Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
File 3 of 3 - City Property - Acquisition Parks Playground,
REQUEbr FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION � S , Date Submitted to: HONORABLE MAYOR. AND CITY COUNCIL Submitted by: PAUL E. COOK, CITY ADMIP?ISTRATORR��`` Prepared by: ROBERT J. FR.AANZ, DEPUTY CITY ADAnNISTRATOR � Subject: ACCEPTANCE OF GIFT OF ENCYCLOPEDIA L ,�1�Y TRACT 45, M.D.,% 9/34, AKA AP #110-186-14 Consistent with Cou�gsrhPol-ycy. [X] Yes [ ] New Policy or Exce tion CTfY C Statement of Issue, Recommendation,Analysis, Funding Source,Alternati ions,Attachments: STATEMENT OF ISSUE: The Heirs of the Estate of Lorraine R. Harms wish to gift the above described encyclopedia lot by quit claim deed to the City of Huntington Beach. - ECOMMENDATION Accept the gift of lot 57 of tract 45, M.M. 9/34 from the heirs of the estate,,. and authorize acceptance ,gf-the deed with the donor' -to-reserve oil/mineral rights below 500' of surface without right of surface entry. ANALYSIS Herman Harms, received the encyclopedia lot in question by deed, to him, dated July 7, 1915 from-Leo M. Rappaport, Trustee, recorded September 4, 1915, as Instrument #10847, in Book 278, page 20 of Deeds of Orange County. This unimproved lot, located on the north side of Ellis Avenue, between Goldenwest and Edwards Avenue, was originally received as an incentive gift for purchasing an encyclopedia.. Two grandaughters, heirs to the estate of their deceased mother, wish to donate this lot to the City of Huntington Beach while reserving the oil/mineral rights below 500' of the surface without right of surface entry. It is further understood that by this gift there would be no legal expenses accruing to the estate. FUNDING SOURCE Any incidental expense covered by Parks Department. ALTERNATE ACTION Reject donation. ATTACHMENT Identifying• plat maps. pl/003lu Plo 5/85 w - SECTIONAL DISTRICT MAP 34- 5-II- - .FEE. =''"LE - � CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH A& ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA USE OF PROPERTY MAP �JJ�'J. ltlJJ J4S�NW pyty NEWBURT DR GLENFO IRONGAi B i c' — C F R of F g BAY Al ol O _ a KEN1ryCK CR, ; \ M Oq vRk Q�AAC IgLEpq iF Dq Jri� IE 0 pR � A k Oq �T4g� 9 J / AYE ED j I II e I � j\ OF W i II 3 I w 4 c~ o � J E i I GARFIELD AV E. ♦�J ! t I ii vy ^:fr-,t - •.J�t•.y-'.' x'. .�+$. .i_ q,.rY__ w:. :r*." 4.( SY,•- �k�.`- _ -r;; :,yc r.�";;�.�. C:v'`' .h�a��S;.�-`i.�`r , `�+ `Z'hc. yg. ♦- • '�.'/ l'r i Xi?'`s }� "rt .J-'. ✓ '.i a .� Y--a Y,{Y. d� 1- y �5 �.r'.`�✓ -.'o+ fit`: .t r•' .�;.': �_ -y r �Jv '` NE SEC 17 so• / P 3 4 5 6 7 5 9 /0 /1 / 30 / /O // N I I RC %I a N y 3 �O 6607 `�D 8C1'10 11 . 12 2.5' 25• 7.5 25' LOT A .� �° LOT A a 8 I (2' C3 4 5 24 25 7) 8" 9 10 I I C 3 5 6 7 C (10 I I; 12 Lor Cfl I LO /4 / l6 7 / /9 / 23 4 G /3 14 /5 /6 /7 /B 119 20 121 22 23 4 6 5 26 27 28 9 30 332 3 34 35 36 2526127 2B 29 / 3 3 3 I 3J ,I �4d C I54 3 �223G' 21 18C� 9 17 3 15 14 13 Zs 2s' ?S' 25' } cor B w LOT B a j 25' ?S' „ n• 2 s. .. 2S• 25• 2s• 23' 1 5 1E16 g I 3 22 23 56 7 8 9 I 2 C3 5 6 7 8 C9� 10 (II I O "3 3B 39 4 4/ 43 44 45 46 ,47 48 1142 143 44 14.5146 4 4 5 5 5 56 7 58 59 60 .4950 / 3 54 5 o T 60 NG 8 "; )vO 5 No Cl2 (918 1716 15 �J4C3 �2 11lo �2; 2! (2 tlg �8 �17 �I6 (15 14.(13 �! rzo' 30' ?S 2.5' 3 0 2S h 2S EL L l5 'o Q m v m 159 - 38 159 - 37 Q � MARCH_ /95/ TR. NO. 8 M.N. 9 - 7 T R. NO. 45 M. M. 9 -34 / /0O ' RECORDING REQUESTED S. City of Huntington Beach When recorded mail to.: . City Clerk City of Huntington Beach rhis document is solely ror WIi Tax-Exempt-Government Agency 2000 Main Street orricial business of the City CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH Huntington Beach, CA 92648 or Huntington Beach, as contem- Connie Brockway, CMc Plated under Government Code Cf)y Clerk �1 Sea. 6I03 and should be recorded By:,�22 else free of shame. Dsl$u I (1) Linda Kay Harms 4 THE GRANTORb) (2) Susan R. Jensen (1) 4718 - 237th Place S.E. Bothell; WA 98021 .-Of (2) 5655 - 116th Place S.E. ,City of Bellevue. WA 98006 (1) Snohomish Countyof (2) King Washington,forand inconsideration of property cited below convey—and quit-claim X to y of City of Huntington Beach A Fiunicipacorporation County of Orange State of California all interest in the following described Real Estate: Unimproved lot situated in the County of Orange, State of California, more particularly described as Lot 57 of Tract No. 45, as per map thereof recorded in Book 9, Page 34 of Miscellaneous Maps, Records of Orange County, California, which real property (received as an incentive gift for purchasing an encyclopedia) was assessed by the Orange County Treasurer as having a full value of $797 for 1985. Value at date of death of Lorraine R. Harms (Mother) Estate = $1,000.00 Both Grantor(s), Linda Kay Harms and Susan R. Jensen request the following stipulation with donation: "Reserving/accepting all oil and mineral rights below 500 feet of the surface without right of surface entry." California situated in the County of Orange State of W%Ff?feM.Dated this 30thday of August 19 89 Linda KaytHakms Susan R. Jensen _'NOTARY ACKNOWLEDGMENT jj STATEOF Washington .` ss. (INDIVIDUAL ACKNOWLEDGMENT) cormt_v of Kin _ I.-A .Notary Public in and for the Stale of Washington ,do hemby certify that on this 30 th Kay J. mith day of August ,19 89 ,personally appeared before me Linda K. Harms/S1.usan R. Jensen to be known to be the individual_ described in nod,who dxecuted the within instrument and acknowledged tha signed the same a ktree and voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes herein mentioned. - GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL THIS 30th day of August 1e 89 TO FORM �J Notary Publicinand for the Stateof .............. ................................ y'�.11_ jai TC�'i My appointment expires: Quit-Claim Deed(Statutory Form) - - Wasbinglnn I.ug:d Iibwk.Ina..Issaquah.WA-Form No.2119 9/fill -- AIA•I•IiRIAI.MAY NUT I1R RETRODUCE'D IN WIIOLE*OR IN VART IN ANY FORM%Vl IATSOHVER. -- - _•- �3 0/1 REQUE%.o F FOR CITY CO-UNCiL ACTION Date February 22, 1989 Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Submitted by: Paul E. Cook, City Administrator Prepared by: Robert Franz, Deputy City Administrato - Subject: Resolutions of Need & Necessity for Warner Ave. Widening � 5990, 599J) 5 99a, 5q9 3.) Cl�� 599q, 5995, 5 99a, 5 Consistent with Council Policy? RA Yes ( ] New Policy or Exce tion Statement of Issue, Recommendation,Analysis, Funding Source, Alternati Actions, m STATEMENT OF ISSUE The widening of Warner Avenue is contingent upon the city acquiring additional right-of-way adjacent to portions of the roadway. Eight separate ownerships have yet to be acquired and because of the press of time, the city must exercise its power of eminent domain on this project . RECOMMENDATION Adopt the attached resolution of need and necessity to initiate the eminent domain proceedings for the acquisition of these eight properties . ANALYSIS: The city of Huntington Beach, in the process of widening Warner Avenue to three (3) lanes each way together with center dividers and turn lanes, is Vsing Federal Aid Urban (FAU) funds at 87 percent to finance the project . Time is of the essence in the funding of these monies . The city must have possession of these parcels within the next three months or face the possibility of dosing the federal funding. FUNDING SOURCE: Eighty-seven percent FAU with the balance paid out of the city gas tax revenues . ALTERNATE ACTION' Not acquire the parcels necessary for this project and lose these federal funds with the consequence of continued frustrating . congestion and unsafe conditions remaining . ATTACHMENTS: Resolutions . No-r;a E L E rrE Rs PEC:PDA: sg P1 O 5/85 PLAT PARCEL ,z- �67 3�41 -�Ls SCA L E : Py = 20' STREET CURVE DATA 4 32 `S8'32., L - 3796 J 0 ` W 20' -e 6O'--- 1 l A BRIZUrLA 1O1o/g6 SHEET—OF—SHEETS • z� PLAT PARc EL P.IV6 E. I�# /6.7- 3�r- F WW R/VEER A VENUE SECT/ON L/NE ti + CENTER L/NE i i0 20' 4 - - t I I. : i�. i SCALE 40' i I G i A.,6R1ZUEL A SHFIT_pf-SHIFTS 11A,9A19A 67J-C H . i lll Z � �v v .�, 4aaks �r.t ra SLAT z OS(36� AP?16-5-3G 1-07 0S _ 14 R NER A VE. 1 17-Z ZQ'- I t .. SCALE : 1 -40_' t I � I I t � I r, SHIFT-of-SMIETS PLAT FARCE! 3, d)Gra.S rgAJ Q, `1AP1VFR A VENUE �o � Q zr S -X 4 $-3 -- �; - SCALE: 1",, 40' i I A.SAMUGLA m3/Z4/lk SHEET-OF-SHEETS d r5 I 20� -51 ' 4'i Z i . LD I PLAT PARCEL 32Y- I 7 Q I I ' I ' ~C, I � I • o WA RNE , AVENUE , b Ii I i I l I I 5CA4 E : 1'4 = 40' { i A 4WIZUr" 01310t. I fM!!T_0/_1M11Tf 1!l PLAT PARCEL = 4 x -5 Rusk �P 11 /-o n-�L--0 P WAPNER A VENUE .o � r .-i Mr.�•r r I 30� r I i SCA L E 1 - 40� 1` ' A. BR/LufGA VZ6/QS SHEET-OF-SHEETS fi` OFFICE OF =-r`•'. ef CITY ATTORNEY o , P.O.BOX 2740 mf�rurtr� 2000 MAIN STREET HUNTINGTON BEACH CALIFORNIA 92647 GAIL HUTTON TELEPHONE City Attorney (714)5366555 February 8 , 1989 William Longley Quality Bldg. Supplies 7502 Warner Ave. Huntington Beach, CA 92647 Dear Sir or Madam: On March 6 , 1989, at 7 :30 p.m. in the Council Chambers at 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, Calfornia 92648, the Huntington Beach City Council intends to adopt a "resolution of necessity" as such is described in California Code of Civil Procedure § 1245 .230 . This resolution will evidence the intention of the City of Huntington Beach to take an interest in the real property commonly known as A.P . #111-360-15 . Your name and address appears on the last County of Orange equalized easement roll as owner of the interest in real property to be acquired. Please take notice you have a right to appear and be heard on following matters : a) Is there a public interest in and necessity for the City of Huntington Beach to acquire the stated interest in the property? b) Is the project planned or located in a manner that will be most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury? c ) Is the interest to be acquired necessary for the project? Your right to appear and be heard will be waived by your failure to file with the City a written request to appear and be heard within fifteen ( 15 ) days from the date shown on the postmark of this letter , which is the date of mailing . GAIL HUTTON City Attorney GH/rf 66421 OFFICE OF tlNG CITY ATTORNEY A .= P.O.BOX 2740 2000 MAIN STREET HUNTINGTON BEACH CALIFORNIA 92647 GAIL HUTTON TELEPHONE City Attorney (714)536-6555 February 8, 1989 Dr . Robert Osborne 18160 Santa Lauretta Circle Fountain Valley, CA 92708 Dear Sir or Madam: On March 6, 1989, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers at 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, Calfornia 92648, the Huntington Beach City Council intends to adopt a "resolution of necessity" as such is described in California Code of Civil Procedure § 1245 .230 . This resolution will evidence the intention of the City of Huntington Beach to take an interest in the real property commonly known as A.P . #111-360-15 . Your name and address appears on the last County of Orange equalized easement roll as owner of the interest in real property to be acquired. Please take notice you have a right to appear and be heard on following matters : a ) Is there a public interest in and necessity for the City of Huntington Beach to acquire the stated interest in the property? b) Is the project planned or located in a manner that will be most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury? c ) Is the interest to be acquired necessary for the project? Your right to appear and be heard will be waived by your failure to file with the City a written request to appear and be heard within fifteen ( 15 ) days from the date shown on the postmark of this letter , which is the date of mailing . GAIL HUTTON City Attorney GH/rf 66421 OFFICE OF �avl�6,�eF CITY ATTORNEY � _ s P.O.BOX 2740 f6f�ourTV�� 2000 MAIN STREET HUNTINGTON BEACH CALIFORNIA 92647 GAIL HUTTON TELEPHONE City Attorney (714)536-&%5 February 8, 1989 American Dream R.E . Co. 8072 Warner Avenue Huntington Beach, CA 92647 Dear Sir or Madam: On March 6 , 1989, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers at 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, Calfornia 92648, the Huntington Beach City Council intends to adopt a "resolution of necessity" as such is described in California Code of Civil Procedure § 1245 .230 . This resolution will evidence the intention of the City of Huntington Beach to take an interest in the real property commonly known as A.P . #111-360-15 . Your name and address appears on the last County of Orange equalized easement roll as owner of the interest in real property to be acquired. Please take notice you have a right to appear and be heard on following matters: a ) Is there a public interest in and necessity for the City of Huntington Beach to acquire the stated interest in the property? b) Is the project planned or located in a manner that will be most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury?, c ) Is the interest to be acquired necessary for the project? Your right to appear and be heard will be waived by your failure to file with the City a written request to appear and be heard within fifteen ( 15 ) days from the date shown on the postmark of this letter , which is the date of mailing . GAIL HUTTON City Attorney GH/rf 66421 