Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAcquisition of property by eminent domain - Redevelopment Ag i1 REQUEST FOR REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ACTION r APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL D 92-51 . 19 Date October 19 1992, s a _!�ECITY LERI =r Honorable Chairman and Redevelopment Agency Members Submitted to: Submitted by: Michael T. Uberuaga, Executive`Dire v, a P.T. co ri T,� . Prepared by: Barbara A..Kaiser, Deputy City Administrator/Economic DeveP6pment REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY* RESOLUTION OF NECESSITY FOR MAIN IER Subject: REDEVELOPMENT ��PROJECT A 3 REA (AP# 024-152-11 & 12 Consistent with�9APd$sT1 WER1,/C PQM�1F)1 New Policy or Exception . Statement of Issue, Recommendation, Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attachments: STATEMENT OF ISSUE: The Redevelopment Agency is purchasing property in the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area. This parcel is critical to the consolidation of a key block and requires public acquisition to complete a needed redevelopment project in the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area, as amended. The acquisition of this parcel will result in the least private injury for reasons to be articulated at the public hearing. RECOMMENDATION: I. Conduct and conclude the noticed hearing and adopt the attached Resolution of Necessity (Agency Resolution No. 23 y-). Lots 1, 2, and 3, Block 1.05 of the . Huntington Beach Tract Assessor Parcel 024-152-11 & 12. 2. Appropriate $680,295 from Main-Pier Capital Project fund balance to appropriate Main-Pier Capital Project account. ANALYSIS: The Agency has been attempting to purchase and consolidate parcels in the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area to accommodate a planned development project. On August 3, 1992 the Agency directed staff to initiate negotiations with the property.- owners for the acquisition of the subject property. On August 6, 1992 the Agency. extended a written offer to the property owners. Staff has met with all the property owners in an attempt to negotiate a mutually agreeable purchase price. Attempts to acquire this property to date, through good faith negotiations with the property owners, have been unsuccessful. The adoption of a Resolution of Necessity will authorize the acquisition of this parcel by eminent domain, which will allow the Agency to proceed with the development of this key site in the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area. FUNDING SOURCE: ri Budgeted Main-Pier Phase II Land Acquisition Account No. E-TM-ED-909-6-10-00. ,r PinniR; J. RAA ED 92-51 October 19,1992 Page two ALTERNATIVE ACTION: Do not adopt the Resolution of Necessity and continue negotiations with property owners. ATTACHMENTS: 1) Resolution 2) Map 3) Fiscal Impact Statement (FIS) MTU/BAK/KBB:jar 1300r \r RESOLUTION NO. 234 A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH DECLARING THAT THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND NECESSITY REQUIRE ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY IN THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, AND AUTHORIZING THE ACQUISITTION OF SUCH PROPERTY BY EMINENT DOMAIN (APN 24-152-11 & 12) WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach is proposing to take certain real property, hereafter referred to as "the Property, " commonly known as Assessor ' s Parcel Number 24-152-11 & 12, for public use; to wit, for redevelopment purposes, the elimination of blight, and the construction of a mixed use retail/residential project for the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area, Phase II; and Health & Safety Code § 33391(b) authorizes the Redevelopment Agency to acquire real property by eminent domain for purposes of redevelopment; and All persons whose names and addresses appear on the last equalized assessment roll for the Property were given notice of the intention of the Agency to adopt a Resolution of Necessity and to authorize the acquisition by eminent domain of the aforesaid property, and informing them of their right to be heard on said matter pursuant to the Code of Civil Procedure § 1245 .235; and A public hearing was held by the City Council on October 19 , 1992, at which the matters set forth above and in Code of Civil Procedure § 1240 . 030 were discussed, including - 1 - the following matters : (a) whether the public interest and necessity require the acquisition of the Property; (b) whether the redevelopment project is planned or located in the manner that will be most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury; (c) whether the Property is necessary for the redevelopment project; (d) whether an offer of just compensation pursuant to Government Code § 7267. 2 has been made to the owner or owners of record; and (e) whether the Agency' s offer of just compensation was refused by the owner or owners of record, NOW, THEREFORE, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach does hereby find, determine and resolve as follows: 1. That the above Recitals are all true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference. 2 . That the public use for which the Property is to be taken is redevelopment purposes; to wit, the elimination of blight and the construction of a mixed use retail/residential project for the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area, Phase II . 3 . That the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach is authorized to take the Property by eminent domain pursuant to Health & Safety Code § 33391(b) . 4 . That the legal description of the real property to be taken is set forth in Exhibit "A-1, " which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Said real property is also graphically depicted by Exhibit "A-2, " attached hereto. 2 - 5 . That the public interest and necessity require the proposed project. 6 . That the proposed project is planned or located in the manner that is most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury. 7 . That the acquisition of the Property described in Exhibit "A-l" attached hereto is necessary to permit construction and completion of the Project . Without inclusion of the Property, the Project could not be completed. B. That offers of just compensation pursuant to Government Code § 7267.2 have been made to all owners of record of the Property, that reasonable diligence has been used to locate every interested owner, and that the Redevelopment Agency' s offer of just compensation was based on an appraisal of the Property, and that the Redevelopment Agency' s offer was for the full appraisal amount . 9 . That due to the refusal of the owner or owners of record to accept the Redevelopment Agency' s offer of just compensation, the Project cannot be completed except by the Redevelopment Agency' s power of eminent domain. 10 . That the public interest and necessity require the acquisition of the Property for redevelopment purposes and for the elimination of blight, and that such acquisition is necessary for the Project. 11. That pursuant to Government Code § 65402, the location, purpose and extent of the proposed acquisition of the - 3 - Property conforms with the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach. 12 . That the development proposal, and the proposed acquisition of real property incidental thereto, conforms to the provisions of Resolution 48 of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach, relating to the procedures for approving development proposals within the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area. 13 . That participation in the Redevelopment Project has been reasonably offered to the owner or owners of the property described herein. 14 . That notice has been given as required by California Code of Civil Procedure § 1245.235. 15 . That the taking of said real property be in fee simple, and that acquisition of said real property in fee simple is most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury. 16. That the Agency Attorney is hereby authorized and directed to commence an action in the Superior Court of the State of California in and for the County of Orange, in the name and on behalf of the Redevelopment Agency against those persons who appear as owner or owners of record or who are known to have any claim or interest in the Property for the purpose of acquiring the property by eminent domain for the public use described herein, to make application for possession of the Property prior to judgment, and to do all things necessary to prosecute the action to its final determination in accordance with the provisions of law applicable thereto. - 4 - 17 . That the Redevelopment Agency staff is hereby authorized and directed to take any appropriate action consistent with the purposes of this Resolution, including but not limited to the withdrawal of necessary sums to deposit with the court as the probable amount of compensation that will be awarded in the eminent domain proceedings to acquire the Property. 12 . That the real property described herein, which is authorized for condemnation by this resolution, is located in the City of Huntington Beach, County of Orange, State of California, within the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area . PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach at a regular meeting thereof held on the 19th day of October, 1992 . Chairman ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Agency Clerk Agency Attorney R-k REVIEWED AND APPROVED: INITIATED AND APPROVED: Executive Director '� r Director of Economic Development 5 - Exhibit "A-1" LEGAL DESCRIPTION LOTS 1, 2, & 3 IN BLOCK 105 OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 3 , PAGE 36 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. EXCEPTING THE INTEREST IN THE SOUTHEAST 10 FEET OF SAID LOT 1 WHICH WAS CONDEMNED FOR STREET PURPOSES BY THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH IN THE DECREE OF CONDEMNATION ENTERED NOVEMBER 30 , 1923 , IN AN ACTION ENTITLED CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH VS. C.P. PATTON AND OTHERS, CASE NO. 13054 , SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR ORANGE COUNTY, A CERTIFIED COPY OF WHICH DECREE WAS RECORDED DECEMBER 3 , 1923 , IN BOOK 500, PAGE 278 OF DEEDS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. 65) 17) - i /o r-S I - 1 �I 20 f 27 2B I27 kN zo 1 n I� .� 24 23 `r- 35 (3 22 2/ ---I �--1 -- --, /B /7 / 3 'G-1 /s 7 I > / I /5 Q.5 '\ 12 /2 // 15 3 / 25� .a' _) 0 B T 602 " 30 FL'�; _ J 277) r w r 26 25 . � W .. I 2 •� 5 W 24 J4j, '3 5 =% 2 _ / ). Inc) / 17 nos' 17 17 — i /2.s►�/ ,u,j1. til iti ,,:s 013 ," /D 9 © 6 5 4 I/ t 9 B 6 5 4 IZ / I I (113�11 I Q 15 A- k 10 C-f�f-/ 0 a Exhibit "A-2" Res. No. 234 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) CITY OF HUNTINGICN BEACH) I, CONNIE BR XWW, Clerk of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beads, California, M HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was duly adapted by the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach at a meeting of said Redevelopment Agency held on the 2nd day of November , 1992 , and that it was so adopted by the following vote: AYES: Members: Robitaille, Moulton-Patterson, Winchell, Silva, Green, MacAllister, Kelly NOES: Members: None ABSENT: Members: None Clerk of the Redevelopment Aofticy of the City of Huntington Beach, Ca. REQUEST FOR REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ACTION ED 92-51 Date October 19, 1992 Submitted to: Honorable Chairman and Redevelopment Agency Members Submitted by:Michael T. Uberuaga, Executive Directo Prepared by: Barbara A. Kaiser, Deputy City Administrator/Economic Deve'Lopment REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY RESOLUTION OF NECESSITY FOR MAIN-PIER Subject: REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT TTpARREA (AP# 024-152-11 & 12 Consistent with �ouncIt-P-otRABE 1-Y ---i' ] New Policy or Exception Q� —G�- vZ.