway.
27. Bicycle racks shall be provided within the project area.
28 . After building completion, the applicant shall cause to be
erected a historical monument memorializing the location of the
Pacific Electric Line terminus .
29 . Prior to Occupancy of each restaurant, the Planning Commission
shall review and approve a Restaurant Operation Plan. The Plan
shall include, at minimum:
a. The final architectural form, colors, materials, and
landscaping as recommended by the Design Review Board.
b. The proposed hours of operation.
.c. Floor plans, including floor area devoted to restaurant
versus bar/lounge.
d. Proposed types and hours of entertainment, and location of
entertainment .
e. Plans for outdoor service.
f . Operational plans which discourage patrons from entering the
beach after its 12 : 00 midnight closure.
30 . A safe pedestrian walkway shall be provided from the parking
structure to the lifeguard headquarters .
31. No compact parking spaces shall be allowed in the parking
structure. Full size. parking spaces and adequate
pedestrian/service walkways/shall be provided.
Attachment 2 -10- (8900d)
32 . A total of eight (8) handicap parking spaces shall be provided
on the surface level, in 'accordance with State law.
33 . Construction shall comply with the Floodplain Standards for FP3
Zones, as outlined in Article 940-Floodplain Suffix, Huntington
Beach Ordinance Code.
34 . The project architecture may be subject to redesign to achieve
compatibility with the proposed pier plaza project.
35 . This conditional use permit shall not become effective for any
purpose until an "Acceptance of Conditions" form has been
properly executed by the applicant and an authorized
representative of the owner of the property, and returned to the
Planning Division; and until the ten day appeal period has
elapsed.
36 . This conditional use permit 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 Department a minimum 30 days prior to the expiration
date.
Attachment 2 -11- (8900d)
PIERSIDE LEASE
- -
Project Description
The proposed Pierside Lease provides for the development of a multi-level restaurant
project located within the footprint of the asphalt parking lot; consisting of 3.5. acres
of land immediately south of the Huntington Beach- Pier, on the ocean side of the
Pacific Coast Highway. Currently, the site is improved with a 17,800 square 'foot
commercial structure with miscellaneous retail on the first level, "Maxwell's"
restaurant -on the second level; a freestanding- structure containing . "Dwight's"
concession stand, and a public parking lot with 239 spaces.
The proposed development for the site is a 48,522 square foot restaurant complex
contained within three restaurant pads. . The restaurants will be built with-. 611
structured parking spaces including 250 subterranean public parking spaces. Public
access to the beach will be provided by two central staircases, two smaller stairways
and three handicapped accessible elevators for a total of seven accessways leading to
the beach. The proposed project will also provide two major public plazas on the
upper level and a series of plazas and promenades on the lower level (78,258 square
feet or 48% of net site area). Relocation of Maxwell's Restaurant to the south will
allow for the development of Pier Plaza, a project proposed by the City to complete '
the new pier development.
Agency Obligations +4
The Agency responsibilities can be:summarized as follows:
7
1. The Agency is obligated to purchase the subject site from the City. of
Huntington Beach. The.Agency must acquire:the subject parcel from the-City
at a price equal to the current .fair market value at the highest and best use
allowed by zoning codes and the general plan. The value of this property is
$5.86 million. The Agency will acquire the property subject to a note from the
City, bearing interest at 10% per annum. pnd make regular payments to the
City. Payments to the City on this loan will replace current general fund
receipts from Maxwell's rent payment (approximately $330,000 annually).
2. The Agency is obligated to.provide the site in a reasonable time period free and
clear of all recorded encumbrances to the developer. In order to prepare the
site for the proposed development, the Agency has agreed to allocate a
maximum of $1.0 million upfront for various costs including relocation of
existing tenants, potential legal expenses (maximum $50,000), potential toxic
clean-up costs (maximum $50,000) and adequate utilities available to the site.
3. The Agency is obligated to reimburse.the developer the total construction cost
of 250 parking spaces being built to replace the existing 239 public beach
parking spaces plus an additional 11 new spaces. In addition, the Agency would
finance the difference in construction costs between the structured parking and
surface parking for the remaining 361 parking spaces.
The Agency parking costs consist of two components:
a. An upfront payment-of $40.milhon='to_cover-tle.total construction cost for the
- µ-
250 replacement public parking'spaces.($1b,000 per space) L -
b. An upfront payment of $1.0 million, plus thirty annual payments of $325,500
(total amortized, costs: of _$3.96" million -:present value) -to` amortize,the;
difference in construction, costs;_between. structured' parking and surface
parking for the 361 spaces serving.the private development. The rationale for.-
this payment is that in a typical:ground lease where the lessor is receiving
2.00% to 3.25% of gross sales,as.'rent; the lessor has provided enough land-to
allow for the building improvements and. surface- parking. In the proposed . -
Lease Agreement, the Agency has not provided enough land to develop a
sufficient amount of surface parking and, thus, must make up the difference in_
parking costs to justify the lease terms. In addition, a Keyser Marston
Associates, Inc. (KMA) report concludes that Agency development *of ' the
project and a subsequent ground lease at 8% is. comparable to the proposed
lease.
Developer Obligations
The developer's responsibilities are as follows: ::4
1. The developer will ground lease the site from the Agency for an original term
of 55 years with an option to extend to a maximum of 80 years, subject to
major renovation.
The Pierside Lease Agreement is structured so that the amount of ground rent
paid is directly related to the project's performance. The ground rent-schedule
is as follows:
Percent of Total Sales
Gross Restaurant Sales -Applied to Ground Lease..
$0 - 35 million 2.00% 4
_8
$35 - $55 million 2.50% :}
$55 - 100 million 3.00%
$100 million + 3.25%
In no event can the percentage of gross sales applied to the ground lease
payment decrease from year to year. In addition, over the term of the lease,
provisions are made to reevaluate the base rent to a higher percentage. Over
the original term, KMA has estimated that the lease will "generate nearly $124
million in revenues (present value of $8.07 million). The property will revert to
the Agency at the termination of the lease. The reversionary value is
projected at nearly.$145 million (present value of $764,000).
Currently, the City is receiving net parking revenues after expenses of
$110,000 from the site annually. The developer must guarantee . this parking
income, with upward adjustments commensurate with increases in other City
parking revenues, over the life of the lease. This provides total revenues of
$21.03 million (present value of $1.75 million). The developer is obligated to
pay all costs for operating and maintaining the parking structure.
<' The ",following is a_'chronological outline: of`the actions° _taken'wlth reg'a to rthe x=
entitlements and lease for the original Pierside Village Project J
September -16,` 1986 The _Planning Commission approved Pierside Village
entitlementsr_Conditional Use Permit 86 43 -andtConditional Developtnent'Permrt
86=27 with'conditions: Zs
October 10, 1986 -_-The City .Council/Redevelopment :Agency approved ythe First
Amended Disposition'_and;>Develo went: A Bement an Pierside Lease between =3
p
Huntington,- Pacifica` I%Pierside '. Development-.-''and*.-' Huntington Beach ,
Redevelopment Agency. _
October 13, 1986 - The City Council approved the Pierside Village"eniitlemenffon
appeal:
-April 21-24, 1987 - The California Coastal Commission reviewed:- the Pierside=
Village entitlements on appeal and approved the project with modified.conditioris :."
Through 1987, planning efforts continued and a change of direction beganto emerge.:
with respect to downtown redevelopment efforts. The 3DI Plan previously approved
in concept began to evolve into what has become the "Village Concept:" This _
changing direction was finalized in March of 1988, with conceptual approval by.the -
Agency of the Pierside Pavilion entertainment complex in lieu of:the`previously
proposed hotel, and Agency approval of the "Village Concept" in April of:1988.
With this shift in direction, the Agency and staff began to re-think..the`need for a
specialty/retail center as previously envisioned.- Throughout-;this ,period-_of time;`
the economics of this project were continually evaluated. --Ultimately;:a. point was
reached where the..viability not" only from aland=use biit,�an;=economic standpoint
concluded that the "Pierside Village concept should:;be:,modified to achieve-a more
desirable land use with regard' to public.-ameriities (eg increased opportunities,
increased beach. accessability, open plaza.-and: promenades)a_- Thus; "th6 .'Agency: l
decided to proceed with a "cluster of restaurants"=rather ,then'-"to:"attempt a`.
specialty/retail center. that would be in direct: competition :With."the" revitalized
Main Street retail core.
AZ
Following this new direction the Council/Agency took the following_act ions
January 17, 1989 - The City Council/Redevelopment Agency directed staff to
prepare an amended Pierside Village plan utilizing the "cluster, of .restaurants" -
concept eliminating all other specialty uses.
September 18, 1989 - The City Council adopted a "Pier Plaza" concept that called
for the development of a 2.1 acre "Pier Plaza" to be located between the base of
the Pier and Pacific Coast Highway. This concept required Maxwell's to be
relocated in order to provide the proposed 2.1 acre "Pier Plaza" foot print.
February 20, 1990 - The Redevelopment Agency approved the conceptual plan for
the development of the "Pierside Restaurants" which includes:
z z
a Sr ✓ �_r .Lo w M�R?+ _v L ,may Y� t e y s z
✓ 1 f
o 7-iUhem development'ro . twoYnew-restaurant yr (25 00 S F)'
pads ,0 Y
_A c mmodations for the relocation of -the existing Maxwell's Restaurant
(15,000
o -The -develo)ment of a parking structure, i eludingsurface and "subsurface
_parking forboth beachgoers and restaurantpatrons
o ;The development!-.'o f beach 'related concessioris, including:approximately `6,000Ww
�sq ft of casual dining space; and r
o _-Authorize.staff and the developer of Pierside to negotiate for. the relocation
-'andtintegration of Max well's;into;the Pierside plan r
X
o . :Authorize s"taff to negotiate an amended Pierside Lease
with Stanley M Bloom:
The ; developer submitted his plans' for-:entitlements in April of this year.
Subsequently it was-determined that EnvironmentaTImpacf.Report"(EIR•.90-2) would
need to-.be conducted as a supplemental. (EIR to' EIR82-2).. At:their meeting on
November.6; 1990. the Planning.Commission :approved' the Pierside Restaurants
entitlements. including.Environmental:,Impact Report 90-2, ,`Conditional:Use Permit
90=17; and Coastal Development Permit 90=18
;untington beach departure ���f community development
STAff
REPOR
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Community Development
DATE: November 6, 1990
SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE NO. 90-8
APPLICANT: City of Huntington Beach ZONE: Downtown Specific
Department of Plan District 10 (Pier-
Administrative Services Related Commercial)
Huntington Beach, CA 92648
GENERAL PLAN: Visitor-
PROPERTY City of Huntington Beach Serving Commercial
OWNER: 2000 Main Street
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 EXISTING USE: Maxwell ' s
Restaurant, parking lot,
REOUEST: Determine that the Beach-related concessions
conveyance of 5 . 9 acres of
real property from the ACREAGE: 5 . 9 acres
. City of Huntington Beach
to the Huntington Beach
Redevelopment Agency is in
conformance with the
General Plan.
LOCATION: Ocean side of Pacific
Coast Highway between Main
Street and First Street
(southeast of the pier)
1 . 0 SUGGESTED ACTION:
Approve General Plan Conformance No. 90-2 with findings .
2 . 0 GENERAL INFORMATION:
The subject property (portion of APN 24-281-14) is located on the ocean
side of Pacific Coast Highway between Main Street and First Street
(southeast of the. existing pier) . The site is currently occupied by
Maxwell ' s Restaurant, . a parking lot, and beach concessions .The parcel
is located within the Downtown Specific. Plan, District 10 which is
designated as pier-related commercial; and within the Downtown
Redevelopment Project Area .
The parcel will be used as part of the Pierside Project . The
Government Code of the- State of California, Section 65402, provides
that a local agency shall not acquire real property nor dispose of any
real property, nor construct a public building or structure in any
County or city until the location, - purpose and extent of such"activity
has been reported upon as " to conformity with the adopted General Plan.
A-F M-23C
qaw
a
~ f:2
3 . 0 DISCUSSION:
The subject property currently has a General Plan Land Use Element and =,
Coastal Element designation of Visitor-Serving Commercial and is zoned
as Downtown Specific Plan-District 10 (Pier-Related Commercial) .
These designations are defined as follows :
Land Use:
Visitor-Serving Commercial : This commercial category was created
in response to the Coastal Act policy which encourages adequate
Visitor-Serving facilities in the coastal area . The principal
permitted uses are hotels, motels, restaurants, theaters , museums,
specialty and beach-related retail and service uses . The primary
criteria for the location of Visitor-Serving Commercial
development is that they be located near visitor-drawing
attractions such as the Municipal Pier and the beaches , and along
major access routes from inland areas .
Zoning :
Downtown Specific Plan-District 10 : This district is intended to
provide for commercial uses on and alongside the pier to expand
the public ' s use and enjoyment of this area . The primary
permitted uses in this district include 'aquariums, bait and tackle
shops, beach-related commercial uses, parking lots, restaurants,
and beach-related retail sales .
The uses on the subject site proposed by the Redevelopment Agency
conform to the existing General Plan and Zoning Designations on
the Site. Therefore, the City' s conveyance of the subject
property to the Redevelopment Agency for visitor-serving
commercial development is consistent with the General Plan and
Zoning .
4 . 0 RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve General Plan
Conformance No. 90-8 pursuant to Section 65402 of the Government Code
of the State of California with the following suggested findings :
SUGGESTED FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL:
1. Conveying the subject site to the Redevelopment Agency to allow
Visitor-Serving Commercial development is consistent with the
Visitor-Serving Commercial General Plan Designation for the
property.
2 . The conveyance - of -property for the visitor-serving commercial
project is consistent with. the following policies contained in the
General Plan:
3 . 6 . 2 . 1(2) Protect, encourage, and where feasible, provide a
variety of recreation facilities which provide
opportunities for .all income groups (Coastal Element) .
Staff Report - 11/6/90 . -2- (7658d)
r ^t
j
3 . 6 . 2 .2(1) Protect, encourage, and where feasible provide
visitor-serving facilities in the Coastal Zone which are
varied in type and price (Coastal Element) .
(a) Encourage the provision of additional restaurants and
hotel/motel accomodations in keeping with the alternative
chosen by the City Council (Coastal Element) .
3 .4 . 2 . 4 (2) Provide parking for residents and beach users (Land Use
Element-Shoreline) .
3 . 4 . 2 . 8 To promote the development of services and facilities
necessary to support a tourist industry and insure
commercial development that is economically viable,
attractive, well related to other land uses , and satisfies
the needs of the City' s residents by:
(1) Encouraging planned commercial development that will
coincide with residential growth;
(2) Continuing to diversify the economic base of the City
and increasing the tax base;
(3) Promoting the revitalization of the Downtown area; and
(4) Promoting hotel and tourist-oriented retail
development in appropriate locations (Land Use
Element) .
5 . 0 ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
The Planning Commission may deny General Plan Conformance No . 90-8
with findings .
ATTACHMENTS:
1 . Area map
2 . Exhibit of subject parcels
3 . Section 65402 of the California Government Code.
HS:TR: kjl
Staff Report - 11/6/90 .-3- (7658d)
......... ...... ....
.1- N
A,
41
"
un I 55rrmeh 1 community
M
D
q�v
�,� trs `}_v t is i .4
4- 0Aj,
F'
Ep OR
''TO: Planning- Commission
FROM: Community Development
DATE: ..November. 6,. 1990.. .
SUBJECT-:- CONDITIONAL USE 'PERMIT-'NO. .90-1.7/COASTAL;--DEVELOPMENT.;
PERMIT''NO. ' 9 0 --18/FINAL -ENVIRONMENTAL. IMPACT . REPORT
90-2. (CONTINUED FROM-- THE OCTOBER 23, .1990, :PLANNING
COMMISSION. MEETING) '
APPLICANT: Redevelopment Agency-
City, of Huntington Beach/
Pierside Restaurant- Develop. DATE ACCEPTED:
. 306 Third Street May 15, 1990
Huntington Beach, CA 92648
PROPERTY City of Huntington Beach MANDATORY PROCESSING DATE:.
OWNER: 2000 Main Street May 15, 1991 '
Huntington Beach, CA 92648
ZONE: Downtown Specific Plan
-. ,REOUEST: To. allow 48, 522 square. ... District 10 (Pier-Related '"„
feet of commercial devel= Commercial)
opmdnt, including up to. 5,-
new. restaur-ants and. GENERAL PLAN: Visitor- -
beach -related. concessions Serving Commercial
with parking and- 78,250.
. . square- feet.. of .-publIc plaza .
EXISTING USE: Maxwell -s
LOCATION ION: Ocean 'side of Pacific Restaurant, parking lot,
coast .Highway-.between Beach-related concessions
r Main' 9t '6et and Virst Strd.et...(sou_thea§t of the ACREAGE: 3 . 5 acres
pier)
0:".': SUGGESTED- -DACTI ON:
-A. Adopt and .certify a'"s ,adequate Final Environmental Impact Report
No'. .9 0-2 by adopting. Planning Commiss.ion..Reso.lution No . 1437 with
Mitigation Measures,-Statement of Overriding Considerations, and
Findings and "F6cts-inL support of, Findings;'
B. Approve Coastal _PeVe -6.pme'nt-_'No . ..90=18 with findings; and
C.-, - -Approve .;Conditional, Use_,_Permitri:No. 90-17 as modified by staff .
conditions of approval.
with----findings. --an :,cohdi
A-FM-23C
_N t! !rA
X
CIA.
2 '0 BACKGROUND. Y
This item was- automatically continued from the Pla' nriin" o . ..issibn
meeting .of October 23, 1990, due to a 3-.3 -vote' on. a' motiori-I.t.g,",approve
the project as, outlined in Sectioxi 1. 0, .above. A 3-3 vot
e''on-'any
motion constitutes no action, and results in au"tomatic. ccintinuance to
the next scheduled Planning Commission meeting.
The public hearing was opened and closed on October 23 , 1990 and the
.Planning Commission completed their deliberations ., The applicant
agreed to the conditions of approval as outlined by -staff, including
reduction of the project square footage from 53, 750 square feet to
48, 522 square feet.
As a result of discussionss - during the public hearing, staff is. also
recommending that the applicants incorporate a refacade of Lifeguard
Headquarters, to be compatible with the proposed project . In
addition, the project may be- subject to design modifications to be
compatible with the proposed pier plaza project. The casual
restaurant should also be relocated adjacent to the pier plaza on the
lower level to maintain the approximately 1, 000 foot spacing between
concessions .
The Police Department has indicated that there will eventually be a
need for a police substation in the downtown area . They are. not,
however, prepared to staff a station at this time, and have indicated
that they do not wish to pursue a substation in this project .
A concern was also raised on October 23 , 1990 with regard to the curb
. cuts on Pacific Coast Highway. The Department of Public Works has
indicated that, with construction of proper acceleration and
deceleration lanes, as proposed, no serious impacts to traffic
circulation are anticipated.
3 . 0 RECOMMENDATION:
A. Adopt and 'certify as adequate Final Environmental Impact Report
No ., . 90-2 by adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1437 with -
Mitigation Measures, Statement of Overriding Considerations, and
Findings and Facts in Support of Findings;
B. Approve Coastal Development No . 90-18 with findings; and
C. Approve Conditional Use Permit No. 90-17 as modified by,- staff with
findings and suggested conditions of approval.
4 . 0 ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
The Planning Commi.ssi6n May:
1. Adopt. and Icertify as adequate Environmental Impact Report No .. 90-2
by adop9 Commission tin Planning Coission Resolution No. . 1437, `approve
Coastal-.Development Permit No . 90-18 .with finding§, ,and- approve
Coriditional -Use Permit No. . 90-17 with' findings .and conditions of
.. approval, with modifications to preserve'- the. 'existing Maxwell ' s
Staff Report. --l-1/6/90.. -2- (7625d)
nj Xx f'aht
7Q ' "i
NOW
i
I
VOWQ
MA I
building.-and',bonsruc two :'a additional ,restaurant itaufan t rt 1%
.e Ami e Ami.
each cdhces s ions This Ja ernative,:,would"' impact`s to
historic resource's and:--reduce paiking .-de'mand:v,byspaces`
.2 . Adopt and certify .4s - adequate Environmental Impact Repo rt..* No'-.- -9 072
byadopting Planning Commission Resolution No. - 1437, ,,and 'deny- -
Coastal Development Permit No. 90-18 and Conditional Use Permits
No . 90-17 with. find.ings . '
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Attachment No. li - Findings and suggested conditions of ' approval ..
2 . Resolution No. 1437, including Mitigation Measures., ]Findings, and. ..
Statement of Overriding Considerations .
3 . Staff Report dated October 23 , 1990
4 . Staff Report dated October 2, 1990
HS:LP:kjl
Staff - Report - - 11/6/90 3 (7625d)
.............................
.L - u 5��i � s 1 t_-fi r. -� i d$MrSy {S�.f ✓ r-4e Ra Va : !,�`7.�f+�.*�+r�.a" .x� , _
i i -
Y � L -.z. a SCr.� t�x z• r -.- fi
-� Ja- v -- ' ii r�.ga �.Yflt•Gt+s.,pc- ri:
ATTACHMENT .NO. 1 ', ` - t
FINDINGS AND SUGGESTED CONDITIONS OF .-APPROVAL
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - COASTAL �DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO, 90-18 :
1. The proposed Pierside Restaurant development conforms with the
plans, policies, requirements and standards of the Huntington
Beach Coastal Element of the General Plan, -because it implements
the adopted Coastal Land Use Plan and Downtown Specific Plan by
preserving existing visitor serving opportunities and providing
additional visitor-serving commercial opportunities which are
varied in type and price. The proposal also improves _public
access to the beach by providing handicap access, public plazas
and walkways, and wide stairways to the beach.
2 . Coastal. Development Permit No. 90-18 is consistent with the CZ
(Coastal Zone) suffix, the Downtown Specific Plan District 10 and
other provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code
applicable to the property, because all zoning code requirements
can be met, including building height, project parking,
replacement of beach parking, and public plazas and open space.
3 . At the time of occupancy, the proposed Pierside Restaurant
development can be provided with infrastructure in a manner that
is consistent with the Huntington Beach Coastal Element and-.
Coastal Land Use Plan of the General Plan. All- services and
utilities are available to the site, and the project will not
over burden any public services or facilities .
4 . The proposed Pierside Restaurant development conforms with the
public access and public recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the
California Coastal Act, -because it provides for improved public
access through the site to the shore line, including handicap
-access, allowing for public access to recreational opportunities
on the City Beach.
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 90-17 :
. 1 . The proposed restaurant development will have a beneficial effect
upon the general health welfare, safety, and convenience of
persons residing or working in the area due to the type and
quality of the activities proposed, and the improvement of
accerss and. parking opportunities, and will contribute to an
increase in the value of the property and . improvements in the
neighborhood..
f -
Attachment No. 1 .- 11/6/90 -2- (7625d)
7
4 p
t { i A 7d
.-) (�5 Z; 1"-•'r°4='k-5{t, i'4..� F.^s lk —� -,.: c '" : i��
R
..�
- ierside eloP2 The proposed, t pment ss�designed to be in
conformance with the City'"s adopted Gener'al '.'P1an" .:(incl-uding the
State 'Certified Coastal Element) the Downtown Specific :P1'an and
thee,Downtown Design Guidelines, because it� implements the
visitor-serving designation on .the-Coastal Land Use. Plan and.
Gene.ral -Plan .Land Use Map, and provides for: pier .related.'
commercial activities and public open "space in accordance with
the Downtown Specific Plan, District 10 .
3 . The proposed location, site layout, and design will properly
adapt the proposed structures to streets, driveways, and other.
adjacent structures to streets, driveways, and other adjacent
structures and' uses in a harmonious manner, because a footprint
for the pier plaza, view corridors and public plazas. will .be
provided. In addition, the pedestrian and vehicular circulation
has been designed to avoid conflicts, and to utilize a signalized
intersection.
4 . The proposed combination and relationship of uses to one another
on the site are properly integrated. The proposed project will
provides commercial activities designed to suit the open public
recreational use of the: site.