OFFICE OF Its`°`ef CITY ATTORNEY - s P.O.BOX 2740 sf Ty 2000 MAIN STREET HUNTINGTON BEACH CALIFORNIA 92647 GAIL HUTTON TELEPHONE City Attorney (714)536-&%5 February 8 , 1989 James D. Durston 7762 Warner Ave. Huntington Beach, CA 92647 Dear Sir or Madam: On March 6, 1989, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers at 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, Calfornia 92648, the Huntington Beach City Council intends to adopt a "resolution of necessity" as such is described in California Code of Civil Procedure § 1245 .230 . This resolution will evidence the intention of the City of Huntington Beach to take an interest in the real property commonly known as A.P. #111-360-15 . Your name and address appears on the last County of Orange equalized easement roll as owner of the interest in real property to be acquired. Please take notice you have a right to appear and be heard on following matters: a) Is there a public interest in and necessity for the City of Huntington Beach to acquire the stated interest in the property? b) Is the project planned or located in a manner that will be most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury? c) Is the interest to be acquired necessary for the project? Your right to appear and be heard will be waived by your failure to file with the City a written request to appear and be heard within fifteen ( 15 ) days from the date shown on the postmark of this letter , which is the date of mailing . L GAIL HUTTON City Attorney GH/rf 66421 OFFICE OF 116 CITY ATTORNEY Y P.O.BOX 2740 6F�atlNT����``` 2000 MAIN STREET HUNTINGTON BEACH CALIFORNIA 92647 GAIL HUTTON TELEPHONE City Attorney (714)536-&%5 February 8 , 1989 James Rush, Jr . 6851 Jardines Drive Huntington Beach, CA 92647 Dear Sir or Madam: On March 6 , 1989, at 7 :30 p.m. in the Council Chambers at 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, Calfornia 92648, the Huntington Beach City Council intends to adopt a "resolution of necessity" as such is described in California Code of Civil Procedure S 1245 .230 . This resolution will evidence the intention of the City of Huntington Beach to take an interest in the real property commonly known as A.P. #111-360-15 . Your name and address appears on the last County of Orange equalized easement roll as owner of the interest in real property to be acquired. Please take notice you have a right to appear and be heard on following matters : a) Is there a public interest in and necessity for the City of Huntington Beach to acquire the stated interest in the property? b) Is the project planned or located in a manner that will- be most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury? c) Is the interest to be acquired necessary for the project? Your right to appear and be heard will be waived by your failure to file with the City a written request to appear and be heard within fifteen ( 15 ) days from the date shown on the postmark of this letter , which is the date of mailing . GAIL HUTTON City Attorney GH/rf 66421 OFFICE OF c�avl�6,°,ref CITY ATTORNEY - _ e P.O.BOX 2740 2000 MAIN STREET HUNTINGTON BEACH CALIFORNIA 92647 GAIL HUTTON TELEPHONE City Attorney (714)536-555 February 8, 1989 Warner Beach Co. , Inc. P .O. Box 1562 Huntington Beach, CA 92647 Dear Sir or Madam: On March 6, 1989 , at 7 :30 p.m, in the Council Chambers at 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, Calfornia 92648, the Huntington Beach City Council intends to adopt a "resolution of necessity" as such is described in California Code of Civil Procedure S 1245 .230 . This resolution will evidence the intention of the City of Huntington Beach to take an interest in the real property commonly known as A.P. #111-360-15 . Your name and address appears on the last County of Orange equalized easement roll as owner of the interest in real property to be acquired . Please take notice you have a right to appear and be heard on following matters : a ) Is there a public interest in and necessity for the City of Huntington Beach to acquire the stated interest in the property? b) Is the project planned or located in a manner that will be most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury? c) Is the interest to be acquired necessary for the project? Your right to appear and be heard will be waived by your failure to file with the City a written request to appear and be heard within fifteen ( 15 ) days from the date shown on the postmark of this letter , which is the date of mailing . ,-t�dc�� GAIL HUTTON City Attorney GH/rf 66421 OFFICE OF "`'°'�F CITY ATTORNEY - - s Q� P.O.BOX 2740 s6f tpL�it c'`��� 20W MAIN STREET HUNTINGTON BEACH CALIFORNIA 92647 GAIL HUTTON TELEPHONE City Attorney (714)536.5555 February 8 , 1989 Robert Mandic 12869 Lona Kila Lane Garden Grove, CA, 92641 Dear Sir or Madam: On March 6 , 1989, at 7 :30 p.m. in the Council Chambers at 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, Calfornia 92648, the Huntington Beach City Council intends to adopt a "resolution of necessity" as such is described in California Code of Civil Procedure S 1245 .230 . This resolution will evidence the intention of the City of Huntington Beach to take an interest in the real_ property commonly known as A.P. #111-360-15 . Your name and address appears on the last County of Orange equalized easement roll as owner of the interest in real property to be acquired. Please take notice you have a right to appear and be heard on following matters : a ) Is there a public interest in and necessity for the City of Huntington Beach to acquire the stated interest in the property? b) Is the project planned or located in a manner that will be most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury? c) Is the interest to be acquired necessary for the project? Your right to appear and be heard will be waived by your failure to file with the City a written request to appear and be heard within fifteen ( 15 ) days from the date shown on the postmark of this letter , which is the date of mailing . GAIL HUTTON City Attorney GH/rf 66421 Y 1 OFFICE OF 114GCITY ATTORNEY P.O.BOX 2740 6f t1 2000 MAIN STREET HUNTINGTON BEACH CALIFORNIA 92647 GAIL HUTTON TELEPHONE City Attorney (714)53&M5 February 8 , 1989 Mario Tinoco 8234 Big Bear Circle Buena Park , CA 90621 Dear Sir or Madam: On March 6, 1989, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers at 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, Calfornia 92648, the Huntington Beach City Council intends to adopt a "resolution of necessity" as such is described in California Code of Civil Procedure § 1245 .230 . This resolution will evidence the intention of the