•3f Statement of Issue, Recommendation, Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attachments: Q0g) STATEMENT OF ISSUE: The Redevelopment Agency is purchasing property in the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area. This parcel is critical to the consolidation of a key block and requires public acquisition to complete a needed redevelopment project in the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area, as amended. The acquisition of this parcel will result in the least private injury for reasons to be articulated at the public hearing. RECOMMENDATION: 1. Conduct and conclude the noticed hearing and adopt the attached Resolution of Necessity (Agency Resolution No.2 31 ). Lots 1, 2, and 3, Block 105 of the Huntington Beach Tract Assessor Parcel 024-152-11 & 12. ANALYSIS: The Agency has.been attempting to purchase and consolidate parcels in the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area to accommodate a planned development project. On August 3, 1992 the Agency directed staff to initiate negotiations with the property owners for the acquisition of the subject property. On August 6, 1992 the Agency extended a written offer to the property owners. Staff has met with all the property owners in an attempt to negotiate a mutually agreeable purchase price. Attempts to- acquire this property to date, through good faith negotiations with the property owners, have been unsuccessful. The adoption of a Resolution of Necessity will authorize the acquisition of this parcel by eminent domain, which will allow the Agency to proceed with the development of this key site in the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area. FUNDING SOURCE: Budgeted Main-Pier Phase 11 Land Acquisition Account No. E-TM-ED-909-6-10-00. TLir vinil iRr, RAA ED 92-51 October 19,1992 Page two ALTERNATIVE ACTION: Do not adopt the Resolution of Necessity and continue negotiations with property owners. ATTACHMENTS: 1) Resolution 2) Map MTU/BAK/KBB:jar 1300r 4 REQUEST FOR REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ACTION ED 92-51 Ql �, Date October 19,_1 992 Submitted to: Honorable Chairman and Redevelopmp t Agency Members I Submitted by: Michael T. Uberuaga, Executive Director"v. ��_ Prepared by: Barbara A. Kaiser, Deputy City Administrator/Economic Development Subject: REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY RESOLUTION OF NECESSITY FOR MAIN-PIER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA (AP# 024-152-11 & 12 pp d Consistent withVeWM"ERE(g0QRM[AI*4d New Policy.or.Exception CL /uy,23T Statement of Issue, Recommendation, Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attachments: STATEMENT OF ISSUE: The Redevelopment Agency is purchasing property in the Main—Pier Redevelopment Project Area. This parcel is critical to the consolidation of a key block and requires public acquisition to complete a needed redevelopment project in the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area, as amended. The acquisition of this parcel will result in the least private injury for reasons to be articulated at the public hearing. RECOMMENDATION: Conduct and conclude the noticed hearing and adopt the attached Resolution of Necessity (Agency Resolution No. ZI.V/ . Lots 1, 2, and 3, Block 152 of the Huntington Beach Tract Assessor Parcel 024-152-11 & 12. 2 Ap roprt 0,295 from t f to appu Ma n- rCapt o account. r t ,ANALYSIS: The Agency has been attempting to purchase and consolidate parcels in the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area to accommodate a planned development project. On August 3, 1992 the Agency directed staff to initiate negotiations with the property owners for the acquisition of the subject property. On August 6, 1992 the Agency extended a written offer to the property owners. Staff has met with all the property owners in an attempt to negotiate a mutually agreeable purchase price. Attempts to acquire this property to date, through good faith negotiations with the property owners, have been unsuccessful. The adoption of a Resolution of Necessity will authorize the acquisition of this parcel by eminent domain, which will allow the Agency to proceed with the development of this key site in the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area. FUNDING SOURCE: Main-Pier Capital Project e. 'r 191�/Q3 G,n i+ioc RAA ED 92-51 October 19,1992 Page two ALTERNATIVE ACTION: Do not adopt the Resolution of Necessity and continue negotiations with property owners. ' AI ACHMENTS: 1) Resolution 2) Map MTU/BAK/KBB:jar 1300r FJ&� CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINCTOWBEACH TO: CHAIRMAN JIM SILVA AND MEMBERS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH FROM: GAIL HUTTON, City Attorney DATE: November 2, 1992 SUBJECT: Chairman' s Statement Before Noticed Hearing on Eminent Domain Resolution - Agenda Item F-3 Before the noticed hearing on the Resolution of Necessity at the agency meeting on November 2, 1992, the Chairman should announce the following: 1. This agenda item is a special noticed hearing held under Code of Civil Procedure Section 1245.235. It is not a public hearing. 2. The subject. matter of this noticed hearing is limited to the following items: A. Whether- the public interest and necessity require the proposed project. B. Whether the project is planned or located in the manner that will be most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury. C. Whether the property described in the resolution is necessary for the proposed project. i AA Chairman Jim Silva and Members of the Redevelopment Agency November 2, 1992 Page 2 3 . The amount of compensation is not at issue during the noticed hearing. It will be decided by the courts at a later date, should the resolution be adopted. 4 . A two-thirds majority is required to adopt the resolution. 5. Only those person who have previously requested to appear and be heard, under Code of Civil Procedure Section 1245.235 (those property owners whose names appear on the last assessment roll sheet and commercial tenants) shall be heard at this time. (Other comments by the Chairman, as appropriate, may also be made, but the above items 1 through 5 must be stated before opening_ the noticed hearing. ) ZIA GAIL HUTTON City Attorney GH/rj 1 cc Michael Uberuaga, City Administrator Connie Brockway, City Clerk ABC Properties 401 Atlanta Avenue Huntington Beach, California 92648 October 13 , 1992 Z Ln Redevelopment Agency '��' City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California 92648 ,`' 'v " Dear Members of the Redevelopment Agency, Subject: Resolution of Necessity 504/506 Pacific Coast Highway (AP# 024-152-11&12) This letter is intended to be our representation at the scheduled City Meeting of October 19 , 1992 . The co-owners of ABC Properties are unable to attend this meeting and do not feel it necessary to have legal counsel in attendance at this time. We do not, however, want to waive our right to be heard on the subject. We are opposed to the adoption of the Resolution of Necessity. Our opposition is based on the following facts: 1. The proposed project (ie Coultrup Project) in block 105 does not conform with the downtown specific plan. Block 105 is designated as an integration of residential and commercial mix with business ventures aligned on Pacific Coast Scenic Highway, which the 80 unit condominium project fails to meet. 2. A condominium project is considered a non-priority use of the above mentioned property. 3 . This project is a deviation from city guidelines. Without commercial uses along the Pacific Coast Highway frontage between Fifth and Sixth Streets, the project is not in compliance with the City's zoning standards. 4. The City of Huntington Beach Planning Commission previously denied this project and city staff planners were in concurrence with the denial. 5. The proposed condominium project has an excessive parking shortfall and lacks current standards of open space which denies the public these amenities. 6 . Block 105 should act as a visitor-serving commercial 5 core along Pacific Coast Highway. 7 . The use of eminent domain to secure property in Huntington Beach sets a precedent that is unacceptable to property owners in the city. 8. The Sarrabere family has owned the subject property for 74 years and has been a member of the community since 1916. This property has been maintained by the family for this duration of time with hopes that the future would bring an investment opportunity which we feel we rightly deserve. 9 . The City of Huntington Beach has failed to develop a project that would give the property owners of 504/506 Pacific Coast Highway in Block 105 the same commercial investment opportunity on their property as was offered to those property owners in Block 104. ABC properties restates their opposition to the Resolution of Necessity. We would like to reiterate from our prior correspondence to the members of the council that the "highest and best use" of the Pacific Coast Highway property is for commercial use. Denial of this project and resolution of Necessity would open up commercial investment opportunities for all owners of property in Block 105 and enhance future commercial growth of the downtown area. Sincerely, � > Q Charles Sarrabere, Co-owner of ABC Properties ABC Properties 401 Atlanta Avenue Huntington Beach, California 92648 October 13 , 1992 Redevelopment Agency City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California 92648 Dear Members of the Redevelopment Agency, Subject: Resolution of Necessity 504/506 Pacific Coast Highway (AP# 024-152-11&12) This letter is intended to be our representation at the scheduled City Meeting of October 19 , 1992. The co-owners of ABC Properties are unable to attend this meeting and do not feel it necessary to have legal counsel in attendance at this time. We do not, however, want to waive our right to be heard on the subject. We are opposed to the adoption of the Resolution of Necessity. Our opposition is based on the following facts: 1. The proposed project (ie Coultrup Project) in block 105 does not conform with the downtown specific plan. Block 105 is designated as an integration of residential and commercial mix with business ventures aligned on Pacific Coast Scenic Highway, which the 80 unit condominium project fails to meet. 2. A condominium project is considered a non-priority use of the above mentioned property. 