5 . The proposed access to and parking for the Pierside Restaurants
will not adversely impact traffic and parking in the vicinity,
because a traffic study by LSA, Inc. has shown that the
surrounding street system can adequately accommodate the demand
generated, and all users of the parking structure can be
accommodated on-site.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. The site plan, floor plans and elevations received and dated
October 19 , 1990 shall be the conceptually approved layout with
the following_ modifications :
a . Windows shall be shaded: and/or recessed to the extent
feasible to reduce glare.
b. Roof heights shall be lowered to. comply with maximums stated
in the Downtown Specific Plan, i .e. , 25 feet to the highest
point of .the coping_ of a flat roof or -to -the deck line of a
mansard roof or the average height of the highest gable of a
pitched or hipped roof ." An additional ten (10) feet will be
allowed only for roof line treatment, chimneys, solar energy
equipment. and mechanical equipment . An. additional 14 feet
may be allowed for elevator equipment where necessary. The
height is to be measured from the height of the pier deck.
C. The plaza area between building A and B shall be a minimum
of 150 feet in width
d. The plaza area between building and C shall be a minimum
100 "feet in width:.
Attachment .No.-, 1 = .1.1/6/90 -3'- .(.7625d)
5 L 7. h .
1 t. � .• ' l U- " t a j'" r i s 3t1 --^ ( w� iX t efr :
rr X ii F. c - }X,+ r,�t a ..-- 5;+-h�
R L e fis+2�j ��d..e_ �. ; ri iAl,e-cr•- `t r7' .x+e• '^ r 2 s't s+'„r i`�a��` `fi� �_ •�.y' . g•:'EW+•}--' `
r a+f -7r 1 T s i 4r'*,d ��y;' " x.qd:'•`r,�;� �v..E' + s` O r' "'-s
2Z.
S +F 9- - r r".: t z ` . .9 T" -:� �. �_�7 •�-cam`. ti_., i h Y� a; Kf.�,t.
e Lifeguard Headquarters parking shall be located southeast 'of
the Headquarter building and; the' current'7parking•_:a,rea.
heavily landscaped.
f . Building C shall . be reconfigured 'if .necessary..to the
satisfaction of marine safety 'so that 'a.:•direct line. of sight
is available from the windows of the, lifeguard .headquarters
to the point at which the water meets the sand at the pier.
This is required for marine safety purposes .
g . Any modifications as required by Design -Review Board and
Planning Commission pursuant to condition 2h.
h. The project shall incorporate public re.strooms in the
following manner: Minimum of 6 ladies stalls, 2 Mens '
stalls, 2 urinals; Handicap access shall be provided.
i . A total of 8% of the site -area shall be landscaped.
J . A stairway from the plaza to the beach shall be provided in
the vicinity of Building A.
k. No tandem spaces shall be located on the lower (beach
parking) level.
1 . Relocate Buildings A and C toward Pacific Coast Highway and
show additional public open space on. the ocean side of the
buildings .
M. Remove .six (6) surface level spaces near building .A.
. n. The casual restaurant shall be relocated adjacent to the
pier plaza on the lower level, to maintain the approximately
1, 000 foot spacing between concessions .
2 . Prior to submittal for building permits, the applicant/owner
shall complete the following :
a . Depict all utility apparatus, such as but not, limited to
backflow devices and Edison transformers, on the site plan
and on the landscape plan. They shall be properly screened
by landscaping. or .other method as approved by the Community
Development Director.
b. Floor plans shall depict natural gas. stubbed in at the
locations of cooking facilities, water heaters, and central
heating units; and low-volume heads shall be used on all
spigots and water faucets .
C. If foil-type insulation is to be used, a fire retardant type
shall . be installed as approved by-the Building Department
and- .indica.ted .on the floor plans .
Attachment No. 1 - 11/6/90 -4- (7625d)
F
r`_ x-.n. a --.C : rJr -- c rn---< c r'�L .-.. r -k _5 m _ 4 ,e a� art=,---ydr>3 �. °• ,l y}i�'e � N±a� �3 r*�}rY' r " --ti :,
--ae..-
X.:
'W vat.."M S "' y r
t -3 - t 5�� •S x �°' r 6 ty_ �a ,�x #.s- i.z Pa. ;5 �� -.5- r t.-.' � '�,-ya`i' 7 -`4f'P1" '� ��-�5�, 0 r `rY7}-+'�^ 3 '.F�Z
t-. H ?r �_isr ', �5. :;.oc+'r— _ .-_*^ -f�r �-fit 3 5� - _ � (_J +`. .�Fx`�_ �r ryy4�` }°" k.{'§�c_ •�k�.L�s - rCtr° #�' S a.
,', X ." y - --it r- r .. <-. :x - ��' _c :'"" °;-. ? ar- -y"fir $3 'q[•�.�`.3 r fi -t
d., A11 rooftop. .mechanical equipment: shall be screened from any
,. , _ ;
view. : 'Sa;id screening ,,.shall_`-be axchite:ct-urally compatible
with the building 'in terms :of.•materaals -a'rid colors .' If
screening is not designed. specifically ;into ,the. .,building, a
rooftop mechanical equipment 'plari must, be= submi-tted showing
screening and- must be approved by the";Director of .Community
Development.. "
e. Outdoor lighting shall utilize energy savings lamps . All
outside lighting shall be directed to prevent "spillage
onto the beach and Pacific Coast Highway, and shall be noted
on the site plan and elevations .
f . A detailed soils analysis shall be prepared by a registered
Soils Engineer. This .analysis shall 'include on-site soil
sampling and laboratory testing of materials. to provide.
detailed recommendations regarding grading, chemical and . :
fill properties, foundations, retaining walls, streets, -and
utilities .
g . The Design Review Board and the Planning Commission shall
review and approve the following :
a) The final building form, elevations, colors, and
materials for each building .
b) The conceptual public plaza lighting, street furniture
and landscape plan for the development, in compliance
with the Downtown Design Guidelines .
h. An engineering geologist shall be engaged to submit a report
indicating the ground .surface acceleration from earth
movement for the subject property. All structures within
this development shall- be constructed in compliance with the
g-factors as indicated by the geologist ' s report.
Calculations for footings and structural members to
withstand anticipated g-factors shall be submitted to the
City. for review prior to the issuance of building permits .
i . . The site plan (or reference page) shall include all
conditions of approval imposed on the project printed
verbatim.
j . Elevations shall depict colors and building materials as
approved by the Design Review Board.
3 . Prior to issuance of building permits_ , the applicant/owner shall
complete the following:.
a . .. Submit copy of the revised site plan, floor plans and
elevations pursuant..to condition no. Land 2h for review and
approval' and inclusion °in the entitlement file.
Attachment -No. 1 11/,6/90 -5 (7625d)
mf.
�. - 3 --`_. -_4[ � � f t- -{•[ } P �6 e� �'� � •�e<�k+ 't-�A..`E.�i ,i 't V,
j - _ r r t - i .... .i y - a � fit', - s .y.. 1 •`'- 1. ' y, 1' '- n.
�$ ��s�
eVJ
b A final Landscape Construction Set must bet submitted {to the
"Department"s ,•of-'Community [Development ;"and `Publ'ic 4,V6rks :an
must :be" approved." The Land' "— Construction, Set .shall
include, .a landscape .plan prepared 'and si"gned;.':by a state:.
Licensed Landscape Architect and -which-.•includes •all ° • .__
proposed/existing plant materials .(lo'cation' ' ,typpl- size,
quantity) , an irrigation plan, a grading' p`lari:;:. an approved
site plan,- and a copy of .:the entitlement .•conditions.:of
approval . The landscape plans •shall _be in conformance •with
Section 9608 and the. Downtown Specific Plan of 'the
Huntington Beach Ordinance Code.: The set must 'be approved
by- both departments prior to issuance• of• building ;permits .
The existing mature palm trees on-site shall be' stoied' 'and
returned to the site, and incorporated into the project ' s "
landscape plan.
C. 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 .
d. Hydrology and hydraulic studies shall be submitted for
Public Works approval . Drainage facilities and flow
direction shall be approved-.
e. All applicable Public Works fees shall be paid.
f . An interim parking and/or building materials storage plan
shall -be submitted to the Department of Community
Development to assure adequate parking is available for
employees, customers, contractors, etc. , during the
project ' s construction phase.
g. The developer shall .submit a parking management and control
plan for review and approval by the Departments of Community
Development and .Public Works, prior to issuance of building
permits . This -plan should,, address hours and operation of
valet service,--.plans. for attended parking and amount and
time of availability of self-parking facilities . .A mi-nimum
of " 250 beach parking spaces shall be available for self "
parking at all times at rates set by the City Council . The
Plan shall" delineate these spaces, and describe the
accessibility of the spaces during valet parking hours . All
required parking shall be provided on-site.
h. The developer shall submit plans to refacade the Lifeguard
Headquarters'-to be compatible with the project. The plans
shall be approved by the Director of Community Services, the
Director of Community Development, and the Design Review
Board.
1.
(7625d)Attachment .No 1 11/6/90 ' =6- .
-h
1 r'.-^a` `�� L ���.ui�i`ss a �- s..: � i-.� 1 r �y Y v'•.. i {-� Nam.. �' iaJJa' ��.�L t i y 3z..�.,,[%
4 'A Planned S,rgn 'Erogram for :the deveaopment> shall be rev.iewed and
, approved by the Design Review Board. a-nd i; 'inning ".Comrriiss on prior
to the first sign request .
5 . The Public Works Department requirements a.re as ``-fol.1•ows : , .,-
a. Remove •the water system on-site and construct a'J'2 inch `
water main in Pacific Coast Highway, to Lake -- (First) Street
and Beach parking lot water mains .
b. All restaurants- shall have grease interceptors .
C. Construct Pacific Coast Highway improvements as required by
. the City and Caltrans, including right turn lanes:
d. No landscaping shall be . permitted within the Pacific Coast
Highway right-of-way unless approved by the Department of ".-
Public Works and Caltrans .
e. Design and location of parking control devices shall be
subject to final review by the Director of Public works .and
Director of Community Development.
f .. The applicant shall be responsible for paying Traffic Impact
Fees adopted 'by the City Council prior to issuance of
building permits .
g . The applicant shall be responsible for payment of Water
Master Plan Fees if adopted by the City Council prior to
issuance of building permits .
6 . Fire Department Requirements are as follows :
a . An automatic fire sprinkler system shall be approved and
installed pursuant to Fire Department regulations .
b. Fire access lanes shall be designated, posted, and
maintained. If fire lane violations occur and the services
of the. Fire Department are required, the applicant will be
liable- for expenses incurred.
C. Two fire hydrants shall be installed prior to combustible
construction. '
d. The applicant shall meet all applicable local, State and
Federal Fire Codes, Ordinances, and standards .
e. A Class III wet standpipe system (combination) will be
installed to comply with. Huntington Beach Fire Department.
and Uniform Building code standards . .
Attachment No. 1 - 11/6/90 -7- (7625d)
A
W
@
&OME
T Nr�l
R
.At W.
"ZI
4..........
R-M
7r,
e
k 11"b' 1 n' s-f r e 'alarm, sys.t,em�-.wi,. MA
-
Huntington-,Beach e -a d.1-Uhi f 0,3 m Fire Code
Fire' D 'partmeht' ' n
Standards . The system will provide manual--ppil t__'24.Lhou r
supervision, audib.le.: alarms, . and ,.water flow �v63-,V&,,�tamper.,
and trouble detection.
9 . Fire extinguishers will be installed and loc6ted .,lin - areas to
comply with the Huntington Beach Fire code Standards .
h. - Elevators will . be sized to accommodate an ambulance gurney
(minimum 6 foot . 81nches wide by 4 foot 3 -inches deep :with
minimum 42 inch opening) .
i . Address numbers will be installed to comply with the
Huntington- Beach Fire Code Standards .
j . A Fire Protection Plan containing requirements of Fire .
Department Specifi-cation No. 426 shall be submitted to the
Fire Department for approval .
k. Full access to the structures for emergency vehicles shall
be maintained from the beach access road and from the
parking lot adjacent to Pacific Coast Highway.
1 . The access ways designated as fire lanes over the
subterranean parking area are to .be reinforced to sustain
the weight of fire apparatus .
M. Should any abandoned oil- wells- or tanks be encountered, the
Fire Department shall. be notified and current standards met
as required by Article 15- of the Huntington Beach Ordinance
Code.. Any abandonment of- existing wells must be current
standards as well .
7. The development shall comply with all applicable provisions of.
the Ordinance Code, Building Division, and Fire Department.
8 . All building spoils, such as unusable lumber, wire, pipe, and
other surplus or unusable material, shall be disposed. of at an
off-site facility equipped to handle them.
9 . Installation of required landscaping and irrigation systems shall
be completed prior to fi.nal inspection.
10. 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 thelate morning and after work is
-completed for the .day
;
:Attachment -No.' 1-.- - 11/6/90 -8- (7625d)
.... ......
41
f4
MU A-
6
-Lz,
fO 5 Vl-'�b "Ji
.'up e-asulfur' fuel C.,
equipm
ent;pmentss
d. Attempt-i.to phase and sche.du' 1 1 e -const,ru..c, to e s' "to
avoid- high. ozone days (first -stage smog Ek'l:ert's)-: ' '-
e. Discontinue construction during 'second, sta"ge ,smog, alerts;
11. Construction shall be limited to Monday g7atutday, 7 : 00 AM to
8 : 00 Pm. Construction shall be prohibited Sundays . and Federal
holidays .
12 . Prior to issuance of demolition permits for MaxwelVs', the
. history and architecture of the building shall. be'*,.reco-rded to the
standards of, the Historic American Buildings Survey` (HABS) . . this
includes the preparation of a detailed historic6l'. na'rrative, and
complete graphic documentation- of the building ' through large . . .
format photography. Historic photographs and building plans are
also reproduced for the HABS record, which ultimately- is curated
in the- Library. of Congress . Since the significance of the
structure is historical rather than architectural,. oral history
in addition to archival records are required. The completion of
the HABS documentation shall' be verified by the Director of
Community Development prior to issuance of demolition permits .
13 . The plans for the project shall incorporate a means of
memorializing the existing Maxwell ' s structure. Such measures
could include placement of a commemorative plaque on or near the
site,, development of an exhibit either on or off site (e.g . at a
local hi.s-to*rical museum, public library or. City Hall) , and/or
.development-- of a publication interpreting the role of the
Pavilion' in the history of the City, prepared by a qualified
historian. The proposed measure(s.) shall be reviewed and
approved by -the Director of Community Development priorto
issuance of building permits .
14 . Prior to initiation of construction, police and fire departments
shall be. notified and the departments shall be kept informed
about duration and extent of construction throughout the process .
1.5.,. The,. applicant shall provide- a ,plan tobe approved:-:by the Public:
-Works Department which,-depict for traffic
raffic.
during the construction' phase, if necessary. Adequate signage.,
shall be provided to warn motor vehicles, bicyclists and
pedestrians of construction. The beach access road shall remain
open during construction, or a safe alternate route shall be
approved by the Departments of Public Works, Community Services,
and Community Development .
16 ... Signs shall be posted within the project informing patrons that
the public beach closes at 12 : 00 midnight.
Attachment --No.' 1 - -11/6./90 9- (7625d) .
L.ty.• '{ T WON Fj t
17. Du'r•ing construction. of.. e c the pro� `t; `the develo`pev,- fni conk-unction
with the City, shall provide parking, spacesSwi'thri a reasonable
distance to accommodate beach access
18 . Prior to occupancy of any building; the developer:; Agency,.' and
the City shall execute a landscape :.'maintenance agreement`w:ith.
provisions determined by the City for. maintenance.'of landscaping
along the street frontages . '
19 . The beach access roadway south of the pier must be a 'min.imum 24
feet and must loop with the beach access road on the north, side
of the pier. This roadway must also be a _minimum .24 feet . The
roadway .must be designed to accommodate beach service vehicles,
bicycles and pedestrian access, subject to -City review and..... ,
approval. The • access road shall be completed prior to issnce
of any Certificate of Occupancy for the project .
20 . The developer shall provide the City with a detailed description
of the project ' s proposed security systems for review and
approval by all affected departments prior to issuance of any
Certificate of Occupancy for the project .
21. Handicap access to all levels of the project shall be provided
from all elevator locations .
22 . If it is determined by the Department of Public Works that
dewatering will be required, the applicant shall provide the
Department of Community Development with an assessment of impacts
on groundwater and underground storage tanks in the vicinity-.
This assessment along with any necessary mitigation measures
shall be reviewed and approved- prior to issuance of dewatering
permits .
23 . Any asbestos identified prior to or during removal of the
existing structures shall be removed in accordance with City and
State regulations .
24 . The project owner/applicant shall provide for /additional trash
cans along the beach -and bike.. path along the project frontage.
The type and locations shall be approved by the Department of
Community Services . -�
25 . The lower level of the parking structure shall be closed when
high tides coincide with severe storm conditions .
26 . An encroachment permit from Caltrans shall be required should the '
project infringe on Pacific Coast Highway.
27. Bicycle racks shall be provided within the project area .
28 . After building completion, the applicant :.shall cause to be
erected a historical monument ,memorializing the location ;of the
Pacific Electric Line _t-erminus .
Attachment No. 1 - 11/6/90 -10- (7625d)
�'f { y i qs3 T�7 t
tr - 'sg - -� _ * - f _- ¢ r-;
t 4.E.�re. 3[:"..c -� -i ' - S''C rr
tM.Y
y •2 - ✓-i S } `Y •* ! 3tSr:I vfa
Skr F
Min
29 Prior to Occupancy of each` nestaurant<', the Planning 5 Commi`ssiont
shall review and approve a . Restaurant .0peration Plan *`.'The-:P.1'an'
shall. include; at minimum:
a. The final .architectural form, colors, mater-ia ';'...and
landscaping :as recommended by the Design-.Rev ew `.B.oard.
b. The proposed hours of operation.
c. • Floor plans, including floor area devoted to restaurant- .
versus bar/lounge.
d. Proposed types and hours of entertainment, and .location of
entertainment.
e. Plans for outdoor service.
f . Operational plans- which discourage patrons from entering the ,
beach after its 12 : 00 midnight closure.
30 . A safe pedestrian walkway shall be provided from the parking
structure to the lifeguard headquarters .
31. No compact parking spaces shall be allowed in the parking
structure. If necessary, the size of the retail spaces shall be
reduced to accommodate..both. full size parking spaces and adequate
pedestrian/service walkways .
32 . A total of eight (8) handicap- parking spaces shall be provided on
the surface level, in accordance with State law.
33 . Construction shall comply with the Floodplain Standards for FP3
Zones, as outlined in-Article 940-Floodplain Suffix, Huntington
Beach Ordinance Code.
34 . The project architecture may be subject to redesign to achieve
compatibility with .the proposed pier plaza project..
35 . This conditional use permit shall not become effective for any
purpose until an "Acceptance of Conditions" form 'has been
properly executed by the applicant and an authorized
representative of the owner of the property, recorded with County
Recorder ' s Office, and returned to the Planning Division; and
until the ten day appeal period has elapsed.
36 . This conditional use permit 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 Department a minimum 30 days prior to the expiration
date.
Attachment No. 1 -. 1116/90 -11- (7625d)
_ -- r _ 1 )k�.� P x -r - Ji 1 7•G "'_si'�-k�t',,''�e `$' br�� (y''�+,t'�s-: ar ��y .k ' 7-.
Y i -. 7 y T S .4 � - r Et t } Z_ 72`' iT ��'d•�i: - A i r� E k i _ n .
stc3- .i: s' �c -+'^- -ajz .,?•{ E.-_ [r i s r ' )1 i •�'s
M'r r��Jtiirr
-•. T r E- :t c } - i.-[�F'i,Er% a°h+3; ;r 7 - r �E r 't F",�f a �'•t�. *df Zt•[t S� sj `d a
1
RESOLUTION NO. 1437
A RESOLUTION OF THE HUNTINGTON BEACH
PLANNING COMMISSION ADOPTING AND CERTIFYING
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 90-2 :
PIERSIDE RESTAURANT DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, Environmental Impact Report No. .90-2 and related
entitlements have been prepared; and
The City of Huntington Beach was the lead agency in the
preparation of the environmental impact report; and
All persons and agencies wishing to respond to notice duly
given have been heard by the Planning Commission, either through
written notice or during public hearings held on August 21, 1990,
October 2, 1990 and October 23, 1990, and such comments were duly
noted and re_sponded ,to.
NOW, 'THEREFORE,. BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of
the City of Huntington Beach as follows.:
SECTION• 1: The Planning Commission does hereby find that
Final Environmental Impact Report No. 90-2 was prepared in
accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and all
State and local guidelines.
SECTION 2: The Planning Commission. has considered all
significant effects detailed in Environmental Impact Report No.
90-2, together with proposed mitigation measures to mitigate such
effects (see Exhibit A) .
SECTION 3 : The Planning Commission finds that through the
implementation of the aforementioned mitigation measures, that some
of the potentially adverse impacts associated with the proposed
project can be eliminated or reduced to a level of insignificance,
and. has made appropriate findings (see Exhibit B) . -
SECTION 4 : . The Planning Commission further finds that the
benefits. accruing to the. City by"virtue of. implementing the Downtown
Specific Plan, -override the unmitigable. effects outlined in
Environmental Impact Report No.- 9.0-2, as detailed in the Statement
Qf Overriding Considerations (see -Exhibit C) .
5
V
NO
A
SECTION 5 The Planning Commission =bf' -the on
Beach does hereby adopt and .-certify as ade* 4pate. Enviroftment,a.l
Impact
Report No. 90-2 .
SECTION 6 : The Planning Director' is hereby authorized and
directed to file with the .Office of the .County Clerk and the' PtatE.i
Office of Planning and Research a notice of determination for
Environmental Impact Report No. 90-2, as required by Section 15094
of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines .
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of
Huntington Beach at a regular meeting thereof held on the
twenty-third day of October, 1990 .
Michael C. Adams-1 Secretary Planning Commission Chairwoman
(7505d-18)
ct 7, 'SYhZlrtp ;iP _4,,,
7A.
EXHIBIT
MITIGATION--MEASURES
1. Windows shall be shaded and/or recessed -to the extent feasible
to reduce glare.
2 . Outdoor lighting shall utilize energy savings lamps . All
outside lighting shall be directed to prevent I'spillagell onto
the beach and Pacific Coast Highway, and shall be noted on the- :...
site plan and elevations .
3 . A final 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 plant
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 9608 and the Downtown Specific
Plan of the Huntington -Beach- Ordinance Code. The set must be
approved by both: depa-rtmentsprior to issuance of building
permits .The existing.-mature.. p.al.m trees .on-site shall be stored --
and returned to the- site, and' incorporated into the project ' s'
landscape plan.
4 . Prior.- to issuance: of, demo-li-t.ion. permits for Maxwells, the
history and architecture of the building shall be recorded to
the standards of the Historic American Buildings Survey (HABS) .
This includes the preparation of a detailed historical
narrative, and; complet'e -graphic documentation of the building
through large format photography. Historic photographs and
building plans are also reproduced for the HABS record, which
ultimately is curated in. the,' Library of -Congress . Since the-
significance of-.the structure" is historical rather than
architectural, oral history in addition to archival records are
required.
. 5 . The plans for the project shall incorporate a means of
memorializing the existing Maxwell ' s structure. Such measures
could in*clude placement .of a commemorative plaque on or near the
site, development- of.. a.n exhibit eitheron or off site (e.g . at a
local historical museum, public library or City Hall) , and/or
development of .a publication interpreting the role of the
Pavilion in the.'histoiry of theCity, prepared by a qualified
historiah-. The proposed .mb.dsure(s) shall be reviewed and
approved by.*t the i. 0 eCtor-':ofommunity Development prior to
issuance of buildingp6rmits .,_
(7505d-19)
;71
-. � `k- "' # -- lip cs` 4'^ a. {r._ ^" i_ zs •,_. -rs. ems.. q
'3
1
,� �..
iy2a�;
3 x
s K..
EXHIBIT 'H -;
CEQA STATEMENT. OF. FINDINGS:'AND: FACTS:
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO.. '_90-2
(PIERSIDE RESTAURANT DEVELOPMENT) .
