Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBolsa Chica Annexation Study and Negotiation Issues - Hearth W. 44OW4k- P�glani✓G Council/Agency Meeting Held: ►b 0 rp�S ;Co ntiihued to::ed [I Conditionally Approved ❑ Denied � _,Ep City 's Si nature Council Meeting Date: June 28, 1999 Department ID Number: AD99-2 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION SUBMITTED TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS SUBMITTED BY: RAY SILVER, City Administrator"P PREPARED BY: MELANIE S. FALLON Assistant City Admini trato�r'-�'& 'y HOWARD ZELEFSKY, Planning Director SUBJECT: ACCEPT AND FILE STAFF RESPONSES TO THE 117 BOLSA CHICA ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION IN PRE-ANNEXATION NEGOTIATIONS WITH HEARTHSIDE HOMES, AND DIRECT STAFF WITH RESPECT TO CONTINUED NEGOTIATIONS Statement of Issue,Funding Source,Recommended Action,Alternative Actlon(s),Analysis,Environmental Status,Attachments) Statement of Issue• Staff has completed its responses to the 117 Bolsa Chica Issues submitted by the City Council for consideration in ,pre-annexation negotiations with Hearthside Homes. In addition to receiving and filing those responses, staff requests that the City Council provide further direction with respect to continued, pre-annexation negotiations with Hearthside Homes. Funding_Source: Not applicable. Recommended Action: Motion to: 1. Accept and filAe7sponses to the 117 Bolsa Chica Issues for consideration in pre- anrl xatio negotiatigjl wit Heal�slt�eFjpmes ex� fare ose� rrcr� �Y�,, , 2. rec staff to continue negotiation o apre-annexation agreement in accordance with the conceptual terms summarized in this RCA �w-� .��,< '``�' �y � c �:- Q�id eo/are�cn3 ex�r�ss�d b�, >�.iic. �'.14}, Lp�grL EhAl ri,ee o,4 Qv REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: June 28, 1999 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: AD99-2 3. Direct staff to prepare an updated analysis of the costs/benefits to City from annexation based on entering a pre-annexation agreement 4. Direct staff to agendize, for City Council consideration, a pre-annexation agreement and an updated analysis of the costs/benefits of annexation for a speeial meeting to be held imly lt. d e 7`v Ae deZernwneW 6� the Jfi�I and 1-he Iro�e�ct 'ow ntR. �� ro✓ed. 7. D as Ynoc%r-led Alternative Action(s)`� The City Council may make the following alternative motion(s): 1. Accept and file only specifically designated responses to the 117 Bolsa Chica Issues and request4uttMerinformation and responses to remaining Issues 2. Continue this matter to a date certain and direct staff accordingly Analysis: A. BACKGROUND The unincorporated island area of Bolsa Chica is located within the adopted sphere of influence for the City of Huntington Beach. The Orange County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) is required by State law to adopt a sphere of influence for every city and agency in the County. According to LAFCO's written policy, "Territory placed within a city's sphere indicates that the city is the most logical provider of urban services for development." Moreover, LAFCO's written policies clearly require that special efforts be directed toward annexing County islands (unincorporated areas surrounded by a city) into adjacent municipalities. Once an area has been annexed into a city, the city is duty-bound to provide the area with municipal services (water, sewer, emergency and community services). As a practical matter, however, the timing of when a territory is annexed into a city (before or after development has occurred) can have a significant effect on the availability of revenue allocated to the city to provide those services. On January 20, 1998, the City Council authorized staff to prepare a detailed study concerning the cost/benefit of annexation of the Bolsa Chica to the City and to report to the City Council Subcommittee on the Bolsa Chica. The City retained the services of several annexation consultants and a draft fiscal study was released to the City Council Subcommittee in June 1998. Public workshops were held on July 29, 1998, September 24, 1998, and November 30, 1998. On January 7, 1999, the City Council Subcommittee took two important actions. The Subcommittee approved the 56-page annexation report that was reviewed and revised over the course of the three public workshops. The subcommittee also recommended that 62899rca 3 -2- 06/24/99 4:49 PM REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: June 28, 1999 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: AD99-2 the full City Council direct the City Administrator to propose a strategy for annexing the Bolsa Chica and develop parameters for negotiating a pre-annexation agreement. The study indicated that it would provide the most financial benefit to the City if annexation occurred prior to development. On February 22, 1999, the City Council directed the City Administrator to consult with the City Council to establish those parameters that should be addressed in any negotiation of a pre-annexation agreement for the Bolsa Chica. On March 29, 1999, the City Council instructed staff to draft a pre-annexation agreement with Hearthside Homes or report on the status of the negotiations of a pre-annexation agreement with Hearthside Homes. The City Council identified 117 issues and requested staff to include responses to those issues in any report on the status of negotiations with Hearthside Homes. This Request for Council Action provides staffs responses to the 117 issues, as well as an update on the status of negotiations with Hearthside Homes. Since the City began its study of annexation in 1998, two significant developments have occurred in relation to the Bolsa Chica that have had an effect on the proposed development of the Mesa and, consequently, on staffs pre-annexation negotiations with Hearthside Homes. These developments are discussed below. Appellate Court Decision In April 1999, the Court of Appeal rendered its decision on the appeal of the trial court's decisions pertaining to the Bolsa Chica Local Coastal Program (LCP). In summary, the Court of Appeal determined that the existing raptor habitat (grove of eucalyptus trees) on the Mesa was an Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area that cannot be relocated to the Harriett Wieder Regional Park, that Warner Pond cannot be filled to widen Warner Avenue, and that residential development in the lowland wetlands is not permitted. The Court of Appeal decision will require the LCP to return to the Coastal Commission for their review and approval. The LCP is scheduled to return to the Coastal Commission in the fall of 1999. Public Utilities Commission Proceedings In November 1997, the Southern California Water Company applied to the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) to provide water and wastewater service to the Bolsa Chica planned community. The City protested these applications. City representatives have appeared on behalf of the City during the PUC process. The process includes an evidentiary hearing before an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) followed by a full hearing before the Commission itself. At the latest pre-hearing conference, held on April 22, 1999, the ALJ revised the previous schedule of hearing dates and written testimony deadlines. The new schedule requires that all involved parties submit written 62899rca 3 -3- 06/24/99 4:49 PM REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: June 28, 1999 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: AD99-2 testimony on August 4, 1999 for the evidentiary hearing on August 23, 1999. A decision from the Commission is not expected until April 2000. B. SUMMARY OF STAFF RESPONSES TO THE CITY COUNCIL'S 117 ISSUES This section provides a brief summary highlighting staffs responses in seven important categories derived from the 117 issues - land sale issues, development issues, environmental issues, financial issues, parks issues, water issues and coastal issues. The City Council may refer to Attachment No. 1 for staffs complete response to each of the 117 issues. Land Sale Issues As part of the initial pre-annexation negotiations, staff insisted that Hearthside Homes become a willing seller and allow an appraisal of the Mesa property. Because Hearthside Homes anticipated that it could obtain all required approvals to begin grading of the Mesa by June 2000 (even without a pre-annexation agreement with the City), it would only agree to provide an option to purchase through June 1, 2000. It will allow an appraisal of the property for the purpose of obtaining funding sources any time after execution of a pre- annexation agreement, up until the expiration of the option period. Development Issues In general, standards within the proposed LCP are similar to projects that have been processed and approved within the City. During the past several years, the City has approved a variety of projects with a range of development standards, lot sizes, height, and design standards (Ocean Colony, Meadowlark, Centerstone, etc.). A mixture of residential product types surrounds the proposed residential development. The project proposes a maximum density of 6.5-12 du/acre that is compatible with the adjacent, existing single family and multi-family product. The pre-annexation agreement would not address specific development standards. To the contrary, the anticipated annexation of the property would occur only after all entitlements are obtained by Hearthside Homes through the Coastal Commission and the County. Environmental Issues Environmental issues specific to development of the Mesa are left to the Coastal Commission and County decision-makers. Annexation of the Bolsa Chica (including the Mesa) would require a CEQA analysis as part of the LAFCO process. Financial Issues Staff estimates that value of the infrastructure improvements and municipal service payments to the City set forth in the pre-annexation agreement terms summarized below is 62899rca_3 -4- 06/24/99 4:49 PM REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: June 28, 1999 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: AD99-2 approximately $12 to $15 million. This amount is over and above the annual revenue estimates as presented in the 1998 Annexation Study. Parks Issues The dedication of the Harriett Wieder Park site to the County and inclusion of the Mesa community park exceeds the City's park acreage requirements. The pre-annexation agreement provides for the Mesa community park to be improved with a playing field with "practice level" lighting. The Harriet Wieder Park dedication requirements are subject to express provisions contained in the County's previously negotiated Development Agreement. Water Issues The terms of the pre-annexation agreement as summarized below would include substantial water infrastructure improvements for the City at Hearthside Homes' expense, including a 9 million-gallon reservoir. In return, the City would agree to provide water service to the Mesa development project. The agreement to provide water service may require the Council to determine whether surplus water is available to serve the Mesa development project on an interim basis pending completion of the annexation. Coastal Issues Because the Courts have sent the LCP back to the Coastal Commission, all coastal issues have not yet been resolved. Staff is informed that the Coastal Commission will not review the LCP until later this year (perhaps at the Coastal Commission's November 1999 meeting). C. SUMMARY OF THE STATUS OF NEGOTIATIONS WITH HEARTHSIDE HOMES Staff began negotiating a pre-annexation agreement with Hearthside Homes in March 1999. Based on the last three months negotiations, staff believes that Hearthside Homes will agree to allow the City to annex its property in accordance with the following conceptual terms. For convenience, the terms have been summarized below in three basic categories: terms relating to process, terms relating to an option to purchase the Mesa, and terms relating to the provision of municipal services. To be acceptable to Hearthside Homes the following terms would need to be included in the pre-annexation agreement. Of course, many details remain to be worked-out. However, the following conceptual terms should give the City Council a thorough understanding of Hearthside Home's position to date. Process 1. The City approves pre-annexation agreement prior to submittal of written testimony for evidentiary hearing on Southern California Water Company's PUC applications. The date for submitting written testimony is August 4, 1999 2. Hearthside Homes will cause Southern California Water Company to abandon its PUC applications 62899rca_3 -5- 06/24/99 4:49 PM I REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: June 28, 1999 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: AD99-2 3. The City will adopt a Resolution of Intent and initiate annexation of the Bolsa Chica, including the Mesa development project 4. The Mesa property will be annexed in phases. Phase 1 (approximately 350 homes) will be annexed concurrent with the rest of the Bolsa Chica (after the County approves the tract map for Phase 1). Subsequent phases will be annexed after tract maps are approved by the County 5. The City will cooperate with Hearthside Homes in its efforts to obtain all required governmental approvals and permits for the Mesa development project (including Coastal Commission) 6. The City will accept LCP and County Development Agreement (assuming no more than 1235 units) 7. The County will approve, plan check and inspect grading plans and street improvement plans. Building permits for residential units will be obtained by Hearthside Homes through the County, but the County will contract with City to plan check construction drawings, inspect homes and issue permits. Residential building permit fees will be at City rates and paid to the City Option to Purchase 1. Hearthside Homes will grant the City an option to purchase the Mesa property, Edward's Thumb and Harriett Wieder Regional Park (at a price to be determined by Hearthside Homes) 2. The option will remain open until June 1, 2000 with no extensions 3. The option terminates if any litigation is filed challenging the pre-annexation agreement, annexation, LCP approvals or other discretionary approvals required for the Mesa development project 4. Hearthside Homes will allow an appraisal to be conducted any time during the option period. (The appraisal will not be determinative of the price to be set by Hearthside Homes, but will be used for the purpose of obtaining funding sources.) Municipal Services 1. The City shall provide all municipal services to the Mesa development project, including, but not limited, to water, sewer, police and fire services 2. Hearthside Homes will provide the City with an improvement security (bond or other acceptable instrument of credit) to pay for a 9 million-gallon water reservoir, booster station and appurtenances (the "water improvements"). Hearthside Homes will 62899rca 3 -6- 06/24/99 4:49 PM REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: June 28, 1999 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: AD99-2 complete construction of the water improvements (to City standards) before occupancy of the 351 st unit in the Mesa development project 3. Hearthside Homes will dedicate approximately 1.5 acres of land to the City for the water reservoir (at a site mutually agreeable to Hearthside Homes and the City). Hearthside Homes will design and complete park features and landscaping of this property (reservoir to be underground). Dedication of property will be restricted to park purposes. Title to the property will pass to the City upon issuance of final building permit for the Mesa development project 4. Hearthside Homes will provide the City with a sewer lift station (the "sewer improvements"). Hearthside Homes will complete construction of the sewer improvements to City standards prior to occupancy of the first unit in the Mesa development project 5. Hearthside Homes will pay to the City $2.5 million for fire service improvements. This amount shall include (a) the actual cost incurred by Hearthside Homes to install any additional sprinklers in homes (sprinklers that the City requires over and above those required under County standards) for the Mesa development project and (b) a contribution toward the cost of relocating the Heil/Springdale fire station. Every dollar not required for sprinklers will go to the relocation of the fire station. The timing of the payments will be as follows: $250,000 upon issuance of the first residential building permit with the balance due within 2-years after issuance of the first residential building permit. The City will accept 36-foot wide streets with sprinklers as required 6. Hearthside Homes will make a one-time payment of $75,000 to City for police equipment at issuance of the first residential building permit 7. Hearthside Homes will use its best efforts to assist the City in directing ATIP traffic improvement contributions ($4.5 million payment required of Hearthside Homes under the County Development Agreement) to projects that directly benefit the City 8. Hearthside Homes will use its best efforts to assist the City in directing child care impact contributions to a non-profit child care organization operating in the City ($20 per unit payments required of Hearthside Homes in the County Development Agreement) 9. Hearthside Homes will construct a recreational playing field (soccer) with "practice level" lighting on the park planned to be adjacent to the new school playing fields 10.Hearthside Homes will deed restrict approximately 3.5 acres of property for owner- occupied, affordable housing (approximately 20-30 units). Hearthside Homes and the City will mutually agree to a site and cooperate to implement this requirement 62899rea 3 -7- 06/24/99 4:49 PM REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: June 28, 1999 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: AD99-2 D. CONCLUSION LAFCO's written policies include the following directive: "City spheres that include unincorporated islands of territory should be encouraged to annex the islands in to the city." The 1998 annexation study indicated that annexation of the Bolsa Chica "island" would be good for the City with or without development. If development were to occur, however, the City would receive the most financial benefit by initiating annexation before development was completed. Up until this time, Hearthside Homes has be unwilling to agree to allow the City to annex its property. Now conceptual terms for a pre-annexation agreement have been negotiated. Staff recommends continued negotiation of a pre-annexation agreement based on the conceptual terms as set forth above. There are significant details to be negotiated once the conceptual terms are translated into a formal pre-annexation agreement. Minor issues may also be raised during the course of final negotiations. With respect to the conceptual terms above, Staff remains specifically concerned about the extent of Hearthside Homes' affordable housing commitment and about further defining the level of "cooperation" expected from the City by at the upcoming Coastal Commission hearing. Still, the overall benefits of annexation appear compelling. E. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the following motions: 1. Accept and file responses to the 117 Bolsa Chica Issues for consideration in pre- annexation negotiations with Hearthside Homes 2. Direct staff to continue negotiation of a pre-annexation agreement in accordance with the conceptual terms summarized in this RCA 3. Direct staff to prepare an updated analysis of the costs/benefits to City from annexation based on entering a pre-annexation agreement 4. Direct staff to agendize, for City Council consideration, a pre-annexation agreement and an updated analysis of the costs/benefits of annexation for a special meeting to be held on Wednesday, July 28, 1999 62899rca_3 -8- 06/24/99 4:49 PM REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: June 28, 1999 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: AD99-2 Environmental Status: Not applicable. This action is for the purpose of filing a report to the City Council and does not constitute a project under the California Environmental Quality Act. Attachment(s): NumberCity Clerk's Page • Description 1 117 Bolsa Chica Issues RCA Author: PGrant 62899rca_3 -9- 06/24/99 4:49 PM Attachment 1 On March 29, 1999, staff received 117 issues submitted by the City Council that were to be included in any pre-annexation discussions with Hearthside Homes. Over the past three months, staff has conducted research to respond to City Council's issues and has also held several meetings with Hearthside Homes. Following are staffs responses/updates to the 117 Issues. Original issues are presented with staffs responses/updates in italics. NOTE: Since the last City Council meeting, a recent appellate court decision now requires that the County's Local Coastal Program (LCP), which was previously certified, return to the Coastal Commission for their review and approval. The Coastal Commission may make alterations to the existing LCP subject to the court's rulings, however, for purposes of this update, staffs responses are based upon the existing version of the LCP that is dated January 1998. BOLSA CHICA ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION IN NEGOTIATIONS WITH HEARTHSIDE HOMES COUNCILMEMBER RALPH BAUER 1. Items mentioned in agenda of 2/22/99 including the slide presentation. Refer to issues 102-110. 2. Wording which would allow acquisition by a third party especially for open space. As part of the initial pre-annexation negotiations, staff insisted that Hearthside Homes become a willing seller and allow an appraisal of the Mesa property. Because Hearthside Homes anticipated that it could obtain all required approvals to begin grading of the Mesa by June 2000 (even without a pre-annexation agreement with the City), it would only agree to provide an option to purchase through June 1, 2000. It will allow an appraisal of the property for the purpose of obtaining funding sources any time after execution of a pre-annexation agreement, up until the expiration of the option period. 3. Items outlined in Amigos de Bolsa Chica letter by Dave Carlberg dated 2/22/99. Refer to issues 58-68. 4. Items outlined in "Amigos de Bolsa Chica Annexation Goals — First Draft." With one amendment: Warner Pond buffer changed to 100 feet. Refer to issues 69-84. A 100-foot residential development setback shall be maintained around Warner Pond (except where adjacent to Warner Avenue and the Mesa Connector). The development 06/25/99 setback shall include a low fence (3 to 4 feet) with a mesh screen around the entire pond to keep some predators from entering the pond area and to keep trash from Warner Avenue from entering the pond. (Source: LCP Sections 2.2.28, of the Planned Community Program and Section 6.2.17 of the Land Use Plan, see Exhibit A) 5. Implicit in any negotiation, is the approximately $13 million that Hearthside saves by not building a pipeline. A major part of these funds should come to the city in the form of improvements or cash to finance things like the construction of the Interpretive Center. The owner's financial obligation toward the construction of the interpretive center shall not exceed $500,000. (Source: DA Section 5.1, page D-23 & 24, Exhibit B) The Draft Pre Annexation Agreement will contain significant benefits to the City. A staff report and Request for Council Action will be prepared for a subsequent City Council meeting that provides an analysis of the benefits to the City. 6. Any annexation must be conditional on the tax rates and other financial benefits outlined in the Bolsa Chica Annexation Study dated 1/7/99. It should be emphasized that the builder and the ultimate residents are subject to all city fees and any subsequent increases. Staff continues to support the findings of the Bolsa Chica Annexation Study dated January 7, 1999. Through discussions with Hearthside Homes and City staff, it is proposed that, as a term of any pre-annexation agreement, the County will approve, plan check and inspect grading plans and street improvement plans. Building permits for residential units will be obtained by Hearthside Homes through the County, but the County will contract with City to plan check construction drawings, inspect homes and issue permits. Residential building permit fees will be at City rates and paid to the City. 7. Definition of contamination and clean-up plan for all areas especially the Edwards Thumb. Clean up of any contamination from oil operations will be done by the responsible oil operator as a pre-condition to Bolsa Chica Mesa development. Oil operations are conducted by the responsible oil operators in accordance with all local, state, and federal laws, the Bolsa Surface Use Agreement, existing oil leases, and other clean-up agreements already in place among those oil operators and various land owners, including the State of California. Staff continues to research the status of Edwards Thumb, as it relates to soil contamination, an Irrevocable Offer of Dedication and restoration. 8. Conveying of linear parkland for public purposes, free of contamination easements, leases, and other encumbrances, must occur prior to grading on the mesa. The Development Agreement states that an irrevocable offer of dedication of approximately 49 acres within the Regional Park "shall be made after certification of the LCP by the Coastal Commission and before the issuance of the first mass grading permit for the project." Neither of the events that would trigger the offer of dedication has occurred at this time. The County has indicated that it will not accept the dedication 06/25/99 2 of land until remediation has occurred(Source: Development Agreement page D-23, see Exhibits B). The County has determined that several events must occur in relation to the acquisition process affecting Wieder Regional Park. An outline received from the County on June 17, 1999 that identifies their goals and requirements relating to the regional park is attached(see Exhibit C). 9. Restoration Plan for the wetlands must include 100 percent diversion of the Wintersberg Channel into the wetlands not into outer Bolsa Bay and Huntington Harbour. Review and critique of the Restoration Plan should occur. Currently, the Bolsa Chica Steering Committee (comprised of eight state and federal agencies) is conducting research to evaluate several alternatives in association with the Wetlands Restoration Project. The alternatives include proposals for a possible tidal inlet and also alternatives to alter the layout of the East Garden Grove Wntersburg Channel. I The Environmental Impact Report for the Bolsa Chica Wetlands Restoration Project is tentatively scheduled to be distributed in December 1999. At that time, the City will have the opportunity to review the proposed alternatives and make a recommendation to support a specific alternative proposed in the Project. No determination has been made as to which alternative will have the least impact on the surrounding resources at this time. 10. Definition of contract or other documents affecting oil production, on oil barrel tax, and clean up after a given oil well is abandoned must occur. Clean up of any contamination from oil operations will be done by the responsible oil operator as a pre-condition to Bolsa Chica Mesa development. Oil operations are conducted by the responsible oil operators in accordance with all local, state, and federal laws, the Bolsa Surface Use Agreement, existing oil leases, and other clean-up agreements already in place among those oil operators and various land owners, including the State of California. 11. Water reservoir capacity must be consistent with Huntington Beach Water Master Plan. Through discussions with Hearthside Homes and City staff, both parties have proposed that, as a term of any pre-annexation agreement, the City shall provide all municipal services to the Mesa development project, including, but not limited to: water, police, and fire services. i The terms have also proposed that Hearthside Homes will provide the City with an improvement security (bond or other acceptable instrument of credit) to pay for a 9 million-gallon water reservoir, booster station and appurtenances (the "water improvements"). Hearthside Homes will complete construction of the water improvements (to City standards) before occupancy of the 351sr unit in the Mesa development project. 06/25/99 3 i If the Bolsa Chica is annexed into the City, the City would have a statutory obligation to provide water service to the area. If the annexation occurs, the 9 million-gallon water reservoir will help to complete Water Master Plan improvements. 12. Ownership and fate of the MWD Property currently controlled by the Bolsa Chica Land Trust must be determined. It is rumored that MWD attorneys want some kind of a hold harmless agreement on possible contamination in that property. The subject site (24.8 acres) is still in MWD's ownership. MWD is preparing documents to transfer the property title to the State Lands Commission, and hopes to complete the process within the next six months (late 1999). Language has been provided within the context of the transaction which insures that the responsibility for clean up of any potential contamination remains with past property owners and/or lessees who may have created the problems. 13. Status of Fieldstone property. The Fieldstone property is currently owned by Hearthside Homes. The option between Hearthside Homes and the State Lands Commission to purchase the property has expired, however, a new agreement to renew the option is currently being discussed. The purchase of the site has been delayed until the State obtains additional funding needed to acquire the property. The State Lands Commission most likely will not attempt to acquire the property until the PCB contamination identified on-site has been remediated. 14. Location of proposed school. Conceptual plans have been prepared for alternative locations for a school, however, the Oceanview School District and Hearthside Homes have not determined a precise location at this time. 15. What are the County's remaining responsibilities after annexation? Staff recommends that the County's responsibilities should be minimized if the Bolsa Chica is annexed into the City, however, the County will remain involved with issues related to the Harriett Wieder Linear Park, as it will serve as a regional recreation facility to be managed by the County. Through discussions with Hearthside Homes and City staff, both parties have proposed that, as a term of any pre-annexation agreement, Hearthside Homes will use its best efforts to assist the City in directing ATIP traffic improvement contributions ($4.5 million payment already required of Hearthside Homes under the County Development Agreement) to projects that directly benefit the City. Hearthside Homes will use its best efforts to assist the City in directing child care impact contributions to a non-profit child care organization operating in the City(a payment of$20 per unit is currently required of Hearthside Homes per the County Development Agreement). 16. What, if any, are Hearthside's and the County's responsibility to build an Interpretive Center? 06/25/99 4 The County's LCP states that the Harriett Wieder Regional Park will include an approximately 10,000 square-foot interpretive Visitor Center, that is centrally located within the park. (Source: LCP Land Use Plan Section 4.3.21,, see Exhibit E) The County's Development Agreement requires the `owner" to pay for the costs of construction of an interpretive center. The County will determine the precise location and design of the center. The owner's obligation shall be based on a facility that will not exceed 5,000 square feet. The owner's financial obligation toward the construction of the interpretive center shall not exceed $500,000. The owner's obligation shall be secured before the issuance of the 500"' residential building permit for the project. (Source: DA Section 5.1, page D-23 &24, see Exhibit B) 17. Reservation of potential for lowlands acquisition for wetlands restoration. The State Lands Commission has acquired 880 acres of lowland for wetlands restoration purposes. The Bolsa Chica Steering Committee, comprised of eight federal and state agencies, is currently preparing the Wetlands Restoration Program and has tentatively scheduled the Draft EIR/EIS for release in December of 1999. With the exception of the former Fieldstone property, the County's LCP Land Use Plan designates all of the approximately 1,249 acre Wetlands Ecosystem Area within the lowland for Conservation (Source: LCP Land Use Map, Exhibit F). 