3 . This project is a deviation from city guidelines. Without commercial uses along the Pacific Coast Highway frontage between Fifth and Sixth Streets, the project is not in compliance with the City's zoning standards. 4. The City of Huntington Beach Planning Commission previously denied this project and city staff planners were in concurrence with the denial . 5. The proposed condominium project has an excessive parking shortfall and lacks current standards of open space which denies the public these amenities. 6. Block 105 should act as a visitor-serving commercial core along Pacific Coast Highway. 7. The use of eminent domain to secure property in Huntington Beach sets a precedent that is unacceptable to property owners in the city. 8. The Sarrabere family has owned the subject property for 74 years and has been a member of the community since 1916. This property has been maintained by the family for this duration of time with hopes that the future would bring an investment opportunity which we feel we rightly deserve. 9. The City of Huntington Beach has failed to develop a project that would give the property owners of 504/506 Pacific Coast Highway in Block 105 the same commercial investment opportunity on their property as was offered to those property owners in Block 104. ABC properties restates their opposition to the Resolution of Necessity. We would like to reiterate from our prior correspondence to the members of the council that the "highest and best use" of the Pacific Coast Highway property is for commercial use. Denial of this project and resolution of Necessity would open up commercial investment opportunities for all owners of property in Block 105 and enhance future commercial growth of the downtown area. Sincerely, Charles Sarrabere, Co-owner of ABC Properties To ABC Properties 401 Atlanta Avenue Huntington Beach, California 92648 October 13 , 1992 O ,x Redevelopment Agency 4 x City of Huntington Beach �' x 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California 92648 ►V �;��' C K17 n 00 UT nr r.. Dear Members of the Redevelopment Agency, 4 o Subject: Resolution of Necessity �, 504/506 Pacific Coast Highway (AP# 024-152-11&12) :; This letter is intended to be our representation at the scheduled City Meeting of October 19 , 1992 . The co-owners of ABC Properties are unable to attend this meeting and do not feel it necessary to have legal counsel in attendance at this time. We do not, however, want to waive our right to be heard on the subject. We are opposed to the adoption of the Resolution of Necessity. Our opposition is based on the following facts: 1. The proposed project (ie Coultrup Project) in block 105 does not conform with the downtown specific plan. Block 105 is designated as an integration of residential and commercial mix with business ventures aligned on Pacific Coast Scenic Highway, which the 80 unit condominium project fails to meet. 2 . A condominium project is considered a non-priority use of the above mentioned property. 3 . This project is a deviation from city guidelines. Without commercial uses along the Pacific Coast Highway frontage between Fifth and Sixth Streets, the project is not in compliance with the City's zoning standards. 4. The City of Huntington Beach Planning Commission previously denied this project and city staff planners were in concurrence with the denial. 5. The proposed condominium project has an excessive parking shortfall and lacks current standards of open space which denies the public these amenities. 6 . Block 105' should act as a visitor-serving commercial 2 core along Pacific Coast Highway. 7. The use of eminent domain to secure property in Huntington Beach sets a precedent that is unacceptable to property owners in the city. 8. The Sarrabere family has owned the subject property for 74 years and has been a member of the community since 1916. This property has been maintained by the family for this duration of time with hopes that the future would bring an investment opportunity which we feel we rightly deserve. 9. The City of Huntington Beach has failed to develop a project that would give the property owners of 504/506 Pacific Coast Highway in Block 105 the same commercial investment opportunity on their property as was offered to those property owners in Block 104. ABC properties restates their. opposition to the Resolution of Necessity. We would like to reiterate from our prior correspondence to the members of the council that the "highest and best use" of the Pacific Coast Highway property is for commercial use. Denial of this project and resolution of Necessity would open up commercial investment opportunities for all owners of property in Block 105 and enhance future commercial growth of the downtown area. Sincerely, Charles Sarrabere, Co-owner of ABC Properties ABC Properties 401 Atlanta Avenue Huntington Beach, California 92648 o = October 13 , 1992 -<c-2 R1 r.oLn �m Redevelopment Agency m City of Huntington Beach s 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California 92648 Dear Members of the Redevelopment Agency, Subject: Resolution of Necessity 504/506 Pacific Coast Highway (AP# 024-152-11&12) This letter is intended to be our representation at the scheduled City Meeting of October 19, 1992. The co-owners of ABC Properties are unable to attend this meeting and do not feel it necessary to have legal counsel in attendance at this time. We do not, however, want to waive our right to be .heard on the subject. We are opposed to the adoption of the Resolution of Necessity. Our opposition is based on the following facts: 1. The proposed project (ie Coultrup Project) in block 105 does not conform with the downtown specific plan. Block 105 is designated as an integration of residential and commercial mix with business ventures aligned on Pacific Coast Scenic Highway, which the 80 unit condominium project fails to meet. 2. A condominium project is considered a non-priority use of the above mentioned property. 3 . This project is a deviation from city guidelines. Without commercial uses along the Pacific Coast Highway frontage between Fifth and Sixth Streets, the project is not in compliance with the City's zoning standards. 4. The City of Huntington Beach Planning Commission previously denied this project and city staff planners were in concurrence with the denial . 5. The proposed condominium project has an excessive parking shortfall and lacks current standards of open space which denies the public these amenities. 6 . Block 105 should act as a visitor-serving commercial core along Pacific Coast Highway. 7. The use of eminent domain to secure property in Huntington Beach sets a precedent that is unacceptable to property owners in the city. 8. The Sarrabere family has owned the subject property for 74 years and has been a member of the community since 1916. This property has been maintained by the family for this duration of time with hopes that the future would bring an investment opportunity which we feel we rightly deserve. 9. The City of Huntington Beach has failed to develop a project that would give the property owners of 504/506 Pacific -Coast Highway in Block 105 the same commercial investment opportunity on their property as was offered to those property owners in Block 104. ABC properties restates their opposition to the Resolution of Necessity- We would like to reiterate from our prior correspondence to the members of the council that the "highest and best use" of the Pacific Coast Highway property is for commercial use. Denial of this project and resolution of Necessity would open up commercial investment opportunities for all owners of property in Block 105 and enhance future commercial growth of the downtown area. Sincerely, _ Charles Sarrabere; Co-owner of ABC Properties OFFICE OF ING•'.°"sf CITY ATTORNEY P.O.BOX 2740 TI 2000 MAIN STREET HUNTINGTON BEACH CALIFORNIA 92647 GAIL HUTTON TELEPHONE City Attorney (714)536-M5 FAX 714 374-16W October 27, . 1992 Ms. Helene K. Goodman 17052 Palmdale Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 - Dear Ms. Goodman: Please note that the Redevelopment .Agency hearing on the Resolution of Necessity for APN 024-152-11 & 12, previously set for October 19, 1992, was continued to November 2, 1992, at 7:00 P.M. in the Huntington Beach City Council Chambers at 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, CA 92648. As discussed in Gail Hutton' s October 2, 1992 letter, if you have already filed a written notice to appear and be heard on this matter, you do not need to file another one. However, if you have not filed a written notice, and you would like to appear and be heard at the meeting, please file a notice with the City Clerk as soon as possible. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely GAIL HUTTON, City Attorney D By: PAUL D'ALESSANDRO Deputy City Attorney PDA:k cc: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrator Gail Hutton, City Attorney Connie Brockway, City Clerk Barbara Kaiser, Deputy City Administrator Keith Bohr, Assistant Project Manager Art DeLaLoza, Deputy City Attorney OFFICE OF ��°�.T..'�s'0'✓f CITY ATTORNEY t. P.O.BOX 2740 `sf tQllIT~I c 2000 MAIN STREET HUNTINGTON BEACH CALIFORNIA 92647 GAIL HUTTON TELEPHONE City Attorney 1714)536-5565 FAX 714 374-1690 October 27, 1992 Mr. Leonard Warmack 508% Pacific Coast Highway Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Dear Mr. Warmack: Please note that the Redevelopment Agency hearing on the Resolution of Necessity for APN 024-152-11 & 12, previously set for October 19, 1992, was continued to November 2, 1992, at 7:00 P.M. in the Huntington Beach City Council Chambers at 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, CA 92648. As discussed in Gail Hutton's October 2, 1992 letter, if you have already filed a written notice to appear and be heard on this matter, you do not need to file another one. However, if you have not filed a written notice, and you would like to appear and be heard at the meeting, please file a notice with the City Clerk as soon as possible. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely GAIL HUTTON, City Attorney By: PAUL D'ALESSANDRO Deputy City Attorney PDA:k cc: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrator Gail Hutton, City Attorney Connie Brockway, City Clerk Barbara Kaiser, Deputy City Administrator Keith Bohr, Assistant Project Manager Art DeLaLoza, Deputy City Attorney OFFICE OF TINS CITY ATTORNEY P.O.BOX 2740 �f�oa>rrr ti*�� 2000 MAIN STREET HUNTINGTON BEACH CALIFORNIA 92647 GAIL HUTTON TELEPHONE City Attorney (714)5365555 FAX 714 374-1690 October 27, 1992 Mr. Leonard Warmack 504 Pacific Coast Highway Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Dear Mr. Warmack: Please note that the Redevelopment Agency hearing on the Resolution of Necessity for APN 024-152-11 & 12, previously set for October 19, 1992, was continued to November 2, 1992, at 7:00 P.M. in the Huntington Beach City Council Chambers at 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, CA 92648. As discussed in Gail Hutton' s October 2, 1992 letter, if you have already filed a written notice to appear and be heard on this matter, you do not need to file another one. However, if you have not filed a written notice, and you would like to appear and be heard at the meeting, please file a notice with the City Clerk as soon as possible. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely GAIL HUTTON, City Attorney By: PAUL D'ALESSANDRO Deputy City Attorney PDA:k cc: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrator Gail Hutton, City Attorney Connie Brockway, City Clerk Barbara Kaiser, Deputy City Administrator Keith Bohr, Assistant Project Manager Art DeLaLoza, Deputy City Attorney OFFICE OF IN�`�f CITY ATTORNEY P.O.BOX 2740 sf Div��� 2000 MAIN STREET HUNTINGTON BEACH CALIFORNIA 92647 GAIL HUTTON TELEPHONE City Attorney (714)536-&%S FAX 714 374-1690 October 27, 1992 Mr. Charles A. Sarrabere 401 Atlanta Avenue, No. 2 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Dear Mr. Sarrabere: Please note that the Redevelopment Agency hearing on the Resolution of Necessity for APN 024-152-11 & 12, previously set for October 19, 1992, was continued to November 2, 1992, at 7:00 P.M. in the Huntington Beach City Council Chambers at 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, CA 92648 . As discussed in Gail Hutton' s October 2, 1992 letter, if you have already filed a written notice to appear and be heard on this matter, you do not need to file another one. However, if you have not filed a written notice, and you would like to appear and be heard at the meeting, please file a notice with the City Clerk as soon as possible. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely GAIL HUTTON, City Attorney By: PAUL D'ALESSANDRO Deputy City Attorney PDA:k cc: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrator Gail Hutton, City Attorney Connie Brockway, City Clerk Barbara Kaiser, Deputy City Administrator Keith Bohr, Assistant Project Manager Art DeLaLoza, Deputy City Attorney OFFICE OF a�116.' CITY ATTORNEY 4 _ 6 s _ P.O.BOX 2740 2000 MAIN STREET HUNTINGTON BEACH CALIFORNIA 92647 GAIL HUTTON TELEPHONE City Attorney (714)5366%5 FAX 714 374.1690 October 27, 1992 Ms . Blanche Wood 201 5th Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Dear Ms . Wood: Please note that the Redevelopment Agency hearing on the Resolution of Necessity for APN 024-152-11 & 12, previously set for October 19, 1992, was continued to November 2, 1992, at 7:00 P.M. in the Huntington Beach City Council Chambers at 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, CA 92648. As discussed in Gail Hutton' s October 2, 1992 letter, if you have already filed a written notice to appear and be heard on this matter, you do not need to file another one. However, if you have not filed a written notice, and you would like to appear and be heard at the meeting, please file a notice with the City Clerk as soon as possible. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely GAIL HUTTON, City Attorney By: PAUL D'ALESSANDRO Deputy City Attorney PDA:k cc: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrator Gail Hutton, City Attorney Connie Brockway, City Clerk Barbara Kaiser, Deputy City Administrator Keith Bohr, Assistant Project Manager Art DeLaLoza, Deputy City Attorney GTY r �RK 7 �17Y 0F - r --- -- - -- -- ---- - ---- - - - - {{UN-TiHr . _. �T. fc �. OFFICE OF ING CITY ATTORNEY P.O.BOX 2740 �F�4Y1TV 2000 MAIN STREET HUNTINGTON BEACH CALIFORNIA 92647 GAIL HUTTON TELEPHONE City Attorney (714)5364555 FAX 714 374-1690 October 2, 1992 Ms . Helene K. Goodman 17052 Palmdale Street Huntington Beach, California 92648 Dear Ms. Goodman: On October 19, 1992, .at 7:00 p.m. , in the City Council Chambers located at 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California, 92648, the Redevelopment Agency of the. City of Huntington Beach intends to adopt a Resolution of Necessity as such is described in California Code of Civil Procedure § 1245.230. This resolution, should it be adopted, will authorize the Redevelopment Agency to acquire by eminent domain certain real property in the City of Huntington Beach, commonly known as Assessor' s Parcel Number 24-152-11 & -12. Your name and address appear on the last equalized Orange County assessment roll as the owner of the real property listed above. As such, you have a right to appear and be heard on the following matters: 1. Whether the public interest and necessity require the proposed project. 2. Whether the proposed project is planned or located in the manner that will be the most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury. 3 . Whether the property described in the resolution is necessary for the proposed project . Failure to file a written notice to appear and be heard within fifteen (15) days after this notice was mailed will result in waiver of your right to appear and be heard. This notice will be mailed on October 2, 1992; therefore, your notice must be filed with the Agency Clerk no later than October 17. Ms. Helene K. Goodman October 2, 1992 Page 2 You may file your written notice to appear and be heard with: Connie Brockway, Agency Clerk Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Very truly yours, GAIL HUTTON City Attorney cc: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrator Connie Brockway, Agency Clerk Keith Bohr, Project Manager Barbara Kaiser, Director of Economic Development Paul D'Alessandro, Deputy City Attorney Arthur DeLaLoza, Deputy City Attorney t I PROOF OF SERVICE OF PAPERS 2 STATE OF CALIFORNIA: ss . 3 COUNTY OF ORANGE: 4 I am employed in the County of Orange, State of California. I am over the age of 18 and not a party to the within action; my 5 business address is : 2000 Main Street, P.O. Box 2740, Huntington Beach, CA 92648 . 6 On October 2 1992,- I served the foregoing document 7 described as : 8 Letter dated October 2, 1992 9 on the interested parties in this action by placing a true copy thereof in sealed envelope addressed as follows : 10 Ms. Helene K. Goodman 11 17052 Palmdale Street Huntington Beach,.., California 92648 -12 a . [X] BY MAIL -- I caused such- envelope to be deposited in 13 the mail at Huntington Beach, California. The envelope was mailed with postage thereon fully prepaid. I am 14 "readily familiar" with firm' s practice of collection and processing correspondence for mailing. It is 15 deposited with U.S. Postal Service on that same day in the ordinary course - of business . I am aware than on 16 motion .of party served, ' service is .presumed invalid if postal cancellation date or postage meter date is more 17 than 1 day after date of deposit for mailing in affidavit. 18 b. [ ] BY MAIL -- By depositing a true copy thereof in a 19 sealed envelope with postage thereon fully prepaid in the United States mail at Huntington Beach, California, 20 addressed to the address shown above. 21 c. [ ] BY DELIVERY BY HAND to the office of the addressee. 22 d. [ ] BY PERSONAL DELIVERY to the person(s) named above. 23 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. 24 Executed on October 2 1992, at Huntington Beach, 25 California . 26 27 28 •r OFFICE OF INS CITY ATTORNEY c� P.O.BOX 2740 2000 MAIN STREET HUNTINGTON BEACH CALIFORNIA 92647 GAIL HUTTON TELEPHONE City Attorney (714)536-M5 October 2, 1992 Ms . Blanche Wood 201 5th Street Huntington Beach, California 92648 Dear Ms . Wood: On October 19, 1992, at 7:00 p.m. , in the City Council Chambers located at 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California, 92648, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach intends to adopt a Resolution of Necessity as such is described in California Code of Civil Procedure § 1245.230. This resolution, should it be adopted, will authorize the Redevelopment Agency to acquire by eminent domain certain real property in the City of Huntington Beach, commonly known as Assessor' s Parcel Number 24-152-11 & -12. Your name and address appear on the last equalized Orange County assessment roll as the owner of the real property listed above. As such, you have a right to appear and be heard on the following matters: 1. Whether the public interest and necessity require the proposed project. 2 . Whether the proposed project is planned or located in the manner that will be the most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury. 3 . Whether the property described in the resolution is necessary for the proposed project. Failure to file a written notice to appear and be heard within fifteen (15) days after this notice was mailed will result in waiver of your right to appear and be heard. This notice will be mailed on October 2, 1992; therefore, your notice must be filed with the Agency Clerk no later than October 17. t Ms . Blanche Wood October 2, 1992 Page 2 You may file your written notice to appear and be heard with: Connie Brockway, Agency Clerk Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Very truly yours, GAIL HUTTON City Attorney cc: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrator Connie Brockway, Agency Clerk Keith Bohr, Project Manager Barbara Kaiser, Director of Economic Development Paul D'Alessandro, Deputy City Attorney Arthur DeLaLoza, Deputy City Attorney y r 1 PROOF OF SERVICE OF PAPERS 2 STATE OF CALIFORNIA: ss . 3 COUNTY OF ORANGE: 4 I am employed in the County of Orange, State of California . I am over the age of 18 and not a party to the within action; my 5 business address is : 2000 Main Street, P.O. Box 2740, Huntington Beach_ , CA 92648 . 6 On October 2 1992',' I served the foregoing document 7 described as : 8 -Letter dated October-72 , 1992. 9 on the interested parties in this action by placing a true copy thereof in sealed .envelope addressed-. as follows : 10 11 Ms. Blanche Wood 2.01 5th Street - Huntington. Beach, .California 92648 12 . .. a. EX BY MAIL -- I caused 'such envelope to be deposited in 13 the mail at Huntington Beach, California. The envelope was mailed with postage thereon fully prepaid. I am 14 "readily familiar" with firm' s practice of collection and processing correspondence for mailing . It is 15 deposited with U.S. Postal Service on that same day in the ordinary course of business. I am aware than on 16 motion of party served, service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation date or postage meter date is more 17 than 1 day after date ' of deposit for mailing in affidavit. 18 b. [ ] BY MAIL -- By depositing a true copy thereof in a 19 sealed envelope with postage thereon fully prepaid in the United States mail at Huntington Beach, California, 20 addressed to the address shown above. -. 21 c. [ ] BY DELIVERY BY HAND to the office of the addressee. 22 d. [ ] BY PERSONAL DELIVERY to the person(s) named above. 23 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct . 24 Executed on October 2 1992, at Huntington Beach, 25 California. .26 27 28 OFFICE OF ��_°_"•G•'°'eF CITY ATTORNEY s :a P.O.BOX 2740 �f MTV �` 2000 MAIN STREET HUNTINGTON BEACH CALIFORNIA 92647 GAIL HUTTON TELEPHONE City Attorney (714)536.