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 90-17/
COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT .NO. 90-18
Background:
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the. State CEQA
Guidelines provide:
"No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for.'
which an EIR has been- completed which indentifys one, or more.
significant- environmental effects' of the project unless the
public agency makes one or more written findings for each of
those, significant environmental effects accompanied by a
brief explanation of the rationale for each finding" - (Section
15091, CEQA Guidelines) .
The possible findings are:
1. Changes or alterations have been required -in, or
incorporated into-, .the . project which avoid or
substantially lessen the significant-. environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR. Hereafter referred to as
Finding 1.
2 . Such changes or alterations are withi-n the. responsibility
and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the
agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted
by such other agency. Hereafter- 'referred to as Finding 2 .
3 . ,Specific economic, social, or other considerations make
. infeasible .the mitigation measures or project alternatives
identified in the final EIR. Hereafter referred to as.
Finding 3 .
.The City of Huntington Beach is considering approval of Conditional'
Use Permit No 90-17. and Coastal Development Permit No. 90-18 .
Because the proposed actions constitute a project " under the CEQA
guidelines, -the City of Huntington Beach has prepared an
Environmental Impact Report. This Environmental Impact Report has
identified certain significant effects which may occur as a result
of the project. Further, the City desires 'to approve this project
and, after determining that the EIR is . complete and has been
prepared .in`"-acco.rdance_ with CEQA'.and the Guidelines, the findings
set forth herein .are made:
_4 Y
n'r.
-
' EF-FECTS -:DETERMINED -NOT *TO BE SIGNIFICANT: ..
The :City of Huntington Beach prepared an: I ni t i'a 1 Study•to identify
the.-,effects of the proposed project which are and are-not
potentially significant. Those topics determined no-t to be.
significant are listed- below. In addition, Environmen'tal' Impact
Report No. 90-2 concludes that impacts in the areas of shade and
shadow, and traffic/parking are not significant . These are also
listed below:
Air Human Health
Water Natural Resources
Plant Life Risk of Upset
Animal Life Population
Noise Recreation:
Energy Shade/Shadow
Public Services Housing
Traffic/Parking— Utilities
Land Use Earth/Liquification, Tsunamis
EFFECTS DETERMINED TO BE MITIGATED TO A LEVEL OF INSIGNIFICANCE:
Effect #1 ,
The addition of on-site lighting and reflective building windows
would increase the amount of light and glare emanating from the site.
Finding
Finding #1 Changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated
orporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen.
the,..s.i'gnificant environmental effect as identified in the Final
Environmental Impact-Report.
Facts in Support of Finding
The .significant . effect has been substantially lessened by virtue of
the following mitigation measures identified in the, Final
Environmental Impact Report and incorporated into the project as
conditions of approval: .
Windows shall be- shaded and/or recessed to the extent feasible
to reduce glare..
. 2 . Outdoor lighting shall utilize . 6nergy savings lamps . All
outside lighting shall be directed to prevent "spillage" onto
the beach and Pacific Coast. Highway, and shall be noted on the
'site plan and elevations .
SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED IF THE
PROJECT IS IMPLEMENTED:
Effect #1 -
result in th I_rqJ ect implementation would s e demolition of the
hittbric Pava lon ,i(P..avi lion) building, currently used for -Maxwel-l ' s
rqs _aY rant. -This building is potenti'ally .eligible for- theNational
Register. of Historic;H; nd . is considered an historical
resource of thb-City of Hun .;'Beach.
ting on .
IRAY
No
Wi
�W-
A
XF!,
Finding- #3. Specific social, economic, or other :donside rations make
ea6ible the mitigation measures and alternatives e'r tives
infeasible 6' na identified i n
the Final Environmental Impact., Report.,
Facts in Support of Finding
There are 'no measures which can fully mitigate the adverse impacts
to the integrity of the historic. .building if...the. structure is
demolished. The following measur.es .will tedu-ce' - impacts ' to the
extent feasible:
4 . Prior to issuance of demolition permits for Maxwell ' s, the
history and architecture of the building shall be recorded to
the standards of the Historic American Buildings Survey (HABS) .
This includes the preparation of a detailed historical
narrative, and complete graphic documentation of- the building'
through large format photography. Historic photographs and
building plans are also reproduced for the .HABS record, which
ultimately is curated in the Library of Congress . Since the
significance of the structure is historical rather than
architectural, oral history in addition to archival records are
required.
5 . The plans for the project shall incorporate a means of
memorializing the existing Maxwell ' s structure. Such measures
could include placement of. a commemorative. plaque on or near the
site, development of an exhibit -ei:ther .on, or off site (e.g. at a
local historical museum,: public library or City Hall) , and/or- :�
development of a publication interpreting the role of the
Pavilion in the history of -the City, prepared by a .qualified . .
'historian.; The ,proposed -measure.(s) shall be reviewed and
approved by the Director of Community Development prior to
issuance of building permits .
The specific considerations referred to in Finding #3 are detailed
in the Statement of Overriding Considerations (Exhibit C) .
Effect #2
The. proposed buildings would obstruct .direct views of the ocean and
the pier from Pacific Coast Highway and inland properties, in some
locations .
Finding
Finding. #3 Specific .social, economic, or other considerations make
in'feasible mitigation measures and alternative identified in the
Fi.nal Environmental. .Impac* t :Report.
Qk
n�
Facts in', Spo W5 r'
t-6f-Fin ing
There are no- measures which can fully-- m- itigate the obstruc*i0n' .of
direct views - if- the -project is implemented. The project: -has,!.:-been _ .
designed to .IncorporAte view corridors to the extent fedsible.: : The
..specific considerations referred -toin Finding #3 are. :detailed :'in
the Statement of Overriding considerations (Exhibit C) .
PROJECT ALTERNATIVES:
Environmental Impact Report No. 90-2 evaluated alternatives for the.
proposed Pierside Restaurant Development. The following provides a
brief description of the project
oject alternatives, which were rejected
in favor of the current project proposal The rationale for
rejection of each alternative is provided below, and in the
Statement of Overriding Considerations (Exhibit C) ,.
NO PROJECT ALTERNATIVE
The No Project Alternative assumes the continuation of present uses
on the site. The existing Maxwell ' s restaurant, beach concessions,
parking lot, and lifeguard headquarters would all remain.
Finding
Finding #3 - Specific economic, social, or other considerations -make
infeasible the no project alternative, in that:
The no project. alternative does--:not as effectively implement.. :
important go-als of the Huntington. Beach General Plan, the
Downtown Specific Plan, or Downtown --Design -Guidelines . These
include creation of a major activity node at the pier head,.
provi-sion of commercial- uses,-on .and alongside the pier which
will enhance and expand the public' s use and enjoyment of the
area, and provision of varied types of visitor serving
facilities in the Coastal Zone.
Significant effects of the project are acceptable when balanced
-against the facts set forth in the Statement of Overriding
.Considerations (Exhibit C) and stated above.
'OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION ALTERNATIVE:
This alternative envisions removal of all existing uses on the site,
including the parking lot, Maxwell ' s restaurant, and the beach
concessions, and conversion of the site to open space with minor
public recreation amenities .
Finding -
. .Finding #3. - Specific economic, social,- or other considerations make
infeasible the Open- Space - and Recreation Alternative, in that:,
T
A,y
4 .• Y
The Open Space and Recreation__Alternative does riots fulfill the•
interit :;of the: General 'Pl-an Larid .Use. :designa`ti:onJI
.zoning and
Coastal Lai d .Use Plan for this site in that . it..:does not. provide
for. visitor-.serving commercial uses . It would .remove a
potential Nat.ional. Register structure without providing off
setting sales tax revenue. or tax increment benefits ,to the
city. It would also,. e.liminate existing public beach- parking
spaces .
Significant effects of the project are acceptable when balanced
against the ..facts set forth in. the Statement_ of Overriding
Considerations (Exhibit C) and stated above.
PRESERVATION OF MAXWELL'S ALTERNATIVE:
This alternative envisions the preservation of Maxwell ' s in the
existing structure, and the addition of two new restaurant
buildings, plus beach concessions . - The uses and approximate square
footage would remain the same as the proposed project.
Finding
Finding #3 - Specific economic, social,- -or other considerations make
infeasible the Preservation of Maxwell ' s Alternative, in that:
The preservation of Maxwell ' s Alternative does not provide for
the appropriate size pier plaza as currently envisioned by the
City Council,- or provide -for an architecturaly cohesive project.
Significant effects of the project are acceptable when balanced
against the facts set forth in the Statement of Overriding
Considerations (Exhibit .C) and stated above.
OFF SITE ALTERNATIVES:
Off-site alternatives would locate the project on a site or sites
other than southeast of the pier.
Finding
Finding • #3 - Specific economic, social, or other considerations make
infeasible the Off-Site Alternative, in that :
The proposed project is inherently related to the subject site.
The project proponent seeks to develop pier-related commercial
uses in accordance with the intent of the Downtown Specific Plan
District 10 . As such, no other site is immediately adjacent to
the pier, with the exception of the site immediately north of
the pier, where a -parking structure has been approved. No other
site fulfills one of the primary project objectives of creating
a focus at the- confluence of Pacific Coast- Highway and the Pier.
��e §..:,� �x t i
"Nott'i,.Y IN
r-' _,.t 2• -ice., `..�'�J L i � � a '� -- w� d '[� ��� t
_-.. ' _ ., _ - tv �,b. � fief '- •r
LOWER INTENSITY. ALTERNATIVErr
:=
This alternative could include the preservation of. Mazwell ' s and the
addition of fewer or smaller buildings than._the 'proposed- pr;oject.,. or
the demolition of Maxwell ' s and reconstruction of .fewer .or smaller.
buildings than proposed by the project.
Finding (Note: this Finding should be made if the project is
approved as proposed by the applicant)
Finding #3 - Specific economic, social, or other considerations make
infeasible the Lower Intensity Alternative, in that:.
Lower intensity projects may result, to some degree, in the same
types of impacts that would occur as a result of implementing
the proposed project, but would not as effectively implement the
Downtown Specific Plan, and Coastal Land Use Plan. A smaller
project would not provide -the same degree of sales tax revenue
or tax increment revenue.
Significant effects of the project are acceptable when balanced
against the facts set forth in the Statement of Overriding .
Considerations (Exhibit C) and stated above.
(7505d-20,25)
..........
I t-N f � "1 _ ,.V �i �F� l- � - � Y 4 j ,;, L�' 3 4. i t
EXHIBIT C
-,
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO 90-2-
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
The Final Environment,-a' l Impact Report No. 90-2 for the construction
of' restaurants and beach-related concessions (Piersid6. Restaurdnt
Development) identifies certain unavoidable 'significant adverse., '
environmental effects . CEQA Guidelines Section 15093' requires the
decision-maker to balance the benefits of a proposed project against
unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether the project
should be approved. If the decision-maker concludes that the
benefits of the project outweigh the unavoidable adverse
environmental effects, the effects may be considered acceptable.
Here, the City of Huntington Beach does find that the benefits
flowing to the City and its residents from the project outweigh the '
-
significant adverse environmental effects which remain after the
project s - mitigation measures are implemented. - Primary among these
considerations is the project ' s * furtherance of the Downtown Specific
ic
Plan' s and Local Coastal Plan' s objectives of providing improved
accessto coastal amenities, creation of .a visitor-serving
commercial node at the pierhead, and revitalization of the Downtown ,,'
. Core Area. Another important consideration is . the increased sales
. tax and tax increment revenue that will flow to the City and
Redevelopment Agency asa result of .increased property values and
sales activity. - Such revenue can be 'used to the benefit of the
community as a whole to improve service levels, construct capital
kaciiitids, and provide additional affordable housing .
The Final Environmental Impact Report identifies two unavoidable
adverse impacts . These are:
a . Demolition of a structure which is important in the history
of Huntington Beach, and which is eligible for the
National35egister of Historic Places .
b. Impact to views of the pier and the ocean from certain
locations along Pacific Coast Highway.
Some of the effectsare lessened by the mitigation measures
suggested in the Environmental Impact Report, which measures will be
required and incorporated into the project. The reasons the City
has determined that the remaining effects are acceptable, given
dEfsetting pro Ject benefits, .. are- discussed below.
41,
411�1�, tv:a
1. HIstoti&: Imr) (it_s, '.pro o 'demo of Maxweli"
Implementation of the'-,project will inv: lve* 'de i on
testau-rant,.-. a--Natioha1 Register eligible structure-.. The
Envirohmehtalilmpact Report has identified mitigation'measures that
en:-these will helpless ' ,impacts,, including...'complE-ite ,documentation...of
I ' t.o - b" """riate'
the site e maintained for review, and appropriate
memorialization of the building.
Some project. alternatilves, ,including the No. .Prdject Alternative, and
Preservation of 'Makwell ' s Alternative, would eliminate the impact to
hist6r.,k._d.,,4 esourbes." However, none of these alternatives would as
effect-, M,meet important goals ofthe General-'Plan, Local Coastal .
Program, Redevelopment Plan, or Downtown Specific Plan. * These
inc ludWi6V:V:E4-;tl i zat ion of the Main Street corridor, provision of
addi- a: st- - or-serving facilities in the coastal zone,
,
deve'...opment,'. -;a major activity node at the pier'head, and improving
n
verti.cal1_acc;ess to the shoreline. Other alternatives would also
havb--�ttfe,;�,',;.'di'a-s4backs of providing less sales tax and tax increment
revemid: ;...46_r would entail similar adverse impacts to view corridors .
The proposed- project will provide for high quality visitor-serving
development at the end. of the vital Main Street 'commercial ' core,
contributing to the rejuvination of the Downtown area.
Based on the ab'ove stated public benefits of the project, the City
finds that the impact to historic resources is acceptable.
2 . View Impacts:
".2
The project.-.wil-l" blo.ck views of the ocean and the pier -fro.m certain
points along Pacific CoastHighway and. inland properties .
The Environmental Impact Report has identified mitigation measures
which will help lessen impacts to the extent feasible, including
appropria"t_e'.lighting.. and landscaping. The project also incorporates
public plazas and boardwalks which will provide the public with open
vistas from the site.
Although some -project alternatives including the No Project, Open
.... , Space, and Lower Density altp-rnatives would reduce view impacts,
they would not .aseffectively implement important .goals of the
General Plan,. Local Coastal Program, Redevelopment Plan, or Downtown
Specific Plan'. These include ievitilization of the Downtown area,
provision of Adequate visitor-serving commercial facilities, and
improved vertical access to the shoreline.
Given- the many public benefits of the project as referenced. above,
the City finds- that impacts to 'views associated with the project are
acceptable..
. . i
I Y,Y"
f.
Won 4
3,
2 6 A
,
-i
e b 6 drb 4'd
kbp I I-I ;ig W.V61-615.Men
7C !'f! •
y
m
W
4M'ORT p
3-m
-TO: Planning Commission .
FROM: Coffimunity .DdV e-lopment
DATE: October "_`23;'. 1990
1
SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO 90-17/PQASTAL DEVELOPMENT
- " A
PERMIT NO. ' 90"18/FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL -IMPACT-, REP0 90-2 (CONTINUED 'FROM THE OCTOBER 2, .1990 PLANNI
"d.
COMMISSION MEETING)
APPLICANT: Redevelopment Agency
City of *Hunting-ton -Beach/
Pierside Restaurant Develop. DATE ACCEPTED.- . '
306 Third Street May-'15, 1990:
Huntington Beach, CA 92648
.. . PROPERTY City of Huntington Beach MANDATORY PROCESSIN(j . DATE:.....
.OWNER: . 2000 Main Street May 15, 1991
Huntington Beach,, CA 92648
ZONE: Downtown Specific Plan
REQUEST: To allow 53, 750 square District
feet-. of commercial-' devel Commercial) .
opmept, including- up to .5 .'
new- restaurants and GENERAL PLAN: V,isitor--- -_ *-z..,,'� -.,..'.-*�. ,..�....
-beach related concessions Serving Commercial
with" parking and. 78,250
square feet of public plaza..
EXISTING USE: Maxwell s
LOCATION: Ocean side of Pacific Restau'rant,-',pa.rking lot,
Coast -between : Beach�related ,-concessions::;
H i.g hway
M Ma
in -Street and First
- Strbet (southeast of the ACREAGE: 3 .5-,.acres
-p.ier
S ED CT l,.0 SUGGESTED ON:T I
A. Adopt: and certify as adeiuclte Final Environmental - Impact Report
No. 90-2 by adopting 'Planning -Commission Reso'lutioniNo. 1437 with
Mitigati.on ,Meas'ures, Statement of Overriding. Considerations, and
.Findings' and Facts -in -Suppqrt ' of Findings; '
B. Approv6._Coastal .Development No. 90-18 with findings; and-
P-i 'Appro.ye .-._C_6ndi-tio' na_1' Us* e' ,P.ermi.t No. 90-17 as modified by staff
9p 449 ,cohditibns of ,.approval.:
,
A-FM-23C777Z
37
..........
.r f f '}_4_.•!'''jJ t '7� Y -- R. ` ba-;5. jJ f -4n ' ttl Y '+'--t � •+.G` 3' 4.`t}t tq/
f - LVi --- - t t; gw
`, •�c {
Pp ' i .
; fi
.�
:-+ii� '.�
•i s- t. s\,; 4 A�.
• 1 Y _ _ _ '' - 1 , `. r -:d. t -.ten j• 4-_!'Si , � s
2; 0 GENERAL.:.,INFORMATION.
` 4t
This item was continued from the meetingof Oct'ober-:`.2, ';1990 in order
to address several 'questions and issues: Identified. �by,:thePlanning
commission'.
3 . 0 ISSUES & ANALYSIS:
A. Alternative Project Sites
The California Environmental Quality Act. Guidelines,:state that an
agency must examine "a range of reasonable alternatives to the project :
or tolthe location of the project. . . " (Secti6n •15126d) . It does , not .
require that off-site alternatives be analyzed_. Although recent court,..::.
cases have indicated that such analysis may, at times, be appropriate;'''.
the Court in Goleta states :
"We find no authority or- rationale for an inflexible rule .that the...;:,::
availability of other sites always must be considered or that it "
never need be considered. Situations differ; what is reasonable
in one case may be unreasonable in another. It is necessary to
examine the particular situation presented to determine whether
the availability of other feasible -sites must be considered ' in the'--
Environmental Impact Report. "
(197 Cal . App. 3d at 1179 [243 Cal . Rptr. 339, 3461 . ) '
Staff maintains that an alternative site would not meet the basic
objective of the project, which is to provide pier-related open space:
amenities and pier, related commercial development. As- such, the
project is inherently related to. the subject site. No other site is
adjacent to the pier and designated for pier related commercial,
except for the site northwest of . the pier, which is under the
jurisdiction of the State Department �of Parks -and Recreation and has:
been approved for a parking structure. Staff. has .determined that a
reasonable range of project alternatives has been presented in the.
Draft Environmental Impact Report and response to comments, which
serve to lessen or avoid identified impacts.
B. Easement/Land Use Issues
Several questions were raised- at the October 2,. 1990- Planning
Commission hearing -with regard to the easement and allowable land uses
on the subject site. . The easement for public use and recreation has
been in place since the early 1930 ' s. . The City of Huntington Beach is
the underlying owner of the land.
The primary purpose and focus of the proposed project is improvement.
of public recreational,...opportunities-. . The project will increase
available beach parking, provide public plazas and vista points where
none currently exist, and improve pedestrian and vehicular access .
- (These issues are •discussed in:-more- detail - below under Site Plan
Issues.)_ " The proposed -commercial .p.ort-ions of -`the project are a
continuation of historical and existing •uses, and are permitted
purauant to .the _Local . Coastal Program,. Huntington -Beach General Plan, .
f and Downtown Specific Plan.
Staff Report: 10/23/90 2 (7505d) '?
Alm
"N.I
" . . - 'ComMerc: ia recreation- usbhay e �exi
sted
, nc
of the, Pavi1116n n •the 1930.' s . ay. was.;.operated.._ dance
hall, convention center", roller rink -and._:._1in:_finally; -'a
-g, . . . .V.has,,,' a`remined ,-a municipally owned . bui.ldin.' leased. :to--: ous� -operators
for diff6ient` .-'commercial uses The! sa'me' wili true of the proposed
new-..restaurant -structures . .1 It is staffs a's ses sment.,that. this,. ype of
plazas.commercial use, in combination with the public � azas, and vista
. points, public . accessways,. and public beach .parking, is a .valid'.
permitted ,recre'ational use of the site. The proposal will allow a .
wider .cross .section of people to enjoy the b'each atmosphere, .- and to
engage in passive .recreational pursuits bn:' the' site such as strollingi
observing, and casual and fine dining.
Staff is recommending that, prior to issuance of building permits, a-
Tentative Map be filed to clearly delineate the public.- open areas from
the leasehold spaces .
C. Community ' Services Commission Review
The Community Services Commission, on February 14, 1990, reviewed the
conceptual plans for the Pierside Restaurant Development. The
Commission voted 7-2 to approve the conceptual plans as presented,
which included three buildings; buildings limited to two-story, -
maximum of 25 feet in height; large view corridors in excess of 80
feet in width; open space plaza; ample parking in the lower level; and
with the project to be located on the existing parking lot area and
not to encroach on the sand.
D. Summary of Previous Public Discussions
The proposed project has been presented for public review and comment
over: the past several months in the following manner:
February 14, 1990 Community Services Commission review
and approval .
May 24, 1990 Notice of preparation. of Draft
Environmental Impact Report
advertised, -sent to interested
agencies and individuals .
July 25, 1990 Public Workshop held to present
project and solicit comments on the
Environmental Impact Report.
Environmental Impact Report made
available for 45. day public review and,`-
comment period.
August 81 1990 Public Workshop held to solicit .
comments on Environmental Impact
Report.
St6ff Report"' 10/23/90 -3- (7505d)
to pp ss
�y�f�
�.. i i. z - � f j3•z� -_'P3 x '}'. 't Yj�ruz'} �1 i
s µl - ! - -_r e .� -. ,, - f - -± � - ti,�u�r�S• r'�- c - - i t- r ,,fir.
t z WE
_ t� .:• z ; - c.> �^r ;c.x` f,- .dk �..-Iea! a='. 4�f.-.} F.�- i.. �August 21,. .1'990 Planning Commission public hearing to
solicit commerits �-on Env�i.ronmental
`Impact Report
October -2, 1990 Planning. Commisson 'hearing .;on project
and Final Environmental Impact Report.
E. Site Plan Issues
1. Proposed Uses
The applicant proposes- 40,000 square feet of restaurants• on •the
plaza level, in three buildings . Since the October 2, 1990
meeting, the applicant has modified the lower level, which now
includes a 5, 000 square foot casual restaurant, 6,250 square feet',
of beach related retail, and a 2, 500 square foot Dwight' s . The . .
public service use shown on the previous plans .has been deleted. ..
The total project square- footage is 53 ,750 .square feet which .is. ,a
3, 047 square foot reduction from the previous proposal of 56, 797
square feet.
Staff recommends that the project be further modified to .provide a
casual restaurant of 5, 750 square feet, and to eliminate the
additional 6,250 square feet of retail space. The 5, 750 square
feet of casual restaurant represents the existing square footage
of the Green Burrito and other existing beach concessions . It is
staff ' s assessment that the 6,250 square feet of additional retail
is not necessary to serve the beach going public. The Downtown
Specific Plan,. District 11 (Beach Open :Space) gives a general
guideli.ne for the appropriate amount of beach related concession
area facing- the beach. Section 4 . 13 : 01 states that, "Beach
concession stands shall be .-limited to 2, 500 square feet and spaced
at intervals no closer than 1, 000 feet" . District 10 does not
carry such a limitation, however, staff feels that a 5,750 square
foot restaurant and the 2, 500 square foot Dwight ' s, located along
the projects approximately 1,000 feet of frontage, are adequate to
serve the public. Furthermore, elimination of the retail space
would allow for a more efficiently designed parking area by
allowing for the deletion of 31 spaces from selected areas
throughout the structure. :- The staff recommendation is for a total
project square footage of-° 48, 522 square feet.