18. Prior to the issuance of the Coastal Development Permit, the applicant shall execute and record a deed restriction, in a form and of content acceptable to the Huntington Beach City Council which shall provide that the applicant agrees to sell the lowlands and uplands area of the property to any public agency or non-profit association acceptable to the Huntington Beach City Council that requests in writing to purchase the property. The sale shall be at fair market value as established by an appraisal paid for by the buyer and prepared by an appraiser mutually acceptable to the buyer and applicant. If the parties are unable to agree, by an appraiser designated by third party, or if the buyer and applicant agree through an arbitration on value. For uses restricted to wetlands and contiguous uplands restoration and education purposes. The deed restriction shall be recorded over the lowlands and uplands area of the property and shall run with the land, binding all successors and assigns, and shall be recorded free of prior liens and encumbrances that the City Council determines may affect the enforceability of the restriction. This deed restriction shall not be removed or changed without City Council approval. As part of the initial pre-annexation negotiations, staff insisted that Hearthside Homes become a willing seller and allow an appraisal of the Mesa property. As a result of those discussions, both parties have proposed that, as a term of any pre-annexation agreement, Hearthside Homes will grant the City an option to purchase the Mesa property, Edward's Thumb, and Harriett Wieder Regional Park (at a price to be determined by Hearthside Homes). The option will remain open until June 1, 2000 with no extensions. The option terminates if any litigation is filed challenging the pre- annexation agreement, annexation, LCP approvals, or other discretionary approvals required for the Mesa development project. Hearthside Homes will allow appraisal to be conducted at anytime during the option period (the appraisal will not be determinative of the price to be set by Hearthside, but will be used for the purpose of obtaining funding sources). 06/25/99 5 19. All Conditions set forth by the county in their Development Agreement and miscellaneous entitlement documents in connection with the Bolsa Chica. Through discussions with Hearthside Homes and City staff, it has been proposed that as a term of any pre-annexation agreement, the City will accept the County LCP and County development agreement(that assumes no more than 1,235 units). COUNCILMEMBER SHIRLEY DETTLOFF 20. Development must meet all of the building standards of the City of Huntington Beach. The proposed project will be reviewed by the Building Department staff to ensure compliance with the City's building standards. 21. City defined park standards must be met. Community Services has determined that the proposed concept plan for the Mesa Community Park is acceptable if the project can provide for three lighted fields to maximize the availability of the fields to serve the youth sports participants that the project will generate. Through discussions with Hearthside Homes and City staff, both parties have proposed that, as a term of any pre-annexation agreement, that Hearthside Homes will construct a recreational playing field (soccer) with "practice level"lighting on the park planned to be adjacent to the new school playing fields. As part of an anticipated land exchange agreement, staff expects the Ocean View School District and Hearthside Homes will cooperate in lighting the two proposed school playing fields. 22. City water requirements as well as project needs must be considered. Through discussions with Hearthside Homes and City staff, both parties have proposed that, as a term of any pre-annexation agreement, the City shall provide all municipal services to the Mesa development project, including, but not limited to: water, police, and fire services. The terms have also proposed that Hearthside Homes will provide the City with an improvement security (bond or other acceptable instrument of credit) to pay for a 9 million-gallon water reservoir, booster station and appurtenances (the "water improvements"). Hearthside Homes will complete construction of the water improvements (to City standards) before occupancy of the 351 sr unit in the Mesa development project. If the Bolsa Chica were annexed into the City, the City would have a statutory obligation to provide water service to the area. If the annexation occurs, the 9 million-gallon water reservoir will help to complete Water Master Plan improvements. 06/25/99 6 23. Conveyance of linear parkland must be free of contamination before building commences. The Development Agreement states that an irrevocable offer of dedication of approximately 49 acres within the Regional Park "shall be made after certification of the LCP by the Coastal Commission and before the issuance of the first mass grading permit for the project." Neither of the events that would trigger the offer of dedication has occurred at this time. The County has indicated that it will not accept the dedication of land until remediation has occurred. (Source: DA page D-23, see Exhibits B) 24. A buffer between the wetlands and the project, which meets the criteria set by Fish and Game, must be in place. The current LCP requires the development to provide a 50-foot wide development setback along the edge of the Bolsa Chica Mesa in addition to the bluff face. The development setback and bluff face shall be landscaped exclusively with native and drought tolerant plant materials that provide habitat value and a naturally appearing visual transition between the Wetlands Ecosystem Area and the residential/community park areas of the Planned Community. Public trails required by the LCP may be included in the development setback. (Source: LCP Land Use Section 6.2 item 17, see Exhibit A. As a result of the Appellate Court ruling, Hearthside Homes is required to preserve the eucalyptus trees that are located on the project site. Any development on the Mesa needs to be sensitive to the location of the trees, which in some areas, act as a buffer between the wetlands and the Mesa. 25. All development must be compatible with surrounding housing product. Staff is currently reviewing the LCP development standards and comparing them to residential projects recently approved for development. During the past several years, the City has approved a variety of projects with a range of development standards, lot sizes, height, and design standards (Ocean Colony, Meadowlark, Centerstone, etc.). In general, standards within the County's LCP are similar to projects that have been processed and approved within the City. A mixture of residential product types surrounds the proposed residential development. The project proposes a maximum density of 6.5-12 du/acre that is compatible with the adjacent, existing single family and multi-family product. 26. Fire and police services must be in place with no negative costs to the city. The Bolsa Chica Annexation Study found that the City's on-going costs for police and fire service to the proposed Mesa development would be off-set by the property taxes generated by the development. Included in this assumption is transfer of the Orange County Fire Authority's property tax levy to the City. In addition to these on-going revenues, staffs negotiations with Hearthside Homes have proposed that Hearthside Homes will pay to the City $2.5 million for fire service improvements. This amount shall include (a) the actual cost incurred by Hearthside 06/25/99 7 Homes to install any additional sprinklers in homes (sprinklers that the City requires over and above those required under County standards) for the Mesa development project and(b) a contribution toward the cost of relocating the Heil/Springdale fire station. Every dollar not required for sprinklers will go to the relocation of the fire station. The timing of the payments will be as follows: $250,000 upon issuance of the first residential building permit with the balance due within 2-years after issuance of the first residential building permit. The City will accept 36-foot wide streets with sprinklers as required. Hearthside Homes will also make a one-time payment of $75,000 to City for police equipment at issuance of the first residential building permit 27. Drainage facilities must not drain directly into the wetlands. Figure 6.3-2 of the LCP Land Use Plan shows the location of the storm drain outlets as approved by the Coastal Commission (Exhibit H). The LCP provides for one drain into the pocket area lowlands and four drains into Outer Bolsa Bay. An application to the U.S. Army Cops of engineers for the stormdrain outfall pipes is still pending. Even if the Army Corps grants a permit for the construction of the pipes, it cannot be implemented without first obtaining County and Coastal Commission approval of a Coastal Development Permit (CDP). The City will be provided the opportunity to review and comment on the CDP proposed for the pipes, as this permit requires a public hearing. The County cannot consider any permit for outfall pipes until there is a certified Local Coastal Program (LCP) (Source: Memo from the County dated May 4, 1998, see Exhibit H). 28. All conditions referenced by the Amigos de Bolsa Chica should be answered. Refer to issues 58— 84. 29. During the annexation process, Hearthside Homes will discuss any offers of purchase with a responsible buyer if the price being discussed is fair market value. Prior to such offers, the property owner will allow an appraisal to establish the value of the property. As part of the initial pre-annexation negotiations, staff insisted that Hearthside Homes become a willing seller and allow an appraisal of the Mesa property. As a result of those discussions, both parties have proposed that, as a term of any pre-annexation agreement, Hearthside Homes will grant the City an option to purchase the Mesa property, Edward's Thumb, and Harriett Wieder Regional Park (at a price to be determined by Hearthside Homes). The option will remain open until June 1, 2000 with no extensions. The option terminates if any litigation is filed challenging the pre- annexation agreement, annexation, LCP approvals, or other discretionary approvals required for the Mesa development project. Hearthside Homes will allow appraisal to be conducted at anytime during the option period (the appraisal will not be determinative of the price to be set by Hearthside, but will be used for the purpose of obtaining funding sources). 06/25/99 8 COUNCILMEMBER TOM HARMAN 30. All of the conditions listed on the Amigos de Bolsa Chica Annexation Goals — First Draft, a copy of which is attached to this memo. Refer to issues 69— 84. 31. That no substitutions of some new or different land be allowed for land previously identified as being set aside for dedication to the linear park. The Development Agreement states that an irrevocable offer of dedication of approximately 49 acres within the Regional Park "shall be made after certification of the LCP by the Coastal Commission and before the issuance of the first mass grading permit for the project." Neither of the events that would trigger the offer of dedication has occurred at this time (Source: DA page D-23, see Exhibit B). To date, no substitutions for parkland identified for dedication have been considered by the City. 32. Hearthside Homes shall be required to pay all LAFCO processing fees. Staff has not investigated the cost of annexing the Bolsa Chica area or whether or not Hearthside Homes will pay all, or a portion of, any LAFCO processing fees. It is anticipated that this issue will be addressed in any pre-annexation agreement. 33. Hearthside Homes must agree to be a "willing seller' of their property if a bona fide purchaser offers to purchase the property for open space purposes. As part of the initial pre-annexation negotiations, staff insisted that Hearthside Homes become a willing seller and allow an appraisal of the Mesa property. As a result of those discussions, both parties have proposed that, as a term of any pre-annexation agreement, Hearthside Homes will grant the City an option to purchase the Mesa property, Edward's Thumb, and Harriett Wieder Regional Park (at a price to be determined by Hearthside Homes). The option will remain open until June 1, 2000 with no extensions. The option terminates if any litigation is filed challenging the pre- annexation agreement, annexation, LCP approvals, or other discretionary approvals required for the Mesa development project. Hearthside Homes will allow appraisal to be conducted at anytime during the option period (the appraisal will not be determinative of the price to be set by Hearthside, but will be used for the purpose of obtaining funding sources). 34. Hearthside Homes must agree to a price-setting process that would establish the fair market value of the property by way of an appraisal. If a bona fide purchaser is found that is willing to pay the appraised price, Hearthside Homes must agree to sell for that price. As part of the initial pre-annexation negotiations, staff insisted that Hearthside Homes become a willing seller and allow an appraisal of the Mesa property. As a result of those discussions, both parties have proposed that, as a tern of any pre-annexation agreement, Hearthside Homes will grant the City an option to purchase the Mesa 06/25/99 9 property, Edward's Thumb, and Harriett Wieder Regional Park (at a price to be determined by Hearthside Homes). The option will remain open until June 1, 2000 with no extensions. The option terminates if any litigation is filed challenging the pre- annexation agreement, annexation, LCP approvals, or other discretionary approvals required for the Mesa development project. Hearthside Homes will allow appraisal to be conducted at anytime during the option period(the appraisal will not be determinative of the price to be set by Hearthside, but will be used for the purpose of obtaining funding sources). 35. Hearthside Homes must agree to grant an option to purchase for 24 months to an appropriate land conservation organization such as the Nature Conservancy or American Land Conservancy. The option would be exercisable as provided in paragraph 5 above. As part of the initial pre-annexation negotiations, staff insisted that Hearthside Homes become a willing seller and allow an appraisal of the Mesa property. As a result of those discussions, both parties have proposed that, as a term of any pre-annexation agreement, Hearthside Homes will grant the City an option to purchase the Mesa property, Edward's Thumb, and Harriett Wieder Regional Park (at a price to be determined by Hearthside Homes). The option will remain open until June 1, 2000 with no extensions. The option terminates if any litigation is filed challenging the pre- annexation agreement, annexation, LCP approvals, or other discretionary approvals required for the Mesa development project. Hearthside Homes will allow appraisal to be conducted at anytime during the option period(the appraisal will not be determinative of the price to be set by Hearthside, but will be used for the purpose of obtaining funding sources). 36. No grading or commencement of any construction activities would occur on the property for a period of 24 months, i.e., the estimated time to complete the process of annexation. As part of the initial pre-annexation negotiations, staff insisted that Hearthside Homes become a willing seller and allow an appraisal of the Mesa property. As a result of those discussions, both parties have proposed that, as a term of any pre-annexation agreement, Hearthside Homes will grant the City an option to purchase the Mesa property, Edward's Thumb, and Harriett Wieder Regional Park (at a price to be determined by Hearthside Homes). The option will remain open until June 1, 2000 with no extensions. The option terminates if any litigation is filed challenging the pre- annexation agreement, annexation, LCP approvals, or other discretionary approvals required for the Mesa development project. Hearthside Homes will allow appraisal to be conducted at anytime during the option period(the appraisal will not be determinative of the price to be set by Hearthside, but will be used for the purpose of obtaining funding sources). COUNCILMEMBER PAM JULIEN 37. Support staff presented goals per February 22"d RCA pages five and six. Refer to issues 102— 110. 06/25/99 10 i 38. Develop a plan for water service that provides economic benefit to the city of Huntington Beach that utilizes either a Southern California Water Company pipeline or a city of Huntington Beach connection if adequate resources are available. Through discussions with Hearthside Homes and City staff, both parties have proposed that, as a term of any pre-annexation agreement, the City shall provide all municipal services to the Mesa development project, including, but not limited to: water, police, and fire services. The terms have also proposed that Hearthside Homes will provide the City with an improvement security (bond or other acceptable instrument of credit) to pay for a 9 million-gallon water reservoir, booster station and appurtenances (the "water improvements'). Hearthside Homes will complete construction of the water improvements (to City standards) before occupancy of the 351 sr unit in the Mesa development project. If the Bolsa Chica were annexed into the City, the City would have a statutory obligation to provide water service to the area. If the annexation occurs, the 9 million-gallon water reservoir will help to complete Water Master Plan improvements. 39. Clarify the funding source of the Orange County Fire fund and the role of the Fire Authority in an annexation. The Orange County Fire Authority(OCFA) is funded by a property tax levy of$0.116 per $100 of assessed value. The City has an agreement in place with the OCFA that will transfer 100 percent of the OCFA property tax levy from the Mesa development to the City upon annexation. The OCFA will not play any role, beyond its agreement with the City in or after annexation. 40. Answer Amigos de Bolsa Chica's questions per their February 22, 1999 letter. Refer to issues 58— 68. 41. Direct staff to review the County's Local Coastal Program Development Standards in relation to the City's newly developed residential projects. Staff is currently reviewing the LCP development standards and comparing them to residential projects recently approved for development. In general, standards within the County's LCP are similar to projects that have been processed and approved within the City. During the past several years, the City has approved a variety of projects with a range of development standards, lot sizes, height, and design standards (Ocean Colony, Meadowlark, Centerstone, etc.). A mixture of residential product types surrounds the proposed residential development. The project proposes a maximum density of 6.5-12 du/acre that is compatible with the adjacent, existing single family and multi-family product. 06/25/99 11 42. Direct staff to develop a process for annexation that insures that fees, which were not included in the fiscal analysis for annexation, associated with building permits and inspection are directed to the city. Through discussions with Hearthside Homes and City staff, it is proposed that, as a term of any pre-annexation agreement, the County will approve, plan check and inspect grading plans and street improvement plans. Building permits for residential units will be obtained by Hearthside Homes through the County, but the County will contract with City to plan check construction drawings, inspect homes and issue permits. Residential building permit fees will be at City rates and paid to the City. 43. Authorize staff to negotiate a draft pre-annexation agreement based on the parameters identified by the City Council and return prior to June 1, 1999, for City Council consideration. Attached is stafFs response to the City Council's request. COUNCLIMEMBER DAVE SULLIVAN 44. Hearthside Homes must agree to be a willing seller for 24 months. As part of the initial pre-annexation negotiations, staff insisted that Hearthside Homes become a willing seller and allow an appraisal of the Mesa property. As a result of those discussions, both parties have proposed that, as a term of any pre-annexation agreement, Hearthside Homes will grant the City an option to purchase the Mesa property, Edward's Thumb, and Harriett Wieder Regional Park (at a price to be determined by Hearthside Homes). The option will remain open until June 1, 2000 with no extensions. The option terminates if any litigation is filed challenging the pre- annexation agreement, annexation, LCP approvals, or other discretionary approvals required for the Mesa development project. Hearthside Homes will allow appraisal to be conducted at anytime during the option period(the appraisal will not be determinative of the price to be set by Hearthside, but will be used for the purpose of obtaining funding sources). 45. Hearthside Homes must agree to allow an appraisal of the land (federal funds have already been appropriated for the appraisal). As part of the initial pre-annexation negotiations, staff insisted that Hearthside Homes become a willing seller and allow an appraisal of the Mesa property. As a result of those discussions, both parties have proposed that, as a term of any pre-annexation agreement, Hearthside Homes will grant the City an option to purchase the Mesa property, Edward's Thumb, and Harriett Wieder Regional Park (at a price to be determined by Hearthside Homes). The option will remain open until June 1, 2000 with no extensions. The option terminates if any litigation is filed challenging the pre- annexation agreement, annexation, LCP approvals, or other discretionary approvals required for the Mesa development project. Hearthside Homes will allow appraisal to be conducted at anytime during the option period (the appraisal will not be determinative of the price to be set by Hearthside, but will be used for the purpose of obtaining funding sources). 06/25/99 12 46. All linear park property obligated under the development agreement must be dedicated contamination free prior to any building on the mesa. The Development Agreement states that an irrevocable offer of dedication of approximately 49 acres within the Regional Park "shall be made after certification of the LCP by the Coastal Commission and before the issuance of the first mass grading permit for the project." Neither of the events that would trigger the offer of dedication has occurred at this time. The County has indicated that it will not accept the dedication of land until remediation has occurred. (Source: Development Agreement page D-23, see Exhibit B) The County has determined that several events must occur in relation to the acquisition process affecting Wieder Regional Park. An outline received from the County on June 17, 1999 that identifies their goals and requirements for the regional park is attached. (see Exhibit C) 47. 100 foot buffer around Warner Pond. A 100-foot residential development setback shall be maintained around Warner Pond (except where adjacent to Warner Avenue and the Mesa Connector). The development setback shall include a low fence (3 to 4 feet) with a mesh screen around the entire pond to keep some predators from entering the pond area and to keep trash from Warner Avenue from entering the pond. (Exhibit A: LCP Sections 2.2.28 and 6.2.17 of the Land Use Plan and Plan View and Cross Section of Development Setback Around Warner Pond) 48. Shielding of development. Fencing and landscaping around any development on the Bolsa Chica Mesa should be required to soften the visual impact of the development and also to minimize access of domestic animals into the wetlands. The LCP Land Use Plan establishes that the development setback and bluff face shall be landscaped exclusively with native plant material that provides habitat value and a visual transition between the Wetlands Ecosystem Area and the residential/community park areas of the project. Landscape screening shall be designed and installed along streets, trails, and the perimeters of residential and recreational developments to soften development edges visible form PCH and other public areas of the Bolsa Chica. (Source: LCP Land Use Plan, Section 6.2, Community Design Policies 16 & 17, see Exhibit A) All fences shall be designed to be functional and to have a minimum impact on coastal and scenic views from public locations. This includes privacy fencing for residential areas as well as environmental control fencing used within the Wetlands Ecosystem Area for species protection. 49. All of the County Fire Authority assessment must go to Huntington Beach. The City has a proposed agreement w/the OCFA that will transfer 100 percent of the OCFA property tax levy from the Mesa development to the City upon annexation. 06/25/99 13 50. Mesa Top Buffer— The Bolsa Chica Coastal Plan should include an open space buffer, on top of the mesa (along the bluff edge), to protect the bluff and wetlands restoration area from the areas designated for development. The buffer must be 100 feet from the top of the bluff to accommodate passive recreational uses (such as bicycle and/or pedestrian trails, benches, and vista overlooks) similar to those planned for the Linear Regional Park (which runs, parallel to the Bolsa Chica Mesa, along the length of the Huntington Mesa at the southern most edge of the Bolsa Chica area). Buffer improvements must be completed before construction on the mesa is started. The current LCP requires the development to provide a 50-foot wide development setback along the edge of the Bolsa Chica Mesa in addition to the bluff face. The development setback and bluff face shall be landscaped exclusively with native and drought tolerant plant materials that provide habitat value and a naturally appearing visual transition between the Wetlands Ecosystem Area and the residential/community park areas of the Planned Community. Public trails required by the LCP may be included in the development setback (Source: LCP Land Use Section 6.2 item 17, see Exhibit A). As a result of the Appellate Court ruling, Hearthside Homes is required to preserve the eucalyptus trees that are located on the project site. Any development on the Mesa would need to be sensitive to the location of the trees, which in some areas, acts as a buffer between the wetlands and the Mesa. 51. Mesa Top Roadway—The project must incorporate a buffer by a mesa top roadway that runs roughly parallel to the recommended bluff top buffer and separates the buffer from development areas. The mesa roadway would serve as a distinct boundary between areas designated for development and public open space areas and would provide public access opportunities to public open space areas while providing additional separation from development and protection to the wetland restoration area. As a result of the Appellate Court ruling, Hearthside Homes is required to preserve the eucalyptus trees that are located on the project site. Any proposed roads on the Mesa would need to be sensitive to the location of the trees, which in some areas, acts as a buffer between the wetlands and the Mesa. Hearthside Homes is currently evaluating the placement of the road within the project in light of the Appellate Court's ruling. 52. Compatibility with Existing Los Patos Development — The LCP should designate the Bolsa Chica areas, adjacent to the city, to a compatible land use and zoning that is of similar density, type, and scale to existing development along Los Patos Avenue. Staff is currently reviewing the LCP development standards and comparing them to residential projects recently approved for development. During the past several years, the City has approved a variety of projects with a range of development standards, lot sizes, height, and design standards (Ocean Colony, Meadowlark, Centerstone, etc.). In general, standards within the County's LCP are similar to projects that have been processed and approved within the City. I 06/25/99 14 A mixture of residential product types surrounds the proposed residential development. The project proposes a maximum density of 6.5-12 du/acre that is compatible with the adjacent, existing single family and multi-family product. 53. Product Type — The LCP should reflect the same percentage of single and multi-family units that exists in the immediate project vicinity which is not less than 66.66% single family. At this time, it is the intention of Hearthside Homes to build primarily single family homes on the Mesa (approximately 85 percent) with the remaining units to be townhomes. 54. The Bolsa Chica project development standards should be the same as the City of Huntington Beach standards including: • lot size • height • design standards • open space • park dedication • city soil remediation Staff is currently reviewing the LCP development standards and comparing them to residential projects recently approved for development. During the past several years, the City has approved a variety of projects with a range of development standards, lot sizes, height, and design standards (Ocean Colony, Meadowlark, Centerstone, etc.). In general, standards within the County's LCP are similar to projects that have been processed and approved within the City. A mixture of residential product types surrounds the proposed residential development. The project proposes a maximum density of 6.5-12 du/acre that is compatible with the adjacent, existing single family and multi-family product. 55. The Bolsa Chica project should reflect a compatible building density and type with neighboring city residences. Staff is currently reviewing the LCP development standards and comparing them to residential projects recently approved for development. During the past several years, the City has approved a variety of projects with a range of development standards, lot sizes, height, and design standards (Ocean Colony, Meadowlark, Centerstone, etc.). In general, standards within the County's LCP are similar to projects that have been processed and approved within the City. A mixture of residential product types surrounds the proposed residential development. The project proposes a maximum density of 6.5-12 du/acre that is compatible with the adjacent, existing single family and multi-family product. 56. The natural topography of the mesa should be maintained by limiting grading, terracing or other similar methods. Existing mature trees on-site should be preserved rather than replaced. Mesa development should minimize impacts to wetlands. 06/25/99 15 The bluff along Outer Bolsa Bay will be preserved in its current condition with the exception of four storm drain outlets that will be sensitively designed, located and aesthetically treated as to minimize the visual impacts to the bluff. The City will review and comment on the plans for the storm drain outfall pipes when the applicant submits an application to the County for a Coastal Development Permit. The Court of Appeal recently rendered its decision on the appeal of the trial court's decisions pertaining to the Bolsa Chica Local Coastal Program (LCP). The Court of Appeal determined that the approximately six acres of existing eucalyptus trees on the Mesa cannot be removed. As a result, any proposed development will be required to incorporate the eucalyptus trees into the tract design. The LCP and EIR incorporate land use policies, conditions of approval, and mitigation measures to minimize development impacts to wetlands both during construction and after the project is complete. Vegetation screening and fencing will be installed to minimize human intrusion into the wetlands once development is complete and the trails are open to the public. 