&%5 FAX 714 374-16M October 2, 1992 Mr. Leonard Warmack 504 Pacific Coast Highway Huntington Beach, California 92648 Dear Mr. Warmack: On October 19, 1992, at 7:00 p.m. , in the City Council Chambers located at 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California, 92648, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach intends to adopt a Resolution of Necessity as such is described in California Code of Civil Procedure § 1245.230. This resolution, should it be adopted, will authorize the Redevelopment Agency to acquire by eminent domain certain real property in the City of Huntington Beach, commonly known as Assessor' s Parcel Number 24-152-11 & -12. You are the business tenant located at the property to be acquired. As such, you have a right to appear and be heard on the following matters : 1. Whether the public interest and necessity require the proposed project. 2 . Whether the proposed project is planned or located in the manner that will be the most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury. 3 . Whether the property described in the resolution is necessary for the proposed project. Failure to ,file a -written notice to appear and be heard within fifteen (15) days after this notice was mailed will result in waiver of your right to appear and be heard. This notice will be mailed on October 2, 1992; therefore, your notice must be filed with the Agency Clerk no later than October 17. Mr. Leonard Warmack October 2, 1992 Page 2 You may file your written notice to appear and be heard with: Connie Brockway, Agency Clerk Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Very truly yours, GAIL HUTTON City Attorney cc: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrator Connie Brockway, Agency Clerk Keith Bohr, Project Manager Barbara Kaiser, Director of Economic Development Paul D•Alessandro, Deputy City Attorney Arthur DeLaLoza, Deputy City Attorney 1 PROOF OF SERVICE OF PAPERS 2 STATE OF CALIFORNIA: ss . 3 COUNTY OF ORANGE.: 4 I am employed in the County of Orange, State of California. I am over the age of 18 and not. a. party to the within action; my 5 business address is : 2000 Main Street, P.O. Box 2740, Huntington Beach CA 92648. 6 On October. 2 1992, I served the foregoing document 7 described as : 8 Letter: .datdd .October 2, 1992 9 on the interested parties in this action by placing a true copy thereof in sealed- envelope addressed as follows : 10 . .Air. Leonard Warmack 11 5`04 Pacific Coast Highway Huntington Beach, California 92648 12 - a . [X] BY MAIL -- I 'caused such envelope to be deposited in 13 the mail at Huntington Beach, California . The envelope was mailed with postage thereon fully prepaid. I am 14 "readily familiar" with firm' s practice of collection and processing correspondence for mailing. It is 15 deposited with U.S. Postal Service on that same day in the ordinary course of business . I am aware than on 16 motion of party served, service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation date or postage meter date is more 17 than 1 day after date of deposit fo.r mailing in affidavit. 18 b. [ ] BY MAIL -- By depositing a true copy thereof in a 19 sealed envelope with postage thereon fully prepaid in the United States mail at Huntington Beach, California, 20 addres:sed to. the address shown above. - 21 c. [ ] BY DELIVERY BY HAND to the office of the addressee. 22 d. [ ] BY PERSONAL DELIVERY to the person(s) named above. 23 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. 24 October 2 Executed on 1992, at Huntington Beach, 25 California . 26 27 28 OFFICE OF INS CITY ATTORNEY s` e P.O.BOX 2740 �f�AIITT 2000 MAIN STREET HUNTINGTON BEACH CALIFORNIA 92647 GAIL HUTTON TELEPHONE City Attorney (714)536w6555 FAX 714 374-INN October 2, 1992 Mr. Leonard Warmack 508-1/2 Pacific Coast Highway Huntington Beach, California 92648 Dear Mr. Warmack: On October 19, 1992, at 7:00 p.m. , in the City Council Chambers located at 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California, 92648, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach intends to adopt a Resolution of Necessity as such is described in California Code of Civil Procedure § 1245.230. This resolution, should it be adopted, will authorize the Redevelopment Agency to acquire by eminent domain certain real property in the City of Huntington Beach, commonly known as Assessor ' s Parcel Number 24-152-11 & -12 . You are the business tenant located at the property to be acquired. As such, you have a right to appear and be' heard on the following matters: 1. Whether the public interest and necessity require the proposed project. 2. Whether the proposed project is planned or located in the manner that will be the most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury. 3 . Whether the property described in the resolution is necessary for the proposed project. Failure to file a written notice to appear and be heard within fifteen (15) days after this notice was mailed will result in waiver of your right to appear and be heard. This notice will be mailed on October 2, 1992; therefore, your notice must be filed with the Agency Clerk no later than October 17. Mr. Leonard Warmack October 2, 1992 Page 2 You may file your written notice to appear and be heard with: Connie Brockway, Agency Clerk Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Very truly yours, GAIL HUTTON City Attorney cc: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrator Connie Brockway, Agency Clerk Keith Bohr, Project Manager Barbara Kaiser, Director of Economic Development Paul D'Alessandro, Deputy City Attorney Arthur DeLaLoza, Deputy City Attorney ' 1 PROOF OF SERVICE OF PAPERS 2 STATE OF CALIFORNIA: ss . •3 COUNTY OF ORANGE:: 4 • I am employed in the County of Orange, State of California. I am- over the age. of_ 18 and not.:a party to .the within action; my 5 business address is : 2000• Main Street; P.O. Box 2740, Huntington Beach CA 92648 . 6 On October 2 1992, I served the foregoing document 7 described as : 8 Letter dated October 2 , 1992 9 on the interested parties in this action by placing a true copy thereof in sealed envelope addressed as follows: 10 -Mr. Leonard Warmack 11 .�508-1/2 Pacific" Coast Highway Huntington Beach, California 92648 12 - •a. [X] BY MAIL "-- I caused sucfi-"envelope to be deposited in 13 the mail at Huntington Beach, California . The envelope was mailed with postage thereon fully prepaid. I am 14 "readily familiar" with firm' s practice of collection and processing correspondence for mailing. It is 15 deposited with U.S. Postal Service on that same day in the ordinary course of business . I am aware than on 16 motion of party served, service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation date or postage meter date is more 17 than 1 day after date of deposit for mailing in affidavit. 18 b. [ ] BY MAIL -- By depositing a true copy thereof in a 19 sealed envelope with postage .thereon fully prepaid in the United States mail at Huntington Beach, California, 20 addressed to:-the address shown :-above. 21 c. [ ] BY DELIVERY BY HAND to. the office of the addressee. 22 d. [ ] BY PERSONAL DELIVERY to the person(s) named above. 23 I declare under penalty of. perjury under the laws of the State of California. that the foregoing is true and correct. 24 Executed on October 2 1992, at Huntington Beach, 25 California. 26 27 28 J' OFFICE OF ii116 CITY ATTORNEY V P.O.BOX 2740 2000 MAIN STREET F�ao�11 HUNTINGTON BEACH CALIFORNIA 92647 GAIL HUTTON TELEPHONE City Attorney (714)536.5555 FAX 714 374-1690 October 2, 1992 Mr. Charles A. Sarrabere 401 Atlanta Avenue, #2 Huntington Beach, California 92648 Dear Mr. Sarrabere: On October 19, 1992, at 7:00 p.m. , in the City Council Chambers located at 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California, 92648, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach intends to adopt a Resolution of Necessity as such is described in California Code of Civil Procedure § 1245.230 . This resolution, should it be adopted, will authorize the Redevelopment Agency to acquire by eminent domain certain real property in the City of Huntington Beach, commonly known as Assessor' s Parcel Number 24-152-11 & -12. Your name and address appear on the last equalized Or County assessment roll as the owner of the real property listed above. As such, you have a right to appear and be heard on the following matters: 1. Whether the public interest and necessity require the proposed project. 2 . Whether the proposed project is planned or located in the manner that will be the most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury. 3 . Whether the property described in the resolution is necessary for the proposed project. Failure to file a written notice to appear and be heard within fifteen (15) days after this notice was mailed will result in waiver of your right to appear and be heard. This notice will be mailed on October 2, 1992; therefore, your notice must be filed with the Agency Clerk no later than October 17. Mr. Charles A. Sarrabere October 2, 1992 Page 2 You may file your written notice to appear and be heard with: Connie Brockway, Agency Clerk Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Very truly yours, GAIL HUTTON City Attorney cc: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrator Connie Brockway, Agency Clerk Keith Bohr, Project Manager Barbara Kaiser, Director of Economic Development Paul D'Alessandro, Deputy City Attorney Arthur DeLaLoza, Deputy City Attorney I PROOF OF SERVICE OF PAPERS 2 STATE OF CALIFORNIA: ss . 3 COUNTY OF ORANGE: 4 I am employed in the County of Orange, State of California. I am over the .age of 18 and not a party to the within action; my 5 business address is: 2000 Main Street, P.O. Box 2740, Huntington Beach, . CA 92648 . 6 Oct. 2 , On 1992, I served the foregoing document 7 described as: 8 Letter dated October 2,.- 1992 9 on the interested parties in this action by placing a true copy thereof in sealed envelope addressed as follows : 10 Mr. Charles A. Sarrabere 401 Atlanta Avenue, #2 11 Huntington 'Beach, CA 92648 12 a . [X] BY MAIL -- I caused such envelope to be deposited in 13 the mail at Huntington Beach, California. The envelope was mailed with postage thereon fully prepaid. I am 14 "readily familiar" with firm' s practice *of collection and processing correspondence for mailing. It is 15 deposited with U.S. Postal Service on that same day in the ordinary course of business . I am aware than on 16 motion of party served, service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation date or postage meter date is more 17 than 1 day after date of deposit for mailing in affidavit. 18 b. [ ] BY MAIL -- By depositing a true copy thereof in a 19 sealed envelope with postage thereon fully prepaid in the United States mail at Huntington Beach, California, 20 addressed to the address shown above. 21 c. [ .] BY DELIVERY BY HAND to the .office of the addressee. 22 d. [ ] BY PERSONAL DELIVERY to the person(s) named above. 23 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct . 24 Executed on. October 2 1992, at Huntington Beach, 25 California. 