2 . Access
The proposed plan will improve public vehicular access to the site .
and public- pedestrian access: to the beach beyond. Currently, .
there are two vehicular access points - one at Maxwells, and one
from First - (Lake) ^,Street to the City parking lot. The proposed
plans will provide for one in-only and one out-only drive for
southbound :.traffic between Main Street and. First Street, and for a
direct entry .to the parking structure from -the signalized First
Street intersection. The plans will include a drop-off area away
from ..the valet lanes on 'the plaza level for restaurant or other
uses -.(such -as *.junior .lifeguard or beach goers) . The plans will be
conditioned to -also allow for future modification to provide. a
"punch-through". to the north of the pier parking structure, if
such reciprocal- ..access � is -deemed appropriate_..at. that time.
. . .. Staff' -Report:- ,10/23/90 -4- (7.505d)
��X. '44
-N.- 01%
..........
,%
.7" V"
e Nj ,r Pacific
With regard
r id-to--pEidastrlan, access -rom,..!they
hway, to" t -
'
Coast Hig h'e beach, there-1-are" dult-rently ,6-- tot
(4) stairways which lead from the axw s 'ana, bea.ch-,.P.-ai-king'. 16-'t-:-s
to the. beach -access road.- ..The ' stairways :6re � apip;r'ox- lAa-e,eily',--nine.',_�'
(9) "to ten .(10) feet in width.. . The proposed"•
p"iqjedt -.wi_ll,-Amproye
access by providing- five ',(5) . stairways,--two of,.,oih.i-ch-.1ea'd-.'.ft6m.'the
major public plazas .-,. the primary stairway will be,a50 feet 'wide;,
and the secondary 'Will be 30 feet wide. The' other stairways,., one
of which will be added as a condition of approval, may -be' the
standard nine (9) to ten (10) foot width.'. ;; The -plans will 'also ,
allow for handicap access, which'. cioes .not -currently-*-exi6t'' via
three elevators and a series 'of ramps: In ' summary;---where,40
linear feet of - pedestrian stairways *current.ly exist., tb6' project. . . ,
proposes to provide 100 linear feet of stairways:'
3 . Public Plazas/Open Space
Currently, there' are no public plaza amenities provided . on the._, :
site. The proposed project will provide two major public plazas ,
on the upper level and a series of plazas and promenades on the
lower level . The plazas will' have views of the beach and ocean.- '
and will increase the opportunities for a cross section. of the
public to enjoy the beach atmosphere away from the parking areas .
The plazas account for 78,258 square feet, or 48%, ,of the net site
area. Total building site coverage on the plaza level will be
approximately 18 . 5% (28,200 square feet) of the net site area. A
tot-al of 6% of the site will be in landscaped area. Staff is
recommending that the landscaped area be increased to 8% of the
site. Staff i's also recommending that Buildings A and C be
relocated slightly towards Pacific Coast Highway to provide more
public open space on the .ocean side of the structures .
In addition to the -plazas, new public pedestrian promenades will
be provided at two levels . The lower level'- promenade, at
approximately 720 linear feet, wi,ll be separated from the bike
path, and will afford unobstructed views` to the beach. The upper-
level promenade, in front of the restaurants, will also afford
such views, and will be a minimum of 825 linear, feet and 10 feet
wide. No restaurant use shall encroach on the public, pedestrian
rights-of-way.
3 . Views
Final Environmental Impact Report No. 90-2 acknowledges. that views
of the beach and ocean will be obstructed from Pacific Coast
Highway. However., the project design is sensitive to view
corridors at Second, Third,. and Main Streets, and provides wide,
open public plazas--toprovide oblique views from Pacific Coast
Highway. Since the October 2, 1990, meeting, the applicant has
slightly modified thebuilding -designs .to - scale the -structures
back at th'e. p.lazas ., This allows for additional viewing .area
through 'the ' si.te to -the ocean.
'Staff -Report
eport 10/23/90 _75- (7.505d)
0.
7A
he,.,project�, .,Importantr d on
opportunities th
at did not -prev-1 ou- -s v:63C The lower level
promenade is separated from-the . bike*.'path '� ..two ps,, allowing
views .above-, and out of danger from,:'.biketraf ..i c The t.u..ppd-r . --
level promenade allows for unobstructed:,'v" istas' 'in .f rorit of-'.all
restaurants, including -Maxwell ' s--.- ' This .. is an. improvement to,,
existing conditions.. The wide public plazas will A lso allow for
viewing unobstructed by automobiles, as now occurs in the parking
lot on-site. The plaza between buildings A and B. will be a
minimum of 150 feet wide and the plaza between; . buildings' B .and C
will- be a minimum of 100 feet wide.
5 . Parking
The surface parking level provides for two valet stacking lanes' in.
front of the restaurants, and for 44 additional single loaded
spaces, for a total of 75 spaces. No tandem spaces are shown.
Staff does recommend cer-tain =difications to. the surface parking
area, however. Staff recommends that the six sp.Aces in the plaza
area near Building A be removed, and that the number of spaces in
the parking court in front of Building t be reduced by eight
spaces. This allows creation of additional public plaza area.
The first subterranean level provides fpr 223 ,single loaded
spaces, or with a valet plan, 147 single loaded and 149 tandem
commercial spaces, for total of 296 spaces . --No changes are
recommended to this level . The second subterranean level provides
252 single loaded beach parking spaces, and 40 tandem commercial
. , . .,..-.. 'I.-_
spaces . Staff does recommend modification to' this parking level,
Staff recommends that -the tandem commercial spaces be removed from
the lower level, allowing for 272 single loaded spaces .
In- summary, the applicant has proposed that an overall total of
663 spaces be provided, of which 53 % (218) are tandem valet
parked, and 47% (191) are self-park, single loaded. The applicant
has technically provided enough on-site parking, including tandem
valet spaces, to serve the proposed use. ,
The following table (1)
compares the applicant ' s proposal to staff ' s proposed
modifications (table 2). as discussed above.
TABLE 1----.z APPLICANT'S-PROPOSAL
Square Feet/ Code Req'd Proposed
Use Spaces Parking Parking Read
Maxwell ' s 15 000 150 ill
New Restaurants 25: 000 250 250
Casual Restaurant .5, 000 so 352
Retail 6,250 .31.25. 103
Dwight ' s 2,500 25 04
Beach Parking 252 239 2525
TOTAL 53,750 sf 746 658
2'7- (7505d)
Staff Rep9rt ,-.. l0/23/90 6
i$xF k [�.. .3Y+ '� 5 Lf z t .,
h , 'i
t + + •� r x i -r- - - - r - � -rF t c Y. . ..-:if >r!<_a:'V --c a--- F 3
Ei
-J t
1 Maxwell restaurant .currently has 11, 600, s
qua re.:fee.t', :with
77. parking spaces . The.. new ,str.uc.ture.. wil_1: :.add:.3,400 square
feet and 34_ spaces fora total of 15,OOo square feet=and 111
spaces
2 The existing 1, 500 . square feet of the Green Burrito are
assumed to be grandfathered, requiring :no' additional parking
beyond the beach parking. The add.ition.al .3, 50.O. sgu.are feet
of casual restaurant is parked at code;,ratio . of- .1/].00 .
3 The existing 4,250 square feet of retail space is assumed.-.to
be grandfathered, requiring no additional .parking beyond the,..;: .;
beach parking. The additional 2000. square feet of retail ds .`
parked at the code ratio of 1/200 .
4 The square footage- of Dwight ' s is equal to :the existing, and
no additional parking is required beyond beach-user parking.
5 252 beach parking spaces are to be provided, which exceeds
the required replacement of 239 spaces .
TABLE 2 - STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Square Feet/ Code Req'd Proposed
Use Spaces Parking Parking
Maxwell ' s 15,000 150 1116
New Restaurants 25, 000 250 250
Casual Restaurant 5,750 57. 5 07
Retail 0 0 0
Dwight ' s 2,500 25 08
Beach Parking 252 239 252
TOTAL 48, 522 sf 722 613
6 See Note 1 above
7 The casual restaurant square footage shown is equal to the
existing square footage of the Green Burrito and other beach
concessions . Therefore, no additional parking is required
beyond beach parking.
8 See Note 4 above
With staff ' s proposed modifications to the parking layout, a total of
629 spaces are available with a valet parking plan for the restaurants .
-7 (7505d)
Staff: Report 10/23/9.0
r = a t t�l•r,�}v' k' yf t_- {�:�}7
R -
r #.�,.�a
�� v � v�r sip
f t -..1 - >;v a4'4L'r w�wy- ..([ x� •c -..I. s -y�.-: 0.t�. !'{ i a '. e' s,-"tt5� r t+s 44� 'K''2 r!F a r f s rS. y Ir' t t f t d _' �t a .'S 1 � --_,� l e� °f s�r '� >•
•�r' t p.-4i Ir.a ,f�. j `i - is�' t Tc t'. r -,sti t -- 1 x'.-a�i ss`ly�^ EMI." n "' J y',�°(
.y+ a{. 1-t� +; X 1 -:'S q-
}t tr'S
•. Y -/ �- - r { �. r y't r t� } 5 rt lS t- -. ,
4 .0 RECOMMENDATION
A. Adopt and certify as adequate -Final Environmental 'Impact Re.port--
No. 90-2. by-, adopting Planning Commission -Resol"ution No:•_,,1437_.with
Mitig-ation -Measur.es, Statement' of -Overriding -Considera.t:ions'; . and
Findings and Facts .-in Support of Findings'-
B. Approve Coastal Development No. 90-18 with findings; and
C. Approve Conditional :Use Permit .No. 9.0-1. as modified .by, staff with
findings and conditions of approval. : . '
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 90-18.:
1. The proposed Pierside Restaurant development conforms with the
plans, policies, requirements and standards of the Huntington
Beach Coastal Element of the General Plan, because it implements'.-
the adopted Coastal Land- Use Plan and Downtown Specific Plan by
preserving existing visitor serving opportunities and providing
additional visitor-serving commercial opportunities .which are
varied in type and price. The proposal also improves public
access to the beach by providing handicap access, public plazas .
and walkways, and wide - stairways to the beach.
2. Coastal Development Permit No. 90-18 is consistent with the CZ
(Coastal Zone) suffix, the Downtown Specific Plan District 10 and
other provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code applicable
to the property., because all zoning code requirements can be met,
including building height, project parking, replacement of beach
parking, . and public plazas and open space.
3 . At the time- of `occupancy, the proposed. Pierside. Restaurant
development can be:-provided with infrastructure in a manner , that
is consistent with the Huntington Beach Coastal Element and
Coastal -Land Use Plan of the General Plan. All services and
utilities are available to the site, and the project will not over
burden -any - public services or facilities .
4 . . The proposed Pierside, Restaurant development conforms with the
public access and public recreation policies of Chapter 3 , of the
California Coastal Act, -because it provides for improved public
access through -._the site to the shore line, including handicap
access, allowing. for public access to recreational opportunities
on the City .Beach. -
,4 .
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL' =CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO, 90-17:
1. The proposed restaurant development will have a beneficial effect
upon the general health welfare, safety, and convenience of
persons residing :or- working in the area due to the type and
quality of-the activities .proposed, and will contribute .to an
increase iri`:_tYie value of the. property and improvements in ;the
neighborhood,:
Staff}.Report,:'_ 10/23/90 =8- (7505d)
iz
.2,
Y 7"
,'-'1.B
-�__C d. Th&,` . area betweenbuilding
100:.mf de:t'. in' width.
e.. Lifeguard.-,Headquarters- parking shallbe located s6utheast .of
the- Headquarter building and the.- current park ng 'area.- heavily
landscaped.
f . Building C 'shall be reconfigured if niecessary .to the
satisfaction of marinesafety so that a direct line of sight
is 'available from the windows of .the lifeguard headquarters -'..
to the point at...,which the 'Water' ffi6ets--the .sand at the pier'. .'
This is required for marine s a f e ty. purposes.
g. Any, modifications as required by Design Review Board and
Planning Commission .pursuant to. condition 2h.-
h. The project shall incorporate public restrooms in the -
following manner: -Minimum of 6 ladies stalls, 2 'Mens '
stalls, 2 urinals; Handicap access shall be provided.
i . A total of 8% of the site area shall be landscaped.
j . A stairway from the plaza to the beach shall be provided in
the vicinity of Building A.
k. No tandem spaces shall be located on the lower (beach
parking) level .
1 . Relocate -Buildings A and C toward Pacific Coast Highway and
show additional -public open- space -on the ocean side of. the
buildings .
M. RePove'. six!: (-6) surface level spaces near building A.
2. Prior to submittal for .building permits., the applicant/owner
shall complete the following:
a. Depict all utility apparatus, such as but 'not limited to
backflow- devices' and Edison transformers, 'on the site plan
.and on the landscape _plan. . They shall be properly screened
by landscaping or G4her 'method -as approved by the Community
Development Director.
b. Floor plans shall depict natural gas stubbed in at the
locations of cooking facilities, water heaters, and central
heating units; and low-volume heads shall be used on all
spigots and water faucets.
C. If f6il,"type . insulation is to be used, a fire retardant type
shall be in'stalled as approved by the Building Department and
i.ndic,at.6d on the floor plans.
Staff ' Repoxt.,- = -:10/23/90
(7505d)
h F � t f ..1�4 x•�"+'�_.r�� Kt ��h ��T '- l�y,� _ _ �; �.��'cT� �f
w } L^
d. Al. 'rooftop mechanical equipment shall be�9screened from zany
view. Said screening shall'-�be a'rchitec`tura511y} comPatiY le
with the, building in terms of -materials . and colors :�', I•f ;
screening is. not.:desigried. .specifically into the- bui-ldi'g i a
rooftop mechanical':equipment plan must be submit-ted''showing
screening and must :be approved .by the Director. of,'Community
Development.
e. Outdoor lighting. sha'll .utilize energy savings- lamps . All
outside lighting shall be .directed to prevent "spillage".onto
the beach and .Pacific Coast Highway, and shall be. noted on
the site plan and elevations .
f . A detailed soils analysis shall be prepared by a registered
Soils Engineer. This analysis shall include on-site soil
sampling and laboratory testing of materials to .provide
detailed recommendations regarding grading, - chemical and fill
properties, foundat-ions, retaining walls, streets, and
utilities.
g. The Design Review Board and the Planning Commission shall
review and approve the following:
a) The final building form, elevations, colors, and
materials for each building.
b) The conceptual public plaza lighting, street furniture
and landscape plan for the development, in compliance
with the Downtown Design Guidelines.
h. An engineering geologist shall be engaged to submit a report
indicating the ground surface acceleration from earth
movement . for- the-- subject property. All structures within
this development -shall-:be constructed in compliance with the
g-factors as indicated by the geologist' s report.
Calculations for .footings and structural members to
withstand anticipated g-factors shall be submitted to the
City for review prior to the issuance of building permits .
i . The site plan (or reference page) shall include all
condi.tions� of_ approval- imposed on the .project printed
verbatim. T
j . Elevations. shall depict colors and building materials as
approved by the Design Review Board.
3 . Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant/owner shall
complete the following:
a. Submit copy of the revised site plan, floor plans and
elevations pursuant to condition no. . l and 2h for review and
approval: and inclusion in- the entitlement file.
Staff' Report = 10/23/90 11= . (7505d)
.......o... , r ,.. h^1 T -i v 1 - j y f�l _,c ; iFt 'o- .f ! n �NrT frt -,y r -•'
� �,
i+.k.-i
S
N�h�i"'
• ' r r, yr_ * ti- :.t- .: -.5 r- a :.t r
b A final -Landscape. Construction Set must ;-be submi?tted) td,. }the `
Departments of Community Development- and Public Works=.arid >
must be approved. The Landscape Construction.'Set,..'sh"al-1
include. a landscape -plan prepared and signed 1by' a: Statie
Licensed Landscape Architect and which. .,includes
proposed/existing - plant 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 9608 and the - Downtown, Specific Plan of the
Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. The set must be approved
by both departments prior to issuance of building permits .
The existing mature palm trees on-site shall be stored and
returned to the site, and incorporated into the projects.
landscape plan.C. 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 .
d. Hydrology and hydraulic studies shall be submitted for
Public Works approval . Drainage facilities and flow
direction shall be approved.
e. All applicable Public Works fees shall be paid.
f . An interim parking and/or building materials storage plan
shall be submitted -to the Department of Community
Development to assure adequate parking is available for-
employees•,: customers,-- contractors, etc. , during- the
project' s construction phase:
h. The developer shall submit a parking management and control
plan for review and approval by the Departments of Community
Development and Public Works, prior to issuance of building
permits. This plan should. address hours and operation =of
valet service, plans for attended parking and amount and
time of availabili-ty of self-parking facilities . A minimum
of 250 beach parking spaces shall be available for self
parking at. all times at rates set by the City Council. The
Plan shall delineate these spaces, and describe the
accessibility of the spaces during valet parking hours . All
required q parking shall be provided on-site.
4 . A Planned Sign Program for the development shall be reviewed and
approved by the Design Review Board and Planning Commission prior
to the first sign request.
I
Staff Report - -10/23/9.0 -12- (7505d)
�RMat
-
--, xr fiY4 a,; t '1 S' -.t -1 3 �. �'S `'t• !F;'� _ 3 -
r._
} Y!(. } � .rt �1. wy.� t Ai.. }t h 2 ��`�• �'�' �9{ ���.� � �� r`;�-. S"'a.F}�
a ,�.. '..Cn #' �y i's\ r c � �•� c __:t 'r�t"3y ����� �s.�;,'M3.`� r�lr-'����L-.-a��T 7' �'Sx -tT'
_ 5 _The Public Works" Department requirements are as fJ.ollows
a. :-. Remove the` water .system-.on site- and -construct a, 12 inch
water main. in Pacific Coast.:Highway, :to .:Lake '`(First), Street
and Beach -parking lot water mains
b. All restaurants shall have grease interceptors .
C. Construct Pacific Coast Highway improvements as required by
the City and Caltrans., including right urn lanes .
d. No landscaping shall be 'permitted witYin the Pacific Coast
Highway right-of-.way -unless approved .by -the.. Department of
Public Works and Caltrans .
e. Design and location of parking control devices shall be
subject to final review by the Director of Public works and ..
Director of Community Development .
f . The applicant shall be responsible for paying Traffic Impact
Fees adopted by the City Council prior to issuance of
building permits .
g.. The applicant shall be responsible for payment of Water
Master Plan Fees if adopted by the City Council prior to
issuance of building permits ..
6 . Fire Department Requirements are as follows:
a. An automatic fire sprinkler - system -shall be approved and
installed- pursuant- to Fire Department regulations .
b. Fire access lanes shall be -designated, posted, and
maintained. If fire lane violations occur and the services
of the Fire Department are required, the applicant will be
liable ,for expenses incurred.
c. : Two fi-re" hydrants. shall be installed prio.r to combustible
construction. .
d. The applicant shal-1 -meet. all applicable local, State and
Federal Fire Codes, Ordinances, and standards .
e. A Class III wet standpipe system (combination) will be
j installed to comply with . Huntington Beach Fire Department
j and ,Uniform Building code standards .
i f. A fire alarm,system -will be installed to comply with
Huntington .Beach .Fire Department and Uniform Fire Code
Standards . The system ,will .provide manual pulls, 24-hour
supervision, audible,`:alarms, and water flow, valve tamper,
1 and trouble detection: , - '
Staff Report 10/23/90 =13- (7.505d)
.t7 eK - ;.'v. - - - +,.:-•'S F- -:��j'r -§ t � 4
+ 1 L - W '1 at T _{-.-•. -_� t r-._ i�f"tl._- ' t.z.��J"r'm�i'4+.�„. t rt ��`' #i•-yi`• � _"Y>''� r�4, "`4 �iyriJivir,..- t .-}`mil to-.
al,. -_a v 7 'may- r" _ .•r c' + {4 `tWW -
r_...,`: 1 +1; 7'-a`.rr. 4 v..4 i'- - - - rc-` "��'t: { _ 'Jt -" fi- ! .�ir._C^' - 9> rr`H'i. °t'{1-�•• / �Jrn' "`
1
p7 �;•-4� - +>.0 + r-. I..x }.s
-
g Fire extinguishers will.`be . insaallled >and 'locaned iin areas
comply"with the'-Huntington'.Beach . Fire code S;tanda"rds
h. Elevators.will -be sized to accommodate an amkulance"gurney,
(minimum .' 6 ' foot--8 inches ,wide 'by 4,.,foot' .3 .inches deep with .
minimum '-42. .inch opening) .
i . Address- 'numbers will be installed to_ comply with the
Huntington Beach Fire Code Standards'..-. ',
j . A Fire Protection Plan containing ,requirement:s of -Tire.
Department Specification No. 426 -sha1.1-be ;submitted.:'to the.
Fire Department for approval.
k. Full access to the structures for emergency -vehicles shall
be maintained from the beach access road and, from the
parking lot adjacent to Pacific Coast Highway. .
1 . The access ways designated as fire lanes over the
subterranean parking area are to be reinforced to sustain
the weight of fire apparatus .
m. Should any abandoned oil wells or tanks be encountered, the
Fire Department shall be notified and. current standards met
as. required by Article 15 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance
Code. Any abandonment of existing wells must be to current
standards as well.
7 . The development- shall comply with all applicable provisions of
the Ordinance Code, Building Division; and Fire: Department.
8 . All building� spoil's; such as unusable lumber, wire, pipe, and
other surplus or. unusable- material, . sha-1l -be disposed of at an
off-site facility equipped to handle them.
9 . Installation of required landscaping and irrigation systems shall
be completed prior to final inspection.
10 . During construction, the applicant shall:
a. - Use,wate_r trucks o- Isprinkler _ 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 daF;
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 .
Staff Report 10/2.3/9 `, , =14 (7505d)
4
t�V
g
CU'A'
.:X4
XR
'W"
0 b 6 7 ons -rdd ion `Monday
I C
FbdOra,-,`-:8: 06 PM.. Cohstructloh 'shall 'be' prohibited,_,-Su s -ahii.
holidays..'.
12. Prior , to issuance of demo I it.1 on permits for Maxwell s tho..,
-recorded`
a nd'. a r tuie; f� the- building- 'sh'611, be" -�'t to ;:the
histor chitec - r ..o .
standa-rds' '6'f- the 'Historic American Buildings Suivey (HABS) Thi s
includes the prepa.ration" of a detailed historical
orical narrative, and
complete graphic documentation of the building through large
format photography. -Historic. photographs and. lbuilding ,pla.ns are
NABS-"record, Ultimately. is curated
also reproduced-' for'. -.the -HA' Which
' y . It t ?
in the Librar 0 ongres.s . Since the significance of the %
structure is historical rather than architectural, oral history
in addition to archival records are requiredr - The completion .,of
the HABS documentation shall be verified bythe Director 'of
Community Development prior to issuance of demolition 'permits .",
13 . The plans for the project shall incorporate a means - of
memorializing the existing Maxwell ' s structure. Such measures
could include placement of a commemorative plaque on or near the
site, development of an exhibit either on or off site (e.g. at a
local historical museum,
public library or City Hall) , and/or
. development of a publication interpreting the role of the
Pavilion in the history of the City, prepared by a qualified
historian. The proposed measure(s) shall be reviewed and
approved by the Director of Community Development prior to
issuance of building permits .
14 . Prior to initiation of construction, police and fire departments
shall be notified and the departments shall be -kept informed
about duration and extent of construction throughout the process .
15 . The applicant shall- provide:---.a plan to be approved by the Public.
Works Department which depicts alternate routes for traffic
during the construction phase, if necessary. Adequate signage
shall be provided to warn motor vehicles, bicyclists and
pedestrians of construction. The beach access road shall remain
open during construction, or a safe alternate ,route shall be
approved by the Departments of Public Works, Community Services,
-and Community Development
' l 'opment.
16 . Signs sh611' be posted within the project informing patrons that
the 'public beach closes at 12:00 midnight.
17. During construction of the project, the developer, in conjunction.,,
with the City, .shall provide parking spaces within a reasonable
distance to accommodate beach access .