57. Once the LCP and Development Agreement have been approved, the city should be responsible for building plan review, approval, inspection services and other "permit processing" aspects of implementing project entitlements. The city should also be responsible for the collection of fees to cover the costs of such services. Through discussions with Hearthside Homes and City staff, it is proposed that, as a term of any pre-annexation agreement, the County will approve, plan check and inspect grading plans and street improvement plans. Building permits for residential units will be obtained by Hearthside Homes through the County, but the County will contract with City to plan check construction drawings, inspect homes and issue permits. Residential building permit fees will be at City rates and paid to the City. AMIGOS DE BOLSA CHICA 2/22/99 LETTER 58. Linear Park property dedication. The development of Harriett Wieder Park has been delayed for a number of years. For each year of delay the citizens of Huntington Beach and Orange County are denied another 12 months enjoyment of a unique natural resource. We recommend that one of the top priority points of discussion in any annexation agreement is the immediate dedication of all linear park property that the landowner is obliged to complete under the Development Agreement. The Development Agreement states that an irrevocable offer of dedication of approximately 49 acres within the Regional Park "shall be made after certification of the LCP by the Coastal Commission and before the issuance of the first mass grading permit for the project." Neither of the events that would trigger the offer of dedication has occurred at this time. The County has indicated that it will not accept the dedication of land until remediation has occurred. (Source: DA page D-23, see Exhibit B) 59. Edwards Thumb. This property has long been earmarked as a key corridor connecting Huntington Central Park with the Bolsa Chica. We recommend that any annexation agreement include, at the very least, the establishment of a narrow green belt easement to connect the two areas. In addition, the designation of Edwards Thumb as a 06/25/99 16 conservation zone, or preferably the dedication of the entire area to the state for eventual restoration should be pursued. A comprehensive network of bicycle and pedestrian trails shall be provided for public access. This network shall link Huntington Central Park, Harriett Wieder Regional Park, Bolsa Chica Wetlands Ecosystem Area, Bolsa Chica State Beach, Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve, and the Bolsa Chica Mesa bluff trail to surrounding residential, recreation, and public parking areas. (Exhibits F& /) 60. Warner Pond. This small but special habitat will be severely impacted by surrounding development. We recommend that a buffer of at least 50 feet be required around the periphery adjacent to Mesa development. A 100-foot residential development setback shall be maintained around Warner Pond (except where adjacent to Warner Avenue and the Mesa Connector). The development setback shall include a low fence (3 to 4 feet) with a mesh screen around the entire pond to keep some predators from entering the pond area and to keep trash from Warner Avenue from entering the pond. (Source: LCP Sections 2.2.28 and 6.2.17, see Exhibit A) 61. Bluff Buffer. Standard buffers between critical habitats and residential development are normally set at 100 feet. The present plan calls for a 50-foot buffer between the boundary of the wetlands and development on the Bolsa Chica Mesa. However, we understand the landowners have use the term "setback" rather than buffer and we are uncertain what that means. We strongly urge that any annexation agreement include a clear and unequivocal 100-foot buffer from the five-foot contour line within the wetlands to the outermost boundary of any residential development on the Mesa. The current LCP requires the development to provide a 50-foot wide development setback along the edge of the Bolsa Chica Mesa in addition to the bluff face. The development setback and bluff face shall be landscaped exclusively with native and drought tolerant plant materials that provide habitat value and a naturally appearing visual transition between the Wetlands Ecosystem Area and the residential/community park areas of the Planned Community. Public trails required by the LCP may be included in the development setback. (Source: LCP Land Use Section 6.2 item 17, see Exhibit A) As a result of the Appellate Court ruling, Hearthside Homes is required to preserve the eucalyptus trees that are located on the project site. Any development on the Mesa would need to be sensitive to the location of the trees, which in some areas, acts as a buffer between the wetlands and the Mesa. 62. Interpretive Center. Funds from the landowner towards the building of a 5,000 square foot interpretive center were referred to in the 1989 Coalition Plan. Two aspects of the center should be established before annexation is completed. The first is final determination of the location of the center, and the second is its size. For an interpretive center for one of the most significant environmental attractions in Southern California, five thousand square feet is not adequate. In order to provide space for displays on 06/25/99 17 Bolsa Chica history and wildlife, plus offices, meeting area, gift shop and other public and maintenance areas, 10,000 square feet would be a minimum requirement. Part of an annexation agreement must include a means of identifying funding to design and construct a larger interpretive center. The County's LCP states that the Harriett Wieder Regional Park will include an approximately 10,000 square-foot interpretive Visitor Center, that is centrally located within the park. (Source: LCP Land Use Plan Section 4.3.21,, Exhibit E) The County's Development Agreement requires the "owner' to pay for the costs of construction of an interpretive center. The County will determine the precise location and design of the center. The owner's obligation shall be based on a facility that will not exceed 5,000 square feet. The owner's financial obligation toward the construction of the interpretive center shall not exceed $500,000. The owner's obligation shall be secured before the issuance of the 500th residential building permit for the project (Source: DA Section 5.1, page D-23 & 24, see Exhibit B). 63. Storm Drains. Any annexation agreement should require that no runoff from the Bolsa Chica Mesa is to be directed into the Bolsa Chica wetlands. Figure 6.3-2 of the LCP Land Use Plan shows the location of the storm drain outlets as approved by the Coastal Commission (Exhibit H). The LCP provides for one drain into the pocket area lowlands and four drains into Outer Bolsa Bay. An application to the U.S. Army Corps of engineers for the stormdrain outfall pipes is still pending. Even if the Army Corps grants a permit for the construction of the pipes, it cannot be implemented without first obtaining County and Coastal Commission approval of a Coastal Development Permit (CDP). The City will be provided the opportunity to review and comment on the CDP proposed for the pipes, as this permit requires a public hearing. The County cannot consider any permit for outfall pipes until there is a certified Local Coastal Program (LCP) (Source: Memo from the County dated May 4, 1998, see Exhibit H). 64. Fieldstone Property. All parties are encouraged to help accelerate the purchase of this property by the State, but if purchase is not completed by the time an annexation agreement is prepared, a conservation zone designation should be placed on this property to protect it from possible development. The option between Hearthside Homes and the State Lands Commission to purchase the Fieldstone property has expired, however, a new agreement to renew the option is currently being considered. The purchase of the site has been delayed until the State obtains additional funding needed to acquire the property, and the State Lands Commission most likely will not attempt to acquire the property until the PCB contamination identified on-site has been removed. Hearthside Homes will not agree to any conservation zoning of the Fieldstone site until the property has been sold (most likely to the State). Please refer to memo from Hearthside Homes dated February 22, 1999(Exhibit J, item number 7). 06/25/99 18 65. Contamination Issues. Any questions regarding responsibilities for cost of identifying and removing contamination from the Bolsa Chica lowlands, including Edwards Thumb, the Fieldstone property and the Pocket, should be clearly resolved before any annexation agreement is signed. Clean up of any contamination from oil operations will be done by the responsible oil operator as a pre-condition to Bolsa Chica Mesa development. Oil operations are conducted by the responsible oil operators in accordance with all local, state, and federal laws, the Bolsa Surface Use Agreement, existing oil leases, and other clean-up agreements already in place among those oil operators and various land owners, including the State of California. Staff continues to research the status of Edwards Thumb, as it relates to soil contamination, an Irrevocable Offer of Dedication and restoration. 66. Bluff top trails, view areas and public access. An annexation agreement should clearly establish the locations of trails, viewing points, and native landscaping along the bluff edge of the Bolsa Chica Mesa, as well as specifically show the nature and locations of public access to these features. Construction of these features should be completed within two years of dedication of the buffer areas. A comprehensive network of bicycle and pedestrian trails shall be provided for public access. This network shall link Huntington Central Park, Harriett Wieder Regional Park, Bolsa Chica Wetlands Ecosystem Area, Bolsa Chica State Beach, Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve, and the Bolsa Chica Mesa bluff trail to surrounding residential, recreation, and public parking areas (see Exhibit I Linkages to Regional Recreation Facilities). Opportunities for wetlands observation shall be provided by overlooks provided along public trails. Public use of the trails shall not be limited. The landowner/Master Developer shall dedicate to the County of Orange or other public agency, the land and/or easements within the Bolsa Chica LCP Area that are required for the public trails indicated on the Coastal Access and Recreation Plan. (Source: County LCP Land Use Plan Section 4.2 Public Access and Visitor Serving Recreation Policies, see Exhibit I) The `owner"shall dedicate to the County the land and construct the improvements for all bicycle trails and pedestrian trails shown on the Development Plan and the Master Plan of Countywide Bikeways, other than those bicycle and pedestrian trails within the proposed ultimate boundaries of Harriett Wieder Regional Park. Irrevocable offers of dedication shall be made by the owner with the recordation of a final tract map for individual lots which includes areas designated for trails. Improvements shall include design, grading, trail construction, fencing, signing, striping, erosion control, and other standard improvements. The timing of improvements shall be determined prior to recordation of the final tract map for the tract in which the improvements will be located. (Source: County Development Agreement, page D-25, see Exhibit B) 67. Shielding of development. Fencing and landscaping around any development on the Bolsa Chica Mesa should be required to soften the visual impact of the development and also to minimize access of domestic animals into the wetlands. 06/25/99 19 The LCP Land Use Plan establishes that the development setback and bluff face shall be landscaped exclusively with native plant material that provides habitat value and a visual transition between the Wetlands Ecosystem Area and the residential/community park areas of the project. Landscape screening shall be designed and installed along streets, trails, and the perimeters of residential and recreational developments to soften development edges visible form PCH and other public areas of the Bolsa Chica. (Source: LCP Land Use Plan, Section 6.2, Community Design Policies 16 & 17, see Exhibit A) All fences shall be designed to be functional and to have a minimum impact on coastal and scenic views from public locations. This includes privacy fencing for residential areas as well as environmental control fencing used within the Wetlands Ecosystem Area for species. 68. Residential Densities. There are several landowners on the Bolsa Chica Mesa, both within the City and in County territory. To avoid piecemeal planning, any discussion of residential densities in an annexation agreement should be comprehensive and encompass the entire Mesa, regardless of owner or location. Staff is currently reviewing the LCP development standards and comparing them to residential projects recently approved for development. During the past several years, the City has approved a variety of projects with a range of development standards, lot sizes, height, and design standards (Ocean Colony, Meadowlark, Centerstone, etc.). In general, standards within the County's LCP are similar to projects that have been processed and approved within the City. A mixture of residential product types surrounds the proposed residential development. The project proposes a maximum density of 6.5-12 du/acre that is compatible with the adjacent, existing single family and multi-family product AMIGOS DE BOLSA CHICA ANNEXATION GOALS - FIRST DRAFT • Irrevocable Offer of Dedication of the following properties upon approval of annexation by Local Area Formation Commission: 69. Linear park property The Development Agreement states that an irrevocable offer of dedication of approximately 49 acres within the Regional Park "shall be made after certification of the LCP by the Coastal Commission and before the issuance of the first mass grading permit for the project." Neither of the events that would trigger the offer of dedication has occurred at this time. The County has indicated that it will not accept the dedication of land until remediation has occurred(Source: DA page D-23, see Exhibit B). 70. Edwards Thumb property Staff continues to research the status of Edwards Thumb, as it relates to soil contamination, an Irrevocable Offer of Dedication and restoration. 06/25/99 20 71. Warner Avenue Pond and 50 foot buffer around the pond A 100-foot residential development setback shall be maintained around Warner Pond (except where adjacent to Warner Avenue and the Mesa Connector). The development setback shall include a low fence (3 to 4 feet) with a mesh screen around the entire pond to keep some predators from entering the pond area and to keep trash from Warner Avenue from entering the pond. (Source: LCP Sections 2.2.28, and Section 6.2.17 of the Land Use Plan, see Exhibit A) 72. "Bluff' buffer area to extend one hundred feet from the five-foot contour line in the Bolsa Chica Lowlands, or 75 feet from the crest of the mesa bluff, whichever is greater. This buffer area to extend Southerly from Warner Avenue and Northerly to the Easterly extension of Los Patos. The current LCP requires the development to provide a 50-foot wide development setback along the edge of the Bolsa Chica Mesa in addition to the bluff face. The development setback and bluff face shall be landscaped exclusively with native and drought tolerant plant materials that provide habitat value and a naturally appearing visual transition between the Wetlands Ecosystem Area and the residential/community park areas of the Planned Community. Public trails required by the LCP may be included in the development setback (Source: LCP Land Use Section 6.2 item 17, see Exhibit A). As a result of the Appellate Court ruling, Hearthside Homes is required to preserve the eucalyptus trees that are located on the project site. Any development on the Mesa would need to be sensitive to the location of the trees, which in some areas, acts as a buffer between the wetlands and the Mesa. 73. The park area designated on the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach and generally located Southerly of the extension of Bolsa Chica Road. The area located at the southerly extension of Bolsa Chica Road is located out of the LCP boundaries and therefore is not a part of annexation discussions. 74. Other park areas on the Bolsa Chica Mesa designated on the County Plan The LCP requires the Landowner/Master Developer shall prepare a Local Park Implementation Plan (LPIP) so as to fully satisfy the County's Local Park Code. All local public parks required by the LPIP shall be irrevocably offered for dedication to the County of Orange as a condition of subdivision approvals, in accordance with the County's Local Park Code. All local parks shall be improved by the Landowner/Master Developer or the subsequent developer. 75. A permanent"Bolsa Chica Interpretive Center" site. The County's LCP states that the Harriett Wieder Regional Park will include an approximately 10,000 square-foot interpretive Visitor Center, that is centrally located within the park. (Source: LCP Land Use Plan Section 4.3.21,, Exhibit E) 06/25/99 21 The County's Development Agreement requires the "owner" to pay for the costs of construction of an interpretive center. The County will determine the precise location and design of the center. The owner's obligation shall be based on a facility that will not exceed 5,000 square feet. The owner's financial obligation toward the construction of the interpretive center shall not exceed $500,000. The owner's obligation shall be secured before the issuance of the 5001n residential building pennit for the project (Source: DA Section 5.1, page D-23 & 24, see Exhibit B). 76. Conservation zone designation for the former"Fieldstone Property." The option between Hearthside Homes and the State Lands Commission to purchase the Fieldstone property has expired, however, a new agreement to renew the option is currently being considered. The purchase of the site has been delayed until the State obtains additional funding needed to acquire the property, and the State Lands Commission most likely will not attempt to acquire the property until the PCB contamination identified on-site has been removed. Hearthside Homes will not agree to any conservation zoning of the Fieldstone site until the property has been sold(most likely to the State). 77. Permanent option to sell the former"Fieldstone Property" to State Lands Commission or other appropriate public agency with a set purchase price agreeable to both parties. The option between Hearthside Homes and the State Lands Commission to purchase the Fieldstone property has expired, however, a new agreement to renew the option is currently being considered. The purchase of the site has been delayed until the State obtains additional funding needed to acquire the property, and the State Lands Commission most likely will not attempt to acquire the property until the PCB contamination identified on-site has been removed. 78. Commitment to work with public agencies to resolve any contamination issues, to establish responsibilities for cost sharing and to obtain agreement guaranteeing payment of costs associated with contamination cleanup to a level necessary for wetland and upland wildlife habitat areas. Clean up of any contamination from oil operations will be done by the responsible oil operator as a pre-condition to Bolsa Chica Mesa development. Oil operations are conducted by the responsible oil operators in accordance with all local, state, and federal laws, the Bolsa Surface Use Agreement, existing oil leases, and other clean-up agreements already in place among those oil operators and various land owners, including the State of California. I 79. Within two years of dedication of the buffer areas, complete construction of trails, view areas, signage, and planting of approved native plants as determined and specified by the public agency receiving the dedication of the land or its designee. A comprehensive network of bicycle and pedestrian trails shall be provided for public access. This network shall link Huntington Central Park, Harriett Wieder Regional Park, Bolsa Chica Wetlands Ecosystem Area, Bolsa Chica State Beach, Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve, and the Bolsa Chica Mesa bluff trail to surrounding residential, 06/25/99 22 recreation, and public parking areas (see Exhibit I Linkages to Regional Recreation Facilities). Opportunities for wetlands observation shall be provided by overlooks provided along public trails. Public use of the trails shall not be limited. The landowner/Master Developer shall dedicate to the County of Orange or other public agency, the land and/or easements within the Bolsa Chica LCP Area that are required for the public trails indicated on the Coastal Access and Recreation Plan (Source: County LCP Land Use Plan Section 4.2 Public Access and Visitor Serving Recreation Policies, see Exhibit I). The `owner"shall dedicate to the County the land and construct the improvements for all bicycle trails and pedestrian trails shown on the Development Plan and the Master Plan of Countywide Bikeways, other than those bicycle and pedestrian trails within the proposed ultimate boundaries of Harriett Wieder Regional Park. Irrevocable offers of dedication shall be made by the owner with the recordation of a final tract map for individual lots which includes areas designated for trails. Improvements shall include design, grading, trail construction, fencing, signing, striping, erosion control, and other standard improvements. The timing of improvements shall be determined prior to recordation of the final tract map for the tract in which the improvements will be located. (Source: County Development Agreement, page D-25, Exhibit B) 80. Provide funding for the construction of at least a 10,000 square foot Interpretive Center and related improvements based on plans developed by the County of Orange, the City of Huntington Beach, or a collaborative of both parties. The County's LCP states that the Harriett Wieder Regional Park will include an approximately 10,000 square-foot interpretive Visitor Center, that is centrally located within the park. (Source: LCP Land Use Plan Section 4.3.2.f, Exhibit E) The County's Development Agreement requires the "owner" to pay for the costs of construction of an interpretive center. The County will determine the precise location and design of the center. The owner's obligation shall be based on a facility that will not exceed 5,000 square feet. The owner's financial obligation toward the construction of the interpretive center shall not exceed $500,000. The owner's obligation shall be secured before the issuance of the 500th residential building permit for the project (Source: DA Section 5.1, page D-23 & 24, see Exhibitt). 81. To design and construct drainage facilities which will remove to the greatest extent possible, sediments and contaminates flowing from the Bolsa Chica Mesa, or adjacent properties, into the Bolsa Chica Lowlands. Figure 6.3-2 of the LCP Land Use Plan shows the location of the storm drain outlets as approved by the Coastal Commission (Exhibit H). The LCP provides for one drain into the pocket area lowlands and four drains into Outer Bolsa Bay. An application to the U.S. Army Corps of engineers for the stormdrain outfall pipes is still pending. Even if the Army Corps grants a permit for the construction of the pipes, it cannot be implemented without first obtaining County and Coastal Commission approval of a Coastal Development Permit (CDP). The City will be provided the opportunity to review and comment on the CDP proposed for the pipes, as this permit requires a public hearing. The County cannot consider any permit for outfall pipes until there is a certified 06/25/99 23 Local Coastal Program. (Source: Memo from the County dated May 4, 1998, see Exhibit H) 82. To design drainage facilities which will not drain directly into the Bolsa Chica Wetlands or adversely impact the aesthetic appearance of the bluffs or the lowlands. Figure 6.3-2 of the LCP Land Use Plan shows the location of the storm drain outlets as approved by the Coastal Commission (Exhibit 1). The LCP provides for one drain into the pocket area lowlands and four drains into Outer Bolsa Bay. An application to the U.S. Army Corps of engineers for the stormdrain outfall pipes is still pending. Even if the Army Corps grants a permit for the construction of the pipes, it cannot be implemented without first obtaining County and Coastal Commission approval of a Coastal Development Permit (CDP). The City will be provided the opportunity to review and comment on the CDP proposed for the pipes, as this permit requires a public hearing. The County cannot consider any permit for outfall pipes until there is a certified Local Coastal Program (LCP) (Source: Memo from the County dated May 4, 1998, see Exhibit 1). 83. To design any fencing along the boundaries of the buffer areas to minimize visual and esthetic impacts from the adjoining public lands and to minimize domestic animal access to the buffers and wetlands. The current LCP requires the development to provide a 50-foot wide development setback along the edge of the Bolsa Chica Mesa in addition to the bluff face. The development setback and bluff face shall be landscaped exclusively with native and drought tolerant plant materials that provide habitat value and a naturally appearing visual transition between the Wetlands Ecosystem Area and the residential/community park areas of the Planned Community. Public trails required by the LCP may be included in the development setback (Source: LCP Land Use Section 6.2 item 17, see Exhibit A). As a result of the Appellate Court ruling, Hearthside Homes is required to preserve the eucalyptus trees that are located on the project site. Any development on the Mesa would need to be sensitive to the location of the trees, which in some areas, acts as a buffer between the wetlands and the Mesa. 84. Any limitation on the number of residential units shall apply to the entire mesa area, regardless of ownership or location in or outside the boundaries of the City of Huntington Beach. Staff is currently reviewing the LCP development standards and comparing them to residential projects recently approved for development. During the past several years, the City has approved a variety of projects with a range of development standards, lot sizes, height, and design standards (Ocean Colony, Meadowlark, Centerstone, etc.). In general, standards within the County's LCP are similar to projects that have been processed and approved within the City. 06/25/99 24 A mixture of residential product types surrounds the proposed residential development. The project proposes a maximum density of 6.5-12 du/acre that is compatible with the adjacent, existing single family and multi-family product. CITY COUNCIL ADOPTED PRINCIPLES 11/7/94 85. The Bolsa Chica project should be a financial benefit to the City of Huntington Beach. Any development plan for the Bolsa Chica must articulate how Fire, Police, Recreation and Library service deliver to Bolsa Chica over the next 20 years will be accomplished. Services should be delivered with the least cost to Bolsa Chica residents and the least impact to the citizens of Huntington Beach. The Bolsa Chica Annexation Study dated January 7, 1999 evaluates the question of whether or not the annexation of the Bolsa Chica would result in a positive or negative fiscal impact to the City of Huntington Beach. The study analyzed several annexation scenarios including annexation prior to development, development without annexation, annexation after development is complete, and annexation without development. In every case, annexation is shown to create a beneficial fiscal impact to the City. (Please refer to Exhibit D, Bolsa Chica Annexation Study Executive Summary) 86. The Bolsa Chica project must be responsible for guaranteed restoration of the wetland, including a comprehensive maintenance and operation plan. The State Lands Commission has acquired 880 acres of lowland wetlands for restoration purposes. In connection with the sale of the Lowlands, Hearthside Homes'responsibility for restoration has been assumed by the State. Currently, the Bolsa Chica Steering Committee (comprised of eight state and federal agencies) is conducting research to evaluate the Wetlands Restoration Project that will propose restoration alternatives that include proposals for a possible tidal inlet and also alternatives to alter the layout of the East Garden Grove Wintersburg Channel. The Environmental Impact Report for the Bolsa Chica Wetlands Restoration Project is tentatively scheduled for distribution in December of 1999. At that time, the City will have the opportunity to review the EIR and provide comments on the Project. 87. The Bolsa Chica project should be a balanced community with a mix of land uses that minimizes vehicle miles traveled and impacts to city services. The County LCP provides a mix of land uses including residential, recreational, and educational uses that will reduce vehicle miles traveled (see Land Use Map, Exhibit F). A 10-acre commercial site was proposed in the original LCP but was deleted by the Coastal Commission in 1997 when the number of permitted dwelling units was reduced from 3,300 to a maximum of 1,235. 88. The Bolsa Chica project should not exceed the City's infrastructure and service capacity for streets, water, public safety, libraries, parks/recreation, sewerage, cultural activities and other city services. 06/25/99 25 Staff and Hearthside Homes have negotiated conceptual terms of a pre-annexation agreement that requires Hearthside Homes to provide between $12 and $15 million to provide for City services and infrastructure. The Bolsa Chica Annexation study also found that the property tax and other revenues generated by the proposed Mesa Development would provide sufficient revenues to fund the development's municipal service demands. 89. The Bolsa Chica project should be consistent with the City of Huntington Beach General Plan. The Bolsa Chica project is consistent with the County General Plan, which is the governing document of the area. Currently, the City's General Plan does not address the Bolsa Chica area. If the City annexed the Bolsa Chica, an amendment to the City's General Plan would be necessary to include the land that is currently under the jurisdiction of the County. 90. The Bolsa Chica project development standards should be the same as the City of Huntington Beach standards including: lot size, heights, design standards, open space, park dedication and City soil remediation standards. Staff is currently reviewing the LCP development standards and comparing them to residential projects recently approved for development. During the past several years, the City has approved a variety of projects with a range of development standards, lot sizes, height, and design standards (Ocean Colony, Meadowlark, Centerstone, etc.). In general, standards within the County's LCP are similar to projects that have been processed and approved within the City. A mixture of residential product types surrounds the proposed residential development. The project proposes a maximum density of 6.5-12 du/acre that is compatible with the adjacent, existing single family and multi-family product. 91. The Bolsa Chica project should reflect a compatible building density and type with neighboring City residences. Staff is currently reviewing the LCP development standards and comparing them to residential projects recently approved for development. During the past several years, the City has approved a variety of projects with a range of development standards, lot sizes, height, and design standards (Ocean Colony, Meadowlark, Centerstone, etc.). In general, standards within the County's LCP are similar to projects that have been processed and approved within the City. A mixture of residential product types surrounds the proposed residential development. The project proposes a maximum density of 6.5-12 du/acre that is compatible with the adjacent, existing single family and multi-family product. 92. The mesa-lowland relationship should be maintained through careful site planning of open space, parks, trails, ecological reserves or other open space amenities. 06/25/99 26 A comprehensive network of bicycle and pedestrian trails shall be provided for public access. This network shall link Huntington Central Park, Harriett Wieder Regional Park, Bolsa Chica Wetlands Ecosystem Area, Bolsa Chica State Beach, Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve, and the Bolsa Chica Mesa bluff trail to surrounding residential, recreation, and public parking areas (see Exhibit l Linkages to Regional Recreation Facilities). Opportunities for wetlands observation shall be provided by overlooks provided along public trails. Public use of the trails shall not be limited. The landowner/Master Developer shall dedicate to the County of Orange or other public agency, the land and/or easements within the Bolsa Chica LCP Area that are required for the public trails indicated on the Coastal Access and Recreation Plan. (Source: County LCP Land Use Plan Section 4.2 Public Access and Visitor Serving Recreation Policies, see Exhibit I) 93. The natural topography of the mesa should be maintained by limiting grading, terracing or other similar methods. The bluff face should be preserved and protected with a significant open space setback area. Existing mature trees on-site should be preserved rather than replaced. Mesa development should minimize impacts to wetlands. Development shall be sited and designed to minimize the alteration of natural landforms and shall not require the construction of protective devices that would substantially alter natural landforms except for the initial mass grading. The historically graded slope between the Bolsa Chica Mesa and the Lowland Pocket Area, that extends from the southern corner of the Mesa to the East Garden Grove Wintersburg Flood Control Channel, shall be remedially graded for stabilization of the Mesa development. (Source: County LCP Land Use Plan, Section 3.3, items 10 & 11 Physical Resources Component, see Exhibit G) The bluff along Outer Bolsa Bay will be preserved in its current condition with the exception of four storm drain outlets that will be sensitively designed, located and aesthetically treated as to minimize the visual impacts to the bluff. The City will review and comment on the plans for the storm drain outfall pipes when the applicant submits an application to the County for a Coastal Development Permit. The Court of Appeal recently rendered its decision on the appeal of the trial court's decisions pertaining to the Bolsa Chica Local Coastal Program (LCP). The Court of Appeal determined that the approximately 6-acres of existing eucalyptus trees on the Mesa cannot be removed. As a result, any proposed development will be required to incorporate the eucalyptus trees into the tract design. The LCP and EIR incorporate land use policies, conditions of approval, and mitigation measures to minimize development impacts to wetlands both during construction and after the project is complete. Vegetation screening and fencing will be installed to minimize human intrusion into the wetlands once development is complete and the trails are open to the public. 94. The City desires the most environmentally sensitive restoration of the wetland. Restoration should be accomplished through an adaptive management approach. i 06/25/99 27 The State Lands Commission has acquired 880 acres of lowland wetlands for restoration purposes. In connection with the sale of the Lowlands, Hearthside Homes'responsibility for restoration has been assumed by the State. Currently, the Bolsa Chica Steering Committee (comprised of eight state and federal agencies) is conducting research to evaluate the Wetlands Restoration Project that will propose restoration alternatives that include proposals for a possible tidal inlet and also alternatives to alter the layout of the East Garden Grove Wintersburg Channel. The Environmental Impact Report for the Bolsa Chica Wetlands Restoration Project is tentatively scheduled for distribution in December of 1999. At that time, the City will have the opportunity to review the EIR and provide comments on the Project. 