City of Huntington Beach to take an interest in the real property commonly known as A.P. #111-360-15 . Your name and address appears on the last County of Orange equalized easement roll as owner of the interest in real property to be acquired . Please take notice you have a right to appear and be heard on following matters: a) Is there a public interest in and necessity for the City of Huntington Beach to acquire the stated interest in the property? b) Is the project planned or located in a manner that will be most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury? c ) Is the interest to be acquired necessary for the project? Your right to appear and be heard will be waived by your failure to file with the City a written request to appear and be heard within fifteen (15 ) days from the date shown on the postmark of this letter , which is the date of mailing. GAIL HUTTON City Attorney GH/rf 66421 OFFICE OF tINB7 CITY ATTORNEY P.O.BOX 2740 ~6ftglNTr c 2000 MAIN STREET HUNTINGTON BEACH CALIFORNIA 92647 GAIL HUTTON TELEPHONE City Attorney (714)536-&%5 February 8, 1989 Long Kim Pham 827 N. Adlena Drive Fullerton, CA. 92633 Dear Sir or Madam: On March 6 , 1989, at 7 :30 p.m. in the Council Chambers at 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, Calfornia 92648 , the Huntington Beach City Council intends to adopt a "resolution of necessity" as such is described in California Code of Civil Procedure 1245 .230 . This resolution will evidence the intention of the City of Huntington Beach to take an interest in the real property commonly known as A.P. #111-360-15 . Your name and address appears on the last County of Orange equalized easement roll as owner of the interest in real property to be acquired. Please take notice you have a right to appear and be heard on following matters: a) Is there a public interest in and necessity for the City of Huntington Beach to acquire the stated interest in the property? b) Is the project planned or located in a manner that will be most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury? c) Is the interest to be acquired necessary for the- project? Your right to appear and be heard will be waived by your failure to file with the City a written request to appear and be heard within fifteen ( 15 ) days from the date shown on the postmark of this letter , which is the date of mailing. GAIL HUTTON City Attorney GH/rf 66421 l ." CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH • INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH To ROBERT J. FRANZ From PAUL S. LARKIN Deputy City Administrator Real Property Analyst Subject STATUS - WARNER AVENUE Date FEBRUARY 27, 1989. RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION As you know, the Warner Avenue widening project is dependent upon FHWA funds which are channeled to us through CalTrans. Our acquisition activities, therefore, must conform to both FHWA and CalTrans rules and regulations if we wish their funding of this project. To date, we have conformed to these rules and regulations in dealing with the 21 separate ownerships effected along this right-of-way. Starting with a letter and brochure dated April 26, 1988 which explained to each of the owners the reason why the City needed the property and the rules that must be followed in the acquisition process. This was followed with a request for a personal meeting and a presentation of offer to acquire with each of those owners. Many phone and personal contacts both on site and in our office followed with each of the owners. We have now closed escrow with seven of these property owners. We are in escrow with five more and should be closing these escrows within the next month. Another property is being privately developed and, therefore, dedicated and improved by this owner. There remains the eight properties being submitted for Need and Necessity. We are continuing negotiations for these parcels and have reason to believe we may be able to settle some of these soon. However, because of the time limitation, we must proceed to Need and Necessity on these remaining parcels at this time. LARKIN Real Estate Analyst PSL:skd cc: Paul E. Cook Les Evans 4384j \f Ga 11 Hu TO fir, 7)41 S L ER ER 15 1 N RE SPO IU GE 7V 7NE LFItER S U C6JYrD P11 Orr1 Wig ©F rI(Z ON F,'9. P 9 j !9 8 9 /Al w h 1 CIR I X,A VO Tl FI& P D - R c I TY cow A.-Cill, hI PE n or IF 17 ft CAI A A CAI ,c�l1an r' -aK,ESoI�i��v� ®F G�-ss iTr �� 77 .?W �Ovr T Gt/Dl�1�v Ll K� 777 7 t' A'Al Ve,, Z7,U,vi777 TD XAMF PC/ yOli1� li1ST. P'GtT ih Y 7hWp1e Ww rn c tw x N - � n -C.M :J-ff7T n 4 r c T C,O H0b38 N019Nt1NfIH A3N"0 Alto p ly Alm 03At303� Nib R10 T1 AIt��O r c?` cl-/TV RMAMWIO-ly P-0 /30 ir Z74 O lq000 1-VA119A1G TI N REQUEST FO EDEVE�LOPMENT 1ENCY ACTION RH 88-72 Date Ot-tnhPr 9.a, 1 g88 Honorable Chairman and Redevelopment Agency Members Submitted to: n Paul E. Cook, Executive Director p ( ` Submitted by: Douglas N. La Belle, Deputy City Administrator/Economic Developm Prepared by: REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY RESOLUTIONS OF NECESSITY FOR MAIN-PIER Subject: PROJECT AREA - PHASE I OIL INTERESTS Consistent with Council Policy? [ ] Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception Statement of Issue, Recommendation, Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attachments: STATEMENT OF ISSUE: Within the Main-Pier Phase I project site, all real property has been acquired by the developer, or is under the control of the Redevelopment Agency & developer at this time. Located upon several parcels that the developer has previously acquired, there are existing oil operations. For the project to move forward in a timely fashion, it is necessary for the Agency to now acquire the surface oil interests so that the project can begin. Acquisition of these surface oil interests are needed to complete the Phase I project within the Main-Pier Project Area as amended. The acquisition of these interests 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 Resolutions of Necessity for the acquisition of surface oil interests located on Assessor Parcel Nos. 2A-166-02, 03, 09 and 10. ANALYSIS: The Agency has, in conjunction with the developer of the Phase I project, consolidated all parcels within the project site for redevelopment purposes. An offer has been made to acquire the surface oil interests on property presently owned by the developer, and we have been unable to successfully conclude those negotiations to date. The acquisition of these interests now requires condemnation. The adoption of the Resolutions of Necessity will authorize the acquisition of these oil interests by eminent domain which will allow the development to proceed as proposed. FUNDING SOURCE: Account No. 812601. PI O/1/85 RH 88-72 October 24, 1988 Page Two ALTERNATIVE ACTION: Do not adopt the Resolutions of Necessity, and continue negotiations with the owners of the oil interests. ATTACHMENTS: 1) Resolutions. 