18 . Prior. to occupancy- of any building, the developer, Agency, and
the' City shall . execute a - landscape maintenance agreement with
provi.s.io.ns determined by', the, City for maintenance of landscaping
along -'the street frontages
0
Staffport" 16/23/9 5= (7505d)
_
NO
TAY
Y.I.."C
01A
The t
'h beach "access ro.adwa- y.--sdufth ''of A r.: must. be a minimum
's' noft"h"-s''ide
feet 'and: must, loop with thb -beach a&6'� s.toad'.-;*6n�thb..-.-
-' --
of the pier. This roadwaymust :also'-be 'a minimum 24 -4et. Th
e
roadway- must be 'designed to accommodate .beach service","Vehic-les,
bicycles and pedestrian access, subject 'to "City .review and
approval. The 'access road. shall be. completed:. ' r pri: to----issuance
of any Certificate of Occupancy for, the project.
20 . The developer shall provide the City with a detailed description
of the project ' s proposed security systems for review and
approval by. all affected departments prior to issuance- of any.
Certificate of Occupancy for the project.
21. Handicap access to all levels of the project - shall be provided
from all elevator locations .
22 . If it is ,determined by the Department of Public Works that
dewatering will be required, ' the applicant shall .provide -the
Department of Community Development with an assessment of impacts
on groundwater and underground storage- tanks in the vicinity.
This assessment along with any necessary mitigationmeasures
shall be reviewed and approved prior to issuance of dewatering
permits .
23 . Any asbestos identified prior. to or .during removal of the
existing structures shall be removed in accordance with City and
State regulations .
24 . The project owner/applicant shall provide for additional trash
cans along the beach and bike path along the project frontage.
The type and locations - shall- be approved by the Department of
.Community Services:. .
25. The lower level of the parking structure shall be closed when
high tides coincide with severe storm conditions'.
26. An encroachment permit from Caltrans shall be required should the ,
project infringe on Pacific Coast +Highway.
2.7. Bicycle racks shall be provided within the project area.
28. After building completion, the. applicant shall cause to be
erected a historical monument memorializing the location of the
Pacific Electric Line terminus..
29 . Prior to Occupancy of each restaurant, the Planning Commission
shall review and approve a Restaurant Operation Plan.. The Plan
.shall include, 6t_-min' imum:
.. a. The final. architectural form, colors,. materials, and
landscaping - a.s. - recommended by the Design Review Board.
b. The proposed hours- of operation..'.!'
Staff- Report. 10/23/90 . -1.6- (7505d)
fi^.
,J,
JL y" -1 S ai l 1•
4,Ft:
r'E �`
Y -^`X �1 s _ i rf+t�4'` �t�� tY.,�,lfil -`Fc` s /' +.off Z, i-y-+r'°.,!rL�C'i. 17i 1yr- J' 4 �'''a� '•} •.
tgig
A�y`�
c Floorfp`lans, -including floor;area devotedxto restaurant
versus bar/lounge.
'd.' Proposed -types, and rhours-.of entertainment, and location .o.f
entertainment . -.
e. Plans for outdoor, service. .
f . Operational plans which discourage. patrons from entering .the . .
beach after-its .12,:00. midnight closure.
30 . A safe pedestrian walkway shall be provided from the parking
structure to the lifeguard headquarters .
31. No compact parking spaces shall be allowed in the parking- -
structure. If necessary, the size of. the retail spaces shall be
reduced to 'accommodate both full size parking spaces..and adequate'
pedestrian/service walkways .
32 . A total of eight (8) .handicap parking spaces shall be provided on
the surface level, in -accordance with State law.
33 . Construction shall comply with the Floodplain Standards- for FP3
Zones, as outlined in Article 940-Floodplain Suffix, ' Huntington
Beach Ordinance Code.
34 . This conditional use permit shall not become effective for any
purpose until an "Acceptance of- Conditions" form has been
properly executed.by• the -•applicant and an authorized-
representative of the-owner of the .property, recorded with County .
Recorder ' s Office, and returned to the Planning Division; and
until the ten .day- appeal period has elapsed.
35 . This conditional use permit shall become null and void unless
exercised within one (l) 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 Department a minimum 30 days prior to- the' expiration
date. _
12 . 0 ALTERNATIVE ACTIONi .
The Planning Commission may:.
. 1.' Ado.pt and _certify as adequate Environmental Impact Report No.
90-2 by •adopting .Planning Commission Resolution No. 1437;
2'. Approve Coastal bevelopment Permit No. 90-18 with findings; and
3 .' Approve`._Conditional Use. Permit' No. 90-17 as proposed by the
applicant with findings and con dit ions' of approval .
:Staff ':.Report.-,.:..:,Staff 10%23/90 17-; (7505d)
;:
-
• £ r
r -.� t '>, -ill S_ t; t'•�. '�B '� � c_�,
ATTACHMENTS
1.. Area , map
2 . Site .plans,,, elevations, and floor. plans, dated: October.•19, :..19-90
3 . Resolution 'Nd. 1437, including -Mitigation Measures, Findings_`. and
Facts, and Statement of Overriding•'Consideration
4 . Staff Report dated October 2, 1990
HS:LP:kj 1
Staff Report 10/23/90 18. (7505d)
Ia
TP2
- RZ-PD-CZ-FP2„sse_ � 9 1 � �
AK2 y r �V IFIC I O ml I Z� �'. nz�rpola �r I r',r I ° ti" :'•z.,
aL�J�xt ,. �r6 N
:d a .�. „R2-PD--Z
BPLTIMORE AVE n n -FP' -• B ;�a) i
.htnc�cowBtp-_._
�rrrz•ro-ez-Erz :J
t 00 - O/S'rSA, kQ�"Q;.rO o ,•taaz-w-cr R2-PD-CZ-FP2 •,i. . "` I tom,.-'s,,
1, T .o• q/ C�, N( .A8 ?.p - ;"'.-P....-. -yy4cptc4[-:-_:.7;+r•: r �' j ttot' .��,'�I
17,
P.
-'zoo i G� r:hcn, R2-PD-CZ-FP2
i TOWN S o FIC Pt�7SNo , «•A�,4nt9r4M1PcDH
/ 4y of ° <II;A"'°Ia°°ai R2 PD CZ FP2 Y r� 5i �&y
I IS n��'•.,, .so.*al!+D;
11
Gyp ,t�uLUS?-:::W(..
A�MO�YN. R2�D CZ'fP2'
t l tom .
/ ^ \
-.~. •� •9C/�/C r � a pS��jO O/ST'Q'CT � -PD-C�F <a.S R2-PD"rq-• 1 -'' r 4 '1
d, R2 P2 '•i C FP2
H-CZ-FP2 i'•, a 1 �y
':3f4Q2-c1C__:::-�"•...si:e:i"life+. p „' iq; �r'L 5,,;$1,
• //, C/,p +}t .10
.O R2-PD-CZ-FP2''•ai?u?Nta �r t��`LT ; �
,SL
DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN FA3,q-A�qY a T w0 I DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN
DISTRICT
\ DIST #8b01,
FP2
l S
'1 O Ricr
� ;:;. OWN `4`FN �9 p<qOI •,y t ���,�qs��,-�
`�
3 t ,g
,,
O. �,'�r, I fir•
ez
t
V
1.
' ,. I xL Sir,-y.�. •
EIR90-02
HUNTW TON BEACH
HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING DIVISION
f.`7�a•
i�
w {I I k I
W w = 'r rif
w
Z y CP
1t 6
;Q O w '}
o
Z C
..
k
• l`r i
PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY-57
•' , _ ....•:' ''uI1DwArllle It ND[CArl11e tAeOeCAR/e
Y -p
71
,; ,,.'•r }: 'O •AAwr DD a 'Orle iOe[t0V L [Y• 1 e I'
V
I elilT A \ 1Ij .:
{
� a I � s.'Aus vALar' ew.us
r^ ,
eum■e�taleue.e � � ,.
I rru! n�:AiBU I
BUILDING B o 4
BUILDING A 9 ICD NG'C
PIER
- I >✓ ll f
} s
i 1 1r•.
- '.aileneel�•I ., .. If9Vt., �{
{ 9
��r u.
le - e I
I�
SYMBOL LEGEND -PARKING TABULATION Ir
P'L,Z.4 L`EVE'L =z
MMDICY'ACC�eeAeL[rcDcsi1 M nASA LEYA ••r•w - "���) v`ru t
'BEAM LEYA w
mo[Illpei11 cm
PEKsmM PA7ECr VALXMV lowU LlV�'
eTAMMD rMIDND ifNl
NORTH W�.1ri �• li"�Ise.k
FELDERMAN t �a
PIE-RSID .E REST,1UR 'JNT .. DEVELOPM.ENT . .
P1 „ a
• .. ,' w � k�fi�'ssx�l
Z. c;
4 4(
k
T
•,1h
wi41.
f
k{r
t
. I • RAYr Yr��•.,.RAYr OL { 'A�7 M:.{r1t
rPRICING PARKING
1 Ry
AR..t, m°GO1itmSICH u " =}t s li
......
PARKING rARRiMO
' Ir
.lc�
1 .atAa pRer�,Arm •T uwA1 RE11..Arrt T. rnnoms .• raww
'I• ' r,011Y.E59O1 400e 9 ;f00 V rl{EA
• - l��Jc, t seta .ur eR.•. .ur eR;.)�. --- —DR. `) .• y l x5r'Y'.
.,. — —
rv{tA
'I ur'... �Y 1
.t ti.wsi,
. .
BE.MH .4CCESIS- L�EYEL
J I,�
. ,� - K•'t
F „'—y.'��FELOERMAN
.. A'rt ieli tie
PIER S ID E: RE� S TJ UR JN T D E yE L; �O �P� E---.
y -r .CR.'CARNEY e
lAteNNn}•1R{:
#ilk
4
x,
x
PAllwiwo, — r11wa1N*:
j w ` I
rAwilws l; rAww,«o
_
1
yf
J.
5
:
ik
{
LOWER PARKING .LE'YEL
f j
..m .» ,. .. NORTH <ei,
FELDERMAN•
SIDE RES T.fl' UR ,INT ' DEVEL 0PMENT
PIER
P3 g
7 {li n
I I,1 p if 82 . - -_ - - - — - -
y'.I
1RA 4 w.
Se
v g
Rug'Tt e —Z
!01i..
Z-
!"development
h aftili HA'
5-
4
V:4;- V. Mt 11
f f
.4.
yii,
o
o nu'-n i-s To.: Planning-C sion
FROM C mmunit-y-_.--.-Development
0(A68e`im",!-2 1990
SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL -'USE PERMIT!. NOi 9 0 L-17/COASTA.'bEVELOPMEN7
-
PERMIT -NO. 90-�18/FJNAL ENVIRONMENTAL .IMPACT-Rt PORT -.7N6`:---"'
FROM! THE :SEPTEM
0 `2 %(CONTINUED• B, 2'i:'
9 9!9 0 . PLANNING
COMMf bSION 44EETING)_
APPLICANT: Redevelopment ency,
City. ..6-f Huntin§Ct6n._'Be6c11/
Pi6r'side .R6staurant Develop. DATE ACCEPTED
-_
306 .Third Str'eet'.:--t. May 15,�. 19..'9.0
Huntington B.ea-c. ' CA .92648
h
PROPERTY City, of Huntington MANDATORY PROCESSING 'DATE:
OWNER: 20,00 -:Main- Street,'-. - May 15,..,19.9 f';
Huntington. Beach 'CA -92648
ZONE: 'zDowntown Specific Plan .
REQUEST: To a 1.1 ow 797 --s:quat6 -District-.10 '..(Pi6r.-ke1ated.
- ,
of 1' -devel-
A - commerci-a , Commercial) ` .
--opmefit ,An.c u ing-,-.up. o .5
i
new,- ife's t. ant s an GENERAL:;PLANi--Vi .
s -tor-
- -au r
concession Serving erc a
related s Ser
with par.
1k_ing*; .65' 0;'square,
f dei,.,of:'-,-j?ubl'i -P�`6 Ri.a and
a .5 350 s4uare..-foot i
service -s a e. , .
EXISTING ;U5E::!, MaiEweA i- -:,. ing,.--. 0-
parking
LOCATION.: , Ocean, side__of .,Pacif id?..- , Restaur'arft par
o,c ast -,Hi4hway.ber_ween :Becic "rel afteld"..-concess ions--
ji
ain .
'M � ,-,.gtre a nd' First s
�.1.
-ree sout eacs - - . . :
the ACREAGE.:--3 5,'-'a- .cr. es!�,;'`4* _
S t
pier)'-
-1.0 ACT-16N:'."
A :Adopt. and certify as . addquate Final 1: Environmen En
vironmental Impact- -Report
'-- '1437 with-
op. i n .:Coriiinis:sion- Reso ution -NO.'
. .No. 96:-2*..by'.,:ad �1 ' anniri
easures,-, a E ..'Consi er-a mit i -a on-N ,nt!-'of-_:Over.ri gi,t i -.St "ding tions * and
Findings ,and -Feats in,:.-Support-,of. -F indings;
9.0 with :,f findings,n4 s and'.-Development -;No. -18 !
B Approve Zo`&s-tal P
i'j
fri e Permis ',l'-d' `fbnail,`_.Usd� '4-' U N6-7%-��:90' 17 `,'6s' ,,'m6di b e..',COn i.t.3 9 t af f
-finds-ngs , and co rid ft ib ns':f.of,", a pp ro a�42
'tr -60.11 A-FM-23C
lA
{-Aiv,
rP
1h �, -, p 1•i _ t �_. i }- _h � -_l. t - �A _ _ _. ( '� !x I 1 � f
2 0 GENERAL' INFORMATION
This item was continued from the Planning Commission meeting of `
September 21, 1990,_ -in order -to allow staff ad'e4uate,_•ti_me to re'sporid�
to comments on the -Draft Environmental Impact 'Repo
rt Approximately
6'0 pages of comments• were `received -on.-•the final day ,o"f the F45 day` i
review and comment. period ' (September 10; 1990.. The. California '; ....
Y Act requires that the lead
Environmental Quality . , in= x ; t..
�.�,t Yii s the City of Huntington Beach, - respond to all such comments i
writing . Staff required additional time to • compile the, response to :
comments, which is included with this report.
Conditional Use Permit No. 90-17 and Coastal Development .No.' ,90=18',�
constitute a request to demolish one' building (Maxwell 's restaurant) .
and construct a -total of 51,447 (total of 56, 797 square feet) square
feet in three (3) commercial buildings and a 5,350 square foot public
service space on the subject 3 . 5-acre site.
The plaza level (at Pacific Coast Highway elevation) will include
three new buildings;- one of which will house the reconstructed
Maxwell ' s restaurant . The other two buildings will house two to three
new restaurants. These structures total 40, 000 square feet .
The lower level (facing the beach' access road) 'will include a 6, 022
square foot casual restaurant, 5,425 square feet of beach related
concessions including a relocated Dwight ' s, and 5,350 square feet
public service area. Two levels of subterranean parking will be
provided, in addition to .surface parking. The proposal also . calls for
sale of alcoholic beverages and live entertainment at the major, plaza.
level restaurants .
3 . 0 SURROUNDING LAND USE; ZONING AND GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATIONS:
North of Subject Property:
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Visitor Serving Commercial
ZONE: Downtown Specific Plan District 3
(Visitor Serving Commercial)
LAND USE: Pierside Pavilion and 'Colony, Commercial
East and South of Subject Property:
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Open Space-Recreation
ZONE: Downtown Specific Plan District 11
(Beach Open Space)
LAND USE: Lifeguard Headquarters, Beach
West of Subject Property:
GENERAL PLAN. DESIGNATION: Visitor. Serving Commercial
ZONE: Downtown Specific Plan District 10
(Pier. Related Commercial)
LAND USE.: Pier
Staff •Report- - 10/2/90 -2 (7255d)
CT
W_ MIR 0
-i'� �w
t-
W,
M �;.
Ff _fp.p
0 ENVIRONMENTAL'
N.,
A.- Purpose and Focus of Environmental 'Impact- Report: -
According to- the-California Environmental' Qua ity. . 1 * Act (CEQA) - ,.,the ? "
-purpose of ";,an , environmental* impact.. reppf t,.A,s.;:-to'. .inf okm
decision-makers .and the public about.. t h 'p o Ite fil a 1 "significant .
environmental, ef f ects . of proposed activities.- '.it : also identif i6
mitigation measures and project alternativ'6§,.which reduce or avoid'
identified significant impacts . The envir6nment&-l;,impact reportIs
not a document designed -to address l6gal, 'soci�31-, economic, or. 0 6 r
planning issues.. Rather, it is designed to address changes in
physical conditions that exist in the area affected by' ' the proposed
project .
The Environmental Impact Report does not state a position for or
against the project. It outlines the environmental consequences of
a project and of its alternatives . The decision-maker must consider
this information before rendering a decision on the project. The
adequacy of the Environmental impact Report is to be judged on the
basis of whether the document provides a good faith effort at full
disclosure. The document -should. provide the decision-makers with a
sufficient degree . of analysis which .enables them to make a :decision
that intelligently takes account of environmental consequences . The
decision-maker may approve a project that -will have adverse
environmental impacts, provided that they clearly identify the
social, economic, or other benefits accruing from the project which
outweigh the.-advetse- impacts .
En.vironmental .Impact Rppprt No. . 90-2 is- a supplemental Environmental
Impact Report, intended.to .prov.ide: specif-ic analysis necessary to
up.4ate the-,-.previous -Enyi-'ro7nmentaL Imp.adt: Report 82-2, which was
prepared _for- the�:Powntown%.Specific Plan- Staff prepared an initial.
study to identify issues that may be potentially significant, and
are not covered by Environmental Impact Repoxt ,No. 82-2 . Three such
issues were identified: Historic Resources,
sources, Traffic/Parking
.Circulation, and Views/Aesthetics The consulting firm of LSA
prepared' Draft- Environmental Impact Report No. 90-2.. un.der City
'direction. .
B. --:Procedure:
In accordance with the . C'alif'ornia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) ,
the following procedure was followed:
May 16, 1,990 The City conducted an initial study and
determined that . a supplemental Environmental
"-Impact Report .to Environmental Impact Report
No. 82-2 would be required, to focus on
historic issues, -traffic, parking, circulation,
and views/ae'stheti,cs..
Staf f Report 10/2/.90 ,-- (7255d)
M
T
u
W
_41
_,x-k-a4 f
1!T;Z
V 1.M
May-•j24" 1-990: �''Notide; .,of
I Pr.eparation,'iwas-'Ffiled
- ith'.t"ie:
,-,
-
State :clearinghouse t6%�notlf t-he ublicJaha ._
.ps_,::,6fthe ::intent.-.,- o:,prepare.. , ;;--,;_-��-'--'
Anteres'tea agenci t
su Plemental ..EnVir' 6�n-:` Re' 6r-t-
p- men'. & ...*Imp.ac
Notice' of ' Pre Preparation 'pj-r-i 6d
p� comment e ended,
June :25, 1990,. . dl
July 25, ' 1990
A public workshop. was -heid'. t6'.' s 0- licit in pu-'t
the Environmental Im�p.act.�-Report.:: A Notice-.of
Completion was filed.- '. with- the .
State-
Clearinghouse. Draft Envitqhm erta 1 Impact
Re,port was available -f o"r".."pu- b' - lc -,review and
comment for 45 days (July 25.1 . 1990 - Septeffiber ._-
10, 1990.) .
August 8, 1990 A second public workshop was held to solicit
input on the Environmental Impact.- Report .
August 21, 1990 Public hearing at Planning Commi'st'S' ion-':to
receive public comment on the 'Envir6nmental
Impact Report. No action taken.
October. 2, 1990 Planning Commission public hearing."":. Action to
certify. Environmental Impact Report No . ,90-2 .
All-written comments received between July 25 and September ' 10, 1990,
as well as al-1 .comments .made at - publi.'c workshops and the August.-21
Planning Commi-ss-ion-..hearing ,have . been. -responded% to in writing.
comments and responses.,.a-re-. attached---.to-:this- report for 'rdvi'ew' . and,
will-lbe. incorporated %as .-part:,of-: the-. Fihal'- Environment.al :.Impact -Report .
Final_. :Envi:r.onmental:% Impact: Report No-.---907'-2 must' be,,, adopt.ed !and.. .
cert-if ied by','the Planning: Cbmmi-ssion: prior-to- 4ny- action` 'on,
donditibiial Use Permit - No. 90-17 or Coastal Development Permit No.
90-18i There . are. advers.e environmental impacts-associated with. the
project in the areas of historic resources and aesthetics that cannot
be mitigated to a' level' of insignificance. Therefore, approval of the
project as proposed requires that a Statement of Overriding
considerations ' be adopted by ,the Planning. Commilssion,.. finding -that the
economic, ..social,. .o.r -6ther benefits of .the project outweigh its.
potentially -significant adver-se impacts .
A brief overview of each. of the three' issue areas discussed in the
Environmental Impact Report is provided below.
C. Issues :
1. Historic Resources:
ITplement6tion of the proposed project will result in
demolition -of Maxwell '- s. restaurant.. An Hist-ori6 'Resources
Evaluation. of Maxwel l ' s' prepared by LSA (Apppndix, C 'of Draft
Environmental Impact Report 90-2) concluded th6t .-the-'structure
..-. .. ls. eligible for the National Register of Histori.c . Places .
staff ---R6Oort : ..l6/2/9.0 ,.. :. (1'255d)
}N
• - - {+ - a ' < h�i r rt.- 1 d'+ xT ryii "a �Iy r - d�
Although the Building. las been _alltered through 'the,�yearsy fit
retains much :of� its original form and ha"sr sufficient .'i`ntegrity
of. design-; -`-_ mater als-, -and iaorrkmanski`i-p to meet the. :requiremerits
of .-the National Register The- building also possesses
integrity. of. ,location_ and.. setting:
The Environmental Impact Report- coric.ludes that demolition -.of. ';.
the structure to 'implement . the'..proj ect will have a si,gri -f icant .
adverse impact that cannot be fully mitigated. However;
mitigation measures are recommended to reduce -the, 'impacts to . •
the extent feasible. . These measures include complete
documentation of the structure .in= accordance wi-th.,`he-:-Historic
American Buildings Survey Standards, . and memorialization of the
building. Refer to Exhibit. A - Mitigation Measures, attached
to Planning Commission Resolution No. 1437 (Attachment 5 ',to .
this report) .
2 . Traffic and Parking:
LSA prepared .a traffic and parking study to examine the
projected parking demand and supply for the project,
ingress/egress points to the site,- impacts on the surrounding
circulation system, queuing -for the parking structure; and
pedestrian circulation. The -report- is - included as Appendix D
to Draft Environmental Impact Report .No. 90-2 . A summary- of
the report and its conclusions - are -contained in the text ' of the
Draft Environmental Impact Report. A parking analysis- is
provided below. in Section 1.0 . 0 _of this report.
No mitigation measures are, called-.out after .standard' required
design .measures- are- incorporated into the project (such- as
deceleration- •and acceleration- lanes) . No significant adverse
impacts. -are-.,identi-f ied
3 . Aesthetics/Visual Resources :
The proposed project will affect existing views from Pacific .
Coast Highway toward the ocean, and from the beach looking
inland. The buildings will be positioned so. as to -maintain'
view corridors down Main Street, Third Street, Second Street,
and First Street. Two-story elements will -be .minimal . In
addition, a .pedestria-n promenade will be constructed along the
. ocean side of the buildings to provide new view opportunities
to the _public. from the site No significant impacts relating-
to light and glare, or shade and shadow were identified.
However, the report concludes that the obstruction of direct_
views of the ocean and pier from certain locations along
Pacific Coast Highway is a significant adverse impact of the
project which -cannot be fully mitigated. .Mitigation measures
are,.recommended to mitigate impacts to -the extent feasible,.
including provision of `a .lighting plan and landscape plan. for
.review and .approval by the -.Director- of Community Development.
Refer to Exhibit A _- Mitigatio,n. Measures, attached to Planning
Commission Resolution no. 1437 (Attachment No. 5 to this
report)
Staff Report 10%2/9-0 =5 (7255d)
_ ;ti r - t kt-"�'- �5- ,an ' 'nn:+Y- ✓�'°..-y7� �si- � � 7�°s�ik. ss�-- 3} �� �G +'t�, '-kt''il;
y - -e• y l,. a-lFs .A 'G 2 �" P 9.P .iT
Ti
4 .Alternatives
The Califoknia`-En41ronment6l "Quality, Act- requires that .a range of
project alternatives be considered 'which focus :on"`-pp ' r uni S'
for eliminating.. any- significant -adverse environmental- effects,. or
reducing them to a level of- insignificance, even' if.'these
alternatives would impede. to. some ,degree. the attainment of. the
project objectives or -would, be more costly: • Three `alter.natives .
are discussed . iri Draft :Environmental Impact Report No: 90=2 .