95. The Bolsa Chica project should preserve and restore on-site historically significant structures and incorporate them into the site planning of the property. Harriet Wieder Regional Park will include a 10,000 square-foot Interpretive Center, centrally located within the park. Various exhibits will provide visitors with information regarding park resources, archaeology, geology, history, and the Bolsa Chica Wetlands Ecosystem Area. Facilities will include group/visitor display areas, a ranger-program amphitheater, meeting rooms, restrooms, storageAab, public transit drop-off area, and off-street parking. Interpretive displays areas will be provided along trails within Harriet Wieder Regional Park and along the interpretive trail within the State Ecological Reserve, to furnish visitors with information about specific habitats and species protection, and to serve as observation points and staging areas. (Source: County LCP Land Use Plan, Section 4.2, see Exhibit) 96. The Bolsa Chica project should preserve cultural artifacts in designated open space areas that have been determined to be archaeologically and historically significant. The Bolsa Chica Planned Community Program shall require compliance with all County- adopted archaeological/paleontological policies and Board of Supervisors Resolution No. 77-866 related to cultural and scientific resources, to ensure that all reasonable and proper steps are take to either preserve archaeological remains in place, or alternatively that measures are taken to assure the recovery, identification, and analysis of such resources so that their scientific and historical values are preserved. (Source: LCP Land Use Plan Section 3.4.Z Exhibit K) 97. The Bolsa Chica project should be designed as if it would ultimately be annexed to the City of Huntington Beach. If annexation occurs prior to development, there is a greater likelihood of designing any new infrastructure to be compatible with existing City infrastructure. If annexation occurs subsequent to development the City will have less influence over infrastructure design. 98. Once the LCP and Development Agreement have been approved, the City should be responsible for building plan review, approval, inspection services and other "permit 06/25/99 28 processing" aspects of implementing project entitlements. The City should also be responsible for the collection of fees to cover the costs of such services. Through discussions with Hearthside Homes and City staff, it is proposed that, as a term of any pre-annexation agreement, the County will approve, plan check and inspect grading plans and street improvement plans. Building permits for residential units will be obtained by Hearthside Homes through the County, but the County will contract with City to plan check construction drawings, inspect homes and issue permits. Residential building permit fees will be at City rates and paid to the City. 99. The Wintersburg Flood Control Channel should be improved in order to provide an enhanced drainage system and flood control. Pursuant to the requirements of the Orange County Flood Control District (OCFCD), the East Garden Grove Wintersburg (EGGVI9 Channel will be improved to accommodate a 100-year flood event, and will be designed to minimize sedimentation and siltation along the floor of the Channel. Final EIR 560 was prepared by the County of Orange to analyze flood control improvements in central Orange County (including the EGGW Channel). It analyzed three options for improvements along the EGGW Channel within the Bolsa Chica LCP Area, depending on the restoration approach utilized by the State for the Bolsa Chica Lowland. The option to be utilized will be identified in the State- prepared Wetlands Restoration Plan that must be approved by the California Coastal Commission. (Source: LCP Land Use Plan Section 3.2.3-5, Exhibit L) The Environmental Impact Report for the Bolsa Chica Wetlands Restoration Project is tentatively scheduled for distribution in December of 1999. At that time, the City will have the opportunity to review the proposed alternatives and make a recommendation to support a specific alternative proposed in the Project. 100. A tidal inlet should have no impact to beach, public recreation or be detrimental to pubic safety, health or welfare. Currently, the Bolsa Chica Steering Committee (comprised of eight state and federal agencies) is conducting research to evaluate several alternatives in association with the Wetlands Restoration Project. The alternatives include proposals for a possible tidal inlet and also alternatives to alter the layout of the East Garden Grove Wintersburg Channel, The Environmental Impact Report for the Bolsa Chica Wetlands Restoration Project is tentatively scheduled to be distributed in December 1999. At that time, the City will have the opportunity to review the proposed alternatives and make a recommendation to support a specific alternative proposed in the Project. No determination has been made as to which alternative will have the least impact on the surrounding resources at this time. 101. The Bolsa Chica project should be designed to minimize all risks from seismic conditions. The California Department of Mines and Geology has identified the location of potential surface rupture on the Mesas and within the Lowland from the Newport Inglewood Fault. 06/25/99 29 Housing on the Bolsa Chica Mesa has been designed to avoid the area of potential surface rupture by providing a 50-foot setback. No habitable structures will be placed within this setback. Additionally, the project proposes the development of a Community Park (Source: County LCP Land Use Plan, Exhibit F) along the major fault line that will prevent any building structures from being constructed in an unsafe proximity to the fault. Any development within the Bolsa Chica project area will be in full compliance with all Local and State seismic standards and requirements as set forth in the EIR Mitigation Program and LCP conditions of approval. CITY GOALS APPROVED 2/22/99 102. Fire: The Fire Department has indicated that annexing the Bolsa Chica will have an impact on the Department's ability to assume and provide fire protection services throughout the City. Annexing the Bolsa Chica area will consume system-wide facility resources. Goals to achieve (relating to fire issues) include funding for necessary capital improvements, meeting required response time standards for fire or medical emergencies and obtaining acceptable access to the Bolsa Chica Planned Community. The Bolsa Chica Annexation Study found that the City's on-going costs for police and fire service to the proposed Mesa development would be provided for by the property taxes and other revenue generated by the development. Included in this finding is transfer of the Orange County Fire Authority's property tax levy to the City. In addition to these on- going revenues, staffs negotiations with Hearthside Homes have yielded substantial public safety related exactions, including a $75,000 payment for police services and$2.5 million to provide for fire improvements related to the development. 103. Public Works: any pre-annexation agreement would include provisions to address streets, water and wastewater issues. Staff and Hearthside Homes have negotiated conceptual terms of a pre-annexation agreement that requires Hearthside Homes to provide, among other exactions, the City with a 9-million gallon water reservoir and a sewer lift station that will replace an aging City facility and accommodate the development's sewer needs. 104. Water: production, distribution and storage of water should all be part of the pre- annexation negotiations. The City's goal is to ensure that adequate supplies of water are available under all conditions, including provision of storage in case of a temporary cessation of deliveries, and in meeting fire flow pressure and volume. Through discussions with Hearthside Homes and City staff, both parties have proposed that, as a term of any pre-annexation agreement, the City shall provide all municipal services to the Mesa development project, including, but not limited to: water, police, and fire services. The terms have also proposed that Hearthside Homes will provide the City with improvement security (bond or other acceptable instrument of credit) to pay for a 9- million gallon water reservoir, booster station and appurtenances (the "water improvements"). Hearthside Homes will complete construction of the water improvements (to City standards) before occupancy of the 3515r unit in the Mesa development project. Hearthside Homes will also dedicate approximately 1.5 acres of 06/25/99 30 land to the City for the water reservoir(at a site mutually agreeable to Hearthside Homes and the City). If the Bolsa Chica were annexed into the City, the City would have a statutory obligation to provide water service to the area. If the annexation occurs, the 9 million-gallon water reservoir will help to complete Water Master Plan improvements. 105. Wastewater: negotiations must address the means by which wastewater will be collected and pumped and how related facilities will be financed. The City should create the most efficient design to accommodate both the current wastewater service needs and the needs of future development. It was proposed that, as a term of any pre-annexation agreement, Hearthside Homes will provide the City with a sewer lift station (the "sewer improvements"). Hearthside Homes will complete construction of the sewer improvements to City standards prior to occupancy of the first unit in the Mesa development project. 106. Streets: the project must accommodate efficient traffic circulation, address traffic safety standards, and adequately meet parking demands. The local road system for the Bolsa Chica Mesa will be served by the Mesa Connector which will be a collector roadway, connecting Warner Avenue with Bolsa Chica Street. It will be constructed as a 2-lane, divided road, with landscaped parkways and a median between the two project entries (Warner Avenue and Bolsa Chica Street). Class II bicycle lanes will be provided within the roadway. Adjacent to the Mesa Community Park, notched public parking and landscape pockets will be provided on both sides of the roadway. 107. Community Services: it is anticipated that the increase in population will further burden current over-utilized recreation facilities in proximity to the Bolsa Chica area. The Community Services Department has projected the need to provide additional sports field improvements at two adjacent elementary schools. The impacts on facilities will occur whether or not the Bolsa Chica is annexed into the City; however, a pre- annexation agreement may provide the opportunity for the City to negotiate park design standards and adequate funding to address service/maintenance costs. Community Services has determined that the proposed concept plan for the Mesa Community Park is acceptable if the project can provide for three lighted fields to maximize the availability of the fields to serve the youth sports participants that the project will generate. Through discussions with Hearthside Homes and City staff, both parties have proposed that, as a term of any pre-annexation agreement, that Hearthside Homes will construct a recreational playing field (soccer) with "practice level"lighting on the park planned to be adjacent to the new school playing fields. As part of an anticipated land exchange agreement, staff expects the Ocean View School District and Hearthside Homes will cooperate in lighting the two proposed school playing fields. 108. Police: if annexed, the City's Police Department will provide all law enforcement related services to the Bolsa Chica area. Goals relating to police issues include maintaining 06/25/99 31 service (response times, etc.) and safety to current City residents while also providing adequate service to any new residents of the Bolsa Chica Planned Community. Negotiating points critical to the operation of law enforcement include obtaining adequate funding to offset service costs and the ability to provide equipment necessary to adequately service the Bolsa Chica. Through discussions with Hearthside Homes and City staff, both parties have proposed that, as a term of any pre-annexation agreement, that the City shall provide all municipal services to the Mesa development project including, but not limited to: water, sewer, police, and fire services. Hearthside Homes will also make a one-time payment of $75,000 to the City for police equipment at the issuance of the first residential building permit. 109. Library: the additional population generated by the proposed development will increase the use of library services throughout the City. The Library Services Department has indicated that additional impacts on library services would generate the need for additional staffing. The City desires to maintain the level of services currently provided to City residents. The staff would pursue negotiations with the County of Orange to secure tax dollars from the library fund. The City has instituted and currently assesses two separate library-related development fees. A fee of $0.15 per square foot is assessed on all new development under the Community Enrichment Library Fee. An additional$0.25 per square foot is charged as a Library Development Fee. These fees combined with on-going property tax and other revenues generated from the Mesa development should allow the City to maintain the level of services currently provided to City residents. 110. Planning: negotiations should address the project's development standards to ensure that they match the City's to the closest degree possible. A goal of negotiations will be to address the project's compatibility with surrounding uses. Planning issues to be evaluated are discussed in more detail in the 17 Bolsa Chica Principles adopted by City Council on November 7, 1994 and also in the Summary of Bolsa Chica Coastal Issues dated August 30, 1998. Refer to items 85-101 and items 111-117. SUMMARY OF BOLSA CHICA COASTAL ISSUES 8/30/95 111. Conservation Easement: a conservation easement should be placed over the entire restoration area to protect it from future use as anything other than wetland restoration uses. (The conservation easement should be required to protect the lowland restoration areas, even if federal permits are not sought, are should and not granted, or if the property is acquired by a federal agency.) The State Lands Commission has acquired 880 acres of lowland for wetlands restoration purposes. The Bolsa Chica Steering Committee, comprised of eight federal and state agencies, is currently preparing the Wetlands Restoration Program and has tentatively scheduled the Draft EIR/EIS for release in December of 1999. With the exception of the former Fieldstone property, the County's LCP Land Use Plan designates all of the 06/25/99 32 approximately 1,249 acre Wetlands Ecosystem Area within the lowland for Conservation (Source: LCP Land Use Map, Exhibit F). 112. Mesa Top Buffer: the Bolsa Chica Local Coastal Plan should include an open space buffer, on top of the mesa (along the bluff edge), to protect the bluff and wetlands restoration area from the areas designated for development. The buffer should be of sufficient width to accommodate passive recreational uses (such as bicycle and/or pedestrian trails, benches and vista overlooks) similar to those planned for the Harriett M. Wieder Regional Park (which runs parallel to the Bolsa Chica Mesa, along the length of the Huntington Mesa at the southern most edge of the Bolsa Chica area). The current LCP requires the development to provide a 50-foot wide development setback along the edge of the Bolsa Chica Mesa in addition to the bluff face. The development setback and bluff face shall be landscaped exclusively with native and drought tolerant plant materials that provide habitat value and a naturally appearing visual transition between the Wetlands Ecosystem Area and the residential/community park areas of the Planned Community. Public trails required by the LCP may be included in the development setback (Source: LCP Land Use Section 6.2 item 17, see Exhibit A). As a result of the Appellate Court ruling, Hearthside Homes is required to preserve the eucalyptus trees that are located on the project site. Any development on the Mesa would need to be sensitive to the location of the trees, which in some areas, acts as a buffer between the wetlands and the Mesa. 113. Wetland Restoration Plan: the restoration plan proposed in the LCP is a well-balanced plan that provides a valuable combination of habitats and will provide winter eco-tourism opportunities to the City. Implementation of the restoration plan should be careful to ensure that the tidal inlet is designed in a manner which will have no adverse impact to the beach, public recreation or be detrimental to public safety, health or welfare; that site planning of open space, parks, trails, ecological reserves or other open space amenities maintain the relationship between mesa upland and lowland areas; and that the natural topography of the mesa and bluff faces are maintained by limiting of grading, terracing or other similar methods. The State Lands Commission has acquired 880 acres of lowland wetlands for restoration purposes. In connection with the sale of the Lowlands, Hearthside Homes'responsibility for restoration has been assumed by the State. Currently, the Bolsa Chica Steering Committee (comprised of eight state and federal agencies) is conducting research to evaluate the Wetlands Restoration Project that will propose restoration alternatives that include proposals for a possible tidal inlet and also alternatives to alter the layout of the East Garden Grove Wintersburg Channel. The Environmental Impact Report for the Bolsa Chica Wetlands Restoration Project is tentatively scheduled to be distributed in December 1999. At that time, the City will have the opportunity to review the proposed alternatives and make a recommendation to support a specific alternative proposed in the Project. No determination has been made 06/25/99 33 as to which alternative will have the least impact on the surrounding resources at this time. 114. Mesa Top Roadway: the LCP should incorporate a buffer by a mesa top roadway which runs roughly parallel to the recommended bluff top buffer and separates the buffer from development areas. The mesa roadway would serve as a distinct boundary between areas designated for development and public open space areas and would provide public access opportunities to public open space areas while providing additional separation from development and protection to the wetland restoration area. As a result of the Appellate Court ruling, Hearthside Homes is required to preserve the eucalyptus trees that are located on the project site. (Please refer to Exhibit. Any proposed roads on the Mesa would need to be sensitive to the location of the trees, which in some areas, acts as a buffer between the wetlands and the Mesa. Hearthside Homes is currently evaluating the placement of the road within the project in light of the Appellate Court's ruling. 115. Cultural/Historical Memorialization: the LCP should include memorialization of the cultural and historical resources found in the Bolsa Chica. Memorialization should be provided through interpretive signage and displays which depict the Bolsa Chica's history of oil production, use by Native Americans and the significance of the site during World War II; these elements should be incorporated into vista overlooks and small kiosks provided along the buffer. Harriet Wieder Regional Park will include a 10,000 square-foot Interpretive Center, centrally located within the park. Various exhibits will provide visitors with information regarding park resources, archaeology, geology, history, and the Bolsa Chica Wetlands Ecosystem Area. Facilities will include grouplvisitor display areas, a ranger-program amphitheater, meeting rooms, restrooms, storageAab, public transit drop-off area, and off-street parking. Interpretive displays areas will be provided along trails within Harriet Wieder Regional Park and along the interpretive trail within the State Ecological Reserve, to furnish visitors with information about specific habitats and species protection, and to serve as observation points and staging areas. (Source: County LCP Land Use Plan, Section 4.2, see Exhibit E) 116. Compatibility with Existing Los Patos Development: the LCP should designate the Bolsa Chica areas, adjacent to the City, to a compatible land use and zoning that is of similar density, type and scale to existing development along Los Patos Avenue. Staff is currently reviewing the LCP development standards and comparing them to residential projects recently approved for development. During the past several years, the City has approved a variety of projects with a range of development standards, lot sizes, height, and design standards (Ocean Colony, Meadowlark, Centerstone, etc.). In general, standards within the County's LCP are similar to projects that have been processed and approved within the City. 06/25/99 34 A mixture of residential product types surrounds the proposed residential development. The project proposes a maximum density of 6.5-12 du/acre that is compatible with the adjacent, existing single family and multi-family product. 117. Product Type: the LCP should reflect the same percentage of single and multi-family units that exists in the immediate project vicinity which is not less than 66.66% single family. At this time, it is the intention of Hearthside Homes to build primarily single family homes on the Mesa (approximately 85 percent) with the remaining units to be townhomes. 06/25/99 35 Exhibit A i PLANNED COMMUNITY PROGRAM 2. GENERAL REGULATIONS (2) Notification by County of Failure to Act If it is determined by the Director, Planning and Development Services Department that the time limits established pursuant to Government Code Sections 65950 through 65957.1 have expired, and the notice required by law has occurred, the Director, Planning and Development Services Department shall, within seven (7) calendar days of such determination, notify the Coastal Commission and any persons or group entitled to receive notice pursuant to Section 7-9-118.6(d) of the Orange County Zoning Code that the application has been approved by operation of law pursuant to Government Code Sections 65950-65957.1 and, if applicable, that the application may be appealed to the Coastal Commission pursuant to Section 7-9-118.6(g) of the Orange County Zoning Code. This section shall apply equally to a determination by the County that the development has been approved by operation of law and to a judicial determination that the development has been approved by operation of law. (Coastal Act/30333; 30620; 14. Cal. Code of Regulations/ 13571(b)(2)) 2.2.28 Residential Development Setback Along the Bolsa Chica Mesa and Around Warner Avenue Pond The 50-foot residential development setback from the olsa Chica Mesa, as required in Sections .5.3, 5.5.1, 5.5.2, and 5.5. of this r ' Planned Community Program, is illustrated in Figures 2.1 and 2.2. The dew-pment scthack shalLbe 12ndq wed exclusivelv with native and drought-tolerant plant material that provides habitat value and a naturally apt)earingansltl�onhetween Shy W N�ndSFro.Syc,�ett� Li residential/community park areas of the Planned Community. The planting design shall avoid visually abrupt and artificially engineered changes in the type and density of plant material. Portions of the 50-foot setback will occur alongthe south-facingsloe of the Mesa ( _figure an a ong e s ope w 1c adjoins Outer Bolsa Bay (i.e., Section 2.2, where the State ownership is 50 feet or less from the edge of theXufft; Public trails required y e LCP may be included within e setback. Public use of the trails shall be ensured in perpetuity by the dedication of either fee ownership or an appropriate trail easement, as determined in Coastal Development Permits for Mesa development. 1-12-98\PCP\.January 22. 1998 2-19 1h k, r e�.wcLF� PEDEWR4W TR4rL FENCE f � av� la WIED TACAL RESTOPATAON 0 5a DEVELOPMENT STABILIZED SETBACK SLOPE DEVELOPMENTAREA WETLANDS ECOSVSTEMAREA (RESIDENTIAL PLANNING ARE4) (CONSERVATION PLANNING AREA) GOLSA �r / CHICA CH CHICA MUTED MESA TIDAL FULL TIDAL TIDAL INLET OUTER BOLSA BAY Figure 2.1 DEVELOPMENT SETBACK ALONG THE BOGSA CHICA SOUTH-FACING SLOPE OF THE BOLSA CHICA MESA PLANNED COMMUNITY PROGRAM L_U� „1, � oosnnrc srarE RESERVE -v MERPREnw TnAJL 1a- OUTER BOLSA BAY 50' DEVELOPMENT I SETBACK FROM EXISTING BLUFF DEVELOPMENT AREA WETLANDS ECOSYSTEM AREA (RESIDENTIAL PLANNING AREA) (CONSERVATION PLANNING ARE.) / BOI. CH/CAA MUTED MESA 77DAL i ULL ADA TIDAL INLET) OUTER BOLSA BAY Figure 2.2 DEVELOPMENT SETBACK ALONG THE BOLSA CHICA WEST-FACING SLOPE OF THE BOLSA CHICA MESA PLANNED COMMUNITY PROGRAM PLANNED COMMUNITY PROGRAM 2. GENERAL REGULATIONS The 100-foot residential development setback from the edge of the Bolsa r1 P A jN Chica Mesa, as required in Sections 4.5.5.5.1, .5.2, and 5.5.3 of thislY" Planned Community Program, is illustrated in Figures 2.3 and 2.4. a` )want-to the recommendati�gt� s of theletter- or -Wetlands R eseazch Associates dated August 5 1997,.the de Qp��t setback�hallinclude a low fence (3 to 4 feet) with a mesh screen around the -mire pwn t k n some preda�to`- from enterin-"-the and are e4 from Warner Ave ue om entering a pond. Trash cans and "dog waste" receptacles sM11 be firg lI"ed a ong tflie'- pat way. Signs shall also be provided educating the public about the value of this wetland area as it relates to other wetlands in the area, informing them to keep pets in control, and prohibiting entrance into the wetland. 2.2.29 ATIP Financing 1. An ATIP funding program for all Full Construction and Fair-Share Participation ATIP improvements shall be submitted with the Coastal Development Permit application for approval of the first tentative tract map, except a map for financing and conveyance purposes. The ` funding program shall be satisfactory to the Director/PDSD. 2. Security for all "Full Construction" ATIP improvements within an ATIP phase shall be a required condition of approval of the first Coastal Development Permit for a residential unit within that phase. Security may consist of a bond, letter of credit, or establishment of a funding mechanism such as an assessment district or community facilities district. Security shall be provided prior to issuance of the first building permit for residential development. 3. Fees for residential units withl>��riIP phase-�hal be esta�lish,_„ed,.�, before recordation of the final map which includes the„resdentiil nir Payment of the fee shall be a special condition of approval of the first Coastal Development Permit for residential development within that ATIP phase which must be met prior to issuance of the building permit. 1-12-98\PCP\,January 22, 1998 2-22 WARNER AVENUE ---------- - -------- 1\\ r.�- rapt---- ------------------ - -- ------------------ •r. ~� MESA :.:`'.. COMMUNITY PARK WARNER POND Q EXISTING VEGETATION LIMIT ONURISDICTIONAL WETLANDS LOW FENCE BARRIER PLANTING OF NATIVE UPLAND SCRUB VEGETATION DEVELOPMENT PUBLIC TRAIL AREA ALIGNMENT AND DESIGN OF MESA CONNECTOR AND COLLECTOR ROAD ARE CONCEPTUAL AND SUBJECT TO REFINEMENT. Figure 2.3 PLAN VIEW OF DEVELOPMENT BOLSA CHICA SETBACK AROUND WARNER POND PLANNED COMMUNITY PROGRAM Q N.T.S. 3L1 PUBLIC DEDICATION AREA EPA WETLANDS T W MIN. I I MEANDERING TRAIL IDMIIING I PROPOSED ROW i ROW DEVELOPMENT I I AREA � LOW FEMCE IsasnNG POND VEGETATION WARNER AVENUE &AMER PLANTING- NATNE ummD SCRUB BUFFER PUNTING- HIGH MARSH VEGETATION 3-IO SLOPE Figure 2.4 CROSS-SECTION OF DEVELOPMENT BOLSA CHICA SETBACK AROUND WARNER POND PLANNED COMMUNITY PROGRAM N.T.S. LAND USE PLAN 6. DEVELOPMENT COMPONENT 13. New utilities to serve development shall be located outside of the Wetlands Ecosystem Area except to the extent the location of the utilities in this area constitutes an incidental public service, and in accordance with Coastal Act Section 30233(a)(5), there are no other feasible, less environmentally damaging alternatives as defined in the Coastal Act. Mitigation measures shall be provided to minimize adverse environmental effects of any new utilities located in these areas, including utilities directly related to petroleum production, wetlands restoration and maintenance, and water quality and flood control. COMMUNITY DESIGN POLICIES 14. The architecture of the Bolsa Chica community shall draw upon thematic characteristics found in traditional New England coastal towns, and adapt those characteristics to local conditions of climate, market, materials availability, density, and technology. 15. Community Transition/Urban Edge Treatment Plans shall be included as part of Coastal Development Permits required by the Planned Community Program, to illustrate the landscape edges, transitions, and interfaces between Bolsa Chica and existing residential neighborhoods in the City of Huntington Beach. 16. Landscape screening (including low walls, shrubs, and/or drifts and groves of trees) shall be designed and installed along streets, trails, and the perimeters of residential and recreational developments to soften development edges visible from PCH and other public areas of Bolsa Chica. 17. A 50-foot-wide residential development setback shall be established within the 6(. vim(.SGfrX development Planning Areas along the edge of the Bolsa Chica Mesa in addition `" to the bluff face and 100-feet around Warner Pond (except where adjacent to Warner Avenue and the Mesa Connector). The development setback-'a—noNuff face shall be landscaped exclusively Vith native and drought-tolerant plant material that provides habitat value and a naturally appearing visual transition between the Wetlands Ecosystem Area and residential/community park areas of the Planned Community. The planting design shall avoid visually abrupt and artificially engineered changes in the type and density of plant material. Public trails required by the LCP may be included within the development setback. The residential development setback for Warner Pond shall conform with recommendations contained in the letter from Wetlands Research Associates dated August 5, 1997 and shall b: increased to 100 feet. 1-12-9 I.M.January 22. 1998 6-5 Exhibit B i be made prior to the issuance of the 1000th Building Permit to COUNTY or such non-profit entity for the establishment of a child-care facility as approved by the Director of the EMn. 4. RoauzitY for Per*orma„ce_of Work. The obligations of 0NSIR under this Agreement to complete any facility shall be secured by cash, a irrevocable letter of credit, negotiable bonds, surety bond or other security, or combination of security, acceptable to C0WTV, in a sufficient sum (not to exceed the Maximum Amount in connection therewith) to assure completion and the faithful performance of OWNBR's obligations under this section. The amount of such security shall be reduced by the availability of Financing District bond proceeds available to satisfy the obligations of OWNER under this section. S. Dedication of Ooengpace. OWNER shall irrevocably offer to dedicate approximately 49 acres for inclusion within the Harriett Nieder Regional Park in accordance with and subject to the provisions of Chapter 8 of the Local Coastal Program. This land is identified on Figure D-1. This offer shall be made after certification of the LCP by the California Coastal Commission and before issuance of the first mass grading permit for the Project. The offer shall provide for the undergrounding by OMM of all oil and gas pipelines presently located within the OWNER's park dedication area. This undergrounding may occur in phases consistent with the phased development of the park by COUNTY. The offer shall be in form and substance satisfactory to Omm and COUTPY's Director, Environmental !Management Agency. 5.1 interprative Center. 0WNSR shall pay for the costs of construction of an ecological interpretive center within Harriett Nieder Regional Park. The precise location and design of the interpretive center will be determined by COUNTY. OWNER's obligation shall be based on a facility which will not exceed 5,000 square feet and which will provide only those services and facilities which are typical of similar ecological interpretive centers. The interpretive center shall not be used for any commercial, residential, office, retail, hotel, lodging, or industrial activity of any nature except retail sales and office uses which are customarily incidental to the operation of similar interpretive centers. D-23 i OWNER's total financial obligation toward the construction of this interpretive center shall not exceed $500,000. OWNSR'a obligation shall be secured as provided in Section 4 above before the issuance of the 500th residential building permit for the Project. 6. 1Naior Pubj1g WrAfite In Excess of Those Provided for 2n Prior Plans. The Property has been the subject of cooperative planning efforts by the OWNER, the COUNTY, environmental groups and other interested parties for a number of years. The Development Plan contains significant modifications to the earlier (1993) Land Use proposal. The current proposal also represents a significant reduction in the density and intensity of use of the project site from the COUNTY's existing General Plan. The modifications were made by the OWNER with the cooperation of the COUNTY and local environmental groups. They are contained in a Land Use Plan which is included in the 1994 Local Coastal Program. The COUNTY has found that the modifications achieve significant public benefits and further both COUNTY and Coastal Act objectives. 7. Blood Control. Before approval of the first tentative tract map for Lowland residential lots, except for conveyance and financing purposes, OWNER and COMITY shall enter into an agreement securing the construction of the East Garden Grove Wintersburg Channel (ROM Channel) as set forth in the WRp. This agreement shall provide for reimbursement to OWNER, to the extent feasible, of all costs to be incurred.by OWNER which are the "fair share" of other future LCP development. OWNER shall not be reimbursed for the "fair share" . attributable to existing development. Before the issuance of the first grading permit for Lowland residential development, OWNER shall design and construct these improvements. The reconstructed channel shall extend from the boundary of the Project Site to the Graham Avenue Bridge and will include the removal and reconstruction of tidegates in accordance with OCBCD's criteria and standards. The channel will be designed to convey 100-year discharges. The design shall meet the approval of EMA'■ Director of Public works. If, for any reason, COUNTY designs and constructs these channel improvements prior to the occurrence of OWNER's D-24 t ti obligation to do so according to this Section 7, the OWNER, when and if its obligation arises, shall reimburse Comm for coubma s design and construction costs for these improvements contemplated by this Section 7. OWNER shall be entitled to reimbursement from other future developments on the ease terms and conditions as if ON= had provided these improvements. 