2) Site Map. 3) Statutory Offers to Purchase Oil Interests. PEC/DLB:lp 4133h FROM JQ!HH CUTLER HS50C. 10. 19. 1588 14 19 - F. r City of Huntington Beach ` 2000 MAIN STREET CALIFORNIA 92648 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Building Division 536.6241 Housing/Radevelopment Division 536.5542 C:apronVgivls ponm8any271 July 8, 1988 2292 Long Beach Blvd. Long Beach, CA 90806 Regarding: Main-Pier Redevelopment Area Leases: APN: 24-162-8,17,19,20,21 & 25 APN: 24-166--3 & 10 Wells: Ulrich # 1, Wallace #1 Hunnicutt #2 and Sheffield #1 Dear Gentlemen: As you may know, the oil leases held by your company in the City of Huntington Beach Town Lot area and which are referenced above, are located within a redevelopment project area. The Agency is seeking to acquire your leases, minerals rights, wells and well equipment for a proposed redevelopment project. Therefore, the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency hereby makes an offer to acquire your oil interests located between Fake and 3rd Streets and between Walnut Avenue and Pacific Coast Highway (Ulrich 1 , Wallace 1, ' Hunnicutt 2 and Sheffield) for the aum of $41,700.00, which is segregated as follows: $ 19,200.00 Mineral Interests $ 22,500,00 Lease and Well Equipment $ 41,700.00 Total The Agency's offer is the full amount determined to be ,just compensation for your mineral interests and oil well equipment. The basis for that, determinatian is explained in the attached Appraisal Summary Statement. It is the Agency's hope that this price is agreeable to you and that the acquisition can begin immediately, A representative of John Cutler & Associates, the Agency's Acquisition Agent, will work with you in the acquisition of your mineral rights and oil equipment and answer any questions you may have regarding Lhis Letter and Appraisal Summary Statement. The Acquisition Agent can be contact at (213) 427-2333 (collect). It is requested that you acknowledge receipt of the Agency's offer by signing a copy of this letter and returning same to this office. Your signature on the copy does not signify acceptance of the offer to settle the acquisition by the Agency, it only acknowledges receipt of the Agency's offer. /y Your cooperation in this matter will be greatly appreciated.l✓� /a Sin OFFER�1 LtD ��q„�,,+.$/ I 1 BY: / ' LaBELLE DATE: CLT Deput Administrator Receipt of Off r Does Not Director of Community Development Constitute Acceptance i LL .!'::-' hD s: � ire• •t � -i-... 'J � � 4� �:a.L��.t:: .:'._��.i •.l:• ti. t�� to t- a K, ClaimChrck 16 98 906 0-9 ❑Hold D Hold Data Dare ,.r. CAPRO OIL CGIiX __-v `9 7292 LONG EAG VD. t 1sr Notice = sf° o NG BEACH CA ;:wfilo I S ,� 2td0 Motk,a ��f� C�l3oct�, �Q q y� �CE` PS Fv_4w-A. �ti+ �.i - Dsuexed` i i r VS Fyai� '� - ii!#1.1�l:kll.�,iilllttiktttl.Jl 44FFii ii ,: ! ' tt }}_. � �" • -- -111!!kl�I_'!`.�.�l�1l��!QL1�71 C'-1..�! w J r - Cx •, w L A W O F F I C E S SHEILA W. BULLOCK THORPE AND THORPE MAILING ADDRESS JONLVN CALLAHAN POST OFFICE BOX 17972 CATHERINE ENDO CHUCK A PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS LOS ANGELES, CA 90017-0972 DANIEL C. DAVID ONE BUNKER HILL, SUITE 500 EDWARD P. DOWNES DAVID G. FREEDMAN 601 WEST FIFTH STREET TELECOPIER JUDITH A. LOWER (213) 680-4060 BRUCE H. MCBIRNEV LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90071-2094 SUSAN L. MCCARTHV ROBERT H. ROGERS, JR. (213) 680-9940 • (818) 578-0688 PLEASE REFER TO MARK R. STAPKE OUR FILE NO. J OHN G. THORPE' VINCENT W. THORPE* OF COUNSEL HERBERT J. O'MEARA' October 18, 1988 WILLIAM D. ROSS DIANA P. SCOTT •A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION Connie Brockway, City Clerk City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Re: Main-Pier Redevelopment Area _ Leases: APN 24-162-8,17, 19, 20, 21 & 25 APN: 24-166-3 & 10 Wells: Ulrich # 1, Wallace #1 Hunnicutt #2 and Sheffield #1 Dear Ms. Brockway: Our firm represents Capro Oil Company and Mr. Charles Cather. Pursuant to your letter of October 3, 1988, to Capro Oil Company, this will serve as notice on their behalf that they intend to appear before the City of Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency at their meeting on October 24, 1988, and to speak on the issue of the resolution of necessity referred to in your letter of October 3, 1988. Very truly yo rs, o = J n G. Thorpe RPE AND THORPE -- JGT:pt cry 4442h — Z:'-`" w <�m rn r•� cc: Gail Hutton, Esq. Mr. Charles Cather C= m y i 1ITU I -� - - I 1 - Rz I � IIi I I I I I i I I I I I I ► j i I i t I i I-I j i i l lil i I _ I $I,� I-Xa REQUEST FC REDEVELOPMENT . aENCY ACTION;=�"�" ON 7 5--88 &W4- Opp- [b Date J X/A 88 Chairman and Members of the Redevelopment Agency �T Submitted to: Paul Cook, City Administrator/Chief Executive Officer Submitted by: Douglas La Belle, Deputy City Administrator/Community Developme Prepared by: REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY RESOLUTION OF NECESSITY FOR MAIN-PIER Subject: REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA APN 24-148-01 - (CLARK HOTEL) CHILLCUTT/SCHWARTZ Consistent with Council Policy? [ Yes [ ] 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 Project Area. This parcel is critical to the successful implementation of a retail/parking structure project, and requires public acquisition to complete this needed redevelopment project in the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area as amended. 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. ANALYSIS: The Agency has been attempting to purchase and consolidate parcels in the Main-Pier Project Area to accommodate a planned retail development and related parking structure. After months of acquisition efforts, this key parcel requires condemnation. The adoption of the Resolution of Necessity will authorize the acquisition of this parcel by eminent domain which will allow the development to proceed as proposed in the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area. FUNDING SOURCE: Account No. 812-601 ALTERNATE ACTION: Not adopt the Resolution of Necessity and continue negotiations with property owners. ATTACHMENTS: 1) Resolution 2) Map PEC/DLB:jr (0093d) - PI O/1/85 0a-19BIT A The real property proposed to be acquired by the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach is located in the City of Huntington Beach, County of Orange, State of - - -- California, generally located at Main Street and Olive, Avenue, Assessor's parcel number 024-148-01 and more particularly described as Lot 28 Block 203 of the Huntington Beach Tract as recorded in Miscellaneous Maps, Book 3, Page 36. all AVENUE a ` 2 26 25 . ' 3 24 23 19 4 22 2J 5 yIL ,!g /7 / 5 15 117-A 9 D � . 