.a . No Project
The no project alternative would involve the continuation' of
existing uses on the site. Although it would not meet the project
objectives or .implement the General Plan, Downtown 'Specific Plan,
or Coastal Land Use Plan, this alternative would eliminate the
project impacts in the areas of view opportunities . and historic
resources, and would maintain existing traffic levels . It is
therefore, an environmentally superior alternative, and should
remain under consideration.
b Open Space and Recreation Alternative:
This alternative would involve the removal of all existing uses on
the site., including Maxwell ' s restaurant and the parking lot, and
construction of a passive park/recreation area. This alternative
would eliminate impact-. to view- shed and reduce traffic generation,
but would not meet:City" or- project objectives . It would still
eliminate a National Register-' eli.gible historic - structure,, and is
therefor_e,. not�.considered- an' environmentally superior alternative.
c Preservation °•of°.Maxwell ' s Alternative: _
This alternative would involve preservation of Maxwell ' s in its
current location, and the construction of two new buildings . The
total square footage and use of the buildings would be
approximately the same as- for the proposed project.
This alternative would have approximately the same traffic and
visual impacts as the project, but would preserve a potential
National Register Historic structure. .. It would also fulfill many,
but not all, of -the proT et objectives . This alternative is
considered environmentally superior, and should remain under
consideration.
A number of commentors on the Draft Environmental Impact Report
requested that Off-Site Alternatives, and Reduced Intensity
Alternatives be considered. Response to Comments GR-2 and GR-3
fully address these issues, which are summarized below:
Staff Report - 10/2/90 -6- (7255d)
t.. j
d Off Site Alternatives F , T
Off-Site A1te.rna"tives :would locate the `project :on a:' site nor =sites
other- than- southeast of the pier
Thi-s alternative would eliminate impacts to historic structures".
and views.:- However, staff has not cons idered;.this , alternat.ive :as
a feasible option because the proposed project is i.nherent'ly
related to the subject site. The project proponerit-;seeks to
develop piers related commercial uses in accordance,,with, .the' intent
of the Downtown. Specific Plan_ District 10 . , 'As such;; no` ;other:-:si'te
is immediately' adjacent to ' the pier with the except-ion _`of the site
immediately northeast of the pier: However, this'-.s`ite :=h;as :,been
committed to a parking structure, and if implemented there,- -the
project would have similar impacts to views ., No other site
fulfills one. of the primary project objectives of creatirig` a focus
at the confluence of Pacific Coast Highway -and the --pier. .
It should also be noted that the CEQA Guidelines -Section 15126(d)
state the following requirements:
"Alternatives to the Proposed Action. Describe a range of
reasonable alternatives to the project or to the location of the
project, , which could feasible attain the basic objectives' of the
project,- .and- evaluate- the , comparative merits of the -alternatives . "
Alternative sites do not meet the basic objective of the project,
which is to .provide- pier: related commercial .
5 : Lower Intensity`-Alternative: :
This Alternative could include a range of possibilities,
including the` preservation of Maxwell ' s and the addition of
fewer. or' smaller- buildings- than the proposed project, or the
demolition of Maxwell ' s and -re-construction of fewer or smaller
buildings than proposed by the project.
It is reasonable to assume that, the more intense the
development, the greater the impacts to views . Depending on
the design of. this alternative, the impacts to historic .
resources could be. eliminated, and the impacts -to_.�views could
be .reduced, but not eliminated. This alternative would meet,
to some degree, the objectives of the project; and should
remain under consideration.
5 . 0 COASTAL STATUS:
The project site is 'located in an appealable portion of the Coastal
Zone, The California,�Coastal Act mandates that within. the Coastal
Zone, certain-issues be given consideration in the planning process .
These coastal goals and policies are integrally tied..-to the Downtown
Specific Plan-, since the Specific Plan represents the 'City' s method of
implementingthe- Local Coastal Program, including, the Coastal ;Element
of the -General Plan..,,
Stiff- Report 10/2%90 -7 (7255d)
} F'� d'':r
.The Cit t
y s Coastal Element adopted goa=ls and policres� to provide the, u
guidance: for;,.d4' ions regarding activritiers i`n: the--_.coas:t'a1 zone': , One
of these` goals addresses`:vis 'tor-s.er� ng faciTyities ,and :states. the -°
following -
Additional support .;facitilites- :are necessary i.n order to ..
accommodate`the , large numbers of visitors ' att-racted`_to recreation
areas in the coastal zone. The coastal land: use:. plan is designed
to provide -for sufficient areas strategica.11y, located :to .serve the
needs of existing and future levels of visitors-. '.': The intent of
the following. poli.c,ies is to specifically encourage adequate
visitor accommodations: '
Coastal Policy
° Protect, encourage, and where feasible, provide visitor-serving
facilities in the coastal zone which are varied in type and
price.
Project Implementation of Coastal Policy
° The project will provide a range of services from inexpensive
beach retail concessions and a casual cafe, to .top end, high
quality restaurants . These uses are a continuation and
intensificat.ion. of the visitor serving commercial uses which
currently exist on the site.
Coastal Policy
° Encourage the :provision of additiorial-..restaurants. and
hotel/motel' accommodations in-keeping with the alternative
chosen by--the- City Council.
Project Implementation''of',Coastal Policy
° The project provides for up to 5 restaurants, including
Maxwells, up to three new restaurants on the plaza level, and
a casual restaurant' on the beach access level .
Coastal Police
Require an. offer of . d-edication. of an easement. in all new
development to. allow vertical access to the shoreline or to
public trails and bikeways . '
Project Implementation of Coastal Policy
° vertical acce-ss. refers to access from the first public street
along the coast-,- to the . shoreline. This project will provide
ample public access . through the site from Pacific Coast Highway
to the beach.; The design encourages pedestrian flow by pulling
the sidewalk,_ awayfrom: Pacific :Coast Highway to 'avoid
pedestrian/.car- conflicts'. ' A _minimum of- 75 feet ,is provided
StafFf .Report 7 J0/2/90-_ :.. -.8 (7255d)
1141W.111 Z.-NIZ11z _N4
141&A
AM
.r
bptweenbuildings:T: 4 open`'
public
-1c
-
, , . -.6
beacherel 'are, ,al so ,m2nlI '10 feet wide
public walkway a ong the front. 4
which - afford .open;viewing ?opp6r.tunitdes d- !-:-This . r6presents an improvement over the existing- ,con 1t-i'6n
because there. are currently two narrow`-sets`,of: -stairs,-:from,._t
parking area to the beach, and rid'..-viable h*a h-d iba p-, access:: This
project will provide for wide -staircases.-fk6m- the plazarlevel
to the beach, handicap access to`the'-!%:`, each' via"-e'i-'ev";at6i%-s:.'-.a'nd,
w n on various"1evels-1 rom extensive ramps;. and public - ie' i g ,
public plazas- and walkways.
As indicated above, the project will implement applicable coastal
. .policies by providing visitor-serving us' e' s ,which are. varied .in ..t.ype ,
and price, preserving the visitor serving use which -currently -exists`
on the site., and improving vertical access to the shoreline.
Coastal Development Permit No. . 90-18 may be, approved or conditionally
approved only after it has been found to be in conformance with the' .'.
Coastal Element � by making the findings contained in Section 11. 0 of .
this report.
Prior to any action on Conditional Use Permit No. 90-17, it is
necessary for- the - Planning Commission to "-review and act- on- Coastal
Development Permit No. 90-18-.
.6 ,0 REDEVELOPMENT STATUS: .
The project is:. located ::withim: the Main-rP.i-e.r' ...-Redevelopment- Proj e.c.t::.:,
Area. The :-Pro j ect.,::Area was ;:-adopted by ..the City Council on September
7, 1982,- .-and--was by -Sixth Street.,, Walnut Avenue, Lake Street
and the, Pacific-."Ocean-.... On,.June 2011 1:981 zy,� the-:Mai -
Pier Redevelopment
Project Area was -expanded.- to ioughly, coincide with the boundaries of
the Specific .Plan. The expanded area .cover:s - a total of 336 acres .
In part., the purpose of the Downtown Redevelopment
pment effort is to
1. Provide construction and employment opportunities;
2.. Mitigate. 'development limitations. which ;limit proper utilization :'o_f .
the area, resulting in a--serious physical, sodialf - and economic
burden. orithe community;
3 . Provide adequate public improvements, facilities, open spaces and,
utilities; - .
4 . Implement construction of adequate streets, curbs, gutters, storm
drains, and other .,improvements to' facilitate vehicular and
pedestrian access;
5 . - Establish, 'de' v6lopment criteria for permitted reuses,' and
Yi
Staff Report `", _ . "9-
(7255d)
I
...I ....
It - �3 lc wl�"�•r+ - ^ -.���>ti��'�l .r _-�� p- �� A :� �� ,.11€y:g;;� "
, . .L i ti S�C fi � ty Z �._L -.�--_ S v' yt� •q ,� ,}
tl •.l' _ 7t}I ' /;)�i Y Y-Irr --:A t 5..� 1 1 L'. #-- si°la F�gi!74
6 Provide relocation assistance and :benefit's itf bus4i ne'sses or ,
,r
residents are displaced t 3 y•.
a {
The Redevelopment Agency, in pursuing these-goals,•.$is acting as : a
co-app icant .'for._the proposed,"project. . 'The project Awil'1 p:rovide a
visitor-serving"commercial node at the confluence of Main -Street;.
Pacific Coast Highway, and the pier, which willlai`d in ;the
revitalization' of the Downtown commercial core." `,tY e•.'=project. will also
provide increased sales tax revenue and tax increment .,.r'evenue, .to the
City and Redevelopment Agency as a ,result 'of•"increased property values
and sales activity. !Such- revenue can be -used -to ahetbenefit of :the
community. as .a whole to improve service levels, construct capital
facilities, and provide additional affordable housing. - :
7 . 0 SPECIFIC PLAN:
The proposed project is located within the Downtown -.Specific -.Plan,
District 10 (Pier-Related Commercial) . The stated purp.o_se'. for
District' 10 is "to provide for commercial uses on and 'a.'1ongside the
pier which will enhance and expand the public' s use and 'enjoyment of
this area. " The District allows for commercial uses, including -.retail
sales and restaurants along with public recreational .facilities . The
District does not establish .any maximum density or.:intensity: of
development. Section 3 . 2 .3 (Commercial visitor Serving) of the
Downtown Specific Plan makes the following detailed statement
regarding desired- uses :-in District 10 :
District .Ten includes- the-. area -on the -ocean' side • of --Pacific• Coast
Highway. most- suited' for•.commercial development.- This District
includes the pier and the existing parking areas ,on-:ei.ther-.''side;
comprising..:.approximately: 15 gross acres. The<,visitor-serving
commercial,- uses. most:�•appropri'a.te- fov the distr-ict-.are P.
beach-re'l'ated.=�6nd,'.complementaryi toy activ-ities•'which,-_=occur.,around
the pier; such, as- surfing, fishing, :and. sunbathing. Additional :
parking in structures would also be appropriate provided. that they
do not extend above the level of Pacific Coast Highway and block
views . This provision should still provide for the_ option of
multi-level commercial. activities in . this. District.__ The pier is a
prime location for restaurants, which can take .zdvantage of the
panoramic views . Equally important . as the new commercial . .
activities which may be accommodated is to insure. .`that- the major
emphases . in this :District= is , open space. The pier and beach must
remain• accessible to the public for free recreational pursuits
(.Downtown Specific Plan Section 3 .2 .3) .
Further, Section 3 .3 ..2 (Parking) of the Downtown Specific Plan states ,
the following regarding 'District 10 :
New commercial and--restaurant development on the beach side of
Coast Highway,- on or adjacent to the pier, ' should be constructed
on decked parking_ struc.ture which would be..open to ,the public and
provide parking for`_.a variety of patrons of... the pier facilities,
restaurants, .,th•e .commercial..establishments along -Mai-n Street, and
beach users. Since- -the periods of -peak -parking demand for these
Staff. Report-.,.. 10/2/90 -10= „ (7255d)
M .
- - .. - -- M.
n r Pa '� .o•.n +1....*S `4.ytF,.. Y .ft S y xLt}i't }� '' V.Ow tip' ¢'� 7�4 "(S•. j]
�' • ' S v 3 r _;-�f i i ��Y��''"�`t1l'a yr Y-.�"� �A8
I _ _; -:•, -- ry T - -.I. > > -:J, i -^ • '7Sti. -
different types of users vary 'to ysome extent the `utilization o'f 7 ''
parking - struc:ture will be.'-Improved- -and parking`';revenuers- from
it .wil3 be `iiicrea`sed (Downtown Specific P -an Section. 3 '3 2).,.
In, summary, the` Downtown 'Specific Plan; as the implementing tool.
for the. -Local coast-al .-Program, has made very concise-` s;tatements
regarding desired -uses in -Dist-rict 10. Those °uses::are intended` to
be complimentary -to .the visitor serving, recreational:. nature of
the municipal pier: Strong emphasis is placed upon the provision
of public parking, public access, panoramic views'-.from .restaurants
and a .general increase-- •in :the recreational -opportuhit-i:es available
to the visitor. ---Multi level commercial activities located upon .-
decked parking structures are specifically identified .as ' an .
appropriate means of - implementing those objectives .
Staff ' s assessment is that the proposed project uses in fact
comply with and fulfill the stated purposes of the: Downtown -
Specific Plan. Multi-level parking provides for the retention of
all existing beach parking spaces, as .well as additional- parking
for new visitor-serving commercial uses . The commercial uses
themselves constitute a revitalization and. expansion of the
existing commercial uses on the site. Dining opportunities will
be retained and expanded for a broad cross-section of visitors .
Casual facilities will be provided at the beach level for beach
visitors, bike riders and pier strollers . More formal dining and
viewing opportunities- will- be- proided- on top of the .parking
structure for those who desire to experience the pier area in more
comfort. Ample pedestrian :wal•kways - and public plaza areas are
also provided throughout• the .structure-. .. Lastly, handicapped
access to -the beachland`- pier area•--will -be enhanced through the
construction ..of- new:: ramps'.and- elevators . . The proposed project'
then,,_, is .,:fully; consistent with- permitted uses of District 10 of
the. Downtown Speci:f ic .Plan.
The following matrix compares the proposed project to the development.
standards of the Downtown Specific Plan, District 10:
Section Issue Required Provided
4 .12 . 01 Permitted Uses Commercial Uses Restaurants
(beach-related) , beach-related
Restaurants, retail, parking
Retail sales
(beach-related) ,
Parking.
4 . 12 . 02 _- Min. Parcel No minimum Approx. 3 . 5 . acres-
Size, requirement
Staff' Re' ort. .10/2/§0 =11 (7255d)
j - r ` .:. �•" -..�� r � rut �Y rR ,n 'SF�. .Y
Y .
` d t�.
--
r
r t n SZ.: C`,
Section' Issue Required Provided '. . `
4.. 12. 03 Max. Intensity Nomaximum 40,000 'sf..Quality '
requirement j Restaurant-;_` '
11,447 ` sf °Beach
Related
Restaurant/Retail;
' 5350 sf public
service area
4 . 12. 04 Max. Height 25 ft . and no 25 ft. and no more
more than 2 . than 2-stories
stories above above pier level;
pier level . 35 ft. to ,top of
(10 ' additional mechanical
permitted for roof 39 ft . to top of
line treatment, elevator
architectural features,
mechanical equip. ;
14 ' additional '
allowed for elevator
equipment.
No parking Parking level
structures above at or below s
adjacent: PCH PCH elevation
elevation
4 . 12 . 05 : Max.- Site:. No Maximum 26% (excluding.
coverage required the subterranean
structure) :
4 . 12 . 06-09 Setbacks No Minimum Min. 31 ft from
required PCH
4 . 12 . 10 Open Space Public open space Public plazas, ,
and pedestrian beach access,
access to be : and perimeter
-� provided. Public - walkways
walkways around provided
perimeter of new
development required.
Staff Report: 10%2/9.0 =12-' (7.255d)
4
w
J
A
w
'Y4
-C-I-SIQN;I,70MMITT 8';0' "SUBbIV
o,
W 11'�
9 . 0 DES IGIA` ,R'EVIE .' bkkr�
The Design -Rdvie*r:`.b'&;§'rd met on--'September 13 1990 to review the
concept
ual id,I .iplcin-land elevations . The -Board made the following
r
suggestions ',arid�:-cdffiffidhts :
n,
1. The a r c h i t e c',tui- 6 h o u 1 d more closely- follo�4.-.-th'e".DoWntow' n :D_eFsig1k_I.._
Guidelines"-'to --',-'re-ilbct a Mediter' ranean - st
2 . Architecturai" f d"Atures should- be Incliiddd emphasize the
horizontal,': r-at'hd'r than vertical, lines, ,of'-'..th'e'.-buildings
3 . Windows. should,.:,.b`e.-,shadPwed -and/or recesse*.d 't9 . avb i d are
4 . Accentuate the: ;entry to the project to :create. 6:'-s 6h6 e o f_'a rIr i.v a 1..
5 . Reduce the 2-sto ry vertical lines to the: extent- -p.:o"s'Eiible'.-"" ,,!
The Board recommended that the Planning Commission apprpve,'.the- .
conceptual site plafis,� circulation pattern, and buildihg. ma' s.s . --Since
the proposed :project,-.tenants consist- primarily of major :restaurant
tenants that* have.�no't yet been- selected, the precise co' 16r's.- and '.
architectural details are not known at this time. These elements 'may-
vary according tQ: t�hei .- needs of each.-tenant.. ' - Th6refore,- the-Design
Review Board- .also.-;req.ommended that the Planning Co.mmission .include a. .- .
condition of. appr`ov__'.a_`I_-..to require -.that the final.- colors, materials, and.
approved- by- the.architectural det.' '-,be�'�-reviewed -and . Design 'Rev' i'ew
Board .prior to. issuance- of,.--building- permi�ts- :..-A. Planned - Sigrv.Program,-.
§wed.-byl the -Design-Review---Board,:prior o- issuance 'of
should .also. be,,.,-_r,ev1J`44
evi w '-Baa'rds ' -
the first-'--sig'n,.*..'p,'eri,,nl�t-.'-.i- Staff ..concurs -with"-._th6:. D6s ii-gn-A -b
assessment:.t:,-- -The-.:..'�pre-k-iminary- architbctura-1--Ipl.'aris-'-'-as presented- to . -the
Design Review' Bpaid'.�.:.,do' not closely -ref lect the 'Downtown Design
Guidelines in terms.,.o: f items such as. roof materials window shapes,
architectdral : a-cddht-s, pedestria.n-'scale. orientati6n, and other such
feAtures 'cha-ratter-'i'stic of .contemporary Mediterranean I architecture.
Upon final Ise lec-ti6*ii..j6f tenants, the architectural design' f the
buildings: will. nbe_ d,�to bOrefined to comply with the Guidelines;; and
should be" -keView'ed`-' nd: approved by the Design Rev-iew'. Boa' 'td 6nd--Planning
Commission.
.10 , 0 ISSUES ,A- N,D'"'ANALYSIS:
Past Project History,:"_
The Planning pomiffili-s'-slon, on September 16, . 1986, approved. a "Pierside
Village" on thi's-,-.,.'si%te - . consisting of. 1061000- square- feet. of commercial
-development-. - '.-'-Thf§.-:'pro3-ect proposed the creation of a :multiple level
Mediterranean villag e with 60 retail shops - (50,:000- square feet) , 16
ti take -.out, .food"O'U square.�. feet) fout.-:re-sitaui.a nt.s (including
for s I -6t*A' 2, 000 square feet).;1, f64'3' .pc -spaces,
13�king.
QY
ILI
EE.I k t dp
S taff: Ret (7255d)
xc
ZZ
7 K 7iE
,
A;*-t-,4e.,��,_,�--'1—.-"l' � "..,_','.;',.,_-!,--. _"..-l'..� kA,r1-��:j"-I:%-���_I-. --A�,- W,I,
,.� ,-,,___Iy
..
..4 �p , _,L.;r�.t.,.,- �
5
.,.;!--��.;� 'T"l. -�-?-I� k
)Z
2.1
1
.,,.
�-I
"-I-
d
1!rr:.'
I
1�
"1,
,
.,
,.
'
'_t
,
'L-&
_�,.,..z
-l..
..�
,-_,,._.'
r
�
L"a
_,
L
_.,',...'
l
"-
j_
-
.,i�I- J1 "'; t ta I i*q- 4 R ? a!f,, 4 L, !� - -' , } L
Ik1m i I �;�& a.�, ,V ,4 NOIi - i1 ii-4 , q �j, % �" t�Zv- - � , � i, f _ ,- i" ,t'1 4 " 4
" i D p . ; 3 i; '!� - i"lf L k
f' � ,, 4 ,, , 4 , , I , � ,V ff �1' ,4 �j ! �� -
?T , '"'J " ,,r ,_,_,", .V ,I, 0 ,- , r f � 1
W i ]1-; A) z,X� Qr-?t � T �, ; g S. s' ,
".4i IA - -",A I2Vtj " , �, W " ^ 1N _,� l k, _1 '"Fr *V "! tT � iI,P- , J"- ,� i
,�I Y ' 1 - �` IAZ AY".k , 64 �;Pr—,�*` ,t f ', Mx , Z,;F 1 .
i 0-u� �I �� 4 S kl,i': R- 4�M �- 1j-w'-v1'Ni -- Q6ST,Ot,�:I-&-, � '-��*_ _ "X�Ti . f _e,-i'; 0 ) _ .1
-
'
xecdngttidti6h ' aff fit,
"E5ffY ,, fi,,byZZ2- - 001-S MWE6 rft, " 1 -V .
,wV 1 t— K_ _ _ � Z - - ;_,�et1�W L; - _' ` _�-� �. � - . `
and'- a'- PectestfiA * bv rcross-3ng- ot ,Edclfic Coast Highway'., V
k"J ! 4�f �`llT ,gi 0" A) I 4, - i �i _ - ! ,�AJ.,, ; "j _ 1 7 ,I , r
..
-he�:-'.p,.mr',..,I6."..j 6 C..-��---t,_"�.s-w.: a s aP.�_�- ?_.,PP." a", . �� :. t�l e-: �-" d_,; ity "I1:.C--.-�-`o d..i.�. d i',IL�Aii,.l I�"W--1'--!�-Io-, n-1- -o
-_c�1.- t,��.b--_ .._b6.-��,,+�
t..s:,_�1 ZV3 k-��.. 1"j'V,'-9If�t�:..��
;&�-, ,.�
.11
_1�t'.........,,j..'
;
1!.-
jt
-i.
".,.
-:.75,
f
�r-
,q�
%by the"C6 s 6r,tommis lon non ,Ap �i 21987� Nd � U.-Id Ipg'%!p VWiAtM'V-- k,,
(-
,
ever-_issued, :and 4ttldffiehts: exp�rq n-&0&�t6b6�k� ,1 ji E�3, ti
? 1 ! . ! -:7 I ', �-� v"f YIj�4 ,() -1,4N ,. Y1W ' - Z -�,i i,. ` '- 4 � I , t Z r � !;: �TN. ; 1�,N ;1 ;� j
Project Description ' _ �i �M
"-
.-
r; L ,- rj� , t
. .. . ..I The'
e�- p� Zr-;..o-�--..p-._--)..s1.- .'B:Id__: ,�..'pI,'.�r.-,.. o_- e c'.�.1.�..;... l.%..--`.i-�. s.i_,. -. located
odtted r-.;.:�s`��,_,"--4- u- .2t.-. h-bI.- a', _.s--.. --t-'�. V'i 1.-I'---'. e.-.' !F.u-
r-1.- t,
i- n,,-,
g,--- t,- oi-. cI B.;�ea;�,,_". d�j,.i.iI�1�?