26 27 i 28 off_ —VV 17052 Palmdale Street HuntilIgton Beach, California 92647 a l. � OFFICE OF S, CITY ATTORNEY P.O.BOX 2740 2000 MAIN STREET HUNTINGTON BEACH CALIFORNIA 92647 GAIL HUTTON TELEPHONE City Attorney (714)5364W5 FAX 714 374-1M October 2, 1992 Mr. Charles A. Sarrabere 401 Atlanta Avenue, #2 Huntington Beach, California 92648 Dear Mr. Sarrabere: On October 19, 1992, at 7:00 p.m. , in the City Council Chambers located at 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California, 92648, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach intends to adopt a Resolution of Necessity as such is described in California Code of Civil Procedure § 1245.230. This resolution, should it be adopted, will authorize the Redevelopment Agency to acquire by eminent domain certain real property in the City of Huntington Beach, commonly known as Assessor' s Parcel Number 24-152-11 & -12. Your name and address appear on the last equalized Orange County assessment roll as the owner of the real property listed above. As such, you have a right to appear and be heard on the following matters : 1. Whether the public interest and necessity require the proposed project. 2. Whether the proposed project is planned or located in the manner that will be the most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury. 3 . Whether the property described in the resolution is necessary for the proposed project. Failure to file a written notice to appear and be heard within fifteen (15) days after this notice was mailed will result in waiver of your right to appear and be heard. This notice will be mailed on October 2, 1992; therefore, your notice must be filed with the Agency Clerk no later than October 17. C � s Mr. Charles A. Sarrabere October 2, 1992 Page 2 You may file your written notice to appear and be heard with: Connie Brockway, Agency Clerk Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Very truly yours, GAIL HUTTON City Attorney cc: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrator Connie Brockway, Agency Clerk Keith Bohr, Project Manager Barbara Kaiser, Director of Economic Development Paul D'Alessandro, Deputy City Attorney Arthur DeLaLoza, Deputy City Attorney OFFICE OF CITY ATTORNEY P.O.BOX 2740 �f�li I G��`4oQ 2000 MAIN STREET HUNTINGTON BEACH CALIFORNIA 92647 GAIL HUTTON TELEPHONE City Attorney 1714)5366555 FAX 714 374-100 October 2, 1992 Ms . Helene K. Goodman 17052 Palmdale Street Huntington Beach, California 92648 Dear Ms. Goodman: On October 19, 1992, at 7:00 p.m. , in the City Council Chambers located at 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California, 92648, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach intends to adopt a Resolution of Necessity as such is described in California Code of Civil Procedure § 1245.230. This resolution, should it be, adopted, will authorize the Redevelopment Agency to acquire by eminent domain certain real property in the City of Huntington Beach, commonly known as Assessor' s Parcel Number 24-152-11 & -12 . Your name and address appear on the last equalized Orange County assessment roll as the owner of the real property listed above. As such, you have a right to appear and be heard on the following matters : 1. Whether the public interest and necessity require the proposed project. 2. Whether the -proposed -project is planned or located in the manner that will be the most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury. 3 . Whether the property described in the resolution is necessary for the proposed project. Failure to file a written notice to appear and be heard within fifteen (15) days after this notice was mailed will result in waiver of your right to appear and be heard. This notice will be mailed on October 2, 1992; therefore, your notice must be filed with the Agency Clerk no later than October 17. 1 Ms. Helene K. Goodman October 2, 1992 Page 2 You may file your written notice to appear and be heard with: Connie Brockway, Agency Clerk Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Very truly yours, GAIL HUTTON City Attorney cc: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrator Connie Brockway, Agency Clerk Keith Bohr, Project Manager Barbara Kaiser, Director of Economic Development Paul D'Alessandro, Deputy City Attorney Arthur DeLaLoza, Deputy City Attorney x 'ws OFFICE OF tINS CITY ATTORNEY y P.O.BOX 2740 2000 MAIN STREET HUNTINGTON BEACH CALIFORNIA 92647 GAIL HUTTON TELEPHONE City Attorney (714)636wMS October 2, 1992 Ms . Blanche Wood 201 5th Street Huntington Beach, California 92648 Dear Ms. Wood: On October 19, 1992, at 7:00 p.m. , in the City Council Chambers located at 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California, 92648, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach intends to adopt a Resolution of Necessity as such is described in California Code of Civil Procedure § 1245.230. This resolution, should it be adopted, will authorize the Redevelopment Agency to acquire by eminent domain certain real property in the City of Huntington Beach, commonly known as Assessor ' s Parcel Number 24-152-11 & -12. Your name and address appear on the last equalized Orange County assessment roll as the owner of the real property listed above. As such, you have a right to appear and be heard on the following matters: 1. Whether the public interest and necessity require the proposed project. 2 . Whether the proposed project is planned or located in the manner that will be the most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury. 3 . Whether the property described in the resolution is necessary for the proposed project. Failure to file a written notice to appear and be heard within fifteen (15) days after this notice was mailed will result in waiver of your right to appear and be heard. This notice will be mailed on October 2, 1992; therefore, your notice must be filed with the Agency Clerk no later than October 17. i Ms . Blanche Wood October 2, 1992 Page 2 You may file your written notice to appear and be heard with: Connie Brockway, Agency Clerk Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Very truly yours, GAIL HUTTON City Attorney cc: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrator Connie Brockway, Agency Clerk Keith Bohr, Project Manager Barbara Kaiser, Director of Economic Development Paul D'Alessandro, Deputy City Attorney Arthur DeLaLoza, Deputy City Attorney OFFICE OF ="s CITY ATTORNEY Y s ;e + P.O.BOX 2740 6 �4 wry f�Arr11�� 2000 MAIN STREET HUNTINGTON BEACH CALIFORNIA 92647 GAIL HUTTON TELEPHONE City Attorney 17141 536.6555 FAX 714 374-IM October 2, 1992 Mr. Leonard Warmack 504 Pacific Coast Highway Huntington Beach, California 92648 Dear Mr. Warmack: On October 19, 1992, at 7:00 p.m. , in the City Council Chambers located at 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California, 92648, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach intends to adopt a Resolution of Necessity as such is described in California Code of Civil Procedure § 1245.230 . This resolution, should it be adopted, will authorize the Redevelopment Agency to acquire by eminent domain certain real property in the City of Huntington Beach, commonly known as Assessor' s Parcel Number 24-152-11 & -12. You are the business tenant located at the property to be acquired. As such, you have a right to appear and be heard on the following matters: 1. Whether the public interest and necessity require the proposed project. 2 . Whether the proposed project is planned or located in the manner that will be the most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury. 3 . Whether the property described -in the resolution is necessary for the proposed project. Failure to ,file a -written notice to appear and be heard within fifteen (15) days after this notice was mailed will result in waiver of your right to appear and be heard. This notice will be mailed on October 2, 1992; therefore, your notice must be filed with the Agency Clerk no later than October 17. Mr: Leonard Warmack October 2, 1992 Page 2 You may file your written notice to appear and be heard with: Connie Brockway, Agency Clerk Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Very truly yours, GAIL HUTTON City Attorney cc: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrator Connie Brockway, Agency Clerk Keith Bohr, Project Manager Barbara Kaiser, Director of Economic Development Paul D'Alessandro, Deputy City Attorney Arthur DeLaLoza, Deputy City Attorney i -. OFFICE OF CITY ATTORNEY *, P.O.BOX 2740 T1 2000 MAIN STREET HUNTINGTON BEACH CALIFORNIA 92647 GAIL HUTTON TELEPHONE City Attorney (714)536.MS FAX 714 374-1690 October 2, 1992 Mr. Leonard Warmack 508-1/2 Pacific Coast Highway Huntington Beach, California 92648 Dear Mr. Warmack: On October 19, 1992, at 7:00 p.m. , in the City Council Chambers located at 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California, 92648, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach intends to adopt a Resolution of Necessity as such is described in California Code of Civil Procedure § 1245.230. This resolution, should it be adopted, will authorize the Redevelopment Agency to acquire by eminent domain certain real property in the City of Huntington Beach, commonly known as Assessor' s Parcel Number 24-152-11 & -12. You are the business tenant located at the property to be acquired. As such, you have a right to appear and be• heard on the following matters: 1. Whether the public interest and necessity require the proposed project. 2. Whether the proposed project is planned or located in the manner that will -be the most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury. 3 . Whether the property described in the resolution is - necessary for the proposed project. Failure to ,file a written notice to appear and be heard within fifteen (15) days after this notice was mailed will result in waiver of your right to appear and be heard. This notice will be mailed on October 2, 1992; therefore, your notice must be filed with the Agency Clerk no later than October 17. Mr. Leonard Warmack October 2, 1992 Page 2 You may file your written notice to appear and be heard with: Connie Brockway, Agency Clerk Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Very truly yours, Y GAIL HUTTON City Attorney cc: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrator Connie Brockway, Agency Clerk Keith Bohr, Project. Manager Barbara Kaiser, Director of Economic Development Paul D'Alessandro, Deputy City Attorney Arthur DeLaLoza, Deputy City Attorney CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNnNGTON BEACH TO: HONORABLE MAYOR JIM SILVA AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: f GAIL HUTTON, City Attorney i DATE: September 30, 1992 SUBJECT: Report to City Council Agenda Item C-2, October 5, 1992, City Council Meeting Commencement of Resolution No. 48 Procedures for Approving Development Proposals Within the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area (Approval of 66 2/3% of Property Owners) ; Notification to 'Affected Property Owners of Hearing on Resolution of Necessity to Acquire by Eminent Domain Woods-Sarrabere-Goodman (Wimpy' s) Property Issue• • In conjunction with the processing of the referenced development proposal, it is necessary to institute all procedures for eminent domain acquisition of the Woods-Sarrabere-Goodman Property, commonly referred to as Wimpy's, located at. the corner of PCH. and: Fifth. ......