7 21 k O �t 3 VY•AL.�UT AVENUE $ �--1 - (0088d) AF CHILCUTT REALTY 569 E. Main street Ventura, California 93001 (805) 648-5735 - ► 4-F P&L <z C -��Cam- c�P �z E �c'A4 0� (s CAF- of a,c�- -Ter �ovvrj5���4<< o� TWOS VAL- Oj!��Alr, � S uv 13 . C REQUEST FG _ . REDEVELOPMENT . .3NENCY ACTION RH 88-44 July 18, 1988 Date Chairman and Members of the Redevelopment Agency Submitted to: Paul Cook, Executive Director Submitted by: Douglas La Belle, Deputy City Administrator/Community Developm�Prepared by: CONTINUANCE OF RESOLUTION OF NECESSITY FOR PARCEL 024-148-01 Subject: (CLARK HOTEL) Consistent with Council Policy? [ ] Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception Statement of Issue,.Recommendation, Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attachments: 12b1� STATEMENT OF ISSUE: At your meeting of July 5, 1988, regarding the adoption of a Resolution of Necessity on parcel 24-148-01 (Clark Hotel) located in the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area, it was your action to continue this noticed hearing item until July 18, 1988. RECOMMENDATION: Staff would again recommend a further continuance of the noticed hearing for the adoption of a Resolution of Necessity on parcel 24-148-01 until August 15, 1988. ANALYSIS: The Redevelopment staff has reached a tentative settlement regarding the disposition of the Clark Hotel which should be finalized within three weeks. Additionally, the property owners are on vacation until August 1, so staff would like to continue this item until your meeting of August 15, 1988 PEC/CPS:lp 3941h PIO/1/85 REQUE%- FOR CITY COUNC,_ ACTION Date .1i inP ?i , 19Ra Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council GO Submitted by: Paul E. Cook, City Administrator Prepared by: Les G. Evans, Acting Director of Public Works aw9 O /pti Subject: CORPORATION EASEMENT DEED FOR THE REA ENT 6TH STREET, BETWEEN ORANGE AVENUE.AND AIN ST ET Consistent with Council Policy? [ Yes [ ] New Policy or Excepti �9 4 Statement of Issue, Recommendation,Analysis, Funding Source,Alternative Actions,Attachments: STATEMENT OF ISSUE: The realignment of 6th Street, between Orange Avenue and Main Street, has been approved and construction is scheduled to start in July 1988. RECOMMENDATION: Approve the granting of an easement for street and public utility purposes for the realignment of 6th Street, between Orange Avenue and Main Street and approve 2.5 feet of additional right-of-way on Orange Avenue,-between Fifth and Sixth Streets. Authorize the recording of the Corporation Easement Deed. ANALYSIS: Circulation Element Amendment Number 84-1, which established this general alignment is covered by Negative Declaration No. 84-14, as per the California Environmental Quality Act. On July 20, 1987, City Council approved an agreement to proceed with the engineering design for the realignment of 6th Street, between Orange Avenue and Main Street. On June 20, 1988, City Council approved the low bid by Sully - Miller Construction.Company. FUNDING SOURCE: There is no cost in the City granting to the City an easement for public street purposes. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: None ATTACHMENTS: Corporation Easement Deed PEC:LGE:US:dw 1676g/12 P10 5/85 4/22/88 EMINENT DOMAIN OVERVIEW As communities throughout California work through the cycle of urban revitalization, eminent domain may be a necessary tool to allow municipalities to acquire property for public use or to reverse existing conditions of social or economic blight. The city's power of condemnation is exercised only when negotiations to purchase are unable to be resolved. The Huntington Beach City Council recognizes two distinct conditions which must be satisfied before utilizing it's power of eminent domain. The proposed land acquisition must demonstrate public benefit such as the widening of roadways, park expansion, or, as in the case of the city's downtown revitalization efforts, construction of a parking facility. The second category includes property which has been designated as part of a Redevelopment Project Area and condemnation is necessary to reverse blighted, deteriorating, and economic conditions within a Project Area. An Area may be determined to be economically blighted due to various factors including the prevalence of depreciated values, impaired investments, and less than optimal land use resulting from the subdivision of property into many small lots. Redevelopment of such an area is difficult, if not impossible, without the power of eminent domain used to consolidate parcels. In the downtown district of Huntington Beach, condemnation proceedings have been necessary to acquire private real estate for the public good, i.e. construction of public parking facilities to advance the downtown revitalization process which is vital to the economic health of the area, and to provide a stronger tax base which benefits all residents. The use of eminent domain, therefore, is an action which is ultimately taken for the benefit of the larger community: While the Huntington Beach City Council/Redevelopment agency exercises great discretion before deciding to utilize its power of eminent domain it is a tool that can reduce the cost and time of the redevelopment process. The action must be determined to, not only promote the public welfare, but the land use must be judged to be the most economically viable alternative for the community. Redevelopment in Huntington Beach through the joint participation of the City and property owners has resulted in significant accomplishments in a relatively short period of time, and is a financially sound ,and economically feasible process for revitalization of the community. City acquisitions through eminent domain have included small lots for park purposes and parcels for street widening projects such as Warner Avenue. Two completed and successful redevelopment project areas, in which the Agency's power of Eminent Domain was used to consolidate parcels, are the commercial shopping complex located at Golden West and Warner and the highly acclaimed, award winning Emerald Cove and Windward Cove projects at Beach and Talbert. In these cases small "encyclopedia lots" were acquired and consolidated into larger parcels to make development possible. When establishing a redevelopment project area, an implementation plan is also