,�.h
r,
e�.A�'-"t r�'.-
i...�;.i !,'V-
�
on th -'ocea ,side`..' of,-`.Ptcifdc" Coasts Highway.'li The'-pr pAie,c ` 1 te b-I-':.. I; g
_
.
1
Constructed or the! site` wI �,t6Urr_6ntly"h& sesxMak e11la � td 66i ht,A , ,'' Y, ,
%,
va various- be acfi cQncess' ons, tn i axwe1iI : parking; f0j,-_ and- 6 .- �-t W-&- .chZ, 4 d;."
parking area. The' project -will not encroach, onto, the t6posed pier art '
plaza, any - sand area , or- t e .,existihO, 1ke'..�ral-/Bead 0access,koadJ `R�`.
!
,,.
.�.
T Ih. 'qe. . ...p_-'..1 r.'oj. -e.-Ic.....-t..%.entails
ntails.��. --j t-'..hI-.- .,e-'. ',..:t d. e. m o'L1 iI`t�.i'-.4*--o o- f'....". ,.Ma.k�x.-�.-�...--_w. e ll., .-".,-
..s-,�l..`.'_r...-.',.....,,',.e;,, is a,
u a_
,-_t-"'
^._I._ �
�
--"-'-�d
'_,.'.t�--..-
h. b,_.l.i .�",-.--i-
.,.:�-
"Fj:.-:.,,L ,!
construction ' mat y-' 1?4 7 square r 4t 6k- kb taur� iii ��i &
,...i-i,'Zk
beach-rela ei .concessions" and 350 ,-sqq:are" fopt p blib"'sar_0Vi ,e ;space; r
,:.
W, ,.F i
�,
1l.
;.
"-
.,
..
.
,
;
I"
;.
-
�!
I, h
The plaza level .(Padifib .'C ast ':Highway level) 'wilI .ihbl uAe - hrgdnew
re _ . ngqj one4tof .which will 'house .a , relod6t6d Maxw iies
otherThe . buildings will contain two.:to.:.threeL' ew ,restaurants ,
T . l-- .40, 000 ; square -feet.-.:: Surfaceparkihg js a j6 l
provided. The. buildings on ,.the1�pl&za, .level-:. are �i'"e&
. ,!
minimum:15,n:fo6t public Vie - corr!idors f. om-..Mal S i96t, th.i;rd_ ii }
St.reet,' and'-Secohd-Stteet.` __The Jpublic,-plazas--betweenthe buEldinq§ ' ��'
lead to: wide stai-rqiys- to",th6'-,-,be66h *-"-additibn _' public-wlakways � 6lonc
, ,�,.
. -the .- itauranEsi and
_ the nbike:%trail-
-
.
.
-.....T..h_
.e_..:t...._.._ b.. e. a. -;s-.ch -�..a_It.'c1;;..L.ce.-.L. -:s-.,- I,i-�;.' 6_..--,."� (_ f"-. id�- ,..':Ll..k�.-g�_.the:-�,--.-7-.."�..bx. k&`"rpt.'--t.�h,-.i.i! ) will
k.�i1:..T._ 1
d.
o, hl,- t: -a_-
-j...�. .nt_* 1
.,."-a
-'.
-',,1-."...:,',.4.'.
.6
square foot .:re
q are 'kobt-.:re occtdd Dwkqhts;�, 2;2 751��quae *g, , o f i�6i !.r 1ated
retail, 6sr022 square 6foot-qasqa1t restaurant, -n -_ ,3,50 square-foot
o
o
t
'...
.,
.I.-..'.k-.
.
-
-.
Z...
-,
i-
-
public service-,:spatd;� _ This, spacemty� ei- isbdzIbk 'a4-p rpose such as 'the
,
__ _ ,um", �' reiocated,"'Z inx rld,fd4;far ` ea fua ersIor. ,a1 ofthtnxtY _-
Se ices I - rmati6n:'c6nter i;,
. .
d Access 4 -
, .
..
-
-.
--
T....:�,w.��, o :i.. bv, -6, i-.I..*.s- wo �l..tj
.-s,-.-!s?*.. u..:.'t.�_.b7,.l.t:,.;-.._..d,_., r._,-n_...-,r i� : 6. 1Zi- :-P.a._., r-.-
k�_;�;
l n.-�-, g. r_e�-" p- r_%_.�-.,.-..,. --i_ _7a._- e.. -d�;'I,--:,t_
bI.;_,.'en
.,-e,!--'
-a'__-..;_t__h-;'-Z�-t,- h
0...I l
s
'u. - a. ,.._.c e
:.*I
!eveIi .: which ,will.- ptOy1 e !-par-_ing-,tiQr e :project n6 repl e. the .beach..
--p king�-.c x ently.,�ofi"�th - site -analysis &of 'the ;reauire&'tan
avaL1ab1e parking: i provide below -
4
,..
,.
-'
l
.�.-�
,T.',.." h*.-.- -�e.-,p.rI---:. .,.r,-... o'l.,_,,
J..' ec..,*I t.L-_"�-...-
-
.'l.a- i,,�.s-."-_*_",.oI.;_"
: ..i.,n- d.,"..�_1,",1,--_'_.".1.`.t..'.:_I
d�'
'e.,'__--.--,.-�
'-�s-,
"-t-...-Z,w.!-,;--�
sez .t,,, s.�,'.-'w.n
".o public
ubilc"l r_ -"6. s_.Ir-,,. t-o o.,�- m_-- s
__;-,,.7-w!'`.'
Ih1'.;Li:
6
i'L:��_....--%_.,
,-at,.,r1-
e
accessible' oth from-',wit "n,. t e projec - and direct1y-from'-t e bea
c;
`h-.;' I-
,
-y--.--...�-
..
.
ac, e. .�r oaA. The .i estrooms,-will., e -handidap-__accesdible" .,. ,
. )"
Public access to aid" hftftg the' proj_ct 's a major consideration.
Pedestrian plazas' an i-wa kwayplaip" provided 4round_the front the
;buildings on ' wo7level9i Ior Viewihg the pier and ocean k minimum
�.,...*.
.i.�-V
6 - Tde public-�V Tkwa :will i tained�� along-,the o aan.% side of,. the
restaurants,_ with. .-- .view,-obstruct-ions_or _qhdroadlmerti4ZPddesir1an7 � � I -_ ,
traffic 'is`,encour. 4, 0,f16W�ktfiiouqi-the" sit� .tb �t-hO.bb6cW elow
'-.-..�.
'-
-.�I-
.
�
;
..
�.
.,
�
.-,�,
...�.,I I-..-I 1.lUl,.
r `
- �
r, ` *! ; .: ," - --
..,-,---, - --W-�, 'A.-`. � .�-.. A
.. -,��.., . -- ,1..,-,, , ,
* " .- -� �- .7?,
.. .�,._. �.;.1--.� `,.� ..-:,�i�, .. :.,- ,
. --
..- - , .
i� ..,__._I:;tleZ�_
-,
t..... '
T.... ;.'
i
y. I . ' j* _ Ill I ,,4 , j
..,
, --
-.;-
'.t
3" -
j-
:.
..."
_�I.
�
,-
,.
�.r
"f
t",
?
7-_
�
.
.-...
Staff Reportdb1. t50 1 �Z W �'i i4 Yi 1
Z ! . 1 r, —�� -r ) -y�;& :I f , _ )" i aUf:
c r, a , 1 ,P, A ,,U",F,.F -�. � Kj! , , "
r�e" � V - F!�� ", - ''2- .,� i � �Q ? ,- - -4 " " - , 11 ()-
: , , -�
,
'y � a ±V % _ 1
�.....- -' �: W _�, 7�' iZ ....."..:P,. ..:a,.`, l--.--. . �.,.
1,7!-;71_K . , .T.,7 --� ; �_
la - riv.' _ib Mll
Z4 i^ lip`r -4..s :� L...1. a-- -K_•1�y`° 9p !4s'' 3 .. '4
vehicular ,access is',provided .in three ;loca;tioris An .entr"ance3 tjo thet
surface `lot for so i'thYioiind 'traffic is ..loeated= on Pacific 'Coast HigYiway .
-approximately midway between Main Street -and Second Street:: The ramps .
to the. subterranean ,.structure may be accessed -from�:.the,sur�faee,;.lot' = An
exit'- onto, -southbourid .Pacific Coast Highway` is .prov_ided opposite Second '
Street-: =_ r
The signalized- primary access to the subterranean park'ing� -,structure is
located at the Lake Street/Pacific Coast Highway intersection: *".This
entrance. leads directl to ,the underground
y.. g parking, and, allows ,easy - .ingress: and egress for, both .northbound and - s Out hboand traffic : The,
first subterranean parking level provides for a future` opporturiity' to
connect with the north of the pier, parking structure, vi'a *`a.: 26. foot
wide access way under the pier plaza. This connection could' b_ e' '
constructed if deemed desirable at a future, date.
As shown in the zoning conformance matrix -in Section 7'..0 of this:
report, the proposed project-generally complies with all standards of
the Downtown Specific Plan. Staff is concerned, however, with the
projects interpretation of the height standards . Although the zoning
code allows roofline treatments to extend 10 feet above the 25 foot
height limit, some portions of the project which extend above 25 *feet
may not be exclusively devoted to mechanical equipment;--chimneys,
architectural features, or other such permitted uses . In order to
comply with the code, staff is recommending a condition of- approval
which requires the applicant to lower the heights where necessary.
. Final building forms should be reviewed by the Design -Review Board and
Planning .Commission:
Parkins
. The following - chart.-illustrates. the- parking required for the proposed
p-roject .: It' shou•ld'.' be.- noted- that the existing - square .footage -for
Maxwell ' s restaurant (11, 600 square feet) is "grandfathered" at 77
parking. spaces, the number that currently exist for Maxwell ' s exclusive
use. The 'existing square footage for the Green Burrito (1, 500 square
feet) , . and -Dwight ' s (2, 500 square feet) have also been.."grandfathered" ,
assuming that the users of these facilities park in. the beach parking
- area. All-new square footage over and above the existing commercial
:uses, and .any-new -commercial -use, -will ;be charged<,fo.r parking . at
current .ratios The public -&ervice square . footage ..(5,350) is reserved
for a community. service such as a surf museum; relocated .Junior
Lifeguard Headquarters, or other similar use.. This space is not
charged for parking, assuming users of this facility will use the beach
parking.. All existing beach parking will be replaced. The 14 spaces
which will be removed from Pacific Coast Highway as a result of the
widening..will be replaced in the north of the pier structure.
Staff_ Report; 10%2/90 -15= (7255d)
IM-M
par-j ... ....
3w
ri ki
7
PARK-ING:
PROPOSED vi:;MIRRENTLY-W`, SQUA
RE. IJ-N G P")k KA Q
"USE GE MOTA '.-RATIO REQUIRED_,��I',,'-:,.--PRO bk6�z-V',% PR6P69hb ...
Maxwell ' s Rest. .
1-txisting 11, 600 1/100 -1-16. 77,
-Additional 3 ,400. 1/100 34 :N/A
15, 000 150 7.
New Re.staur.ants 25, 000. 1/100. 250 -N/A 0,
Retail
-Existing
(to be' removed) 4, 250 1/200 21 0 , 0
-Additional (to-
replace exst. ) 2,275 1/200 11 N/A
2,275 _ 11 0 0
Casual Restaurant
-Existing
(Green Burrito) 1, 500 1/100 15 0 0
-Additional 4 , 522, 1/100 45 N/A 15
6, 022 60 0 45
Dwights
-Existing, 2,500 1/200 12 0 0
-Additional 650 , 1/200 3 N/A 3
3, 150 15 0 3
Beach Parking
-Existing . N/A N/A 239 239 2349
TOTALS ' 56, 797 Various 752 316 648*
*With tandem and valet
Parking.:Provided
The. prop osed parking is located on the surface and in two subterranean
levels . A portion of each of. the subterranean -levels is designed for
tandem, valet parking . . If .all .spaces were to be used as single
loaded self ark spaces, a'',-total of 437 spaces would be available
on='sitL p
. Mith'the,. 6ddition of- the tandem spaces, and with valet
parking .on- .t.hel'.:'s'u'r-face leve'l..which would. take advantage of open plaza
and-.diive aisle ,spaces, a total of. 627 on-site spaces are available.
'Staff Repp -16- (7255.d)
Y
fOf these; z
e
4 4 ,-a_fe single loa ddd `�s61f' p"an i;ngn
spaces,
t�h`e sutfa-ce: and;
n
J2,
the structure, would require va ze''t -arid/6 i -.at t e e
cars in and out -of tandem position- as necessary. - order vto 'meet he
n-o s 1 te p a rk-1 ng demand the. applica equ
' applicant would`;� e r'
additional'--valet' 'sp ces' .1* .parking:,-i' n' ai"61eways ---,s-'t-r'udtu-'re--
more spaces n. ,
Approximately,imately 65 e's-..could. be 'obt:,di-n--ie'.d`-_-_`,i- ,,Mannex., .f-or. a
total of 69A spaces.
The following chart shows. the number of spaces �that--,icari e' ",obta-ined..:on
each level-, and In 'total,-,' given- dif f erent. parkinci.;...'s lo ua n
4.
LEVEL
Parking Condition Plaza Beach Lower .-.TOTAL
1. Self Parking 66 176 . 195 437
(single loaded,
no tandem)
2 . Tandem in designated 66 239 1263 568
spaces, self parking (113 self, '(131 self,
in designated spaces . 126 valet) . 1.32 valet)
No valet *on Plaza . level .
3 .- Tandem:'in designated 125 . 239 263 627
space, self parking in (113 self, 131 self,.
designated spaces, . 126 valet) 132 valet)
with valet at plaza.-
4 . Full valet-no�-:-. 125. 270 299 694
self parking.
Parking Summarv:�-
The project as proposed would require that the entire parking
structure and surface level be valet. operated to'%obtain the required
number of sp'aces .for . peak use. This includes use of . tandem spaces, -as
well as parking in aisleways and open plaza areas. If the 239 beach
replacement parking we' re .to be maintained as self parking, with the
tandem spaces -used for. restaurants, .- as in c.onditions '2 ,and 3 'above, a
total- of. either 568 or 627 spaces' could -be , obtained j. .depending on
whether, the surface level were. fully -utilized, for :va.let parking. This
is not .sufficient to - park the restaurant. and beach demand at peak
hours .
Project Summary:
As indicated in the 'above. analysis, the proposed project is comprised
of visitor-serving." commercial uses and public parking and access uses
which conform with - and implement the Local Coastal Program and the
Downtown ;Specif ic-Tl,an. With minor exceptions,�'.,thd-_ptoposa 1 also
qbmplies.;with..the,:.Dow-ntown-:Des'ign -Guideline..s , and,,:th,e"1-.Zon' ing Ordinance
Deyelopmentl,:Standards.- As :noted 'in the analysig.,":staff, is ..recommending
Staff Report'; .16,k/9.6 17 (7255d)
77
"T"T—, f. . P , F_—
K
�a 1:t7l
-fv
-i,
57
Ape- e
gn. changes Incorporati'r _,the,vu
"Planning d:'.P l'a'an.Review Those :changes....Commission 1
-!relate
7 i7;"--I
1 ihg-.heights�"
til k.a I:S tf d rchite ''C " f"
a
-." -
..While '
e uses .and design are �g era-lly,.L-aq�dept�6bl'e s t a f is
primarily
rimarily co n' ce.rned* with the ability 'of' th6 project to :provide;.parking
for beach:.goers' as . well 'as restaurant goers . ; s proposed; -there' will.
- ,
c
be peak use hours `during summer af tiatnobns when- th6 be;ii_ " 1i and
restaurants will simultaneously experience. maximum demand. ". During.
those hours, the only way for the project to provide 'the. necessary. 649
parkifig . spiaces is through intensive tandem and.- valet parkin-g .-_-,, :While
valet parking may be acceptable .for restau I rant. .patro'nst' - staff - does not
feel it is appropriate" to require beach goers to'�use v6lie't '-patking'.
In order to retain adequate self-parking areas for beach users during
peak hours it will be 'necessary to slightly scale back .some ' of',.the
proposed new commercial -uses .
Project Modifications :
The square footage o'f structures proposed for the Pierside Restaurants
could be reduced. Such reduction would allow all beach parking and
project generated pa'rking to be located on-site ,` and would reduce the
. . footprint.: and/or heights of the bui-ldings, thereby creating more open
view corridors and public open space.. Reduced restaurant square
footage could also -eliminate the - need for valet -parking - on the plaza_
level, wh'i'ch. further blocks public, bpen . space.- A reduction may also
allow the parking structure layout ,to be redesigned to eliminate some
of the tandemi- valet spaces.-- and provide for more self-parking spaces .
Staff .recommends,. that;,, if thi,s -optibn is pursued', the- following - square
footages.--an.d-parking requirements -.be-, cons-idered;:
use Scrtiare Footage.- Ratio , No . of Spaces .
Maxwell '. s 12, 000 square feet 77 spaces 81
+ 400 sf at
1/100
New Restaurants -20, 000 square feet' ' 1/100 200
between two
buildings
Dwight ' S_ ' 2, 500 squ-ate feet utilize 0
beach parking '
Retail, including 6000 square feet utilize 0
, food concessions beach parking
with less than.
12 seats
.,Public Service 5350 1/200 26 . 75(27 .
Beach: Parking 239 spaces 239
.
TOTALM 45, 8510 sf 547 spaces
Staff Report,.- _'.-10/2/90 -187. (7255d)
77
7.7
_t. 14 r
777-�_:O_
i 0`11
tl,
aces
ar �as-�.desagni� with-t� T!7�755,
e,...-p
'6'n
designated d_:'310 .,spaces des'igna.ted for self ! t
.p rking ,-('total
a licbomm6date' t e Ied down 'square
a f'�5�6 8 h 'E§66
footages with no valet spaces)on the;'plaza level f ici'60t'. number
:goer; . �-T-
of - self -parking" spaces• exist" to- -serve the 239 beach .- spaces`. he"
remainder . (primarily tandem),-.-are devoted to restaurant .use;
11. 0 RECOMMENDATION:,
A. Adopt and certify- as . adequate Final, Environmen.tal- Impact Report
No. 90-2, by adopting Planning' Commission Resolution No. 1437- with
Mitigation Measures, Statement of Overriding *Considera-tions,"Iand -
Findings and Facts in S.Uppo*rt of Findings; '
B. Approve Coastal Development No. 90-18 with findings; and
C. Approve Conditional Use Permit No. 90-17 as modified by staff with
findings and conditions of approval.
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 90-18 :
1.. The proposed Pierside Restaurant development conforms with the
plans, .policies, requirements and standard's of the Huntington
Beach Coastal Element of the General Plan, because - it implements
the adopted Coastal Land Use'e Plan and Downtown Specific Plan by
preserving -existing- visitor serving opportunities and providing
additional visitor-serving commercial opportunities- which are
varied in type and price.. .- The proposal also improves - public
access to the -beach...by:-providing, handicap- access,--- 65, 000- square
-feet- of- public - plazas,z-,-and: walkways�l - and wide, stairways -to- the
beach.
2 . Coastal- Development%:-:.Permi't No. . 90-18 is consistent with the CZ
(Coastal ione) suffiki . the Downtown Specific -Plan- Dist-rict 10 and
other provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code applicable
to theproperty, because all zoning code requirements can be met,
including building height, - project parking, replacement of beach
parking, and public plazas and open space.
3 . At the time okoccu' pan.cy.,, .the proposed Pierside Restaurant
- deve'lopment 'can' be' . proVided with infrastructure in. a.. manner that
is consistent 1wLth -the. -.Hurfitington Beach Coastal Element and
Coastal Land Usb*]Plafi' of the General Plan. All services and
utilities are available to the site, and the project will not over
burden any public services or facilities .
4 . The proposed Pierside- Restaurant development conforms with the .
public access and public recreation policies _of Chapter 3 of the
California Coastal--Act,' 'because it provides for improved public
access through the.- site to the shore line, including handicap
access, al-lowi'ng-.fr public access to recreational opportunities on
the - City Beach.' .
Staff Report 1.0/2/90 . (7255d)
;Y
V""I
piFy, , ..:, .
N
4'.1"'.
4
C L-,�'JUSE�`PERM 0 JZ!IND1-NGS:.--F 'e;' Q�;'af-R,9 0 7RV--,NDI-T-10 VT�4--N
d'- te� tA�iir.6n 1. have ci a. ... .. ...
- A The
propqse s :f 3.
J`i
up.oft the'-general health,wb.lf are, sa etyi--:;-.ana:-�qonvenience of .-,,:i ""..-,..
"I "pe rs on s.; .re sid i rig(-.o r -king in typ -, nd-.a
quality ,of .-proposedj, 6n- dwi'll dohtrd b to :a rf
increase in-.the :value of, the property-' and'Amprovemen S LJ_
neighborhood.
2 . The. .proposed. Pi.ekside-. Restaurant -Developme'nt:.,is -.des-igned to 'be' in-':-1
conformance. with -the,-,City,' s adopted General, iiiciuding:-the
State Certified Coastal Element) , the Dowi ft- tbwh.:Spec i an,--and
the ..Downtown Des.ign ,Guidelines, becaus6 it--' ` :1 s."t]i:e
.__.�,imp,,Pme,h
visitor-serving desigpation on the Coastal' Lind .`Usia Plah- and
General Plan Land Use Map, and provides .fo.r -pier related
commercial activities andpublic open spa ce in accordance with the
Downtown Specific Plan, District 10.
3 . The proposed location, site layout, and ;design wil-l- p 'r'6perly.-iadapt
the .proposed structure's to streets, driveways, and other adjacent
structures to streets, driveways, and other adjacent structures
and uses in a harmonious manner,anner, because a -fobtpring--- for the pier
plaza, view corridors- and ,public plazas ',wi-11 be provided. ' -In
addition, the pedestrian and vehicular circulation. has been
designed to avoid conflicts, and to utilize a signalized
intersection.
5 . The .proposed:-combination and. relationship of uses to one another
on.-. the site :are properly integrated., -:a:4 The-%proppsed .:proj ect Will
provide. a-..greater. number., and- variety .of - people' an opportunity to
enjoy the, City beach--.and ;.pier area- -and-re1ated: ocean*. activities .
6 . The'_proposed' rind--parking.-:f.or -the.. Pierside Restaurants
will not adverse1y 'impacttraffic and parking in the vicinity,
because a traffic . study.. by LSA, Inc. has shown that the
surrounding street' system 'can adequately accommodate the demand
generated; and. adequate parking management plan will be -required
to assure that all.'u96is ,-.of- the parking structure are accommodated.
CONDITIONS-- OF' APPROVAL,;
1. The _site. plan, -.floor plan§'.: and elevations .-received and. dated
-September 27, 199.0'- shall be the conceptuallylapproved layout with
the following modifications :
a. Windows shall be shaded and/or recessed to the extent
feasible to reduce.,glare.
'Staff Repor. 16,Z2Z (7.255d)90.--'_X
.7 J
t F .a..:y. � - R 6� -r rt .... a�r-n��--t •tea y �- t -�. _ .ray _ram' t- ' T.°"f"' {' +3�",XTi�'- 1 � � { �'�� sari.n t'y
IN
b °Roo`fF`heights^ sha-11 be- lowere'd=sto �compl"y wiFtrh `�mazimumsstarted '
in °the ,Downtown ,'Sped is Plan;; ire 25 feet Ito fthe �h�i'ghestY�
point .of the coping of.ra .flat'. roof? or ',to tthe deck t�ne;'o'f ati
mansard' roof or "the average height of the; highest :gabrle of
pitched':'
or hipped`•roof: , Ari additional< teri (1.0) feet will be
allowed only..for...-roof .line treatment, Bch mneys:,t solar energy
equipment' and mechanical equipment An' additional 14'.;feet;'
may:.be allowed for- elevator .equipment',where necessary.:.'.:The
height'.is , to be measured from the.- Might 'of the pier _ deck:
C. Bui�lding'.square.- footages shall be modified.,to acc.omodate `.
additional . public plaza areas:
d. The plaza area between building A .and B shall be .increased- to
125 feet in width
e. The plaza area between building B and C shall be reduced• to -
75 feet in width. .
f . The plaza elevation should increase the amount. of landscaping.
g. Building .0 shall be reconfigured .if necessary so that a
direct line .of sight is available from the windows of the
lifeguard headquarters to the point at which the water meets
the sand at the pier. This is. required for marine safety
purposes .
h. Any -modifications as required- by -Design Review Board and
Planning Commission pursuant to condition 2h.
i . The. 'project sha-11`= incorporate public: restrooms in the
following manner ' Minimum of 6 .ladies stalls. 2 Mens '
st.al�ls:22-ur:inals Handicap access-- shall -be- provided.'.