7.1 A=al :er Pipe, Prior to the submittal of an application for a Coastal Development Permit for the Wetlands Restoration Plan (WRP), OWNER shall submit a study to ZMh1s Director of Public Works considering the benefits of constructing an •Equalizer Pipe- between Inner and Outer Balsa Bay for the purpose of improving water quality and residence times within Huntington harbour. If determined appropriate by EM's Director of Public Works, OWNER shall construct the improvements necessary during Phase 1 of the NRP. a. Trails... OWNER shall dedicate to COUNTY the land and construct the improvements for all bicycle trails and pedestrian trails shown on the Development Plan and the Master Plan of countywide Bikeways, other than these bicycle and pedestrian trails within the proposed ultimate boundaries of Harriett Wieder Regional Park. Dedication shall be on the terms and conditions set forth in the Development Plan and subject to approvals of all other agencies having jurisdiction over development of the trails. Irrevocable offers of dedication shall be made by OWNER with the recordation of a final tract map for individual lots which includes areas designated for trails. Improvements shall include design, grading, trail construction, fencing, signing, striping, erosion control, and other.atandard improvementa. The timing of improvements shall be determined prior to recordation of the final tract may for the tract in which the improvements will be located. 9. Fire Protection. Before a final tract map is recorded (other than for financing or conveyance purposes) OWNER shall enter into a secured fire protection agreement with COUNTY or its successor fire protection agency in a form satisfactory to both parties. This ) agreement shall provide that, among other things: 9.1 OWNER shall irrevocably offer to dedicate a one-acre site for a permanent fire station to serve the D-25 Exhibit C 4_210�- 1 • CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ;?e C E'JV z v 1, INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION APR 19 1999 HUNTINGTON BEACH DEP 'tT Ofi^r To: Mayor and City Council Members Via: Ray Silver, City Administrator From: Melanie Fallon, Assistant City Administrato Date: April 15, 1999 Subject: Harriet M. Wieder Regional Park The purpose of this memorandum is to provide the current status of issues affecting development of the Park based on recent meetings between the City, Hearthside Homes and the County of Orange. Issues Land Dedication to County It Provision of the Park property by Hearthside is mitigation for development on the Bolsa Chica Mesa. Hearthside is obligated to offer the land for dedication to the County, in a manner that is acceptable to the County, once its Bolsa Chica LCP is certified and prior to issuance of permits for grading or any construction. Hearthside owns approximately 49 of the 111 acres designated for the Park. ■ Parkland for Phase II must be dedicated at the same time as Phase I land. Phase II land has an existing oil lease. The lessee has the right to operate until the well is no longer economically viable. a Hearthside must provide the property to the County free and clear of encumbrances. M Approximately 15 acres in Phase II owned by the City will be transferred to the County upon completion of the bluff top park road improvements being completed by PLC. This area has already been remediated. The City does not own any Phase I Park property. Status The pending litigation on the Bolsa Chica development precludes the necessity of Hearthside offering the land for dedication to the County. ■ Even if Hearthside were to agree to a"premature" dedication of the land, County staff has indicated that the County currently will not accept it in its existing condition. Land Clean-up ■ Phase I: Hearthside reports that Aera has surface oil rights on the property and that the parties are working on a quitclaim. Additionally, Hearthside has responsibility to underground existing pipelines. Hearthside claims that there is no soil contamination on Phase I property. ■ Phase II: Some of this property is likely contaminated. The lessee of the oil operation has the.obligation to clean that portion of the property. Status ■ Notwithstanding other constraints, Hearthside has indicated that August 1999 would be the earliest that the Phase I property could be offered for dedication to the County with respect to clean-up issues and surface rights. ■ Little progress has been made with respect to early termination of the oil lease and the associated clean-up of Phase II. ■ Because transfer of Phase I property cannot be completed without transfer of Phase H property, County staff believes that August 1999 may not be achievable. Water Service ■ Phase I: Approximately 25 acres of this portion of the park(total 51 acres) are outside City boundaries. Pursuant to the City's regulations, water cannot be sold to this area without a finding of surplus water. ■ Phase H: Approximately 32 acres of this portion of the park(t6ta160 acres) are outside City boundaries. Status ■ City Staff is evaluating mechanisms by which water could be provided to Phase I of the park. Summary 1. Until the matter of development on the Bolsa Chica Mesa is resolved, it does not appear that the land dedication required by the County"s agreement with Hearthside Homes will proceed. Accordingly, the likelihood that the County could begin development of Phase I in this Fall's planting window(necessary for the native vegetation)is uncertain. 2. The City has completed its current obligations with respect to the Park and expects that the property, which includes the bluff top road in Phase II, will be transferred to the County by this Fall. Cc:Howard Zelefsky,Director of Planning Bob Beardsley,Director of Public Works Daryl Smith,Superintendent of Park,Tree and Landscape Division Mary Beth Broeren, Senior Planner i i BOLSA CHICA LOWLAND Z Q cr'tultii' 'u r15} hie;. ;r•,4e:,: r ' Nil p f- f- ";r Ocean Colony N Q Homes 301 0 Ail U i \ N r y1r. / LL = a \,� � 1 FYI PLC U U `�+.;tt`; SCE\\ 1 U �,% L��t�li„ , Q to S 101 a J I J /,r 'QpO/ �.�t!tt/ \j,rgv ?`i`i�a1':fiJ:�'�� •!Ir?t�. ``\ `j1r m Q NTST,\ \ r \103 \:' ;iv'',)\ 201 102 \ 104 \ _ \\ 41 �5 a I 4+ue o QQ • Q • LANDOWNER ';p p Hearthside Homes 9G� O County of Orange ® City of Huntington Beach HARRIETT WIEDER REGIONAL PARK OWNERSHIP MAP ► �l 0 200 aoo soo !ORN4\ _ c t v County of Orange Acquisition Process Bolas-Mica Regional Park Goal: Satisfactory Irrevocable Offer of Dedication from Developer • 49 acre dedication free and clear regional park dedication • Free and clear of all liens, encumbrances, assessments, leases (recorded and unrecorded), easements and taxes except those approved by the Director PFRD • Meet Development Agreement Criteria (Adopted April 18, 1995) • First Amendment Adopted June 12, 1996 • CA Coastal Commission Certification July 11, 1996 Requirements: • Satisfactory Preliminary Title Report • Financial assurances of completing the clean-up responsibilities • Corporate VP of Finance, parent oil company • Approved Phase One studies of 49 acres • County assessment of risk signed by three Departments • Completed satisfactory clean-up over acres to be accepted now • Habitat Restoration Areas planting completed • Pipelines relocated and undergrounded • Benefited property identified • Phased dedication areas identified « # acres available 1999 • # acres available 2009 • # acres available 2019 • CEQA documentation identified for all phased dedication • General Plan Conformity statement County and City • Coordination of lowlands temporary access requirements • Coordination of requirements of Development Agreement by and Between The City of Huntington Beach and Pacific Coast Homes and Garfield Partners (Nov. 14, 1990) H C:\WINNI'1Profiles\TumerD\Desktop\County of Orange Acquisition Process.doc 6/17199 7:07 ANI Wieder Regional Park Phase I Update i. Funding • FY 1999/2000 Budget $1.4 million 11. Phase I Improvements • 51 acres: Oceancrest to Garfield Improvements • Native Coastal Sage Scrub, grassland, mixed woodland habitat restoration • Trails — riding/hiking & bicycle • Local Park Node —turf, playground, picnicking • Parking Area (+/- 100 cars) Ill. Current Parkland Ownership Acres Hearthside Homes 28'" County of Orange 25 Total 51 * band not offered or accepted IV. Total Park Current Owned By Acres • City of Huntington Beach 28 • County of Orange 34 • Hearthside Homes 49 Total Located In Acres • Incorporated Huntington Beach 49 • Unincorporated County fit Total Exhibit D i BOLSA CHICA ANNEXATION STUDY REVIEW OF OPTIONS LAFCO FISCAL & TECHNICAL REVIEW PROCEDURES A Report to the Huntington Beach City Council Subcommittee on the Bolsa Chica January 7, 1999 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report was prepared to address the question of whether annexation of the unincorporated"island",known as Bolsa Chica,would result in a positive or negative fiscal impact to the City of Huntington Beach. The first five sections of this report were prepared and issued as a draft document on July 29, 1998. On that date, and at three subsequent meetings held in August, September and November of 1998,the City's Bolsa Chica Subcommittee conducted noticed,public workshops to discuss the draft report. The workshops were designed to elicit input from interested individuals and organizations. As a result of the public workshops revisions were made to the original draft text and a few assumptions were altered which resulted in minor adjustments to final numbers. In addition, Sections 6 and 7 were added to this final draft report. Section 6 responds to fifty-three questions raised during public discussion,providing additional background on study methodology and further clarifying report assumptions. At the request of the Council Subcommittee, Section 7 provides a matrix summary of the potential"pros and cons"of annexation. Fiscal Study Findings The fiscal study examined three scenarios, all of which assume that development will occur on the Bolsa Chica Mesa. The three scenarios studied included annexation prior to development, development without annexation and annexation after development is complete. In response to questions raised during public review, a fourth scenario was analyzed. This analysis(which can be found in Section 6 of the report,as part of responses to questions) examined the fiscal impact to the City if Bolsa Chica were annexed,but development did not occur. A four-year horizon was used for each alternative,consistent with project build-out projections. Analysis of each of the four alternatives resulted in the following findings; 1. Annexation prior to development The fiscal impact to the City under this scenario resulted in a negative cash flow the first year after annexation and positive cash flow annually thereafter. The four-year cumulative surplus to the City totaled$1,412,087. 2. Development without annexation This scenario resulted in a negative fiscal impact to the City during the first three years of project build-out. By the fourth year,however,the City begins to realize a surplus ($167,249). This is principally due to required up-front capital expenditures in the initial years to construct a new fire station. The overall cumulative deficit over the four-year horizon is$2,989,749. i 3. Annexation after development is complete This scenario assumes annexation in the fifth year, after build-out of the project is complete. During the four years of project construction,while the area remains unincorporated, a total deficit impact to the City of$2,989,749 has been created. After annexation in year five, an annual surplus to the City begins to reduce this deficit. By year eight,the deficit remains,but is reduced to $2,116,884. 4. Annexation without development This scenario results in a small revenue surplus for all four years with a cumulative surplus of$72,630. The fourth-year annual surplus dwindles to under$6,000 however, principally due to expected reductions in oil extraction tax revenues. Summary This study has been prepared for the Huntington Beach City Council to be used as a decision-making tool as they deliberate the issue of annexation of Bolsa Chica. It should not be assumed that the deficit and surplus projections presented in this report represent exact future sums. Every fiscal study must be based on assumptions, which could alter actual, future figures. This study makes every attempt,however,to insure that all assumptions—on both the cost and revenue side—are sound and conservative. Analysis of the four scenarios presents a clear picture of the fiscal trend that would result from annexation. In every case, annexation creates a beneficial fiscal impact to the City of Huntington Beach. ii EXHIBIT 1 Forecasted Assessed Values - PrQpea Tax Transfer Bolsa Chica Fiscal Impact Analysis (Full Year) (Full Year) (Full Year) (Buildout) Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 2&j Growth Rate Secured Assessed Value 21,334,201 114,754,285 285,063,770 442,836,846 Increases from Development 91,170,000 164,720,000 149,090,000 68,865,000 Unsecured Value 597,358 609,305 621,491 633,921 TOTAL ASSESSED VALUE 113,101,558 280,083,589 434,775,261 512,335,766 GENERAL PROPERTY TAX LEVY 1,131,016 2,800,836 4,347,753 5,123,358 CURRENT PROPERTY TAX DISTRIBUTION 100% County of Orange @ 0.0637 72,046 178,413 276,952 326,358 0% City of Huntington Beach @ 0 0 0 0 0 100% Library District @ 0.0172 19,453 48,174 74,781 88,122 100% Fire Authority @.1160 131,198 324,897 504,339 594,309 POTENTIAL PROPERTY TAX DISTRIBUTION 44% County of Orange @ 0.0280 31,700 78,502 121,859 143,597 66% City of Huntington Beach @ 0.0356 40,346 99,911 155,093 182,760 70.6% Library District(City)@ 0.0121 13,715 33,963 52,721 62,126 100% Fire Authority(City)@ 0.1160 131,198 324,897 504,339 594,309 100% HB City Employment Retirmt @.04930 55,759 138,081 214,344 252,582 Potential City Tax Rate= 0.2130 Property Tax Revenue Calculation: Proposed New SFR Units 234 412 380 177 Huntington Beach(56%of Current Tax Distrib.) 40,346 99,911 155,093 182,760 Library District-(Gen Levy x 0.0172 x 70.5%) 13,715 33,963 52,721 62,126 Fire Authority-(Gen Levy x 0.1160) 131,198 324,897 504,339 594,309 BB City Employment Retirmt @.04930 55,759 138,081 214,344 252,582 Property Tax Total: 241,017 596,863 926,497 1,091,777 PROPERTY TRANSFER TAXES Value Transferred @ 5% 5,655,078 14,004,179 21,738,763 25,616,788 Revenue to City @$0.551$1,000 3,110 7,702 11,956 14,089 RSG,Inc., 1/5M Flsimpat Property&Transfer Taxes EXHIBIT 2 Four Year Revenue & Expenditure Summary Bolsa Chica Fiscal Impact Analysis 'Year 1 l ear 2 1 ear 3 Year 4 (Full 1 ear) Change+(Full l car) Change (Full 1 ear) Change (Buddout) GENERAL F11ND EXPENDITIRES GENERAL GOVERNMENT Administration 1 019 63°! 1 663 169% 4,467 -31% 3 097 Animal Control(Net) 1 191 176%°' 3 287 59% 5,220 17% 6,121 County Tax Collection Charge 4,820 148%1 11 937 55% 18,530 18% 21,836 Subtotal 7,030 140% 16,887 67% 28,217 10a/a 31,054 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT _Community Development(Net) 2500 30/6 2 575 3% _ 2,652 3% 2,732 Subtotal 2 500 3% 2 575 3% 2 652 3% 2,732 PUBLIC SAFETY Law Enforcement Services 170,150 -13°ltr, 148,512 73% 257,300 9% 276 598 Fire Protection and Inspection 130,525 -180A,; 106,452 6% 112,568 5%a 118,472 Ambulance Services 305,333 -18* 251,720 -5% 264 306 5% 277,521 Fire Station Relocation_ 420,000 26 %' 1,540,0_00 •06/a 1,540,000 -100°!a 0 Subtotal 1,026,008 99 2,046,684 6% 2,174,174 - -69% 672,591 LIBRARY SERVICES Library Services _ 103,000 3°la, 106,090 3% 109,273 - 3% 112,551 Subtotal 103,000 S%- 06,090 3% 109,273 3% 112,551 COMMUNITY SERVICES ' - Community Services _ _ 306,600 -98% 6_7_98 3°/a 7,002 3% 7,212 Subtotal 306,600 -98°/a 6,798 3% 7,002 3% 7 212 PUBLIC WORKS Sewer Maintenance Services 6,030 160% 15,706 67% 26,231 18%_ 31,030 Subtotal 6,030 160% 15,706 67% 26,231 18% 31,030 F _ CONTINGENCY 145 117 51%' 219,474 7% 234,755 -63% 85,717 TOTAL GENERAL FUND 1,596,284 51%, 2,414 214 7°la 2,582 304 -63% 942,886 ROAD Ni4INTEN4NCE `� 1 Street Maintenance 1,845 185°/a 5,265 58%a 8,338 17% 9,793 Street Sweeping 80 106% 165 59% 262 17% 307 Bike Trail Maintenance 3,008 174% 8 256 = 590W 13 120 2% 13,360 Traffic Signal Operation/Maintenance 1 950 S°1a _2048 5% 2,150 5% _2,257 Contingency 688 129%a: 1,573 526W 2,387 8% 2,572 TOTAL ROAD FUND 7,571 129%, 17 307 52%a 26,257 8% 28,289 TOTAL 4LL EXPENDITURES 1,603,856 5203V 2,431 521 7% 2,608,561 -63% 971,175 REVENUE SURPLUS/(SHORTFALL) _ (474 941) -139% 183 995 �181% 516,415 130% 1 186 618 CUMULATIVE SURPLUS/(DEFICIT) (474941) (290,946) - 225,468 1,412,087 General Fund Surplus/(Shortfall) (480 567) 164 679 4 844T27 1,146 501 Cumulative General Fund (480 567) (315 888) 168 554 1,315,056 Road Fund Surplus/(Sh_ortfall) __ 5,626 19,315 31 973 40,117 Cumulative Road Fund 5 626 24,941 56,914 97,031 RSG Inc 115,99 Fisimpct EXHIBIT 2 EXHIBIT 2 Four Year Revenue & Expenditure Summary Bolsa Chica Fiscal Impact Analysis fear 1 , 1 car 2 Year 3 1 ear 4 (Full 1 ear) Change (Full 1 ear) Change ' (Full 1 ear) Change (Buildout) GEE- ER AL FUND REWNUES TAXES Property Tax 241,017 148% 596 853 55% 926,497 18% 1,091,777 Property Transfer Tax 3,110 148% 7.702 55% 11,956 18% 14,089 Utility User Tax 70 762 184% 201 21 1 59%° 319,570 17% 374,701 Sales`1 ax 0 0 0 0 •I ransient Occupancy Tax 0 0 0 0 Subtotal -- -- - - - - 314,889 156% 805 766 56% 1,258,024 18% 1,480,567 MO`[OR VEHICLE FEES Motor Vehicle In-Lieu 22,290 176% 61,535 590/0 97,733 17% 114.593 Off_-Highx%ay License _ _ 9 176% 25 59% 40 17% 47 Subtotal 22,299 176% 61,561 59% 97,773 17% 114,640 FRANCHISE FEES Gas,Electric,Trash,and Cable TV 5.379 176% 14,850 59% 23,586 17% _27,655 5.379 176%' 14,850 59% 23,586 17% 27.655 OTHER REVENUES Paramedic and Ambulance Transport Fees 124,200 10% 124,200 0% 124,200 00/a 124,200 Fines&Forfeitures 7.048 176% 19,458 59% 30,904 17% 36,235 Oil Extraction Tar 1 11 545 -8% 102 621 -8% 94,412 -8% 86,859 Capital Contribution Fee(Fire) 350,000 207% 1,075,000 0°! 1,075,000 -100% 0 Capital Contribution Fee(Libyan) 202 320 79% 361 680 -96W 329,880 -54% 151,720 Miscellaneous Revenues 2.008 176°/u 5,543 59% 8,803 17% 10,321 Subtotal 797.121 112% 1,688,502 -1% 1.663,199 -75.39% 409,336 InterestEarnin2s -23,971 8.214 194% 24,165 137% 57,189 TOTAL.GENERAL FUND 1,115,717 131% 2,578.894 19% 3,066.746 -32% 2,089,387 ROAD FUNDS Section 2105 3.415 176% 9,426 59% 14,971 17% 17,554 Section 2106 2.235 176% 6 171 590W 9,800 17% 11,491 Section 2107 4,762 176% 13,147 59% 20,881 17% 24,483 Section 2107 5 0 0 0 0 Measure"M"Local Turnback 2,505 176% 6.914 59% 10,982 1701w 12.876 Interest Famines 281 243% 963 66016 1,595 25% 2.001 TOTAL ROXD FUNDS 13 197 177% 36 622 59014 58,229 17% 68,406 TOTAL -kLL REVE\l'ES 1,128.914 132% 2615.516 19% 3,124.976 -31% 2.157,793 RSG Inc, 111<19 FIsrtnpct EXHIBIT EXHIBIT 3 Four Year Revenue & Expenditure Summary Bolsa Chica Fiscal Impact Analysis (Without Annexation) Year 1 j Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 (Full Year) Change (Full Year) Change (Full Year) Change (Buildout) GENERAL FUND REVENUES t ' TAXES Property Tax 118.673 1481/61 293.881 = 55% 456,192 18% 537.573 Property Transfer Tax 0 0 0 0 Utility User Tax 0 0 0 0 Sales Tax(Direct) 0 'i 0 0 0 Transient Occupancy Tax 0 5 0 0 0 Subtotal - -- -- --- -- — 118.673 148%' 293.881 55% 456,192 18% 537,573 • eaE _ MOTOR VEHICLE FEES Motor Vehicle In-Lieu 0 = 0 0 0 Off-Highway License 0 0 -— -- ---------- — -- - -- -- -0 0— ----- - — --- Subtotal 0 0 0 - 0 FRANCHISE FEES Gas,Electric,Trash,and Cable TV _ 0 r 1 0 0 0 Subtotal 0 0 0 0 OTHER REVENUES Paramedic and Ambulance Transport Fees 124.200 0% 124,200- 0% 124,200 0% 124,200 Fines&Forfeitures 1,624 105% 3.324 114°!° 7,115 17% 8,343 Oil Extraction Tax 0 :n.+ 0 0 0 Capital Contribution Fee(Fire) 150,000 63*' 1,100,000 =100% 0 0 Capital Contribution Fee(Library) 70,200 ­76iu 123.600 e -8% 114,000 -53% 53,100 Miscellaneous Revenues 0 0 _ _ 0 0 Subtotal -- — --— - 346,024 290% 1,351.124 -82% 245,315 -24.32% 185,643 Interest Earnines -48,011 29,214 80,251 8,343 TOTAL GENERAL FUND 416.686 •288% 1,615.791 -62% 621.256 18% 731,559 ROAD FUNDS Section 2105 0 ' Y 0 '° 0 0 Section 2106 0 a= 0 • ;, 0 0 Section 2107 0 0 0 , 0 Section 2107.5 0 0 0 0 Measure"M"Local Tumback 0 0 0 0 Interest Earnings 0 :a ; 0 0 0 TOTAL ROAD FUNDS 0 0 0 0 TOTAL ALL REVENUES 416.686 2886/o 1,615.791 '-62% 621,256 18°!° 731,559 RSG Inc, 1/5/99 hsimpct EXHIBIT EXHIBIT 3 Four Year Revenue & Expenditure Summary Bolsa Chica Fiscal Impact Analysis (Without Annexation) fear 1 Year 2 fear 3 Year 4 (Full 1 car) Change a (Full fear) Change (Full 1 ear) Change (1luildout) GENERAL FUND EXPFNDITum.'s GENERAL GOVERNI MEN-I Administration 0 0 0 0 Animal Control(Net) 0 0 0 0 Count'Tax Collection Char<ve 2.371 148% 5.878 55% 9.124 18% 10,751 Subtotal- - - 2,373 - 148% 5,878 55% 9.124 - 18% 10,751 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMF.N'I Community De%elopment(Net) 0 0 0 0 Subtotal - -- - - 0 ------ - - ()-- ()--- - PUBLIC SAFI-I Y Law Fnforcernent Services 116.500 -22% 90,837 8% 97,650 8% 104.974 Fire Protection and Inspection 0 0 0 0 Ambulance Services 305,333 -18%, 251,720 5% 264,306 5% 277,521 Fire Station Relocation 420,000 267% 1.540.000 0% 1.540.000 -100% 0 Subtotal - - - 841.833 124% 1.882.557 1%• 1.901.956 -80% 382.495 LIBRARY SERVICES Libras•Services 103,000 3% 106,090 3% 109,273 3% 112,551 Subtotal - - 103,000� 3%- - 106,090--- 3% 109.273 3% 112.551 COMMUNITY SERVICES Communit_•Sen.ices 306.600 -98%, 6.798 3% 7.002 3% 7,212 Subtotal - - - - - 306,600 -98% 6,798-- 3% 7.002 3% 7,212 PUBLIC WORKS Sewer Maintenance ScrR ices 0 0 0 0 Subtotal - - 0------- - - 0——� 0 0 CONTINGENCY 1.5,381 60%' 200.132 1% 202.735 -75% 51.301 TOTAL GENERAL F1 ND 1.379.187 60% 2.201.455 1% 2.230.090 -75% 564,310 ROAD MAINTENANCE; Street Maintenance 0 0 0 0 Street S%%eeping 0 0 0 0 Bik*Trai►Maintenance 0 0 0 0 Traffic Signal Operation Maintenance 0 0 0 0 Contingency - - - - 0 - 0-- 0 - 0 TOTAL ROAD FUND 0 0 0 0 TOTAL.ALI,EXPENDITURES 1.379.187 60% 2,201.455 1% 2.230.090 -75% 564,310 REVENUE SIIRPLI'S/(SIiORTFALI.) (962.500) -39% (585.66.1) 175% (1,608.834) -110% 167,249 CI(MULATIVESL'RPLU§.(DI:F[CIT) - (962,500) : (1.,;48,16.1) (3.156.998) (2,989,749) General Fund Surplus/(Shortfall) (962,500) (585.664) (1.608.834) 167,249 Ciinlulatlye General Fund (962.500) 0.548.164) Q%156.998) (2.989,749) Road Fund Surplus/(Shortfall) 0 (` 0 0 Cunttilaffi,e Road Fund - - 0 - - 0 - 0 - 0 RSG :rc, 1.5,99 hsimpct EXHIBIT EXHIBIT 4 Four Year Revenue & Expenditure Summary Bolsa Chica Fiscal Impact Analysis (Annexation - Post Development) 1 ear 4 Near 5 Near 6 Year 7 Year 8 (Buildout) (Full 1 ear) Change (Full 1 car) Change (Full tear) Change (Full 1 ear) GF'NF,RAL FUND REVE\tTES ' TAXES Propert, "I ax 537,573 869 195 2% 886 579 2% 90.1 310 20/6 922 397 Property Transfer'I ax 0 14 371 5% 15 090 5% 15 844 5% 16 636 Lnht" User lax 0 0 0 0 0 Sales Tax 0 0 0 0 0 Tramient Occupancy lax 0 0 0 0 0 Subtotal - - 537,573 883 566 2% 901 668 2% 920,155 -J- 20/6 939,033 MO 1 OR VEHICLE FIFES Motor Vehicle In-I Ieu 0 114.600 0% 114600 00/0 1 14,600 0% 114 600 Off-1 lighwa} license 0 45 0% 45 0% 45-- 0% 45 Subtotal- - - 0 114645 645 0% 114.645 00/0 114645 0% 114 645 FR'�tiC1IISE FLES Gas.Electric,Trash,and Cable TV 0 27.604 3% 28,432 3% 29.285 _ 3% 3l1 164 Subtotal 0 27 604 3% 28 432 3% 29 285 3% 30 164 OI HER RLVENUES Paramedic and Ambulance 7 ransport fees 124 200 124 200 0% 124.200 0% 124.200 0% 124,200 fines&Forfeitures 8,343 36 200 S% 38 010 5% 39.911 5% 41.906 Oil Extraction Tat 0 0 0 0 0 Capital Contribution Fee(Ltbraty) 53,100 0 0 0 0 Miscellaneous Re%enues 0 10300 5% 10 815 5%!0 11,356---5% 11.924 Subtotal 185,643 170 700 1% 173 025 1% 175,466 1 46% 178 030 Interest EarnlnEti 8 343 5 954 11 830 10,177 8 388 "TOTAL GEN ERA 1.FUND 731,559 1.202 469 2% 1.229 600 2% 1.249,728 2%, 1,270,259 ROAD FUNDS ' Section 2105 0 17.600 0% 17 600 00/0 17.600 00/0 17,600 Section 2106 0 11.500 0% 11.500 00/0 11,500 00/0 11,500 Section 2107 0 24 500 -46% 13 147 59% 20 881 17% 24 483 Section 2107 5 0 0 0 0 0 Measure"M" Local Turnbac6 0 12 876 0% 12 876 00/0 12 876 0% 12,876 Interest Earnings 0 3 490 1 912 2.289 2 448 'I OTAL ROAD FUNDS 0 69 966 -18% 57 036 14% 65 146 60/6 68 907 TOTAL ALL REVENUES 731.559 1.272 435 1% 1.286 636 2% 1.314,874 2% 1,339 166 GENFRAL FUND F.XPF.NDITI RES GE`ERAI.GOVERNMENT Administration 0 3 090 3% 183 3% 3 278 3% 3.37; Animal Control(Nct) 0 6 100 0% 6 100 00/0 6,100 0% 6,101 Count} Tat Collection Charge 10,751 18 448 2% 18 317 2% 19,193 2% I9,57 Subtotal — - - 10,751 27 638 2% 28.100 2% 28.571 _ 2% 29 05-� COMMLNITY DEv FLOPJIEN'I RSG Inc 1/5/99 Fisimpct EXHIBIT 4 EXHIBIT 4 Four Year Revenue & Expenditure Summary Bolsa Chica Fiscal Impact Analysis (Annexation - Post Development) Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 (Buildout) (Full Year) Change (Full Year) Change I(Full l ear) Change (Full Year) Community Development(Net) _ _ _ _ _ 0 _ 2 732 3% 2 814 3°!0 2 898 3% 2,985_ Subtotal 0 2 732 3% 2 814 3% 2 898 3% 2,985 PUBLIC SAFETY Law Enforcement Services 104,974 308 598 -4% 297,343 8% 319 644 7% 343,617 Fire Protection and Inspection 0 148,997 -17% 124,396 5o/al 130,615 5% 137,146 Ambulance Services _ _ 277,521 _3.33,121 -15% 291,39_7 594 305967 5% _321,265 Subtotal 382,495 800,716 -11°% 713,136 --66/e, 756 226 6% 802,028 i LIBRARY SERVICES Library_Services _ 112 551 _ 115,928_ 3% 119,405 3O 122 988 3% 126,677 Subtotal 112,551 115,928 3% 119,405 -3% 122,988 3°% 126,677 COMMUNITY SERVICES Community Services __ _ _ 7,212 7,428 3% 7,651 354; 7,881 3% _ 8,117 Subtotal 7,212 7 428 3% 7,651 �3% 7,881 3% 8,117 PUBLIC WORKS _ Sewer Maintenance Services _0 _ 31,030 3%, 31,961 3%1 _32_920 3% _ 33,907 Subtotal 0 31,030 3% 31 961 a 36W 32 920 3% 33,907 CONTINGENCY 51,301 97,628 -8% 89,378 501W 94,211 5% 99 329 TOTAL GENERAL FUND 564,310 1 083 100 -8% 992,446 5W 1,045,694 5% 1 102,098 ROAD NIAINTENANCE Street Maintenance 0 9,793 3% 10,087 di 3° ,� 10,389 = * 3% 10,701 Street Sweeping 0 301 3% 310 33 319 3+l0 329 Bike Trail Maintenance 0 13,360 3% 13,761 3 0 14,174 3% 14,599 Traffic Signal Operation/Maintenance _ _ 0 1,950 3% 2,009 34' 2_069 „3% _ 2,131 Contingency 0 2,540 3% 2,617 3°/0) 2 695 0 2,776 TOTAL R04D FUND 0 27,944 3% 28,783 29,646 ;3°fo 30,536 .+ TOTAL ALL EXPENDITURES 564,310 1 111,044 -8% 1,021,228 =_5%, 1,075 341 5% 1,132 633 REVENUE SURPLUS/(SHORTFALL) _ 167,249 _ 161,391 64% 265,408 -�('}V 239,534 -I, 206,533 CUMULATIVE SURPLUS/(DEFICIT) (2,989,749) (2,828 358)- --ate (2,562,951) (2,323,417) (2,116,884) _General Fund Surplus/(Shortfall) _ 1_67,249 _119,369 237,155 204,034 168,161 Cumulative General Fund (2 989,749) (2,870 380) (2,633,225) (2,429,191) (2,261,030) _Road Fund Surplus/(Shortfall) _0 _ 42,022 _ 28 253 35 500 _ 38,372 Cumulative Road Fund 0 42 022 70,275 105,775 144,146 RSG Inc 1/5/99 Fisimpct EXHISIT4 EXHIBIT 6 Four Year Revenue & Expenditure Summary Bolsa Chica Fiscal Impact Analysis (No Deg elopment) 1 ear 1 A ear 2 Year2 A ear 3 Year 3 Y ear 4 Year 4 (I ull 1 ear) (Full Year) Change (Full Year) Change (Buildout) Change GENERAL Fl.\D REVS\LIES TAXES Property Tat 46 736 47,670 2% 48,624 2% 49,596 2% Property Transfer Tar 0 0 0 0 Utility User Tax 0 0 0 0 Sales Tax 0 0 0 0 Transient Occupancy Tar 0 0 0 0 Subtotal 46 736 47,670 2% 48,624 2% 49,596 2% MOTOR VEHICLE FEES Motor Vehicle In-Lieu 0 0 0 0 Off-Highway License _ __ 0_ 0 0 0 _ Subtotal 0 0 0 0 FRANCHISE FEES Gas,Electric,Trash,and Cable TV _ 0 0 0 _ 0 Subtotal 0 0 0 0 OTHER REVENUES Paramedic and Ambulance Transport Fees 0 0 0 _ 0 Fines&Forfeitures 0 0 0 0 Oil Extraction Tax 111 545 102,621 -80/0 94,412 -8% 86,859 —80/0 Capital Contribution Fee(Fire) 0 0 0 0 Capital Contribution Fee(Library) 0 0 0 0 Miscellaneous Revenues _ 0 0 0 0 Subtotal 111 545 102,621 -80/0 94,412 -8% 86,859 -8 40% Interest Earnings 718 1,688 135% 952 '-44% 265 -72% TOTAL GENERAL FL\D 158 999 151,980 4% 143,988 -P/a 136,720 '17-5% ROAD FUNDS Section 2105 0 0 0 0 Section 2106 0 0" 0 0 Section 2107 0 0 0 0 Section 2107 5 0 0 0 0- Me asure"M"Local Turnback 0 0 B 0 0- Interest Famines 0 0 0 0 TOTAL ROAD FUNDS 0 0 0 0 - TOTAL ALL REVEIV['ES 158 999 151,980 4% 143,988 -5% 136,720 -5% RSG Inc 1/5199 Fisimpct EXHIBIT 6 Exhibit E LAND USE PLAN 4. PUBLIC ACCESS AND VISITOR- SERVING RECREATION COMPONENT f. Harriett Wieder Regional Park Harriett Wieder (formerly Bolsa Chica) Regional Park is planned on the Huntington Mesa, and straddles the southerly boundary of the Bolsa Chica LCP Area. In 1994, the California Coastal Commission approved a Coastal Development Permit for the first phase of the park's development. A final General Development Plan and Resource Management-Plan.forthe Regional Park may_be incorporated into this LCP through an LCP amendment certified by the Coastal(ommission. TRAILS AND PASSIVE RECREATION FACILITIES 32 �y5. �z Harriett Wieder Regional Park will provide regionally significant trail '' �N jinkagojmm. ec.ting Huntington C._entral Park with Bolsa Chica State Beach. In particular, it will connect City of Huntington Beach pedestrian and bicycle trails within Huntington Central Park to existing trails along Pacific �5j7 Coast Highway, and equestrian trails to Huntington Beach Regional Riding and Hiking Trail No.7. The Regional Park will provide the public with a variety of passive recreation opportunities. Park facilities will include picnic areas, tree groves, stands of native vegetation, and vista points. INTERPRETIVE FACILITIES Harriett Wieder Regional Park will include an approximately 10,000- square-foot interpretive Visitor Center, centrally located within the park. -va—rious exhibits will provide visitors with information regarding park resources, archaeology, geology, history, and the Bolsa Chica Wetlands Ecosystem Area. Facilities will include group/visitor display areas, a ranger-program amphitheater, meeting rooms, restrooms, storage/lab, public transit drop-off area, and off-street parking. Interpretive displays areas will be provided along trails within Harriett Wieder Regional Park and along the interpretive trail within the State Ecological Reserve, to furnish visitors with information about specific habitats and species protection, and to serve as observation points and staging areas. 1-12-98\LCP\.January 22. 1998 4-12 Exhibit F LEGEND / / LAND USE DISTRICT: / M CONSERVATION RECREATION ( 1 V PUBLIC FACIUTY MEDIUM-LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL(6.5.12.5 DU/ACRE) ® PLANNING AREA ® COUNTY LCP AREA BOUNDARY / Area of Deferred CarltRcaUon (Fieldstone Properly) �e `�i .. C EGGW Flood Control Chonnel Pf t Or'�i• 8 I M d� 18 Ij t C �I 3A 3D C —�_____---• C 1C C . .•.. ; '... BOIu PACM CCAST HIGHWAY STATE BEACH ---------------- 3C ------------------------ R ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -- --- - PACIFIC OCEAN I I Figure 2.1-1 BOLSA CHICA LAND USE PLAN (Revised First Amendment) LAND USE PLAN ® 'IC*'kA Exhibit G LAND USE PLAN 3.3 PHYSICAL RESOURCES COMPONENT slopes. Protecting and restoring these landfo= is "ignff c u sal o b nefit of this LUP,_because under thc�986 flan �f bluffs and_slopes would have been graded and destroyed 3. Consistency with Coastal Act The Coastal Commission's Final Revised Findings for Approval of the County of Orange's Land Use Plan Amendment 1-95 set forth the consistency of this component with the California Coastal Act. 3.3.2 Physical Resources Policies 1. Structures for human occupancy, which are located in areas of liquefiable soils, shall conform with all design mitigations required by the County of Orange to minimize risk to life and property. Where appropriate, mitigation should include foundation designs and measures to increase the resistance of the underlying soils to liquefaction. 2. In accordance with California's Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone Act, all development within Bolsa Chica shall be consistent with the site planning and engineering guidelines and the real estate disclosure requirements for the Earthquake Hazard Special Study Zones established for the Newport-Inglewood fault zone that traverses Bolsa Chica. 3. The risk to life and property from surface subsidence at Bolsa Chica shall be minimized by full compliance with oil extraction and monitoring techniques as regulated by the California Department of Mines and Geology. 4. Surficial subsidence shall be monitored and groundwater re-pressurization or other methods shall be used to limit potential subsidence impacts. 5. Where development areas adjoin bluffs, all buildings and habitable structures shall be set back a sufficient distance from the bluff edge to be structurally safe, from the threat of bluff erosion for a minimum of 50 years. Geotechnical r� engineering reports shall be required by the County of Orange to determine this u, tl setback. 6. Development above the coastal bluff facing Outer Bolsa Bay shall be engineered . to ensure that surface/subsurface drainage will not contribute to the erosion or affect the stability of the bluff. Any drainage pipes and outlets shall be installed by auguring (i.e., "drilled" from behind the slope face to exit at or near the base 1-12-98\LCP\,January 22, 1998 3-16 LAND USE PLAN 3.3 PHYSICAL RESOURCES COMPONENT of the bluff) not open excavations or trenching, to ensure bluff stability and minimize visual impacts. Any minor residual affects related to drainage improvements shall be mitigated by recontouring and revegetating to obtain a natural landform appearance. 