adopted. This implementation plan would outline certain policies and procedures for subsequent development taking place within that project area. The city's downtown Main-Pier Project Area has a "2/3 rule" as a part of its implementation plan. This 2/3 rule requires that before the Redevelopment Agency can exercise its power of Eminent Domain for any specific individual development proposal, 2/3 of the property having at least 2/3 of ownership effected by that proposal are either participants or in agreement to that development proposal. Within a redevelopment project area, such as Main-Pier, certain identifiable public needs such as street widening and parking structures are necessary. These types of public needs would fall under the category of city acquisition for the public good as opposed to those acquisitions required by the Redevelopment Agency and not governed by the implementation plan's 2/3 rule. 0623H %/a7/8d /��ltlw REQUEtr FOR CITY COUNQL. ACTION s� RH 86-94 Date Gtti Submitted to: 01Q Honorable Mayor and City Council Members / � G Submitted by: n ( G Charles W. Thompson, City Administrator by: Prepared Douglas N. LaBelle, Deputy City Administrator/Redevelo Subject: G DECLARATION OF SURPLUS PROPERTY - LAKE STREE Consistent with Council Policy? P� Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception Q Statement of Issue, Recommendation,Analysis, Funding Source,Alternative Actions,Attachments: STATEMENT OF ISSUE: On December 15, 1986 the City Council/Redevelopment Agency approved a Disposition and Development Agreement for the sale of the Lake Street parcels. Approval of this DDA was predicated on a subsequent declaration as surplus for this property and the procurement of an appraisal. Attached is the appropriate resolution to declare this property surplus. RECOMMENDATION: Approve and authorize the Clerk to execute the attached resolution. ANALYSIS: In March, 1986, the Redevelopment Agency staff solicited proposals for the disposition of the Lake Street parcels. In July, 1986, the Redevelopment Agency selected Beachfront Lake Street to purchase these properties. On December 15, 1986, the City Council/Redevelopment Agency approved a Disposition and Development Agreement with this firm. Approval of this DDA was conditioned upon the declaration of the entire site as surplus (the portion of the site previously used for the Lake Street Fire Station was declared surplus in 1982), and the procurement of an appraisal of the site. Attached is the appropriate resolution to declare this property surplus (that portion acquired from Lindborg Dahl Development and that portion known as the Pacific Electric Right-Of-Way recently accepted from the Huntington Beach Company). The declaration of this property as surplus was the subject of consideration by the Planning Commission at its regular adjourned meeting of Tuesday, January 6, 1987. At that time, the Planning Commission found this declaration of surplus property to be in conformance with the City's General Plan. This finding is necessary prior to adoption of the attached resolution by the City Council. O No 5/85 6 ,0,1 RH 86-94 January 9, 1987 FUNDING SOURCE: Proceeds of sale of the property by the Redevelopment Agency will be Agency revenue. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: Do not approve the attached resolution. This will pre-empt.the sale of this property. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution No. 2. Map. CWT/DLB/SVK:sar 0708r REQUE FOR CITY COUN CO ACTION Date November 3, 1986 Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members Submitted by: Charles W. Thompson, City Administrator Prepared by: Robert J. Franz, Chief of Administrative Services �t/L►- ` ` VZD By Subject: - Conveyance of Lake Street Property to Redevelopment Agenc Consistent with Council Policy? [X] Yes [ ] New Policy or Excepti CITY.. - Statement of Issue, Recommendation,Analysis, Funding Source,Alternative Actions,Attachments: Statement of Issue: The City of Huntington Beach ownes 2.41+ acres of land east of Lake Street between Indianapolis and Frankfort Avenue. The City needs to transfer this property to the Redevelopment Agency in order to finalize the disposition and development agreement for the.sale of this property. Recommendation: Authorize the recording of a deed for this property conveying title from the City of Huntington Beach to the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach. Analysis: AP #24-084-02; the City of Huntington Beach, by Deed #4430 dated 06/28/63, acquired block 704 of Wesley Park Section, Huntington Beach, Book 4, Page 17 M.M., a .71 + acre parcel of land from Southern California Edison Company. This land was used for the Lake Street Fire Station until the City relocated this station to the corner of Lake and Fifth Street in 1984. AP #24-170-01; the City of Huntington Beach, by Deed #4430 dated 03/15/83, acquired block 604 of Huntington Beach, Main Street Section, Book 3, Page 43 M.M., a 1.473 acre parcel of land from Leonard O. Lindborg. Both this and the old fire station property are now vacant. Hartford Avenue, the street running east and west between these two parcels contains .23+ acres. The total acreage of these three properties combined is 2.413+ acres. Funding Source: None. No funds required. Income derived from the sale of the property would go into the Redevelopment Agency. The Agency will then utilize the proceeds to repay the short term loan from the City that was provided in August for Main Pier Phase I land acquisitions. Alternative Action: Do not approve the conveyance. This will inhibit sale of the property as previously approved by the Redevelopment Agency. Attachment: Plat maps. 2828j - 3 W p No 5/85 rLANNINTj .' ZONING UM IZ At SECTIONAL DISTRICT MAP II-6-II LEGEND ADOPTED YARCIt ],1160 p�/bp SasrfJta CITY OF CITt COUNCIL ORDINANCE N0 7St m6 ytn 1m �-�R)L tD [�tO- 1 ti Y w rY P!-N w-r no --bDle�s — Rw -[-•1 all 6w ►6-w rai ipW �] rIAM(e DtMtDsrtrt f•I•Y all YD z- #-0---.mzw O-'•Q tY tft f•16r6.eRPlAt �' t[ra[ arts.[tW[rG[Dpr•1Gr q-)-Y tY fi row 1*3 zm g] n[O—"mme Gt o-l-c' HUNTINGTON BEACH ri �. n am. smt ..�.•K),D`.0 dsr.,Gr •.f-tf w1 q M w0 t' '� r..n 4Mr M1 '�, rAr11l[•A.q.Kfgt+t[d1•q�Gr •1.-YY ]w "w i�]Faaat[f r►y!)i.Ya S Yw[At MAY....... 1:�1-r6 tl �p :j.M n M lira YL fort[Ou[ttlst dtr..G. �P`f•Y Ln' !4r[6 -Y t!Y � pw.[wt.grtp6 a[ogaroru Drir.cT ::,I:i. 0:6!' ur'0'• liw +1-i !1n caftw^+RtrR[[[Dwno..11Dmncr ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA „ =„ t, � ] ,..t•. ----.I. a: tYY[aT a�[Y Mr.KT Im Iw'••M,Y �(,` +qr[. OI.CYI D4r.1Gr Are N-Y 1]!1 r tM)i ® p[flGwar[s r+tGr[Ar>tTK[.aG1wt¢.r 1-t�.rf:.1.h Iio-• O•rY TNGIrArYlD.rr.dl..00utri0rl .