-. Street. Background: Agency Resolution No. 48 and subsequent Minute Order Amendment; dated July 18, 1983, attached, impose as a condition .precedent to going forward with eminent domain in the Main-Pier Project Area that 66 2/3% of the property owners within the site (Block 10.4 and 105) " consider and approve the use of eminent domain within the .site pursuant to the development proposal. The same resolution -also- authorizes the chief executive officer to develop a procedure to secure the approval process. (See attached . city attorney recommended procedure: ) Pursuant to agency action, the redevelopment staff has given the final offer to acquire the Woods-Sarrabere-Goodman site. The final offer has been rejected by Woods-Sarrabere-Goodman. CITY COUNCIL September 30, 1992 Page 2 Conclusion• Accordingly, after 66 2/3 of the owners have approved the specific development proposal, Woods-Sarrabere-Goodman property owners will be given their advance notice, pursuant to CCP 1245.235 "Notice of Hearing on Resolution of Necessity" (to acquire by eminent domain) , so that the hearing on the resolution may be heard on October 19, 1992, by the City Council. GAIL HUTTON City Attorney GH/rj 1 Attachment: 1. Resolution No. 48, September 7, 1982 2. Minute Order Amendment to Resolution No. 48, dated July 18, 1983 . 3._ Recommended procedure to secure the approval process 4. CCP 1245.235 cc: Michael Uberuaga, City Administrator Barbara Kaiser, Deputy City Administrator Arthur DeLaLoza, Deputy City Attorney Paul D'Alessandro, Deputy City Attorney Thomas Clark, Agency Special Counsel RESOLUTION NO. 48 A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ADOPTING PROCEDURES FOR APPROVING DEVELOP- MENT PROPOSALS WITHIN THE MAIN-PIER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach has prepared a proposed Redevelopment- Plan for the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area; and WHEREAS, with the adoption of said Redevelopment Plan by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, the Redevelopment Agency wishes to insure meaningful owner participation in the identification, evalua- tion, selection and implementation of specific development proposals which may occur within the Project Area, NOW, THEREFORE, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach does resolve as follows: Section 1. The Redevelopment Agency of the. City of Huntington Beach will solicit the participation of existing property owners within the Main-Pier Project Area in the redevelopment program as required under the Previously adopted Owner Participation and Re-Entry Rules. Section 2. The Redevelopment Agency, in consultation with partici- pating property owners, will identify and pursue specific development proposals for sites within the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area. Section 3. Upon formulating atspecific development- proposalifor ate, site wit in the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area`d the Redevelopment Agency will submit said development proposal to the owners of property within aid site or their consideration and approval.. Before the Re- development Agency can execute a disposition and development agreement, or owner participation agreement, or both, to implement a development proposal within the site which would require acquisition of property by the use of eminent domain, the development ro osaLmuat._ e a roved_ bra sixty pert' cent (�n ) of the owners of property within the site, by number of owners, and at least sixty percent (60%) of the owners, by land area, excluding public rights-of-way within said site. Section 4. For the purpose of implementing Section 4 of this Reso- lution, the Redevelopment Agency shall utilize the map which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" for determining the land holdings of each individual owner and the number of owners which will be eligible to vote on any specific development proposal. Land holdings of an individual prat-erty a"ner within a site being considered as part of a development proposal will be • aggregated to one total amount of area representing one vote for said property owner. Section 5. With the adoption of this Resolution, the Chief Executive Officer is authorized to develop administrative procedures to implement the owner approval process as outlined above, and is also authorized to amend the ownership map as ownership changes occur. APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 7th day of September 1902 . ATTEST: Secretary Chairman APPROVED AS TO FORM: INITIATED AND APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: LegalCounselDirector, Business n ustria En-se APPROVED: APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CONTENT: STRADLING, YOCCA, CARLSON & . RAUTH' Chie Executive Offrcer BY: TOM CLARK Speical Redevelopment Counsel 1 H'AL Av r 14 7-2 �9 i __ ---- ml� --=--'6 ts T CD i I' i —< 2'T r— rc---- f+�w---- ti r - -ice=- ---' a rn j 14 ]; fig ;19=10' i"13 Id t . iG ~ I- ( '10 m t - 110 1°C� i 1 � 1 I BEACH` In II �.�i �- 1 o m (N rn 2 Z ---- X11ST HM'Y. p O —ice._--..T..�. ..-u..ruu��u�---------------------- --LQ---�•-----------------r.----- � M i 40 rn t Naber, John 1 Pruitt, Robert W. 11 Sarrabere. Charles 2 Morris, Tommie R. 12 To mean Taylor, Margie 3 Marchand, Leo D. 13 to tide line Tubach, Gwendolyn, et al (Holt) 4 Wallace, Gwendolyn I. 14 To mean -+ Foxx Development Company 5 Holwerda, Thomas 15 tide line x Zeidan, Adel M. 6 Nelson, Norma 16 n Davis. Stephen F. 7 Gardner, Richard 17 ° d Gates, Clyde Ronald 8 Gardner, Ernestine 18 H.B. Assistance League 9 O.C. Specialties f2 19 Madzoeff, Helen 10 Pease, Harvey D. 20 0 City of Huntington Beach 40 - N � � • 21—ti — i -- L; --- r4----- 9— 32a " 1:5 4, ' 113_rj _5_—_1 y �� Worthy, Norm 21 ._._.. 136 Westmoreland, Clyde C. 22 Energy DPvelopment•Corporation 23 _ --e- --6 �. --- Conley, John 24 A ig & - [ Shupe, Margaret E. 25 T�7L_ �2w - _ Omohundro. Stuart W. et al 26 �.:' 3 A I.r Cracchiolo. Frank 21 -------1i"�.��!------ r 1•— -r _—�— s,aT! '--i•� .. Wood. Blanche A. et al 28 Terry, Robert 29 : 13. 10 11 12:i !J 11 12 132 14 ; 2 1} Bagstad, Eldon W. 30 1 _ g Gosney. Jack L. 31 ;� �• — — ---:-_—__` 1 i, _—�--- .5 .1 Abdelmuti, Admad Hamed 32 —' o j —"�— :•� Baxter, Anna L. 33 �/�._ � � `5 •9(-'.� .rC�,L 0 Lindley, Mary B. V Terry, C. Victor 34 Mase, Ronald A. 35 ----------------------------•--- ----------------j--,-- Draper, Eleanor J. 36 40 ; Wilson, Thomas E. 31 I Main Street Saloon (Gary Mulligan) 38 Watkins, Homer 39 To mean To mean tide City of Huntington Beach 40 tide line line and outer limits of pier d m A a o' r Res. No. 48 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) • CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH) I , ALICIA M. WENTWORTH, Secretary of the Redevelopment Agency -of the City of Huntington Beach, California, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was duly adopted by the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach at a meeting of said Redevelopment Agency held on the 7th day of September 1982 , and that it was so adopted by the following vote: AYES: Members: Thomas, MacAllister, Mandic, Finley, Bailey, Kelly • NOES: Me mbers: None ABSENT: Members: Pattinson Secretary of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach, Ca. Page 12 - Council Minutes - 7/18/83 Pa • AYES:- Kelly, MacAllister, Bailey AD. NOES: Finley ABSENT: Pattinson, Thomas (out of the room), Mandic (out of the room) Chi 6:. ORDINANCE. NO 2634 - INTRODUCTION APPROVED - ADOPTING A REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT FOR THE MAIN PIER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT. PLAN AMENDMENT N0. 1 AREA AT' The City Clerk presented Ordinance No. 2634 for Council consideration - "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH APPROVING AND ADOPTING A REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT FOR THE MAIN PIER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 1 AREA AS THE OFFICIAL REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR SUCH PROJECT AREA". Discussion was held regarding the number of votes necessary for introduction COU of an ordinance. Acting City Attorney De La Loza and the City Clerk concurred that four votes were only necessary for adoption. May Cit On motion by Bailey, second Kelly, Council approved introduction of Ordinance wit No. 2634, after reading by title, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Kelly, MacAllister, Bailey NOES: Finley ABSENT: Pattinson, Thomas (out of the room), Mandic (out of the room) TT: • REQUIREMENT REGARDING PARTICIPATION IN PROJECT AREA CHANGED FROM 60% TO TWO-THIRDS / A motion was made by Bailey, seconded by MacAllister, to change the C requirement of the sixty per cent for participation in a project area to two-thirds. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: MacAllister, Finley, Bailey NOES: Kelly ABSENT: Pattinson, Thomas (out of the room), Mandic (out of the room) SYSTEM OF RECORDING FINANCIAL PROGRESS OF REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS - TO BE BROUGHT BACK IN SEPTEMBER Councilwoman Finley thanked Robert Franz, Chief of Administrative Services, for the proposal for a system of recording financial progress of redevelopment projects. A motion was made by Finley, seconded by MacAllister, to direct staff to bring back a refined form of the system of recording financial progress of redevelopment projects in September. The motion carried by the following roll call vote AYES: MacAllister, Finley, Bailey NOES: None ABSENT: Pattinson, Thomas (out of the room, Mandic (out of the room) CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH • INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION MUNTINGTON BEACH TO: MICHAEL T. UBERUAGA, City Administrator FROM: GAIL HUTTON, City Attorney SUBJECT: RESOLUTION #48 PROCEDURES DATE: September 29, 1992 Resolution #48, attached for your convenience, gives you, as a chief executive officer, authority to develop administrative procedures to implement the owner approval process. We recommend that you direct the following: A. An updated Exhibit A to Resolution #48 amending the ownership map. B. An analysis of the percentage by owner and landholdings as to the "site" in question in the Coultrup proposal. C. A determination as to what constitutes the "Specific Development Proposal" . D. Submittal of the proposal for consideration and approval to the owners of property within the site. (Approval form should be prepared by City Attorney. )* E. A formal vote by the Redevelopment Agency/City Council considering the Specific Development Proposal. F. Execution of the DDA. By copy hereof I hereby request that Mr. Tom Clark provide his input on changes he may suggest. GAIL HUTTON City Attorney Attachment . cc: Barbara Kaiser Arthur DeLaLoza Paul D'Alessandro Tom Clark *Effectuation of rate by personal meeting with staff or by a general property owners meeting. Note: 66 2/3 is required. See attached Minute Order dated 7/8/83 which amended Resolution 48 to require 66 2/3% of the property owners approval to go forward with eminent domain. V li Sec. 1245.235 CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE been made because the owner cannot be located with and be heard before the governing body ti=1 i reasonable diligence, matters referred to in Section 1240.030. ' If at the time the governing body of a public entity (d) Notwithstanding subdivision (b), the g ' 14 is requested to adopt a resolution of necessity and ing body may satisfy the requirements of.this ' the project for which the property is needed has been through any other procedure that has given.