7. The 25- to 60-foot-high northeast-facing bluff below the Huntington Mesa shall �i�,,f. be preserved and restored as set forth in this Land Use Plan's Public Access and � , Visitor-Serving Recreation Component. This shall include the ESHA restoration+ l- area. Any areas requiring remedial grading or slope stabilization shall be recontoured and revegetated with native plant material to restore the natural landform appearance. 8. The coastal bluff facing Outer Bolsa Bay and the steep bluff below the Huntington Mesa shall both be protected from human intrusion. Where bluff-top trails are permitted, they will be set back from the edge of the bluff and planted and signed to discourage pedestrians from leaving the trails. 9. A 100-foot-wide ESHA/vicetlands buffer zone shall be-designated-the-length-of - Harriett Wieder Regional_Park ar_d_prov_ide separation between the vark's equestrian trail on the Mesa and the ESHAs along the bluff and the Wei ficosystem Area below. Exc �.to the 100-foot-wide buffer shall be allowed �• where the park property is too narrow to accommodate a buffer of this width. 1' Nrw2M to a Coastal Development�ermit for park development. a buffer less than 100 feet.in.width_aWLor,the f.the_equestrian_trail,within-the buffer,_may_b�aallo� . The Resource Management Plan for Harriett Wieder Regional Park shall incorporate and implement this policy. 10. The historically degraded slope between Bolsa Chica Mesa and_the_Lowland Pocket a, that extends from the sou em corner of the Mesa to the EGGW Flood Control Channel, shall be remedially graded for stabilization of the Mesa development. The base of the slope shall a protected from muted tidal flows related to wetlands restoration. Public Class I bicycle and pedestrian trails shall be included in the design of the stabilized slope. 11. Development shall be sited and designed to minimize the alteration of natural landforms and shall not require the construction of protective devices that would substantially alter natural landforms except for the initial mass grading. Grading of the bluff face shall not be allowed beyond that necessary to lower the bluff as proposed in the initial mass grading and for public trails required by the LCP within the development setback. Bluff stabilization shall be allowed if the unstable bluff poses a public safety risk, if bluff stabilization is designed to 1-12-98\LCP\,January 22, 1998 3-17 LAND USE PLAN 3.3 PHYSICAL RESOURCES COMPONENT minimize landform alterations, and if the bluff will be restored to a natural appearance through landscaping consisting of native, drought-tolerant vegetation. 3.3.3 Technical Information 1. Newport-Inglewood Fault Following extensive study over the past 10 years, the California Department of Mines and Geology has identified the location of potential surface rupture on the Mesas and within the Lowland from the Newport/Inglewood Fault (see Figure 3.3-1). Housing on the Bolsa Chica Mesa has been designed to avoid the area of potential surface rupture by providing a 50-foot setback. No habitable structures will be placed within this setback. Additionally, s o es will be designed to ensure stability by uiiiiz ng measures such as buttressing, slope stabilization, and/or excavations for retaining walls. 2. Liquefaction Liquefaction is a geotechnical issue largely limited to the Lowland area of Bolsa Chica. Since residential development has been eliminated within the Lowland, this issue is no longer an applicable public health and safety concern for habitable structures in this area. 3. Avoidance of Groundwater Impacts on Existing Residential Development in Huntington Beach Residences in Huntington Beach located along the northeast border of the Lowland have experienced groundwater intrusion problems from the existing conditions at Bolsa Chica. The County determined that to add substantial amounts of water to this area for wetlands enhancement could exacerbate the existing groundwater intrusion problems. As the Lowland is under State ownership, this issue will be addressed by the State-prepared Wetlands Restoration Plan. 1-12-98\LCP\,January 22, 1998 3-18 Exhibit H 1 LEGEND / / Q PROPOSED STORM DRAIN 0 STORM DRAIN OUn" / 0 DIRECTION OF PLOW ( ' EB COUNTY LCP AREA BOUNDARY NOTE: / // \ \�+� FLITIM MOUE DETAILED ENGINEERING WILL / / \"l. RESULT IN REFINEMENTS TO THE DESIGN CONCEPTS ON THIS TUN.9"AETlHAENTS SHALL NOT RE(XW AN AMBOMENT TO THIS / \v b • \ MAN,PROVIDED M ARE APPROVED AS PART OF A COASTAL DEVELOPMBR RW PROIS® PER CWITR 10 OF ft!DISA CHILI MAN EI) / EGGW F1oed _ \ COMWA NRY PROGRAM. , / Cawd Char.o1 4z- I� r / �, b• �r I / 60• < r o ie• o / b' LOVAN" / se• y / dRH ICUA MY \ PACWC ODAST HIGI/WAY '—--—- Bym CHID► STATE BEACH - - ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - PACIFIC OCEAN i Figure 6.3-2 BOLSA CHICA BACKBONE DRAINAGE PLAN LAND USE PLAN jCp \.�`-"l ',a�G THOMAS B. MATHEWS o} County of Or nge DER U a ' 3W N. FLOWER ST. Planning &.-Development Services Department TH>I FLOOR sANTA ANA, CALffORNIA LtFO� A MAIN ADDRESS: P.O.O BOX 4048 SANTA ANA, CA 92702-4048 May 4, 1998 TELEPHONE: (714) 834-4643 FAX N 834-2771 Mayor Shirley Dettloff R E i E t V E D City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street MAY 07 1998 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 City O'Hunti;;,3; ,'i deach SUBJECT: Bolsa Chica City Council Office Dear Mayor Dettloff: Thank you for your letter of April 7, 1998. Let me assure you that our intention has never been to keep the City of Huntington Beach in the dark over matters on Bolsa Chica. To the contrary, I think our track record in working with numerous City departments over the years speaks for itself in that regard. As you are no doubt aware by now,Judge McConnell's latest decision requires a rehearing of the Bolsa Chica Local.Coastal Program(LCP)before the California Coastal Commission. Consequently,there is no valid LCP for the Bolsa Chica property. The application for a permit from the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers mentioned in your letter is still pending. It is important to note,as a practical matter,.that eyetif the Corps grants the permit,it cannot be implemented without first obtaining County and Coastal Commission approval of a Coastal Development Permit (CDP). The City will be afforded ample opportunity to review and comment on any future CDP considered by the County and the Coastal Commission since these permits require public hearings. In any event,the County cannot consider such a permit until there is a certified LCP. As requested, future communication on Bolsa Chica planning and permit matters will be directed to the City Administrator. In the meantime,if you have further questions or concerns,please feel free to contact me. Ve truly your 11 o B. Math s,Direc or Plmas g&Devel pment Services Department cc: Supervisor James Silva John Sibley George Britton RT:sfl80504 Exhibit I LEGEND /1\ / r °oo°oo°000 NFEWMETM Y MlpWIEDAcass) ' ( r rUKIC PANS / d // rye / 'r ♦ j 4.• ^ 'CeEAcr� HARRIETT © ROrOSM MAX rAMW, // / � / I /) WEIDER v5"aVEaoorc / / REGIONAL � / �` PARK SHOVELM ACCESS • / EGGW n"d �' • / C.n6•r Ch- • MESA © • P, I COMMUNITY PARK I WETLANDS ECOSYSTEM AREA ' © Interpretive Y L Warner Pond Center r. Existing State •ice,',,, State Reserve Overlooks ••/ ' Reserve Existin State 3' Parking 13 o Reserve arking Lot 1/, Lot ° 000°°ooa000 oo°o� � - M�IC CAST Fffi11WAY BOLSA CMCA —————— ————————— BEACH ------------- Y !TTATE '--" OCEAN � PACIFIC , Figure 4.3-2 BOLSA CHICA COASTAL ACCESS AND RECREATION PLAN LAND USE PLAN 0 Boo 1600 LAND USE PLAN 4. PUBLIC ACCESS AND VISITOR- SERVING RECREATION COMPONENT 4.2 PUBLIC ACCESS AND VISITOR-SERVING RECREATION POLICIES COMPREHENSIVE POLICIES 1. Public coastal access and recreational opportunities, including opportunities for wetlands observation and passive recreation such as picnicking, shall be established within new recreation and visitor-serving facilities. Recreational facilities and uses shall be located and designed in such a manner that there will be no adverse impacts to wetlands or ESHA resources. 2. All visitor-serving interpretive facilities shall be designed to be compatible with wildlife habitats. Public trails and interpretive programs shall be designed to ensure they do not adversely affect the Wetlands Ecosystem Area. 3. Adequate public parking shall be distributed throughout the Bolsa Chica LCP area in a manner which encourages public use of the various recreational facilities. 4. Lower cost visitor and recreational facilities shall be protected, encouraged, and, where feasible, provided. Developments providing public recreational opportunities are preferred. 5. A comprehensive signage program for all public access/visitor-serving recreation facilities shall be provided and implemented with the construction of these facilities, and shall inform the public of the availability of, and provide direction to, the on-site recreation amenities of the Bolsa Chica LCP area. TRAILS POLICIES 6. A comprehensive network of bicycle and pedestrian trails shall be provided for public access. This network shall link Huntington Central Park, Harriett Wieder Regional Park, Bolsa Chica Wetlands Ecosystem Area, Bolsa Chica State Beach, Bolsa Chica State Ecological Reserve, and the Bolsa Chica Mesa bluff trail to surrounding residential, recreation, and public parking areas. The public trail system shall be consistent with Figure 4.3-2 of the Land Use Plan which depicts the public trail system. 7. Opportunities for wetlands observation shall be provided by overlooks provided along public trails. Public use of the trails shall not be limited. 1-12-98\LCP\,January 22, 1998 4-2 LAND USE PLAN 4. PUBLIC ACCESS AND VISITOR- SERVING RECREATION COMPONENT 8. All bikeways shall be consistent with the Orange County Master Plan of Regional Bikeways, and the Huntington Beach Master Plan of Local Bikeways. 9. The Landowner/Master Developer shall dedicate to the County of Orange or other public agency, the land and/or easements within the Bolsa Chica LCP Area that are required for public trails indicated on the Coastal Access and Recreation Plan. PUBLIC PARKING AND STAGING AREA POLICIES 10. Harriett Wieder Regional Park, local parks, and other visitor-serving recreation facilities shall include adequate on- and off-street public parking and bicycle racks. 11. Approximately 100 public parking spaces shall be provided within the Mesa Community Park and in parking pockets along the Bolsa Chica Mesa Connector adjacent to the park to accommodate the parking needs of residents and visitors to Bolsa Chica's recreational and interpretive facilities. HARRIETT WIEDER REGIONAL PARK POLICIES 12. The approximately 49 acres of land owned by the Landowner/Master Developer on the Huntington Mesa, shall be irrevocably dedicated to the Courix of Orange for inclusion within the ro osed 106-acre Harriett Wieder Regional Park ri + 't,f _- _. - —�. -_ --- g o to tssuance of the first Master Coastal Development Permit for tthe Bolsa-Chica Mesa. - pri0(4V lt_11_1 ✓W,f "'J Wjq 13. Harriett Wieder Regional Park shall provide a variety of interpretive and recreational opportunities for the public. Interpretive areas which emphasize the ecology and history of Bolsa Chica shall be the focal point of Regional Park facilities. 14. Visitor-serving concessions permitted within the Harriett Wieder Regional Park shall be located, designed and operated so as not to create unmitigable traffic congestion or vehicular/pedestrian hazards. 15. Harriett Wieder (formerly Bolsa Chica) Regional Park shall be devoted to open space/park use. Development shall minimize the alteration of landforms, be landscaped in a manner compatible with the adjacent wetlands and ESHAs, and provide adequate off-street public parking. Any General Development Plan and 1-12-9811-M.January 22, 1998 4-3 Exhibit 3 Feb 22 '99 11 :57 P. 02/05 Aim HEARTHsiiw HOMES,INC. February 22, 1999 Honorable Peter Green, Mayor And Members of the City Council of Huntington Beach Dear Mayor Green and Council Members: We have received by fax a February 22, 1999 letter from David Carlberg of the Amigos de Bolsa Chica regarding Bolsa Chica and our property on Warner Mesa, Mr. Carlberg has requested that the City revisit several "critical points" regarding the community we have planned. We wish to advise the Council of the following: 1. Linear Park dedication. The timing of land dedication is wholly dependent upon when the Bolsa Chica Land Trust terminates its litigation against the California Coastal Commission and us. No dedication of any of our private property can occur, obviously, until the courts have finally adjudicated the plan allowing for reasonable development on Warner Mesa. 2. Edwards Thumb. The protection of this property as a corridor for wildlife and for wetlands restoration purposes is specifically provided for in the Bolsa Chica Local Coastal Program (LCP), approved by the County of Orange and the California Coastal Commission. 3. Warner Pond. Contrary to the Amigos' request for a 50-foot buffer, the LCP already provides for a 100-foot buffer around the pond! 4. Bluff Buffer. The LCP provides for buffers and setbacks from the five-foot contour line that exceed 100 feet. 5. Interpretive Center. Funding:for the center is provided for in the Development Agreement. Location is provided in the County's Coastal Development Permit for the Linear Park. Additional expansion opportunities and funding must come through other public and/or private sources. 6. Storm Drains. The approved LCP provides for one drain into the pocket and four drains into:Outer Bolsa Bay. The Bolsa Chica wetlands already receive run-off from over 27 square miles of Orange County—the equivalent area of the entire City of Huntington Beach—as well as the run-off from the residential communities 1 6 EXECUTIVE CIRCLE, SUITE 250, IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 92614 (949) 250.7700 FAX (949) 250-7705 Feb 22 '99 11 :58 P.03/05 surrounding the Bolsa Chica wetlands, including Seacliff. Our contribution to the existing run-off'is diminimus. 7. Fieldstone. The purchase of this property is delayed pending the State's ability to locate an additional $300,000_ Until the purchase is completed, there will be no conservation zoning of our private property because it would diminish its value. S. Contamination issues in the lowlands are already resolved, except on 25 acres of land currently held in trust by the Bolsa Chica Land.Trust for which our company has neither interest nor control. 9. Bluff top trails, etc, are already provided for., established and located pursuant to the LCP. 10. Shielding of development is already provided for in the LCP. 11.Residential densities are already provided for in the LCP. Please do not hesitate to contact me.if you have any questions regarding the foregoing. As you might have guessed,Mr. Carlberg did not discuss his letter with us prior to sendi you where we might have assuaged most of his concerns. ery truly y rs, C D LDA Cc: David Carlberg 2 Exhibit K LAND USE PLAN 3.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES COMPONENT 3.4.1 Introduction 1. Scope This section describes the archaeological and paleontological resources within Bolsa Chica, and how they will be preserved, protected, and/or documented. 2. Refinements Since 1986 LUP This 1997 Land Use Plan (Revised First Amendment) carries forward most of the policies from the 1986 LUP. The most important new policies require completion of a comprehensive archaeological research design for Bolsa Chica and obtaining recommendations of-1G1ost Ti�CeI`y`Descendanis prior to_and!_ , . reburial of prehistoric Native American remains. Since 1986, data recovery has been initiated and completed-at several-sites in accordance with detailed data recovery programs and Coastal Development Permits approved by the California Coastal Commission. The technical information section describes the status of these data recovery activities. 3. Consistency with Coastal Act The Coastal Commission's Final Revised Findings for Approval of the County of Orange's Land Use Plan Amendment 1-95 set forth the consistency of this component with the California Coastal Act. 3.4.2 Cultural Resources Policies 1. The Bolsa Chica Planned Community Program shall require compliance with all County-adopted archaeological/paleontological policies and Board of Supervisors Resolution No. 77-866 related to cultural and scientific resources, to ensure that all reasonable and proper steps are taken to either preserve archaeological remains in place, or alternatively, that measures are taken to assure the recovery, identification, and analysis of such resources so that their scientific and historical values are preserved. 2. The recommendations of the Most Likely Descendants, as designated by the California Native American Heritage Commission, shall be obtained prior to the reburial of any prehistoric Native American human remains that may be encountered during any archaeological investigation. 1-12-98\LCP\,January 22, 1998 3-21 LAND USE PLAN 3.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES COMPONENT 3. An archaeological research design for Bolsa Chica-shall he_completed-and submitt along ith the first Master Coast la�lopmenl Permit application for land use development within any planning areas as required by the Planned Community Program. The research design shall: a. contain a discussion of important research topics that can be addressed employing data from the Bolsa Chica sites; and b. be reviewed by at least three (3) County-certified archaeologists, as required by the guidelines of the California Coastal Commission. 4. A systematic cultural resources survey of the Lowland shall be initiated to determine if there are any cultural deposits, and if so, to evaluate their significance. If found to be significant, the site(s) shall be tested and preserved in open space, if feasible; or, if preservation cannot be accomplished consistent with the LUP, a data recovery plan shall be implemented in coordination with the phasing of wetlands restoration and/or development activities. 5. A County-certified paleontological field observer, working under the direction of a County-certified paleontologist, shall monitor all grading operations on the Bolsa Chica Mesa and Huntington Mesa. If grading operations uncover paleontological resources, the field observer shall divert equipment to avoid destruction of resources until a determination can be made as to the significance of the paleontological resources. If found to be significant, the site(s) shall be tested and preserved until a recovery plan is completed to assure the protection of the paleontological resources. 3.4.3 Technical Information 1. Archaeological Resources A records search at the South Central Coast Archaeological Information Center at the University of California, Los Angeles, revealed that 14 archaeological sites have been recorded within the Bolsa Chica LCP Area (see Table 3-1). Seven sites are located on the Bolsa Chica Mesa; the remaining seven, on the Huntington Mesa. a. Bolsa Chica Mesa Sites A brief description of each recorded archaeological site on Bolsa Chica Mesa is provided below. 1-12-98\LCP\,January 22, 1998 3-22 Exhibit L LAND USE PLAN 3.2 COASTAL/MARINE RESOURCES COMPONENT A tidal inlet would include two jetties extending to a water depth of 0 feet MLLW to stabilize the position of the inlet and partially block entry of material into the wetlands restoration area. The tidal inlet may impact littoral drift along the Bolsa Chica State Beach shoreline. These jetties will partially block the downcoast flow of sand, causing sand to accumulate along the upcoast jetty. Also, sand may accumulate in an ebb-tidal bar near the mouth, in a flood-tidal bar in the lagoon, and eventually within the inlet channel. To mitigate these effects, hydraulic or mechanical sand bypassing may be done periodically, as dredging has been successfully accomplished elsewhere in Southern California. 4. Water Quality Management During construction of the residential development sediments and contaminants from storm runoff could be washed into Bolsa Bay, Huntington Harbour, and the existing and proposed wetlands areas. The WQMP required under the LUP includes a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan that will contain specific measures to prevent erosion and pollutant runoff during construction. No significant water quality impacts from runoff during construction are expected. Once constructed, the residential development will add urban runoff into Bolsa Bay, Huntington Harbour, and Wetlands Ecosystems Area. The WQMP must contain BMPs to either prevent urban runoff contaminants from entering the storm drain system or to substantially remove them before the runoff reaches the receiving waters. The BMPs may include source controls such as public education, catch basin stenciling, street sweeping, and inlet trash racks. Structural BMPs will include such measures as filtered catch basins and oil/water separators. Pollutant control devices will be designed to handle pollutants contained in the first flush storm event, which accounts for the majority of urban runoff pollutants. With the implementation of these measures, no significant water quality impacts are expected from urban runoff. 5. Flood Control/Drainage Systems EAST GARDEN GROVE-WINTERSBURG FLOOD CONTROL CHANNEL The EGGW Flood Control Channel drains the approximately 17,500-acre EGGW watershed — a flat coastal plain to the northeast. Within Bolsa Chica, the existing EGGW Flood Control Channel is a 70-foot-wide, 14-foot-high trapezoidal earthen structure that widens to 120 feet at its Outer Bolsa Bay outlet. A series of tide gates control discharge, and prevent seawater from flooding inland areas. 1-12-98\LCP\,January 22, 1998 3-13 LAND USE PLAN 3.2 COASTAL/MARNE RESOURCES COMPONENT The Channel was originally designed in the 1950's to carry 65 percent of a 25- year storm. Since its construction, development within the tributary watershed has increased runoff rates to the extent that adequate flood protection cannot be provided during heavy rainfall. In addition, Orange County's design criteria for flood protection has significantly increased. Present Orange County Flood Control District (OCFCD) hydrologic criteria specify a 100-year storm channel design for a watershed of between 4,000 and 20,000 acres. Pursuant to the requirements of the OCFCD, the EGGW Flood Control Channel will be improved to accommodate a 100-year flood event, and will be designed to minimize sedimentation and siltation along the floor of the Channel. Final r' 11 EIR No. 560 was prepared by the County of Orange to analyze flood control 1 improvements in central Orange County (including the EGGW Flood Control Channel). It analyzed three options for improvements along the EGGW Flood Control Channel within the Bolsa Chica LCP Area, depending on the restoration approach utilized by the State for the Bolsa Chica Lowland. The option to be utilized will be identified in the State-prepared Wetlands Restoration Plan which must be approved by the California Coastal Commission. 1-12-98\LCP\,January 22, 1998 3-14 Exhibit M LAND USE PLAN 6. DEVELOPMENT COMPONENT 6.3.3 Local Roads and Infrastructure 1. Local Road System BOLSA CHICA MESA Development on the Bolsa Chica Mesa will be served by the Mesa Connector which will be implemented as a Collector Roadway, connecting Warner Avenue with Bolsa Chica Street across the Bolsa Chica Mesa. It will be constructed as a 2-lane, divided road, with landscaped parkways and a median between the two project entries (Warner Avenue and Bolsa Chica Street) and Collector Street "A". Class II bicycle lanes will be provided within the roadway. Adjacent to the Mesa Community Park, the cross-section will be modified to include notched public parking and landscape pockets on both sides of the roadway — providing public access to the adjacent park. 2. Backbone Drainage System The Backbone Drainage Plan is illustrated on Figure 6.3-2. As shown, the drainage system will consist of gravity-flow storm drains. Individual development projects will include measures to mitigate flood hazards, including on-site underground drainage systems that integrate into the existing County/City-wide storm drainage system, grading project sites so that runoff does not impact adjacent properties, and providing sufficient freeboard at all on- site drainage inlet structures. Most surface drainage on Bolsa Chica Mesa will flow, via an underground storm drain network, primarily into Outer Bolsa Bay. ; It - 1-12-98\LUP\.January 22. 1998 6-10 H CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH To: Connie Brockway, City Clerk From: Melanie Fallon, Assistant City Administrator, Date: June 28, 1999 Subject: Late Communications June 28, 1999 City Council Meeting Included with this memorandum are three items for transmittal to the City Council as Late Communications at the June 28, 1999 City Council meeting. Item #1 Letter from Congressman Norm Dicks and Senator Barbara Boxer to Bruce Babbitt, Secretary of the Interior regarding the appraisal of the Bolsa Chica Mesa Item #2 United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service's response to the letter from Congressman Norm Dicks and Senator Barbara Boxer regarding the appraisal of the Bolsa Chica Mesa Item #3 PowerPoint Presentation to accompany Agenda Item #1 w,-j ,,m. P"j 05/13/99 - 11:57 - - $ - 002 BAPRARA BOXER COMMITT-tss: CALU9NNI A - APPROPRIATION$ BANKING.HOUSING,AND (( VRBAN AFFA IRS 9OGET n }ed tat4sCoate ENVIRONMENT HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING AND PUBLIC WORKS SUITE 112 WASHINGTON,DC 20510-0505 (202)224-3553 se natOr@boxer.9en atr.9av , nttp;r'/Wwwsenate.govl^boxer November 20, 1998 The Honorable Bruce Babbitt Seerctary of the Interior 1849 C Street,NW Washington,DC 20240 Dear Mr. Secretary: We are writing to request a copy of the appraisal of the Bala Chica Mesa as soon as it is complete. Senate Report 105-227 on,the fiscal year 1999 Interior Appropriations bill contains the fallowing language: Within the funds provided for acquisition management,the Committee provides $10,000 for the Service to complete an appraisal of the Bolsa Chico Mesa in Huntington Beach,CA.The mesa is homo to restorable coastal sagebrush habitat as-well as archaeological artifacts. The.Committee understands that preservation of the mesa would provide a buffer that would enhance the biological integrity of the adjacent wetland.The Committee encourages FWS to work with the owners of the property and local interested parties on possibilities for acquisition of the property or a land exchange. The Conference Report for the fiscal year 1999 Ckanibus Appropriations bill does not contradict this language. For over 20 years,concerned citizens have been fighting to protect this threatened coastal area from potential development. In February, 1997=historic agreement was reached to preserve 890 acres of the Bolsa Chica wetlands. This agreement was a giant step toward achieving this goal. However,the adjacent mesa is still threatened. We look forward to reviewing this appraisal and to our continued work together on this issue. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, To I?icks 6arb2a Boxer Member of Congress United States Senator D 1700 MONTGOMERY STREET ❑2250 EAST IMPERIAL.FUGNtYAY C 850 CAPITOL MALL ] mo0 TuLARE STREET 0 No 9 STREET t,,210 NORTH£STREET SUITE 2d0 SUITE 545 $UI rE 6b44 SUiTF 13u Su1TE 224U SUITE 210 SAN FRANC15C0.CA 94711 £L SEGVNDO.CA 90:45 $ACAAMEN-O.CA 9681d pti ESNO.CA Oz1%1 SAN 151EGO,CA 02161 SAN 99FINAR.CINO,CA 92401 (41s)403.-0100 (310)A14-5700 t910)40L 2IR7 009)497-110E (0191 232-3924 12091999-11525 /�+/�YKINTfiD O 5C7CtaD MArPI J f B 05i13%99 11:58 United States Department of the Interior o FISH AND IVMDLIFE SERVICE A California/Newda Operations Office 2233 Warr-Avenue, suite 120 Sacramento, California 95825-0509 N IMLY RBM TOe FWS/ARW-RE DEC 2 399C Honorable Barbara Boxer United States Senate Hart Senate Office Building Suite 112 Washington,D.G. 20510-0505 Dear Ms.Boxer: Thank you for your letter of November 20, 1998, to Secretary Babbitt regarding the appraisal of the Bolsa Chica Mesa(Mesa)- The U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service (Service)recently contacted the owners of the Mesa, Hearthside Hotnes, to ft-form them about the Senate Report language to conduct an appraisal on their property. Hearthside Homes told the Service that the property is not for sale and would not give permission to appraise it. Under these circumstances,we believe it would not be appropriate to spend limited funds on an appraisal that has no possibility of culminating in an acquisition. If the owners of the Mesa change their minds on this issue,we will reevaluate the possibility of an appraisal. If you have any questions please call Scott Wise,Acting Regional Supervisor,Division of Realty at(503)231-6201. Sincerely, anger Californi&Nevada Operations Office Identical Letter Sent To: Congressman Norraw D. Diok's Washington,D.C. Office 4 Bolsa Chica June 28, 1999 Presentation to the Huntington Beach City Council Background 1 January 20, 1998 1 City Council authorized the Bolsa Chica Annexation Study 1 3 public workshops conducted as part of the study process- 7/29/98,9/24/98, 11/30/98 z Background 1 January 7, 1999 City Council Subcommittee takes 2 actions 1. Approved the Annexation Study 2. Recommended that the full City Council direct the City Administrator to propose a strategy for annexing the Bolsa Chica and develop parameters for negotiating a pre- annexation agreement 3 ' 1 � 1� i Annexation Study Findings 1 Annexation before development (Scenario 1) ail r Ui m ffi. a d_ -. - Revenues $1,129 $2,616 $3,125 $2,15B Expenditures $1,604 $2,432 $2,609 $971 Surplus(Shortfall) ($475) $184 $516 $1,187 a Background .......... :•:i:•::: 1 February 22, 1999 1 City Council directed the City Administrator to consult with the City Council to establish those parameters that should be addressed in any negotiation of a pre-annexation agreement for the Bolsa Chica 5 Background .............. 1 March 29, 1999 1 City Council instructed staff to draft a pre- annexation agreement with Hearthside Homes or report on the status of the negotiations City Council identified 117 issues and requested staff to include responses to those issues in the report on negotiations 6 2 Background 1 Appellate Court Decision April 1999-Court sends LCP back to the Coastal Commission I Improper to approve relocation of raptor habitat (ESHA)to Harriet Wieder Regional Park I Warner Pond cannot be filled to widen Warner Ave I Residential development not permitted in lowland wetlands October/November 1999-Expected date for Coastal Commission hearing Background ...... . 1 PUC Applications I November 1998-SCWC seeks permission to provide water/sewer services to Mesa project December 1998-City protests applications August 1999-evidentiary hearing before AU February 2000-AU ruling on hearing (recommendation to the full PUC) April 2000- Final PUC decision 8 117 Issues . ... ............ 1 7 Categories Land Sale Issues Development Issues 1 Environmental Issues 1 Financial Issues Parks Issues 1 Water Issues Coastal Issues 9 3 117 Issues Development Issues LCP standards are similar to the standards in developments the City has approved(Ocean Colony, Meadowlark,Centerstone) 1 Maximum density(6.5-12 du/acre)is compatible with the surrounding development Pre-annexation agreement would not address specific development standards ,0 117 Issues Environmental Issues Annexation will require a CEQA analysis as part of the LAFCO process An EIR will be prepared to analyze a water pipeline if the PUC process proceeds 117 Issues . .._... ............ X. Parks Issues Harriett Wieder/Linear Regional Park I Dedication of 49 acres by Hearthside Homes is required by the County's DA(Exhibit B,pages 1.54-1.56) 1 Dedication must occur once the LCP is certified and prior to the issue of grading or construction permits I Dedication of the park land is irrevocable I However,the County may not accept dedication prior to remediation at the park site z 4 117 Issues 1 Parks Issues Community Park I Approximately 17 acres I Includes one lighted playing field City's Park Acreage Requirement I Hearthside Homes'dedication for Harriett Wieder/Linear Park and the community park (combined 66 acres)exceeds the City's requirement of approximately 20 acres 13 Conceptual Deal Terms 1 Process 1. City approves pre-annexation agreement 2. SCWC abandons the PUC applications 3. City initiates annexation of Bolsa Chica 4. Phased annexation of the Mesa project 5. City"cooperation"at Coastal Commission 6. City accepts LCP and County's DA 7. County/City permits and inspections 1< Conceptual Deal Terms 1 Option to Purchase 1. Hearthside Homes will grant the City an option to purchase the Mesa property, Edward's Thumb and Harriett Wieder Regional Park I Price to be determined by Hearthside Homes ,5 5 Conceptual Deal Terms 1 Option to Purchase 2. The option will remain open until June 1, 2000 with no extensions 3. The option terminates if any litigation is filed challenging the pre-annexation agreement, annexation, LCP approvals or other discretionary approvals required for the Mesa development project 15 Conceptual Deal Terms _._... . ...... 1 Option to Purchase 4. Hearthside Homes will allow an appraisal to be conducted any time during the option period I The appraisal will not be determinative of the price to be set by Hearthside Homes,but will be used for the purpose of obtaining funding sources 1] Conceptual Deal Terms - ............ 