2 . Prior ' to submittal for building permits, the applicant/owner
shall complete the following:
a. Depict. al_l .utility apparatus, such as but not limited to
backflow•.devices and Edison transformers, on the site plan
and on the landscape 'plan. . They shall be properly screened
by -landscaping or .other method as approved by the Community
Development Director:`-
b. Floor' plans. -shall depict natural gas stubbed in at the
locations of cooking facilities, water heaters, and central
heating units; and low-volume heads shall be used on all
spigots and water faucets.
c.- If `,foi'1=type...,insulation is to be used, a fire retardant type
shall.. be . installed as approved by. the 'Building Department and . .
Vindicated on„ the floor plans.
Staff Repor 10%2/90 21 (7255d)
2 `£
-'F—:. ..ram-.'-.� •-: FT7 _ ..-•- — -.
'< a-- r. r n,- r - � t -� ��' '' '4' rk:i6.P' � a_-_x�-,� M1+• t.+i_�'�.�5 t�,/. .6.....z, :_�..
f�
- .
r r ,4 t x4 �� x r , x rv3r�tTf�k
i h .;,� t - aG�+>--� k,,.k, �.1. ,�.r -. .�Er su _- .r _ ,yr
d All xooftop mechanica.-, equipment shalh bey screened -from, any r
view Said screening sh'all be architectur;eiy ;compatible with -
the biiildirig in terms of �:materia'l-s and: colors .r' If .screening
is not designed. specif.i'cally:"into=1ithe building`; a rooftop
mechanical. equipment :plan must be submitted showing screening
and must be approved by the Director of .Community.ir'Development.;
e. Outdoor lighting shall utilize energy savings - lamps ,A11`
outside lighting shall be directed . to. prevent ;"spillage" onto
the beach and Pacific Coast Highway, .and shall' be noted on'
the site plan and elevations.
f: A detailed soils analysis shall be prepared, by_ a . regi:ste;red.
Soils Engineer. This analysis shall include - on=site :so _1
sampling and laboratory testing of materials ,..to'. provide`:=..-
detailed recommendations regarding grading, chemical ind. fill
properties, foundations, retaining walls, streets-, -and
utilities.
g. The Design -Review Board and the Planning *Commission. shall
review and approve the following:
a) The final building form, elevations, colors, and .
materials for each building . .
b) The conceptual public plaza -lighting, street furniture
and landscape plan for the- development, in- compliance
with the Downtown Design Guidelines .
c) Elevations shall depict -colors- and building materials:
as approved=.by..`the _Design Review Board.
h. An engineering -geologist- shall be engaged to -submit a report
indicating°-;the. ground:.surface accel-eration :from .earth :-..
movement for the subject property. All structures within
this development shall be constructed in compliance-with the
g-factors as indicated by the geologist ' s report.
Calculations for footings and structural members to
withstand anticipated g-factors . shall be submitted to the.
City for review prior to' the issuance of ,building . permits .
i . The - site plan (or reference page) -- shall - include all
conditions of approval imposed 'on the project printed
verbatim.
3 . Prior to issuance of building permits, . the applicant/owner. shall
complete the following:
a. Submit copy of the revised site plan, floor plans and
elevations pursuant to condition no.- 1 and 2h for review and
approval and inclusion in the entitlement file.
Staff Report 10/2/90 -22- . (7,.255d)
- .
y iy r F r i k 1 f {.` d _`,'y �,- ..
M r _ - r i t Fi r -- `�.�1'"& .2 YF•d.t{ Y+ s;, 1 Y s. i- C'L a +
-r-gym-• -� i a i..l- 7. )-�j _:+.- 4< Y°' f A c - y- � .x.• a
¢ '1 - r ..._} — •+ P i ' - t t'r-r rix.-PFt, }rr'`- ''N3�
--y 1 i-- 1 - � y - -3-+ -; '' -c t" Kr.s,f C-M � '..-M •- kn ; -i-
b A final' Landscape C6ns3truct1on ASet „must be, submittedY to tYie`r '
7
"Die partmentstof Community Development :and,Publ c4Works and
F]
-must :b'e' approved " The.'Landscape Construct-i.on Set:;shall
include`' a landscape -plan prepared and signed' by ,a-S
Licensed;`Landscape Architect and 'which-"•includes. a-ll
pro.pos:ed%existing:plant materials :(location,. type:,
quantity.) ; an . irrigation-, plan, a 'grading 'pIan:, ari:'approved
:.
-site, plan, and a copy of the entitlement conditions-=of
approval .- The _landscape plans shall be in conformance' with
Section 9608 and the- Downtown Specific .Plan: of. .the
,
Huntington- .Beach Ordinance Code. _ The set must:.,be., approved
by both depattments prior -to issuance of building permits.
The existing mature palm trees' on-site shall be sto.red.;-and
returned to the site, and incorporated into the proje.ct '.s
landscape plan.
C. 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 .
d. Hydrology and hydraulic studies shall be submitted for
Public Works approval . Drainage facilities and flow
direction shall - be approved.
e. All applicable-. Public Works fees shall be paid.
f . An- interim,.parkirig: and/or_- building materials storage- plan
shall-- be- .submitted :to the. Department of Community
Dev.elopment� to,°:.assure .adequate :parking is available for
'emplo.yees; customers, contractors, etc. , during thee_ =
project '-s construction phase.
h. The developer shall submit a parking management and control
plan.. for review and approval by the Departments of Community
Development and Public Works, prior to issuance of building
Permits. . This plan should address hours.-and operation.-of
valet.-..seivice," plans . for attended parking, amount and time
of .ava labili"tyy..of self-parking facili.tiesi" and .the joint
use o_f.parking , A minimum of 239 beach parking spaces shall
-be. ava:ilable for self parking at all times at r.ates 'set by
the City Council . The Plan shall delineate these spaces,
and. de'scribe the accessibility of .the spaces during valet
parking hours . All required parking shall be provided
on-site:
4 . A Planned .Sign Program for the development shall be reviewed and
approved by.- the design Review Board and Planning Commission prior
to the first. sign request:
Staff. Report ` 1.0/2%90 -23. (7.255d)
x x N
_ -LU
;.; -. '�-i^ K? ,E, /3, : 3 CS tfi..,+(, h. rYF .n a-�1t L - M 7 - --a �. �` 4 `• +•.re. R� � i -- i
--
:• e ?--. - ..,�,•r' rt.4. bY. t'',`-1
yv"s rF �-e =S rrfiln t yr _F! 3� as
r x .mac -r fP , y
n g; $
d :_ y," a, r r i" Yr j - -., _ .r�!
a
z 5 The Publics Worksz Department requirements a;re a`s follows ' y ;{ "f
a Parking on :Pacific ,Coast, Highway shall be eliminated'' s `t
{,
fronting -the project; and. shall .be replaced =on the prof:
site or.: in ,the`north of- :pier,, parking .structure � x ?
z }
b Remove ahe water .system'_on site :and construct a 12 inch
water main `•in: Pacific Coast' Highway; to Lake .(First) °;Street
and Beach parking lot .watei 'mains. a
c. AA1.1 restaurants .sh al-1 have grea1se'interce-ptorsi
d. Construct Pacific. Coast Highway improvements; .including,
right. turn` lanes, bus turnouts_; and street improvements_ , per
City, Caltrans, and OCTD requirements -.
e No landscaping shall• be permitted within .the .Pacific Coast
Highway. right-of=way_•unless approved by .the" Department of . .
Public Works and Caltrans.
f . Design and location of parking control devices shall ' be
subject to .final review by the Director of Public works and
Director of Community Development:
g. The applicant shall be responsible for _paying 'Traffic Impact
Fees adopt-ed by- the. City Council prior to final building
permit approval.
h.- The, .applicant-. shall',be-, responsible for payment_ of Water- .
Master -P1"an -Fees adopted by the City"Counci-1 prior to final
.bui-lding-:permit-•,approval. _
6. Fire Department= °Requirements are_'-as--follows :
a: An automatic fire. sprinkler system shall be approved and
installed pursuant to Fire Department regulations :
b. Fire access,,=lanes shall- be designated,, posted, and
maintained- If fire lane violations occu r. and the services
of .,the Fire Department are:-required, -the applicant will be
liable, for:- •expenses:�Jncurred
C. Two fire hydrants shall be' installed prior to combustible
construction.
d. The applicant shall meet all applicable local, State- and
Federal -Fire -Codes, Ordinances, and standards .
e. A Class III'-wet standpipe system (combination) will be
installed to comply with Huntington .Beach Fire Department
and Uniform`Building :code -standards ., -..
Staff d) .
Report 10/2/90 24 (7255
ttx vv �I
z4 yZ .4t
M_
-.. iCtI.
Qx
Wj
Y-
'- -fire
sT z
-em -1"bL Ai ns -
gd�.,t& 16 n
"Al
24
r 1 - i ,
HUMIng "Beach re Depar ' 5E114,."do e
diandArds The Sys provid61' fianu611 ls 4m hour..
-e-:tf -
supervision; ;-audible .alarms, .4fid, Va' t -1-ow ii.,i salvetamper
and trouble detection. .
g*. , Fire ektinguishe�i6 will, be installed' andI:= o ccted: i n .,ar6
conplywi-th the .Huhtington Beach F1re code; .Stan aras
h-. Elevators .,
; will. be sized to accommodate can ambul'Anc6 gurhey .,.
-.;-.6Wit
.(m2*:nimum'-' 1-fo-6- ot -- '8 ..3'.nches wide °3 inches ;deep
,.-by. ,4 � foot-.
minimum 42. -inch ppeni.ng) .
i . Address numbers will. be installed to comply with the ; � .
Huntington Beach Fire Code Standards .
j . A Fite Protection Plan cohtaining .requiremen,t's of ..Fire.
Department Speqif-ication 'No ' 426 shall be submitted to the . .
Fire Department for approval .
k. Full Access to the structures for emergency vehicles shall
be maintained from the beach access road and from the -
parking lot adjacent to Pacific Coast Highway. -
1 . The .access ways .designated as . fire.. lanes over the
subterranean parking"area are 'to be- reinforced to sustain
the -weight. of fire apparatus .
M. . . --gjhould,.any-, abandotied:-%oil":-wells or:.-,.tanks - be.-.encountered,'.-.th_.'-' ...',
Fire.:Department -"shall- be-notifIed:-'and current standards met,
ass irequired_-:by-.'Atticl6' 15.: of:. the, Huntington Beach Ordinance...
:de- 4-A ,-
-- abandonment.- of existing--wells.-.must be -to current-
ny..
-..:stand a-rd s-.a s%--;.-we-II:,..,.
7 . : The development shall comply with all - applicable provisions of
the Ordinance Code, Building. Division, And Fire Department.
:8'.:- All building spoils" such as unusable lumber, wire, pipe, and
othersurplUs or unusable material, shall be disposed of at an ---, ., ,
off-si'te ,facility! equipped to handle them.
9,-: .%Installation o-f requirecT-iandscapirig and irrigation systems shall
be.. completed to f inA1. inspection.
10 .- Duiing.. construction, -'the applicant -shall :
a . Use water--trucks or sprinkler systems in all areas where
vehicfes travel to keep damp enough to prevent dust raised
Vheh:1'eaving-the site; .
:Wet ..d6wn" areas in the late morning• 6nd after work is
Fpmpleted -f or the ..day;
AC
Staff
Report: 10/2/90 2 5 (7255d)
Of M
W-
Oft
M
fi
-P
N y,rr
7 Z,r
.Usev_Iow §uSfutj-fU61 ( ';!,x
......................... .
Y con- t ruct3
-
, ,
:j
.............
q Ulpmen
............
d Attempt to "ph .!and-,�,sc u construction h.",aJdtifi t 169,�ase:
avoid. ifiigh':.ozone_ f irst stage smog 6
dxt
e Discontinue construction :duringsecon s t a�je-'-_smdd-416 r
11. Construction shall• be,- 1 imi ted,.to Monday Saturday 7: 0 O' AM."'to
-:be pro ed ,-Sun ays an eral.
8 : OD PM.. Construbfion � shall hibit 6 d. Fed
holidays.
12 '. Prior to issuance 'of- demolition permits- f o r- M6.iwel 1 s,- the..
history and architecture 'of: the building- shall be '_reco'rded '..to -the
standards of the Historic American Buildin4s_SuiVey ThIs
includes the preparation of- a- detaile'd' historidal." riarrative' , and
complete graphic doc.ument&ti o n'- 6 f 'the U:ildincj ,ethiough: lar9P`_
format .photography,. Historic photographs .and, bu" i-lding-, plan§ ' are
also reproduced for -the NABS record, which." ultimately is cutated
in the Library -of Congressi "Since the'sighificaride of the"-
structure is historical rather than archite.ctural,, oral- history
in addition to archival records are required. . The completion of
: .the NABS documentation'-shall;, be-.verified by the Director- of
Community Developffient- prior 'to issuance of -demolition permits .
13 . The plans:..for 'the, project:.--shall_- incorporate -a means of .
memorializing --the :ex-igting .Maxwell-' s "s'tructure: :::Such measures
could i-nc'lude.:.pI a*cement-.._Pf-'.-_;a'.,commemo rat ive plaque on -or -:near- the_:
he.-
site, development of, or 0ff.'s'ite (e.g.;. at a.`:
local .his.to.ric,ei;l-,:..tiiseiiifi-; ,-,publ:i-c.- 1ibtary-..;ox-: CityrBa1l) - 'a' nd/o.-r,..!
development,., of a'--.-.pub ld 64t'l.&n.---Ifiteip ket-i ng--the,"T610,-.,,of -the'.
Pavi1ion'An .thee_:hi A,6_ty ---.of:'thee Gity, prepared' by .aquali,kded.:
historian.-, -s)-_shall'- be-':reviewed
and:
approved, by the 'Dir_6ct:or-I-of;-,FCo mmuhity Development-%prior to
issuance- of`.building ;.permits.
.14 . Prior to. initiation"'of
a construction,. police and fire departments -
shall be notified. iid`.'the departments - shall be -kept informed:
about duration and, extent:___o_f construction th'r6ugh6ut the process'.
15 ., The app.lica.nt,.,shall provide e I'a.:,plan to-""be approved by the Public , .
Works -Departmerit: W, hlch :d6pitts.- alterri'ate ' routes. for traffic. , .
during thd' n.constructio -:p iia se;. .if necessary Adequate - signage
sh6ll be providi§'d'..t'o ,-.warn.motor .vehicles" bicyclists and .
pedestrians ofcbnstructlion : .The beach access road shall remain ,
open during' constructionl .or .6 ,s6fe -alternate route shall be
.. approved by the Iiepartment's . of:. Public .-Works, Community Services
and Community
6 .-'-...-.Signs shall be.z.pos't'ed' within -,the projec.t i nf o.rmi ng patrons that
public be;the :public beach closes midnight;
'A
is 4
J
4,
(7255d).:
Staff -�'-,10/2`//`90' 6.�
21,
�r 7 r L 7. `'� 'L"_. . - �j� t } t i rrr �a -Y, , `rA �++•��i ,t� a�
, 1 - _;+ysi
• �r ^t a f - 1 ' s - fn. t k J,F 4{.� w��'�^I
17 Durng� construct-ion of the 'pro�ect,ti the ,develo:per, ins con7Aunctrr,�on"t'e "
with the City, shall ,provide ;pa_rki ng :apaees wrthin;- area'soriab{le�
distance, to accommoda'te '.-beach access
18 . Prior to occupancy. of any building, the developer ' Agency,
: the City sha-11 execute: a..landscape maintenance agreement with
provisions :dete.rmined by. the'-City f or--ma inten'ance,_of landscaping '
along ;the .street.`frontages
19 . The beach ;access- roadway. south of :ahe .pier must be .a minimum 24
feet ' must loop`.with the beach `access road. on :the north side
of 'the pier This roadway =must• also•.-be .a'.minimum"24 feet The
roadway _must be designed to 'accommodate "beach."sergace. pehicles;
bicycles and .pedestrian 'access, subject'ao City review and -
approval. The access roadshall' be- completed;-prior .`to;=:issuance,: f . ..-
any Certificate of Occupancy of the project
20 . The.-developer shall pr.ov_ide the City with a -deta:iled -,description
of the- project ' s proposed security systems -for review..�:and .
-approval by all- affected departments prior to: issuance of any._
Certificate of Occupancy for the project . .
.. 21. Handicap• access :to .all._levels of the project shall 'be provided
from all elevator locations .
22 . if .it i.s .determined. by-the Department .of. Public� Works. that-,. -
dewatering . wi-11 -be,-required, the applicant sha11 ' provide'.- the
Department ..of::=Community.:Development.-,with-:an -.assessment of :imp:acts::.
on -.groundwater.-;and:underground-:storage=:-tanks:•in--.the_:viciniay
This- assessment< along. with ::any-.necessary mi:tigation`;.measures::
sha.111, be, reviewed and•:=-approved-prior= t-o_ issuance :,of:-�dewatering
permits'.":
23 . Any' asbestos -identified' prior "to or during removal of" the
existing structures shall be removed in accordance with City and
State .regulations
24 . . The 'pr.oject 'owner/applicant. shall provide .for additional :trash
cans: along the beach .and bike path along the project frontage.
The 'type and.,locationi shall be approved by. 'the Department_ of
Communit
. y Services -_ _-
..25 . " The- lower. level 'of the parking structure shall be closed .when
high' tides:..coincide with severe storm conditions .
26 . An encroachment permit from Caltrans shall be required should the,-;_
, . .project infringe .on Pacific Coast Highway.
27 ycle racks shall be -,provided within the project area
28 :Af:ter building .compaction, ;the City_ shall cause to be erected a' .
historical monument :memorializing the location.-.of the Pacific: ,
Electric Line :_terminus
Staff Report 10/2/90 ="27 r (7255d)
F.
....---;,. .
a
=x f` J* -
29 _:Prior to Occupancy of each restaurant; t'he Planns. g Commiss"D6n
shall, re:view.-.review. and 'approve _a Restau 5rant t-0per.ati"on Prl'an'; rTh"e`P1ariY
.s.h'a11 iricliide, at 'miriimum• M' -
a. The final architectural form, colors materials, and,3
. .::landscaping ,as _recommended by:.the .:D•esign.-Rev"iew Board; }
.b. The proposed hours of operation-:`
c. Floor plansj_jncluding floor area devoted to.., restaurant
versus .bar/lounge.
d. Proposed types and hours of entertainment, and. location_ of
entertainment.
e. Plans for outdoor service.
f . Operational plans which .discourage patrons from :entering the
beach after its 12: 00 midnight closure: ."
30 . The "Public service" square footage . (5350 square feet,) on the
beach access level shall be reserved exclusively for such public
use. . No retail - sales or food - service= business shall be 'permitted
in the space.
31. The designated .ret-ail -space; along the- beach -access road:. shall be
exclusively.-for=-b-each=related retail. . .Service for the
beach-going':pub°1-ic:-sha1-l .be •the pr-imar-y> focus,.° -
32 . A safe pedestrd;an:=-walkkway; shall:. be;°-provided--f rom the, parki-ng
structure-- to th`e-_Tirfegu'ard :-headquarters-.
33 . No. compact'; park-irig,, spaces,=sha-11• be• .a-l-lowed in_ the=.-7parking.=.
structure. If necessary, the size. of the retail spaces shall be
reduced to accommodate both full size parking spaces and -adequate
pedestrian/service walkways. ,
34 . A total of .eight- (8) .handicap parking spaces .shall be -provided .on -
the .surface level, in accordance with: State law.
35 . Construction shaT1 complx::with the F-loodplairi Standards 'for --FP3
wi
Zones, as outl.ined 'in.Article 94�0-Flood_ plain Suffix, Huntington
Beach- Ordinance code.
36.. This conditional- use permit shall not become effective for any
purpose until an '-'Acceptance of Conditions" form has been
properly -executed by the'. applicant and an authorized
representative of. .the owner. of the property, recorded with County ,
d ed to..theP -Division; andRecore
until ...the ten .day .appeal :period -has elapsed.
r
;Staff Report , 10/2/90 - -28 (7255d) ,p
-r r,r� .tx
s (.,,. r r { x.l. `+ F "•-
a i t t ` 5- �,a..ft_I r `:t• n } 2' -- t Sin-: u"" .`' r -''-.i
s G- tkr �� y._� t' i•.'�,' a f {y.�h '!v.'t- '�' ?}.:vf '
-A Tl
Yam-
, T.
t2g J tifKt 9 - >» -z-
ys w t 'fi y td v f E s i
-- �. 3 f4_ r+' ? , r. y+ L-s' l.s �
37 Thisyr,gonditional-urse� permit sha�l�l r,become `nul�l� rand T oi 4nle55� r
ezercisea within ones-: (1)a year of, 'the date of fnal� app{ oval�,yLor;y
'suc,h bxtensiv on:'-of tz:me as_._ may be-granted bye the
Commission pursuant to ' at wrtitten ;request` submitted 3to the
Ptlannima Department ta, min'imum, 30 .days ,prio:r to_ the exp ration,
12,.-0 ALTERNATIVE 'ACTION
The Planning ,Commission May _
1, Adopt .and. certify as :adequate Environmental ImpactjReport No
90=2- by adopting Planning Commission. Reso -ution No: 14.37,
2 . Approve Coastal Development, Permit No:. ',90-18 with findi''ngs_;, and
3 ., Approve Conditional 'Use Permit.•No: 90 , 17--- -as proposed by the ,
applicant with findings_-and conditions of approval. t
ATTACHMENTS: " <
11. Area map
2. Site plans, _ elevations; and .floor - plans dated- September =27, 1990 `w
3 . Comments and Response to comments `
4 . Env..i•ronmenta:l-.Impact=:-Report No. 90-2 .(unde"r-- separate-•=co.ver":) r
5 . Planning Commission:.Resolution No.- 1437
a. Mitigation='Measures
b F.indings ..and=.Facts- -
c. St-at.ement<: of ' Overridung Cons:ider:at`-ions':
HS:LP:kj
- _ - - - - 3
_e-
4.
s
-
' zStaff Report
F
- - - y !NY
..�.�_.��.. -... ... -.'-�—....-.. «..n... ._..�:'R!'+rTs'.^'?.. ...^'^T^-^—^ ^^•� _?f_ ......:?IT+`.�':."`:v._5:.__ ._ i'�^va•3:n^C`"'i_'t:^.:5' -_ ...1. a. - ( �:N
H u W
W. W
Of LL,Q cc 44
- Z N W
f
i t
N
PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY
• LAtttCAll■G LANDSCAPING LAND/GAPING
ue•.•r 1
77
Y GANf GO ■ Ofall TO t[LO. V. -T
[ Y 1 G
LAZ, nl _ ■Ca
Y,
G7 1
[alT
YI
a. INS
"ANN INS
aT.nor
BUILDINGUILONG B` A {Pu:.' - I _ -i'...I' �iBUILDING C
PIER
' I■o.uNG lit
SYMBOL LEGEND PARKING TABULATION. PL f Z.4 L E YE L
rIMmIC P AMSSNUX PEDESTRIAN ••tiliLl tava: �
GALS.
• - I EACH Lava; ..
PaDesTIGAN rAaaC'WAALR•w
• LONER LEV13--
E71 STANDAR0 PAMNC STALL
NORM
FELDERMAN
PIERSIDE REST,4URJNT .. DEVELOPMENT m
CIL CARNEY
AtCUI•LI.IK
Pi.
Qza&m—�, iTLI,
PCH, East Elevation
66
West Beach Elevation
010 to of is* too
• fEEDERMAN
PIERSIDE REST,4UR ,4NT DEVELOPMENT rd
GR.cARNEY
• •rtHN•t•1•e.