-a determined b the public entity to be an emergency Y P Y g Y person described in subdivision (a)reasonable'' project,which•project is necessary either to.protect ten personal notice and a-reasonable opport or preserve health, safety, welfare, or property, the ap pear and be heard on the matters referred.' requirements of Section 7267.2 of the Government Section 1240.030. Leg.H. 1975 ch. 1275, o Code need not be a prerequisite to the adoption of July 1, 1976, 1986 ch. 358. - an authorizing resolution at the time. However, in Ref.: Cal. Fms Pl. & Pr., "Eminent Domain." those cases the provisions of Section 7267.2 of the Government Code shall be implemented by the pub- r: lic entity within a reasonable time thereafter but in §1245.240. Adoption by Two-Thirds Va`` :` . any event, not later than 90 days after adoption of Unless a greater vote is required by statute, the resolution of necessity. Leg.H. 1975 ch. 1275, ter,or ordinance,the resolution shall be adop operative July 1, 1976, 1982 ch. 1059, 1983 ch. a vote of two-thirds of all the members of the 1079. erning body of the public entity. Leg.H. 197 ' ReL: Cal. Fms Pi. & Pr., "Eminent Domain." 1275, Operative July 1, 1976. ;y x Ref.: Cal. Fms Pl. & Pr., "Eminent Domain." ' §1245.235. Notice—Hearing. (a) The governing body of the public entity may §1245.250. Matters Established and - ado t a resolution of necessity only after the govern- Presumed b Resolution. P Y Y g Y ing body has given saph erson whose property is (a) Except as otherwise provided by sta 1 to be acquired by eminent -main and whose name resolution of necessity adopted by the gov and address appears on the last equalized count ,w•�',, P Y body of the public entity pursuant to.this. assessment roll notice and a reasonable opportunity conclusively establishes the matters referred to appear and be heard on the matters referred to PP Section 1240.030. ^- in Section 1240.030. (b) If the taking is by a local public entity and (b) The notice required by subdivision (a) shall property described in the resolution is not be sent by first-class mail to each person described entirely within the boundaries of the local °,i' ' in subdivision(a)and shall state all of the following: •{� , entity,the resolution of necessity creates a p governing P tion that the matters referred to in Section 12 (1) The intent of the overnin body to adopt the resolution. �,,,.�; are true.This presumption is a presumption r (2) The right of such person to appear and be the burden of producing evidence. heard on the matters referred to in Section 1240.030. (c) For the purposes of subdivision (b),a �(3) Failure to file a written request to appear and by the State Reclamation Board for the Sac eard within 15 days after the notice was mailed and San Joaquin Drainage District is not a I, will result in waiver of the right to appear and be y g by a local public entity.Leg.H. 1975 ch. 1275, �. t;O heard. tive July 1, 1976. �?I : (c) The governing body,or a committee of not less ReL: Cal. Fms Pl. & Pr., "Eminent Domain"; than 11 members thereof designated by the govern- Sum., "Constitutional Law" §986. f I ing body if the governing body has more than 40 members, shall hold a hearing at which all persons §1245.255. Judicial Review of Resolutio ' described in subdivision (a) who filed a written re- Necessity. quest within the time specified in the notice may appear and be heard on the matters referred to in (a) A person having an interest in the pro Section 1240.030.Such a committee shall be reason- described in a resolution of necessity adopted - ' ably representative of the various geographical areas governing body of the public entity pursuant to within the public entity's jurisdiction.The governing article may obtain judicial review of the vali !! the resolution: body need not give an opportunity to appear and be � heard to an 1�.. y person who-fails to so file a written ( ) Before the commencement of the e request within the time specified in the notice. If a domain proceeding,by petition for a writ of I committee is designated by the governing body pur- Pursuant to Section 1085.The court having II' suant to this subdivision to hold the hearing, the tion_of the writ of mandate action, upon mo committee, subsequent to the hearing, shall provide ; any party, shall order the writ of mandate the governing body.and any person described in dismissed without prejudice upon comme subdivision who has appeared before the com of the eminent domain proceeding unles ubdi ( PPe - s the:., a e in determines that dismissal'will not in th Y i' rriittee with a written summary of the hearing and be a written recommendation as to whether to adopt of justice. f the resolution of necessity. Any person described in (2) After the commencement of the eminent. subdivision.(a) who has appeared before the com- main proceeding, by objection to the right to mittee shall also be given an opportunity to appear pursuant to this.title. a!i � Office of the City Clerk City of Huntington Beach -Ym�w� a Jc~ 6�� L'` ✓0�i:ric��.''r 5 10 f;1 y C j P.O.BOX 190 CALIFORNIA 92648 ' "� q, p '� State of California Dept of Gener ;0 650 Howe Ave . r! Sacramento CA 95825 �ry 024-150-16 P R E S 0 R T';f-p-"7 n H METER 27754 78 # B. A. Wood ABC Properties 201 Fifth Street Huntington Beach, Ca. 92648 Connie Brockway City Clerk Office of the City Clerk City of Hurt i ngt on Beach 2000 Main .Street Huntington Beach, Ca. 92648 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION' S DENIAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 92-17 WITH SPECIAL •PERMITS/ CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION (VARIANCE)- NO. 92-28/ TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 14666/ COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 92-14 (To construct an 80 unit condominium project and two commercial buildings totaling 47, 774 square feet . ) NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Huntington Beach City Council will hold a public hearing in the Council Chamber at the Huntington Beach Civic Center, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California, on the date and at the time indicated below to receive and consider the statements of all persons who wish to be heard relative to the application described below. . .DATE/TIME: Monday, September 21, 1992, 7 : 00 PM APPLICATION NUMBER: Appeal of the Planning Commission' s denial of Conditional Use Permit No . 92-17 with Special Permits/Conditional Exception (Variance) No . 92-28/Tentative Tract Map No . 14666/ Coastal Development Permit No . 92-14 APPLICANT: Huntington. Beach .Redevelopment Agency/Coultrup ,Development:. Company.- ,- LOCATION: Two blocks'' bounded "by:. Slx.th":.-and Main S_ t-Teets , and-.- Pacific Coast. Highway and Walnut . :y ZONE: Downtown Specific Plan, District 3 REOUEST: To construct an 80 unit condominium project and two (2) commercial buildings totaling 47, 774 square feet on 3 . 8 net acres, located on a two , (2) block project area between Sixth and Main Streets, and Walnut and Pacific Coast Highway. Residential use is being proposed along Pacific Coast Highway between Fifth and Sixth Streets without the normally required visitor serving commercial use being provided. A 100% parking variance from the commercial parking requirement is requested (a shortfall of 496 spaces) , and eight special permits to deviate from the design and development standards of the Downtown Specific Plan which include: 1 . Reduced public,_open space on the commercial block; 2 .- "Reduced alley dedicationon ' the :commercial -block; Reduced comm ercial ' building front �'yard setback along -main Street; NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING (Continued) 4 . Reduced commercial building upper story setback ° 'along Main Street; 5 . Reduced -commercial - building front yard setback .., along Pacific Coast Highway; . . 6 : - Reduced commercial building upper story .setbaek,: along Pacific 'Coast Highway; 7. Reduced commercial building upper story setback along Fifth Street; 8 . Exceed maximum site coverage for the residential project . ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: The project is covered by Final Environmental Impact Report No. 89-6 and Environmental Impact Report No. 89-6 Addendum. COASTAL STATUS: Appealable Area of the Coastal Zone (see below) PUBLIC HEARING PROCEDURE: (1) Staff Report; (2) Public Hearing; (3) Planning Commission Discussion; and (4) Planning Commission action. This project is in the appealable portion of the coastal zone. Under the provisions of ..the "Huntingto,n -.Beach Ordinance Code, the action by the City Council. is final . However, approval of the Coastal Development Permit is appealable to the Coastal Commission pursuant to Public Resources Code, S. 30603 . A denial of the Coastal Development Permit may be appealed (S. 13319 , Title 14, California Administrative Code) only if the City has approved a development on the basis of local land use regulations but has denied the issuance of a coastal development permit because it cannot make the findings required by Section 13311, Title 14 of the California Administrative Code. Pursuant to Public Resources Code, S. 30603 , an appeal must be in writing and must set forth in detail the actions and grounds by and upon which the applicant or interested party deems themself aggrieved. An aggrieved person may file an appeal to the California Coastal Commission office within ten (10) working days of the date of the Council ' s action in writing to: Teresa Henry California Coastal- Commission 245 W. Broadway, Suite 380 P. 0. Box 1450 Long Beach, CA 90801-1450 (213) 590-5071 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING (Continued) The -appeal 'period begins when the -dommission .receives a notice of the City Council -action and continues for ..ten. (.10) .working days . Appli6an-ts will"be notified' by ,-the: Coasta.l Commission as to the date of the conclusion of. the -:Commission's. ion's. review, ..period;. and as to wh6ther -or not an' appe'''al ;'has.' been '-filed-.', :Appl.icants are advised not to begin construction --p'rior_ to ':that ...date. ON FILE: A copy. of the proposed request is on file in the Community Development Department, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California 92648, for inspection by the public. A copy of the staff report will be available to interested parties at City Hall or the Main City Library (7111 Talbert Avenue) after September 17, 1992 . ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to attend said hearing and express opinions or submit to the City Clerk written evidence for or against the application as outlined above. If you challenge the City Council ' s action in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City at, or prior to, the public hearing . If there are any further questions please call Scott Hess, Senior Planner at 536-5271. - Connie Brockway - City .q.lerk OFFICE 'OF THE- CITY CLERK. (4403d) CITY OF HUNTINGTON .BEACH 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 (714) 536-5227