1 Municipal Services The City shall provide 1. All municipal services to the Mesa development project,including, but not limited,to water,sewer,police and fire services 18 6 Conceptual Deal Terms 1 Municipal Services Hearthside Homes will provide 2. Water Improvements(9 million-gallon water reservoir,booster station and appurtenances) 3. Land for the reservoir site 4. Sewer Improvements(sewer lift station) S. Fire Service Improvements($2.5 million) 6. Police Service Improvements($75,000) 13 Conceptual Deal Terms 1 Municipal Services Hearthside Homes will assist the City in directing 7. ATIP traffic improvement contributions to projects that benefit the City($4.5 million payment required of Hearthside Homes under the County DA) 8. Child care impact contributions to child care organizations in the City($20 per unit required of Hearthside Homes under the County DA) 20 Conceptual Deal Terms 1 Municipal Services Hearthside Homes will 9. Construct a recreational playing field with "practice level"lighting at the Mesa project park 10. Deed restrict approximately 3.5 acres of property for owner-occupied,affordable housing(approximately 20-30 units) ,� i 7 Conceptual Deal Terms 1 Estimated Value of the Conceptual Deal Staff estimates that the value of the infrastructure improvements and municipal service payments set-forth in the pre- annexation agreement terms is approximately $12-$15 million This amount is over and above the revenue estimates presented in the Bolsa Chica Annexation Study 22 Conclusion 1 Why annex the Bolsa Chica? 1 Annexation is consistent with City and LAFCO goal of eliminating County"islands"within the City s sphere of influence Annexation allows the City control of the Bolsa Chica developed or not 23 Conclusion ............................. . 1 Why annex the Bolsa Chica? Property owners have the legal right to initiate annexation at any time The timing of annexation can impact the City's financial ability to provide required municipal services 2< 8 Conclusion 1 Recommended Action 1. Accept and file responses to the 117 Bolsa Chica Issues for consideration in pre- annexation negotiations with Hearthside Homes 2. Direct staff to continue negotiation of a pre- annexation agreement in accordance with the conceptual terms summarized in the Request for Council Action dated June 28, 1999 25 Conclusion 1 Recommended Action 3. Direct staff to prepare an updated analysis of the cost/benefits to the City from annexation based on entering a pre- annexation agreement 4. Direct staff to agendize,for City Council consideration,a pre-annexation agreement and an updated analysis of the costs/benefits of annexation for a special meeting to be help on Wednesday,July 28, 1999 26 9 From:Eileen Murphy To:Connie Brockway Date:6/27/99 Time:3:31:40 PM Page 1 of 3 FACSIMILE COVER PAGE To : Connie Brockway From : Eileen Murphy Sent : 6/27/99 at 3:31:26 PM Pages : 3 (including Cover) Subject Connie: We received this study late friday so this is the first chance I had to send the letter. Thanks for putting it in the record. Eileen s :fl z 711 ice - q rw FroT.:Eileen Murphy To:Connie Brockway Date:6/27199 Time.3:31 A0 PM Page 2 of 3 w J June 26,1999 Mayor Peter Green and City Council members. c As a member of the Board of Directors of the Bolsa Chico Land Trust I fea 4` _ I must strongly object to the city agreeing to this pre-annexation agreement that the staff is presenting to you tonite. My objections to the proposed pre-annexation agreement between (Koll) Hearthside and the city are many but the most egregious are these. The City claims this pre- annexation agreement is not a land-use agreement just a pre-annexation agreement yet each page is what the Koll development will give the city and what the city gives up. For Koll/Hearthside to agree to be a willing seller the city gives up too many things that are in the interest of the City and the taxpayers. 1. Things in this agreement that are troubling: A. "City will adopt a Resolution of intent to annex and initiate annexation of the Bolso Chice including the Mesa development project" B Koll/Hearthside gives the City until June 1,2000 to BUY the land with no extensions at a price determined by Koll/Hearthside The option terminates "if any litigation is filed challenging the pre- annexation agreement. Annexation, LCP approvals or other discretionary approvals required for the Bolsa Chico Development Project " This means the city gives up : a The right to protest at the Coastal Commission hearing b. The city agrees without demur to the Development Agreement (DA) c. The city has to agree with the present uncertified LCP C, The Bolsa Chico Mesa will be annexed in phases The first phase is 350 occupied units. "Koll/Hearthside will provide the city with an improvement security (bond or other acceptable instrument of credit) to pay for 9 million gallon reservoir, booster station and appurtenances (the water improvements") The developer will complete the "water improvements to city standards before the occupancy of the 351s" unit in the development." In other words 350 units (the entire units for the first phase) have to be occupied before improvements have to be completed. This n From:Eileen Murphy To:Connie Brockway Date:6/27/99 Time:3:31:40 PM Page 3 of 3 is a bonanza for the developer. He makes the money from the completed units before he has to pay for the water improvements. D One time "gains for the city" 1. Koll/Hearthside will pay the City 2.5 million for fire services improvements. 1 4 million goes toward providing fire sprinklers in the units of the project. Not much for the city here. 2. Koll/Hearthside will pay the city $75,000 for police. A pittance when the need is four personnel for the area. B. Reo/isticolly,what are our hopes of reolizinQ onythinQ from these offers? a."Koll/Hearthside will use their best efforts to get the city 4.5 million now given to the County in the OA for traffic improvements." b. "Also try their best to get the county to give the city $20 per unit for child care the county gets now with the OA? Our chances are virtually nit In conclusion this is the same type of deal the Amigos were offered and accepted years ago. By accepting the developer as a willing seller the City is agreeing to take itself and the taxpayers out of the game and Koll/Hearthside goes forward with their project with no objections from the city. It is my fervent hope that the majority of the City Council who are Amigos recognize the donkey that kicked them in 1990. Remember the old saying" the second time the donkey kicks you it's your fault." Eileen Murphy 201 215t Street HB CA 92646 t Huntington Beach omorrow Box 865 Huntington Beach CA 92648 t RECEIVED FROM Q "�1 1'C0 AND MADE A PART OF THE CORD TFIfo qg COUNCIL MEETING OF OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK CONNIE BROCKWAY,CITY CLERK June 28, 1999 Mayor and City Council Members Huntington City Council 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Mayor and City Council Members: On Monday evening,June 28,you will consider an Request for Council Action(RCA) concerning pre-annexation negotiations underway with Koll, now known as California Coastal Communities/Hearthside Home, which are directed toward possible annexation of Bolsa Chica, including Bolsa Chica mesa,by Huntington Beach. You will also be directing staff with regard to continued negotiations and the possible drafting of a pre-annexation agreement to you on July 28, 1999. Huntington Beach Tomorrow(HBT)wishes to make the following comments concerning this RCA. 1. The status of negotiations to date only became available to you and to the public last Friday in the afternoon. Annexation of the Bolsa Chica is a complex issue, which, if it occurs will have profound and lasting impacts on the quality of life in Huntington Beach. It is of great concern to all residents in Huntington Beach and residents deserve an adequate chance to review and evaluate pre-annexation and make meaningful comments on the activities to date before you make pivotal decisions about what has happened so far and what will and should happen before you direct staff to continue negotiations and take the very important step of drafting a pre- annexation agreement. We do not believe that roughly three(3)days over a weekend is enough time for you to have evaluated what has occurred in negotiations so far to develop a reasoned decision of what needs to be done in negotiations to arrive at a potentially acceptable pre- annexation agreement in roughly three(3)weeks. We know, as residents of this city, who are interested in preserving and enhancing the quality of life in our city, that this is not enough time to be involved in the process in a meaningful way tonight and we are fairly certain that the same will thing will occur, if negotiations continue,there are substantive changes occur, as is almost certain to occur, and a pre-annexation agreement is presented to you, all in the span of a few weeks. You have promised the residents of this city the opportunity for full involvement in the discussions and decisions involving this critical issue. Huntington Beach Tomorrow, on behalf of all the residents of this city, to provide, and continue to provide, for that involvement at all pivotal steps in the process as you did, for instance, by holding public forums on the 4 cosvbenefits of annexation in the summer and fall of last year. We ask you not to rush to judgement tonight or in the space of a few short weeks without enfranchising the residents of this city just to satisfy the desire of developers to avoid controversy in the Public Utility Commission(PUC)hearings in August, concerning water and sewer facilities for the project and their desire to begin development of the Bolsa Chica Mesa. 2. Based on a necessarily cursory evaluation of the information provided by staff in the RCA and in a short meeting last Friday, we wish to make the following comments from the many that we believe probably could be made given appropriate time to study the document. A. Comments on the Summary of Staff Response to the City Council Actions As a prefatory overall comment,HBT wishes to state that the attempt to divide the annexation into two parts, one as supposedly simple agreement to annex and the second an attempt to say that this is not and is not meant to consider land use, development and planning as an entirely separate unrelated issues to be dealt with later, is entirely artificial,misleading,won't work and, hopefully, won't wash with the Council. It certainly wouldn't wash with any reasonable person trying to protect his or her interests and HBT does not believe it will wash with the residents of this city. 1. Willing seller(Land Sale)Issue For years,The Bolsa Chica Land Trust(BCLT)worked to save the entire Bolsa Chica, including Bolsa Chica mesa. Once a commitment was made to acquire the wetlands,BCLT continued to seek from Koll for Bolsa Chica mesa a willing seller commitment, a fair land appraisal, establishment of a reasonable price for the land and the like, in an attempt to secure funds to purchase the mesa so that it could remain in open space and continue to support the health of wetlands below as nature intended. HBT, like BCLT, has never been able to understand why, if the developer gets its money out of and a fair return for the property, the developer would work with the community and others interested in acquisition and preservation to seek funds for acquisition. As a result of numerous discussions with Koll,the developer is well aware that less than a year, i.e. the 8 months maximum that would be available if the developer starts grading in June,2000, is clearly insufficient to develop the funding necessary for acquisition. In addition, before funding can even be sought, an appraisal must be completed and accepted by the developer. Because of the unreasonable time constraints involved,the supposed concession by the developer implied in this statement of the issue by staff is nothing less than smoke and mirrors on the part of the developer, is effectively meaningless, and is,therefore, an attempt to pacify the Council with regard to its adopted position of wanting to see the mesa remain as open space. If Koll is truly committed to being a willing seller, let the developer set a reasonable time for developing acquisition funding, allow a fair appraisal of the land to be done, establish a reasonable price for the acquisition and promise to go hand-in-hand with BCLT and the City to seek funding for acquisition. Until these things occur,the Council should not consider this to be a negotiated concession on the part of the developer and should not concede anything in return. 2. Development Issues I 4 The City has the stated position of wanting to see any development brought into conformance with the city's housing development standards. Unless agreed to by Koll before or after annexation,the lower County development standards would have to be approved by the City for use in Koll's development, since the City would not be able, on its own,to modify Koll's development agreement with the County, which incorporates these standards. Koll would have no incentive to adopt our standards after annexation and an agreement to adopt these standards is,therefore, necessary as part of the pre-annexation agreement. We find the staff s statements about these issues to be inaccurate, incomplete and,worst of all, misleading. The stars statements about standard provides an excellent example of these problems. The Planning Commission, following the lead of the staff, has been approving reduced standards, e.g. lot sizes and street widths, as part of specific plans within the city, e.g. in the Meadowlark development. Parenthetically,this situation is regrettable and these practices must stop, if the quality of life,based in part on the higher General Plan development requirements, is to be retained. It is,therefore, inaccurate and misleading for the staff to imply that the city's standards have now become similar to those of the County just because lower standards have been approved as part of some specific plans for some developments. The General Plan requirements are the same as they have been and are higher than those of the County. The Council should settle for nothing less in Koll's development and the issue remains as critical and unresolved. Similarly, density is not the only development standard to be discussed relative to Koll's projected development. Lastly, we fail to see why conformance with the city's General Plan development standards would not be relevant but absolutely necessary and would have to be included in any pre- annexation agreement, if the City is to have any control over the development as it ought to have, if only by reason and obligation to protect its residents and their quality of life alone. This is exactly the purpose of the pre-annexation agreement and to brush such considerations aside is a disservice to the Council and the residents of this City. 3. Environmental Issues HBT disagrees entirely with the staff s response to environmental issues. If there is one primary thing that is involved in the annexation of the Bolsa Chica, it is environmental issues, not only the environmental effects on the quality of life of Huntington Beach residents that will accompany any development project on the mesa but the effects of such a project on the Bolsa Chica wetlands. This is what pre-annexation agreements are all about and it is certain from the developer's approach in the past that, if these matters are not dealt with by the City in a pre- annexation agreement they will never be able to be dealt with. 4. Financial Issues It is nice to hear that the City would recover some of the infrastructure and service costs it would lose if the property were not annexed. What is not mentioned is that part of these dollars will go A to serve the development itself so the City will not receive the full amount indicated to buy into existing services, facilities and other City infrastructure. It would be interesting to know what part of these monies actually benefit the City as a whole. Perhaps the answer is in the appendices, if only one had time to read it. Further,the much touted annual revenue is only projected for a few years after development is complete. What about all the years of life that the property will have and the projection that the average value of the development is said to be on the order of$400,000, both of which raise the question as to how this development,without any commercial and industrial base will pay for itself as costs continue to rise and$400, 000 becomes the city average for tax base purposes. It will still be well known, as it is now,that housing developments do not pay for themselves, even if there are quarter million to million-dollar homes in the development. Where are these considerations in the staff report but, again, perhaps they are there. 5. Park Issues The question has been raised,but is still unanswered,as to whether this development, e.g. parks will be open to city residents or only to the development's residents. If it is the latter,this is no contribution to the City yet the report would imply that it is. The development agreement is silent in this regard. If the City is going to get a benefit for a benefit given, this needs to be established before annexation in the pre-annexation agreement, a consideration which brings us back to land planning and the inability to separate the pre-annexation agreement and land use planning. 6. Water Issues Here the same question also arises as to how much of the infrastructure improvements benefit the City for benefit given and how much would be required for the development anyway. Further,the City must have surplus water, a declaration which will almost certainly be challenged in one way or another and any legal costs paid for by current city residents. Perhaps this consideration is dealt with in the detail of the report but, if not, it should and must be if city residents are to be fully informed. 7. Coastal Issues If there is no approved Local Coastal Plan(LCP) as mandated by state law,what is this city doing negotiating a pre-annexation agreement when no one even know what coastal issues arise, much less be resolved, and what should or must be contained or negotiated in a pre-annexation agreement, how are city residents to know and make recommendations about and on and on and on? This is at the very least poor representation of the city's interest and poor planning. Council members wouldn't sign a blank check in their own personal dealings. How can you do so on behalf of the people you have been elected to represent. HBT would like to have had the time to make more comments about this RCA but can not do it in the time now available, since there has not been adequate time provided for review,much less t the time necessary to make the comments. We will attempt to provide further comments in person or later as time allows. For the moment,do not be stampeded into conforming to the developer's timetable,just because Koll wants you to do it. Take the time necessary to develop a considered decision in this matter. Thank you for the opportunity to comment at this point in the process R. Winchell For the President,Directors and Members of Huntington Beach Tomorrow Aml*lgQs P.O. Box 3748, Huntington Beach, CA 92605-3748 • (714) 840-1575 de - - o sa RECEIVED FROM P(ht"Ae-C66"t�� • AND MADE A PART OF TH RECORD�A THE _ Chica COUNCIL MEETING y THE-CITY OFFICE OF CLERK CONNIE BROCKWAY,OITY 566RK HUNTINGTON BEACH CITY COUNCIL JUNE 28, 1999 PRESENTATIONS BY AMIGOS DE BOLSA CHICA BOLSA CHICA PRE-ANNEXATION AGREEMENT STATEMENT OF TOM LIVENGOOD PAST PRESIDENT—AMIGOS DE BOLSA CHICA My name is Tom Livengood. I am representing Amigos de Bolsa Chica, the oldest environmental group dedicated to the protection of the Bolsa Chica. Amigos de Bolsa Chica is very disappointed that none of the environmental issues on the 117 item council adopted list of negotiation points were included in the draft agreement. We do not agree that the environmental issues cannot be subject to these negotiations. Page 4 of the staff s report states that Environmental issues specific to development of the mesa are left to the coastal commission and county decision makers. Amigos de Bolsa Chica does not agree that the city must be silent as to environmental issues. Hearthside's agreement to become a willing seller is very positive. However, we continue to have some concerns about that agreement which will be addressed by other representative of Amigos de Bolsa Chica. We urge the council to direct the staff to continue their negotiations with Hearthside with the goal of including the previously specified environmental protections in the pre-annexation agreement. I STATEMENT OF LINDA SAPIRO MOON VICE PRESIDENT OF AMIGOS DE BOLSA CHICA As Mr. Livengood has told you, Amigos de Bolsa Chica has serious concerns about the failure of the staff to attempt to obtain agreement on environmental issues that this council found to be important. They tell you that those will be addressed by the Coastal Commission and the County Board of Supervisors. The draft agreement then appears to muzzle the City with respect to addressing environmental issues before THOSE bodies. The City Council and its staff has a FUNDAMENTAL FIDUCIARY DUTY to represent the best interests of the citizens of this community. The agreement, as presented, would require the city to "cooperate"with Hearthside in its efforts to obtain approval of the LCP. We believe that this agreement would violate your fiduciary duty. The city is obligated to represent all of the interests of the citizens as to this project and we do not believe that you can legally bargain away that responsibility. . We strongly oppose any agreement between the City and Hearthside which would limit the City's ability to fully represent the citizens of Huntington Beach as to environmental issues before the California Coastal Commission. The City cannot legally sacrifice the environment in exchange for economic rewards promised in the draft agreement. The LCP hearing process is intended to address issues relevant to the coastal environment. You have identified many such issues on the 117 issue list. You must be able to advocate appropriate environmental protections on behalf of the citizens of Huntington Beach. STATEMENT OF TERRY DOLTON BOARD MEMBER OF AMITOS DE BOLSA CHICA Option to the City of Huntington Beach to purchase the Bolsa Chica Mesa We support the inclusion of an option to purchase the Bolsa Chica Mesa in the pre- annexation agreement. However, the option suggested has several critical flaws: 1) Option would terminate if anyone files an action in connection with the project. The city's option could be terminated without the involvement of the city and by parties over whom the city has no control. I do not believe the cty wants to be in such a tenus position or in the position of discouraging parties from filing an action which they have a legal right to do. In 35 years in the right of way profession, I have not seen such a provision in an option which could so easily stip away the optionees' right to purchase. 2) The option period of one year is too short. It will take time to obtain an appraisal and then go to agencies and other parties to seek funding. To date parties have not wanted to take the time to consider a purchase because the appraised value was unknown and the owner was an unwilling seller. Would it be possible to have the option open ended and to permit the purchase of any parcel for which a tract map has not yet been approved? Irrevocable offer of dedication of a 100 foot wide buffer area from the top of the Mesa. To assure that the width is sufficient and title to the buffers will be transferred to the City of Huntington Beach or another public agency, provision for an irrevocable offer of dedication should be a part of the pre-annexation agreement. Reference is made to deferring items to the California Coastal Commission. We do not see why anything need be deferred. No one knows at this time what will be the extent of the Coastal Commission's review of the LCP. If the city wants something, it should be included in the pre-annexation agreement and pushed for at the Coastal Commission meeting. STATEMENT OF DAVID CARLBERG PRESIDENT OF AMIGOS DE BOLSA CHICA The Amigos have long opposed the concept of piece-meal planning. Peace-meal planning makes it difficult to assess the overall environmental impact of a project. So too are we bothered by piece-meal annexation. Hearthside has proposed to phase the annexation of the Bolsa Chica, starting with a parcel of approximately 350 homes, about one-third of the maximum number of units proposed. That presumably means that two additional phases are to be annexed sometime in the future. Let us see the whole picture, not fragments of it. If annexation occurs we urge the council to consider all or nothing. i i Council/Agency Meeting Held: Deferred/Continued to: �",�Z' Approved 9 ,onditionally Approved ❑ Denied City Clerks Signature Council Meeting Date: March 29, 1999 Department ID Number: PL99-24 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH REQUEST FOR ACTION SUBMITTED TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS SUBMITTED BY: RAY SILVER, City AdministratorRks-P PREPARED BY: MELANIE FALLON, Assistant City Administratol`-�,�� ; , HOWARD ZELEFSKY, Director of Planning r SUBJECT: APPROVE BOLSA CHICA PRE-ANNEXATION AGREEMENT'. - —` NEGOTIATING ISSUES ~' f Statement of Issue,Funding Source,Recommended Action,Alternative Action(s),Analysis,Environmental Status,Attachalibu ) Statement of Issue: Transmitted for your consideration is a request to approve pre- annexation negotiating issues submitted to staff by the City Council as a result of the February 22, 1999 City Council meeting. The issues identified by City Council will be included in draft pre-annexation agreement negotiations with Hearthside Homes. Funding Source: Not applicable. Recommended Action: Motion to: 1. "Approve items from Attachments 1 and 2 that staff will include in draft pre-annexation agreement negotiations with Hearthside Homes," and 2. "Authorize staff to negotiate a draft pre-annexation agreement with Hearthside Homes ased on the negotiati g strategy approved by City Council in Motion 1," and (A0140✓L d (o-/ (, Zc/eA/.•k1 ) 3. "Authorize staff to return to the City Council with a draft pre-annexation agreement or status of our negotiations in a pre-annexation agreement with Hearthside Homes on or before June 1, 1999." (19do�tVd. G��th A u yne.4 i�A5 -� reed-: 9. l�se fin/y the � dr �iQurl,n�s �o �,ro u� �hP l.ss ve-s �nc� fiat 2cs,eJ l5srl svmm�vi��), . CAP�ev✓ca -�-o) j TNSTv)t?T.5TX3-PF ?a Ri�?U4iV ?a CovIve14- WITH H StD� H0ffke6 5P0 OF;G ?a rriCN INU�VIe��e- NcGoriAT/nl� PaKTJ(APP�eO✓E� (o-/ NO? PeN: Nol 4c1s; N✓e� (/Y)RvN /rJD on/ A-5 +,Bov� f}.7►EiiDeD /�t�T on/ 7D IAXI[ 0 kr")0 eoed C/iv 000 , -�^, oR vv* c.evie c� THE T PRofi o e5 ��vp o r e. 6E.✓EFr t 7 • $CAS' uTY`/ZIN�oG- �C�T /!?E'�71(� of DLrt/�� %��C1.rJLY/Vf. Z•NtIFST/6f+TIdJ 0f ROLsQt>ff i REQUEST FOR ACTION • MEETING DATE: March 29, 1999 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PL99-24 Yesoo.(ee of 79VE fir) o.-- lloWniv6noJ eeacll) �'�pp VED 6-/ (Zeft/oi=T' No) Alternative Action: The City Council may make the following alternative motion: "Do not pursue one or more of the preceding actions and direct staff accordingly." Analysis: A. BACKGROUND At the February 22, 1999 City Council meeting, the City Council directed the City Administrator to develop a strategy that could result in annexing the Bolsa Chica to the City of Huntington Beach prior to development of homes in the Bolsa Chica. The City Council authorized staff to begin pre-annexation agreement discussions with Hearthside Homes based on negotiation strategies and goals approved at that meeting. Pre-annexation meetings between staff and representatives of Hearthside Homes began on March 4, 1999 and have centered on negotiating the issues set forth in the February 22, 1999 RCA. The issues to be negotiated include fire services, community services, infrastructure (streets, water and wastewater), police services, library services and planning. On February 22, 1999, the City Council also directed the City Administrator to consult with the City Council to establish those parameters that should be addressed in any negotiation of a pre-annexation agreement for the Bolsa Chica. As a result, staff received a total of 117 potential negotiating points and requests for information from five City Council Members. The comments and questions have been summarized and placed in a matrix that is included with this report as Attachment 1. The matrix identifies, at a summary level, each issue raised and references the City Council Member's original comments which are included as Attachment 2. B. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Review and Approve City Council Negotiating Issues Staff has separated the City Council Members' input into two categories, negotiating issues and informational and research items. Negotiating Issues The bulk of the comments received from the City Council were categorized as negotiating issues. These items are grouped by issue type and presented on the first five pages of Attachment 1. Beyond the issue grouping, the issues are presented in no particular order. P199-24 -2- 03/26/99 9:36 AM REQUEST FOR ACTION • MEETING DATE: March 29, 1999 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PL99-24 Staff is recommending that the City Council determine a process through which the negotiating issues are: • Included in the pre-annexation negotiations with Hearthside Homes; or • Excluded from the pre-annexation negotiations with Hearthside Homes; or • Referred to staff for research and returned to the City Council The City Council could elect to direct staff to include all the City Council Members' issues in negotiations or the City Council may review issues individually to determine if they are to be included in the negotiating strategy. Should the City Council elect to review the issues individually, Attachment 1 offers three alternatives to direct staff: Yes: the item has been included in the City's negotiating strategy No: the item has been excluded from the City's negotiating strategy R: staff has been directed to conduct additional research Attachment 1 also assigns each Issue Summary a control number, beginning with the letter M, that staff requests the City Council use when referring to a particular Issue Summary. Under each Council Member's name, the table references a specific issue in Attachment 2. These numbers were assigned to the Council Members' comments to facilitate the discussion of similar issues that are presented differently by one or more City Council Members. Informational and Research Items Attachment 1 contains informational and research items drawn from the Council Members' comments. Unless the City Council provides different direction, staff will research these items and provide responses to the City Council. However, these items will be researched as informational items only and will not become part of the City's pre-annexation agreement negotiating strategy with Hearthside Homes unless the City Council specifically directs staff to include them. Direct Staff to Negotiate a Pre-Annexation Agreement with Hearthside Homes It is recommended that City Council direct staff to negotiate with Hearthside Homes based on the negotiating strategy approved by City Council and present the City Council with a draft pre-annexation agreement for consideration or report back on or before June 1, 1999. i P199-24 -3- 03/26/99 9:36 AM • REQUEST FOR ACTION 0 MEETING DATE: March 29, 1999 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PL99-24 Environmental Status: Not applicable. This action is for the purpose of filing a report and a request for authorization to negotiate and does not constitute a project under the California Environmental Quality Act. Attachment(s): City Clerk's Page Number No. Description 1 Bolsa Chica Pre-Annexation Agreement Negotiating Issues Matrix 2 Bolsa Chica Issues for Consideration in Pre-Annexation Negotiations with Hearthside Homes RCA Author: HZ:SH:WN:kjl I P199-24 -4- 03/26/99 9:36 AM Bolsa Chica Attachment 1 Pre-Annexation Negotiating Issues Approved? # Issue Summary Green Garafalo Bauer Dettloff Harman Julien Sullivan LAND SALE Hearthside Homes should discuss any purchase Yes No R* M1 offers with a buyer if the price offered is at fair 2, 18 29 33 market value Hearthside Homes should allow appraisal of the Yes No R* M2 19 29 34 45 property to establish value - -- -.. Yes No R* M3 Hearthside Homes should agree to be a willing 35 44 seller for 24 months Yes No R* M4 Development should meet City building standards 20 54 Yes No R* M5 Development should be compatible with 25 52, 53, . surrounding housing product 55 Yes No R* M6 Establish a 100 foot buffer around Warner Pond 4 47 Yes No R* M7 Establish a 50 foot buffer around Warner Pond 60, 71 60, 71 71 60 Mesa top buffer should be 100 feet from the top Yes No R* M8 of the bluff, improvements to the buffer must be 61, 72 61, 72 72 61 50 completed before construction on the mesa starts • Mesa top roadway should run roughly parallel to Yes No R* M9 the recommended bluff-top buffer 51 Construction of a buffer between the Yes No R* M10 development and the wetlands that meets 24 Department of Fish and Game criteria Yes No R* M11 Wetlands should be shielded from the 67, 83 67, 83 83 67 48 development *R: Direct staff to conduct additional research 5 March 29, 1999 Bolsa Chica" Attachment 1 Pre-Annexation Negotiating Issues Approved? # Issue Summary Green Garafalo Bauer I Dettloff Harman Julien Sullivan DEVELOPMENT PLANNING, STANDARDS & PROCESS (Continued) City should be responsible for building plan Yes No R* M12 review, approval, inspection, and permit 57 processing Yes No R* M13 No grading or construction should occur for 24 36 months (estimated time to complete annexation) Development should attempt to retain the mesa's Yes No R* M14 topography, preserve existing mature trees, and 5* minimize its impact on the wetlands Storm drain run-off from the mesa should be 63, 81, 27, 63, Yes No R M15 diverted away from the wetlands 82 81, 82 81, 82 63 Yes No R* M16 Density should be consistent through.the mesa 68 68 ' 68 (regardless of landowner and location) —. ......... - --.. Yes No R* M17 Any limit on the number of residential units should 84 84 84 be applied to the entire mesa ENVIRONMENTAL EGGW Channel should be 100% diverted into the Yes No R* M18 wetlands and not into outer Bolsa Bay and/or 9 Huntington Harbour If the Fieldstone property has not been sold to the 64, 76, 64, 76 • Yes No R* M19 State at the time of annexation, it should be 77 77 76, 77 64 given a conservation zone designation The City should secure a permanent option Yes No R* M20 providing for the sale the former Fieldstone 64 64 64 property to the State Reservation of potential for lowlands acquisition Yes No R* M21 17 for wetlands restoration Edwards Thumb should be designated as a Yes No R* M21 conservation zone or dedicated to the State for 59, 70 59, 70 70 59 eventual restoration *R: Direct staff to conduct additional research 6 March 29, 1999 Bolsa Chica Attachment 1 Pre-Annexation Negotiating Issues Approved? # Issue Summary Green Garafalo Bauer Dettloff Harman Julien Sullivan FINANCIAL City should capture a major part of any water Yes No R* M22 pipeline construction savings (approx. $13 5 million) Hearthside Homes realizes from annexation Annexation should be conditioned on tax rates Yes No R* M23 and other financial benefits outlined in the Bolsa 6 Chica Annexation Study Yes No R* M24 County Fire Authority assessment should be 49 transferred to the City Yes No R* M25 City should collect building and planning fees 42 57 Yes No R* M26 Public safety services should be in place with no 26 negative cost to the City Yes No R* M27 Hearthside Homes should to pay LAFCO fees 32 PARKS No R* M28 City defined park standards should be met 21 Linear parkland must be contamination free Yes No R* M29 8 23 44 before construction begins Yes No R* M30 No substitution of land should be allowed for land 31 identified for dedication to the linear park Yes No R M31 Dedication of all linear park property identified in 58, 69 58, 69 69 58 46 the development agreement should occur Annexation agreement should include the Yes No R* M32 establishment of a narrow greenbelt easement to 59 59 59 connect Central Park with the Bolsa Chica ....... ... Yes No R* M33 Hearthside Homes should provide all park areas 74 74 74 identified in the development agreement *R: Direct staff to conduct additional research 7 March 29, 1999 Bolsa ChicaAttachment 1 Pre-Annexation Negotiating Issues Approved? # Issue Summary Green Garafalo Bauer Dettloff Harman Julien Sullivan PARKS .d Yes No R* M34 Hearthside Homes should provide for and fund a 62, 75, 62, 75, 75, 80 62 10,000 square foot interpretive center 80 80 City should ensure the dedication of the park area Yes No R* M35 (generally located at the southerly end of Bolsa 73 73 73 Chica Road) identified in the General Plan Bluff top trails, viewing points, native landscaping and public access to these features should be Yes No R* M36 included in the agreement. Construction of these 66, 79 66, 79 79 66 features should be completed within two years of dedication of the buffer areas WATER Yes No R* M37 City water needs and project requirements should 22 be considered Development should have a water service plan Yes No R* M38 that provides economic benefit to the City (using 38 either a SCWC pipeline or City connection) Yes No R* M39 Development's water reservoir capacity should be 11 consistent with the City's Water Master Plan • - 9 - • Yes No R* M39 Conditions set for in County development 19 agreement and existing entitlements Authorize staff to negotiate a draft pre-annexation Yes No R* M40 agreement based on the parameters identified by 43 the City Council and return prior to 6/1/99 Yes No R* M41 Goals from the 2/22/99 RCA 102-110 102-110 102-110 102-110 102-110 102-110 102-110 *R: Direct staff to conduct additional research 8 March 29, 1999 Bolsa Chica Attachment 1 Pre-Annexation Negotiating Issues Approved? # Issue Summary Green Garafalo Bauer Dettloff Harman Julien Sullivan OTHER DIR - . Yes No R* M42 City Council principals adopted 11/7/94 85-101 85-101 85-101 85-101 85-101 85-101 85-101 Yes No R* M43 Bolsa Chica Coastal issues 8/30/95 111-117 111-117 111-117 111-117 111-117 111-117 111-117 • • *R: Direct staff to conduct additional research 9 March 29, 1999 Bolsa Chica Attachment 1 Pre-Annexation Negotiating Issues Issue # Issue Summary INFORMATIONAUSTAFF RESEARCH 7, 65 Definition of contamination and clean-up plan for all areas especially the Edwards Thumb 9 Review and critique restoration plan Definition of contract or other documents affecting oil production, on oil barrel tax, and clean-up after a given oil well 10 is abandoned must occur Ownership and fate of the MWD Property currently controlled by the Bolsa Chica Land Trust must be determined. i 12 It is rumored that MWD attorneys want some kind of a hold harmless agreement on possible contamination in that property 13 . Status of Fieldstone property 14 Location of proposed school 15 What are County's remaining responsibilities after annexation? 16 What, if any, are Hearthside's and the county's responsibility to build an Interpretive Center? 39 Clarify the funding source of the Orange County Fire fund and the role of the Fire Authority in annexation 41 Review the County's Local Coastal Program Development Standards in relation to the city's newly developed residential projects *R: Direct staff to conduct additional research 10 March 29, 1999 0 Attachment 2 BOLSA CHICA ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION IN NEGOTIATIONS WITH HEARTHSIDE HOMES RALPH BAUER 1. Items mentioned in agenda of 2/22/99 including the slide presentation. 2. Wording which would allow acquisition by a third party especially for open space. 3. Items outlined in Amigos de Bolsa Chica letter by Dave Carlberg dated 2/22/99. 4. Items outlined in "Amigos de Bolsa Chica Annexation Goals — First Draft." With one amendment: Warner Pond buffer changed to 100 feet. 5. Implicit in any negotiation, is the approximately $13 million that Hearthside saves by not building a pipeline. A major part of these funds should come to the city in the form of improvements or cash to finance things like the construction of the Interpretive Center. 6. Any annexation must be conditional on the tax rates and other financial benefits outlined in the Bolsa Chica Annexation Study dated 1/7/99. It should be emphasized that the builder and the ultimate residents are subject to all city fees and any subsequent increases. 7. Definition of contamination and clean-up plan for all areas especially the Edwards Thumb. 8. Conveying of linear parkland for public purposes, free of contamination easements, leases, and other encumbrances, must occur prior to grading on the mesa. 9. Restoration Plan for the wetlands must include 100% diversion of the Wintersberg Channel into the wetlands not into outer Bolsa Bay and Huntington Harbour. Review and critique of the Restoration Plan should occur. 10. Definition of contract or other documents affecting oil production, on oil barrel tax, and clean up after a given oil well is abandoned must occur. 11. Water reservoir capacity must be consistent with Huntington Beach Water Master Plan. 11 0 Attachment 2 12. Ownership and fate of the MWD Property currently controlled by the Bolsa Chica Land Trust must be determined. It is rumored that MWD attorneys want some kind of a hold harmless agreement on possible contamination in that property. 13. Status of Fieldstone property. I 14. Location of proposed school. 15. What are County's remaining responsibilities after annexation? 16. What, if any, are Hearthside's and the county's responsibility to build an Interpretive Center? 17. Reservation of potential for lowlands acquisition for wetlands restoration. 18. Prior to the issuance of the Coastal Development Permit, the applicant shall execute and record a deed restriction, in a form and of content acceptable to the Huntington Beach City Council which shall provide that the applicant agrees to sell the lowlands and uplands area of the property to any public agency or non- profit association acceptable to the Huntington Beach City Council that requests in writing to purchase the property. The sale shall be at fair market value as established by an appraisal paid for by the buyer and prepared by an appraiser mutually acceptable to the buyer and applicant. If the parties are unable to agree, by an appraiser designated by third party, or if the buyer and applicant agree through an arbitration on value. For uses restricted to wetlands and contiguous uplands restoration and education purposes. The deed restriction shall be recorded over the lowlands and uplands area of the property and shall run with the land, binding all successors and assigns, and shall be recorded free of prior liens and encumbrances that the City Council determines may affect the enforceability of the restriction. This deed restriction shall not be removed or changed without City Council approval. 19. All Conditions set forth by the county in their Development Agreement and miscellaneous entitlement documents in connection with the Bolsa Chica. SHIRLEY DETTLOFF 20. Development must meet all of the building standards of the City of Huntington Beach. 21. City defined park standards must be met. 22. City water requirements as well as project needs must be considered. 12 Attachment 2 23. Conveyance of linear parkland must be free of contamination before building commences. 24. A buffer between the wetlands and the project, which meets the criteria set by Fish and Game, must be in place. 25. All development must be compatible with surrounding housing product. 26. Fire and police services must be in place with no negative costs to the city. 27. Drainage facilities must not drain directly into the wetlands. 28. All conditions referenced by the Amigos de Bolsa Chica should be answered. 29. During the annexation process, Hearthside Homes will discuss any offers of purchase with a responsible buyer if the price being discussed is fair market value. Prior to such offers, the property owner will allow an appraisal to establish the value of the property. TOM HARMAN 30. All of the conditions listed on the Amigos de Bolsa Chica Annexation Goals — First Draft, a copy of which is attached to this memo. 31. That no substitutions of some new or different land be allowed for land previously identified as being set aside for dedication to the linear park. 32. Hearthside Homes shall be required to pay all LAFCO processing fees. 33. Hearthside Homes must agree to be a "willing seller" of their property if a bona fide purchaser offers to purchase the property for open space purposes. 34. Hearthside Homes must agree to a price-setting process that would establish the fair market value of the property by way of an appraisal. If a bona fide purchaser is found that is willing to pay the appraised price, Hearthside Homes must agree to sell for that price. 35. Hearthside Homes must agree to grant an option to purchase for 24 months to an appropriate land conservation organization such as the Nature Conservancy or American Land Conservancy. The option would be exercisable as provided in paragraph 5 above. 13 • • Attachment 2 36. No grading or commencement of any construction activities would occur on the property for a period of 24 months, i.e., the estimated time to complete the process of annexation. PAM JULIEN 37. Support staff presented goals per February 22Id RCA pages five and six. 38. Develop a plan for water service that provides economic benefit to the city of Huntington Beach that utilizes either a Southern California Water Company pipeline or a city of Huntington Beach connection if adequate resources are available. 39. Clarify the funding source of the Orange County Fire fund and the role of the Fire Authority in an annexation. 40. Answer Amigos de Bolsa Chica's questions per their February 22, 1999, letter. 41. Direct staff to review the County's Local Coastal Program Development Standards in relation to the city's newly developed residential projects. 42. Direct staff to develop a process for annexation that insures that fees, which were not included in the fiscal analysis for annexation, associated with building permits and inspection are directed to the city. 43. Authorize staff to negotiate a draft pre-annexation agreement based on the parameters identified by the City Council and return prior to June 1, 1999, for City Council consideration. DAVE SULLIVAN 44. Hearthside Homes must agree to be a willing seller for 24 months. 45. Hearthside Homes must agree to allow an appraisal of the land (federal funds have already been appropriated for the appraisal). 46. All linear park property obligated under the development agreement must be dedicated contamination free prior to any building on the mesa. 47. 100 foot buffer around Warner Pond. 48. Shielding of development. Fencing and landscaping around any development on the Bolsa Chica Mesa should be required to soften the visual impact of the development and also to minimize access of domestic animals into the wetlands. 14 I • • Attachment 2 49. All of the County Fire Authority assessment must go to Huntington Beach. 50. Mesa Top Buffer — The Bolsa Chica Coastal Plan should include an open space buffer, on top of the mesa (along the bluff edge), to protect the bluff and wetlands restoration area from the areas designated for development. The buffer must be 100 feet from the top of the bluff to accommodate passive recreational uses (such as bicycle and/or pedestrian trails, benches, and vista overlooks) similar to those planned for the Linear Regional Park (which runs, parallel to the Bolsa Chica Mesa, along the length of the Huntington Mesa at the southern most edge of the Bolsa Chica area). Buffer improvements must be completed before construction on the mesa is started. 51. Mesa Top Roadway — The project must incorporate a buffer by a mesa top roadway which runs roughly parallel to the recommended bluff top buffer and separates the buffer from development areas. The mesa roadway would serve as a distinct boundary between areas designated for development and public open space areas and would provide public access opportunities to public open space areas while providing additional separation from development and protection to the wetland restoration area. 52. Compatibility with Existing Los Patos Development — The LCP should designate the Bolsa Chica areas, adjacent to the city, to a compatible land use and zoning that is of similar density, type, and scale to existing development along Los Patos Avenue. 53. Product Type — The LCP should reflect the same percentage of single and multi- family units that exists in the immediate project vicinity which is not less than 66.66% single family. 54. The Bolsa Chica project development standards should be the same as the City of Huntington Beach standards including: • lot size • height • design standards • open space • park dedication • city soil remediation 55. The Bolsa Chica project should reflect a compatible building density and type with neighboring city residences. 56. The natural topography of the mesa should be maintained by limiting grading, terracing or other similar methods. Existing mature trees on-site should be preserved rather than replaced. Mesa development should minimize impacts to wetlands. 15 • • Attachment 2 57. Once the LCP and Development Agreement have been approved, the city should be responsible for building plan review, approval, inspection services and other "permit processing" aspects of implementing project entitlements. The city should also be responsible for the collection of fees to cover the costs of such services. AMIGOS DE BOLSA CHICA 2/22/99 LETTER 58. Linear Park property dedication. The development of Harriett Wieder Park has been delayed for a number of years. For each year of delay the citizens of Huntington Beach and Orange County are denied another 12 months enjoyment of a unique natural resource. We recommend that one of the top priority points of discussion in any annexation agreement is the immediate dedication of all linear park property that the landowner is obliged to complete under the Development Agreement. 59. Edwards Thumb. This property has long been earmarked as a key corridor connecting Huntington Central Park with the Bolsa Chica. We recommend that any annexation agreement include, at the very least, the establishment of a narrow green belt easement to connect the two areas. In addition, the designation of Edwards Thumb as a conservation zone, or preferably the dedication of the entire area to the state for eventual restoration should be pursued. 60. Warner Pond. This small but special habitat will be severely impacted by surrounding development. We recommend that a buffer of at least 50 feet be required around the periphery adjacent to Mesa development. 61. Bluff Buffer. Standard buffers between critical habitats and residential development are normally set at 100 feet. The present plan calls for a 50-foot buffer between the boundary of the wetlands and development on the Bolsa Chica Mesa. However, we understand the landowners have use the term "setback" rather than buffer and we are uncertain what that means. We strongly urge that any annexation agreement include a clear and unequivocal 100-foot buffer from the five-foot contour line within the wetlands to the outermost boundary of any residential development on the Mesa. 62. Interpretive Center. Funds from the landowner towards the building of a 5,000 square foot interpretive center were referred to in the 1989 Coalition Plan. Two aspects of the center should be established before annexation is completed. The first is final determination of the location of the center, and the second is its size. For an interpretive center for one of the most significant environmental attractions in Southern California, five thousand square feet is not adequate. In order to provide space for displays on Bolsa Chica history and wildlife, plus offices, meeting area, gift shop and other public and maintenance areas, 10,000 square 16 • • Attachment 2 feet would be a minimum requirement. Part of an annexation agreement must include a means of identifying funding to design and construct a larger interpretive center. 63. Storm Drains. Any annexation agreement should require that no runoff from the Bolsa Chica Mesa is to be directed into the Bolsa Chica wetlands. 64. Fieldstone Property. All parties are encouraged to help accelerate the purchase of this property by the State, but if purchase is not completed by the time an annexation agreement is prepared, a conservation zone designation should be placed on this property to protect it from possible development. 65. Contamination Issues. Any questions regarding responsibilities for cost of identifying and removing contamination from the Bolsa Chica lowlands, including Edwards Thumb, the Fieldstone property and the Pocket, should be clearly resolved before any annexation agreement is signed. 66. Bluff top trails, view areas and public access. An annexation agreement should clearly establish the locations of trails, viewing points, and native landscaping along the bluff edge of the Bolsa Chica Mesa, as well as specifically show the nature and locations of public access to these features. Construction of these features should be completed within two years of dedication of the buffer areas. 67. Shielding of development. Fencing and landscaping around any development on the Bolsa Chica Mesa should be required to soften the visual impact of the development and also to minimize access of domestic animals into the wetlands. 68. Residential Densities. There are several landowners on the Bolsa Chica Mesa, both within the City and in County territory. To avoid piecemeal planning, any discussion of residential densities in an annexation agreement should be comprehensive and encompass the entire Mesa, regardless of owner or location. AMIGOS DE BOLSA CHICA ANNEXATION GOALS - FIRST DRAFT • Irrevocable Offer of Dedication of the following properties upon approval of annexation by Local Area Formation Commission: 69. Linear park property 70. Edwards Thumb property 71. Warner Avenue Pond and 50 foot buffer around the pond 72. "Bluff' buffer area to extend one hundred feet from the five-foot contour line in the Bolsa Chica Lowlands, or 75 feet from the crest of the mesa bluff, whichever is 17 • • Attachment 2 greater. This buffer area to extend Southerly from Warner Avenue and Northerly to the Easterly extension of Los Patos. I 73. The park area designated on the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach and generally located Southerly of the extension of Bolsa Chica Road. 74. Other park areas on the Bolsa Chica Mesa designated on the County Plan • The following actions or agreements should be in place as part of the plan approved by the Local Area Formation Commission: 75. A permanent "Bolsa Chica Interpretive Center" site. 76. Conservation zone designation for the former "Fieldstone Property." 77. Permanent option to sell the former "Fieldstone Property" to State Lands Commission or other appropriate public agency with a set purchase price agreeable to both parties. 78. Commitment to work with public agencies to resolve any contamination issues, to establish responsibilities for cost sharing and to obtain agreement guaranteeing payment of costs associated with contamination cleanup to a level necessary for wetland and upland wildlife habitat areas. 79. Within two years of dedication of the buffer areas, complete construction of trails, view areas, signage, and planting of approved native plants as determined and specified by the public agency receiving the dedication of the land or its designee. 80. Provide funding for the construction of at least a 10,000 square foot Interpretive Center and related improvements based on plans developed by either the County of Orange, the City of Huntington Beach, or a collaborative of both parties. 81. To design and construct drainage facilities which will remove to the greatest extent possible, sediments and contaminates flowing from the Bolsa Chica Mesa, or adjacent properties, into the Bolsa Chica Lowlands. 82. To design drainage facilities which will not drain directly into the Bolsa Chica Wetlands or adversely impact the esthetic appearance of the bluffs or the lowlands. 83. To design any fencing along the boundaries of the buffer areas to minimize visual and esthetic impacts from the adjoining public lands, and to minimize domestic animal access to the buffers and wetlands. 18 • • Attachment 2 84. Any limitation on the number of residential units shall apply to the entire mesa area, regardless of ownership or location in or outside the boundaries of the City of Huntington Beach. CITY COUNCIL ADOPTED PRINCIPLES 11/7/94 85. The Bolsa Chica project should be a financial benefit to the City of Huntington Beach. Any development plan for the Bolsa Chica must articulate how Fire, Police, Recreation and Library service deliver to Bolsa Chica over the next 20 years will be accomplished. Services should be delivered with the least cost to Bolsa Chica residents and the least impact to the citizens of Huntington Beach. 86. The Bolsa Chica project must be responsible for guaranteed restoration of the wetland, including a comprehensive maintenance and operation plan. 87, The Bolsa Chica project should be a balanced community with a mix of land uses that minimizes vehicle miles traveled and impacts to city services. 88. The Bolsa Chica project should not exceed the City's infrastructure and service capacity for streets, water, public safety, libraries, parks/recreation, sewerage, cultural activities and other city services. 89. The Bolsa Chica project should be consistent with the City of Huntington Beach General Plan. 90. The Bolsa Chica project development standards should be the same as the City of Huntington Beach standards including: lot size, heights, design standards, open space, park dedication and City soil remediation standards. 91. The Bolsa Chica project should reflect a compatible building density and type with neighboring City residences. 92. The mesa-lowland relationship should be maintained through careful site planning of open space, parks, trails, ecological reserves or other open space amenities. 93. The natural topography of the mesa should be maintained by limiting grading, terracing or other similar methods. The bluff face should be preserved and protected with a significant open space setback area. Existing mature trees on- site should be preserved rather than replaced. Mesa development should minimize impacts to wetlands. 94. The City desires the most environmentally sensitive restoration of the wetland. Restoration should be accomplished through an adaptive management approach. 19 Attachment 2 95. The Bolsa Chica project should preserve and restore on-site historically significant structures and incorporate them into the site planning of the property. 96. The Bolsa Chica project should preserve cultural artifacts in designated open space areas that have been determined to be archaeologically and historically significant. 97. The Bolsa Chica project should be designed as if it would ultimately be annexed to the City of Huntington Beach. 98. Once the LCP and Development Agreement have been approved, the City should be responsible for building plan review, approval, inspection services and other "permit processing" aspects of implementing project entitlements. The City should also be responsible for the collection of fees to cover the costs of such services. 99. The Wintersburg Flood Control Channel should be improved in order to provide an enhanced drainage system and flood control. 100. A tidal inlet should have no impact to beach, public recreation or be detrimental to pubic safety, health or welfare. 101. The Bolsa Chica project should be designed to minimize all risks from seismic conditions. CITY GOALS APPROVED 2/22/95 102. Fire The Fire Department has indicated that annexing the Bolsa Chica will have an impact on the Department's ability to assume and provide fire protection services throughout the City. Annexing the Bolsa Chica area will consume system-wide facility resources. Goals to achieve (relating to fire issues) include funding for necessary capital improvements, meeting required response time standards for fire or medical emergencies and obtaining acceptable access to the Bolsa Chica Planned Community. 103. Public Works: any pre-annexation agreement would include provisions to address streets, water and wastewater issues. 104. Water: production, distribution and storage of water should all be part of the pre- annexation negotiations. The City's goal is to ensure that adequate supplies of water are available under all conditions, including provision of storage in case of a temporary cessation of deliveries, and in meeting fire flow pressure and volume. 105. Wastewater: negotiations must address the means by which wastewater will be collected and pumped and how related facilities will be financed. The City should 20 • • Attachment 2 create the most efficient design to accommodate both the current wastewater service needs and the needs of future development. 106. Streets: the project must accommodate efficient traffic circulation, address traffic safety standards, and adequately meet parking demands. 107. Community Services: it is anticipated that the increase in population will further burden current over-utilized recreation facilities in proximity to the Bolsa Chica area. The Community Services Department has projected the need to provide additional sports field improvements at two adjacent elementary schools. The impacts on facilities will occur whether or not the Bolsa Chica is annexed into the City; however, a pre-annexation agreement may provide the opportunity for the City to negotiate park design standards and adequate funding to address service/maintenance costs. 108. Police: if annexed, the City's Police Department will provide all law enforcement related services to the Bolsa Chica area. Goals relating to police issues include maintaining service (response times, etc.) and safety to current City residents while also providing adequate service to any new residents of the Bolsa Chica Planned Community. Negotiating points critical to the operation of law enforcement include obtaining adequate funding to offset service costs and the ability to provide equipment necessary to adequately service the Bolsa Chica. 109. Library: the additional population generated by the proposed development will increase the use of library services throughout the City. The Library Services Department has indicated that additional impacts on library services would generate the need for additional staffing. The City desires to maintain the level of services currently provided to City residents. The staff would pursue negotiations with the County of Orange to secure tax dollars from the library fund. 110. Planning: negotiations should address the project's development standards to ensure that they match the City's to the closest degree possible. A goal of negotiations will be to address the project's compatibility with surrounding uses. Planning issues to be evaluated are discussed in more detail in the 17 Bolsa Chica Principles adopted by City Council on November 7, 1994 and also in the Summary of Bolsa Chica Coastal Issues dated August 30, 1998. SUMMARY OF BOLSA CHICA COASTAL ISSUES 8/30/95 111. Conservation Easement: a conservation easement should be placed over the entire restoration area to protect it from future use as anything other than wetland restoration uses. (The conservation easement should be required to protect the lowland restoration areas, even if federal permits are not sought, are should and not granted, or if the property is acquired by a federal agency.) 21 0 Attachment 2 112. Mesa Top Buffer: the Bolsa Chica Local Coastal Plan should include an open space buffer, on top of the mesa (along the bluff edge), to protect the bluff and wetlands restoration area from the areas designated for development. The buffer should be of sufficient width to accommodate passive recreational uses (such as bicycle and/or pedestrian trails, benches and vista overlooks) similar to those planned for the Harriett M. Wieder Regional Park (which runs parallel to the Bolsa Chica Mesa, along the length of the Huntington Mesa at the southern most edge of the Bolsa Chica area). 113. Wetland Restoration Plan: the restoration plan proposed in the LCP is a well- balanced plan which provides a valuable combination of habitats and will provide winter eco-tourism opportunities to the City. Implementation of the restoration plan should be careful to ensure that the tidal inlet is designed in a manner which will have no adverse impact to the beach, public recreation or be detrimental to public safety, health or welfare; that site planning of open space, parks, trails, ecological reserves or other open space amenities maintain the relationship between mesa upland and lowland areas; and that the natural topography of the mesa and bluff faces are maintained by limiting of grading, terracing or other similar methods. 114. Mesa Top Roadway: the LCP should incorporate a buffer by a mesa top roadway which runs roughly parallel to the recommended bluff top buffer and separates the buffer from development areas. The mesa roadway would serve as a distinct boundary between areas designated for development and public open space areas and would provide public access opportunities to public open space areas while providing additional separation from development and protection to the wetland restoration area. 115. Cultural/Historical Memorialization: the LCP should include memorialization of the cultural and historical resources found in the Bolsa Chica. Memorialization should be provided through interpretive signage and displays which depict the Bolsa Chica's history of oil production, use by Native Americans and the significance of the site during World War II; these elements should be incorporated into vista overlooks and small kiosks provided along the buffer. 116. Compatibility with Existing Los Patos Development: the LCP should designate the Bolsa Chica areas, adjacent to the City, to a compatible land use and zoning that is of similar density, type and scale to existing development along Los Patos Avenue. 117. Product Type: the LCP should reflect the same percentage of single and multi- family units that exists in the immediate project vicinity which is not less than 66.66% single family. 22 RCA ROUTING SHEET INITIATING DEPARTMENT: Planning SUBJECT: Approve Bolsa Chica Pre-Annexation Agreement Negotiating Issues COUNCIL MEETING DATE: March 29, 1999 RCA ATTACHMENTS STATUS Ordinance (w/exhibits & legislative draft if applicable) Not Applicable Resolution (w/exhibits & legislative draft if applicable) Not Applicable Tract Map, Location Map and/or other Exhibits Attached Contract/Agreement (w/exhibits if applicable) (Signed in full by the City Attorney) Not Applicable Subleases, Third Party Agreements, etc. (Approved as to form by City Attorney) Not Applicable Certificates of Insurance (Approved by the City Attorney) Not Applicable Financial Impact Statement (Unbudget, over $5,000) Not Applicable Bonds (If applicable) Not Applicable Staff Report (If applicable) Not Applicable Commission, Board or Committee Report (If applicable) Not Applicable Findings/Conditions for Approval and/or Denial Not Applicable EXPLANATION FOR MISSING ATTACHMENTS REVIEWED RETURNED FOR RDED Administrative Staff ( ) ( ) Assistant City Administrator (Initial) ( ) ( ) City Administrator (Initial) City Clerk ( ) EXPLANATION FOR RETURN OF ITEM: (Below • . For Only) RCA Author: HZ:SH:WN:kjl