[.ri r,.q tY i-Y Mr tlpt� -- gT6apt t� - -r1 t ro+s !•u H •.Au 6.Ww n+L. r[o.s[.frrarrtm sr ADAM$ tsN rfn HAVE. aw,aur � o. W. •Yvi[.. err x �• ._�---....--- U LJ!_—J L_JLJ lJl._1�J..l_J 1- —1. I I �—J 11 1 1 ) t t_ ?,J•�+ -ti. �! 1-0 RI RI R-I F R-I R•I R2 1 ` wW�-7e j vCi2 Ir /p• •`'..�0�' RI n RI RI RI R F I 11 I -0 i�Mrtu LAN I . •�� / - �a o�aoIl--.,y.`.�dS.iR,o-�T i ) nf RI RI R ' n ACFv[ R2-PO-q0 E O RI � RI RI RI I ts . i�•r!P::...-t�:l C t NA NV1LL AYC .. •. ._.- � IOLDTOW c+CJ' RI RI Q -1vcJ•+ ' 1-LMi`I� Rl�.t CF-REMP-13 IN E. R2-mobJ , Ar �F_R ELEVENTN wHn TILDO, DAD RI L••Ia �N 1 R3 C♦ eA RI RI I ) •c 1 N N ar AoG DD DD DD DDI '. A� RI R2 - R 2 R I '° 1 a R 1 r��i li E 1 I II ; R3IR3` iC4 R 2 ,� N U To.s,Lor fwne ,L u I wt. Kr�• l f o R3 R2 R2 R �J 1 S R3 R3 o R3 C ♦r 4 NA _��AV R 3 R3 D �- � AV / I I Ar /a V� GE NE VA -A ,r = n R•Nrtronr r� To i ECIFIC N (DISTR E ICJ LN1A Y� � DDyD MH f� �vr~ •.� Z Ta0 7 r6 . - �D DD Fla-PD-CZ a 6f • I < R2-rD-Cz m r O ••� r .+ e.lE °SS " �2-PD-czg .R2-CZ 8 .. ate >�.. _ a� ;;R2-PD-CZ: R2 -CZ + --1c �I/q � • �c g - r ATLANTA AVE ItET \ NCTE /•• / at Dr[rslos aK w.[n q'E.11rrDr gwrK cr[■ • •0 a S.C.nw or.n Z � . o � W y O 1. z I i O .�� 75�0 Ca A _ OF HUNTONGTON SWCH L JE COUNCIL ADMINISTRATOR COMMUNICATION CA 8/6-53 HUNTINGTON BEACH - ll --- /., %%'�✓ -' A5 To Honorable Mayor and From Charles W. Thompson City Council Members City Administrator Subject SUBMITTALS FOR LAKE Date July 2, 1986 STREET PROPERTY Attached for Council's review are copies of the submittals from the four finalists for the sale and development of the city's Lake Street property. The Council's redevelopment committee has interviewed the finalists and a summary of their comments and their recommendation will be forwarded to the Council prior to the July 7, 1986, meeting. (This item is presently scheduled for the meeting of July 7). A matrix of the proposals has been attached to this communication. Requests for development proposal were first distributed in March. Twenty-one proposals were submitted by the kiarch 28, 1986, deadline, and twelve developers were interviewed by a staff selection committee comprised of Jim Palin, �Ylike Adams, Stephen Kohler, Dan Brennan, and myself. The selection committee recommended the four finalists based on the diversity of approach, anticipated tenant profile, architectural quality and amenity package, estimated assessed value of the project, and purchase price for the land. Respectfully submitted, 7Z� �. Charles W. Thompson City Administrator CWT/�lA:sr Attachment .�624h L A K l: S T R E E T P R O J E C T ` I Project Description Project Value Developer Units Type Size and Mix Cost/Rent Const. Land Est. Total Miscellaneous Posilovich 8-lb-lb-717 sq. ft. $624 $49/sq. ft. $1,758,000 $6,330,000 Enterprises 56 Apts. 16-2b-2b-936 sq. ft. $815 8-2b-lb-867 sq. ft. $755 10 8-lb-lb-663 sq. ft. $580 16-2b-21/2b-1 109 sq. ft. $965 66 Single 4-3b-21 2b-1500 sq.. ft. Family 6-3b-21/2b-1850 sq. ft. I 1. S. 68 Condo 52-2b-2b-746 sq. ft. :: $99,500 $50/sq. ft. $1,83.6,000 $6,782,000 Properties 8-2b-2b-900 sq. ft. $114,500 . 8-lb-lb-634 sq. ft. $86,500. Beachfront 70 Apts. 20-lb-lb-675 sq. ft. $800/mo. $68/sq. ft. $1,750,000 $8,457,278 i Construction 38-2b-2b-975 sq. ft.' $1135/mo. Company 4-3b-2b-1100 sq. ft $119.5/mo. 8-3b-21/2b-1500 sq. ft. $1600/mo. Beach Cities 9`5 Apts. 8-lb-lb-758 sq. ft. $735/mo. $46/sq. ft. $1,628,000 $6,600,000 ) Development 16-lb-lb-726 sq. ft. $700/mo. *Includes a Corporation 16-2b-2b-978 sq. ft. $950/mo. discount 24-2b-2b-1048 sq. ft. $1020/mo. rate for 1-1b-11/2b-866 sq. :ft. $840/mo. many items. 6/25/86 2618h d REQ T FOR .CITY COUN^IL/ REDEVEL PMENT AGENCY AGf ION Date May 22 GG� 'Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members Y�'pv�9 l0 ` Submitted by: Charles W. Thompson, City Administrator L' Prepared by: Robert J. Franz, Chief of Administrative Servic Subject: Trade of 7882 Alhambra Ave., H.B., for 7842 Talbert A B. Consistent with Council Policy? [X] Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception Statement of Issue, Recommendation,Analysis, Funding Source,Alternative Actions,Attachments: Statement of Issue: The Redevelopment Agency Resolution #56, dated 12/20/82, and other actions has authorized staff to negotiate the purchase of property in the Talbert/Beach Redevelopment Area. Recommendation: Authorize the trade of the City's property on Alhambra Avenue (duplex) for Mr. Warner's Talbert Avenue residence as an equal value exchange. Analysis: The widening of Heil Avenue and the elimination of dangerous ingress and egress on this street has necessitated the City's acquisition of the property at 7882 Alhambra. After dedication of the right of way for the widening of Heil (25' x 571) and rehabilitating this duplex to meet code it now has an appraised value of $132,000. In a separate matter, to complete the acquisition of the final property in the Talbert/Beach Redevelopment Project, the City/Agency can purchase the property at 7842 Talbert Avenue (Warner) at a value determined to be $132,000. The owner of the Talbert Avenue residence is willing to trade his property for the City's duplex on Alhambra Avenue. The City's Real Property staff, in negotiating this trade, is of the opinion that this equal value exchange of properties is in the best interest of both the City/Agency and of Mr. Robert J. Warner. Funding Source: Not applicable. Alternative Action: 1. Purchase Talbert property with cash. 2. Hold Alhambra property indefinitely. Attachments: Plat maps. 2543j PIO 4184 .. .,.. ...,•y.. ,...,_. .•a..,... ill,WON jg 142 II � �M ' S' l P/ l I d TRACT r v i,o•7T I I I I� O Iasi►t � OWN t G) ) O 10 11 I i 101 ( m II a s�E�coE AVENUE a� � � � JAL fir, r,�r 1 • l� o i o (°c I Q I ;7- T jif, le, I I 12, 13 -,~� �, 53 ; 19 ` asp Jra,T JV•T C• tl J s t:s ��s *� ! 0, f7j t s s�D .tl�. i.•• ' JJ sl 1 ID/s •• �—r-- 1 I I I ! a r « <P PII I SO-5 it „6.,J � PM ,j<3 I6 ado '*A r 1 ACN/ 1 Aip t i - i, I 41 1 O ox I C/ 3$ j (3Z• �' 04 . 4S' 43 1 © sl i xl/ cz? V , too tl- �,i� �• I lld JI ♦• fl I •«+ l,k "f: .•lam 40 I S' Nl' ` / AL HAMBRA 7= �L�/A�a2� /t�� AVENUE • I• i ' \ W • � � � ' zT ± PN tt.<d r ( - ; 't9 z •Gr1 l OT/Opa 9 94 ' , 2 IR /W \il I C% C' �) �. I v t 3 25, I� 2. i3 ai 23 1 24 'un J!r / _ � JL I d R� Fe• - Ss f� s s l s,<.!� le � f - 1 «- • -= A✓F/VUE - ?� NCtf - ASSESSOR'S FLOCK ® ASSESSOR'S MAP Q PAS f. NUM£EQS 800K142 PAGE 10 MARCH 1962 TRACT NI-1 5?2 M N .19- 49 5HC►4ti ;ti C;F:" f5 COuti'r CF ORANGE l„ WL 933-07-039 • 31 G-34,P-34 933-I'7-007 2 G-2,I 933-87-040 35 G-35,P-35 933-87-OBB 3 G_3,P_3 933-07-041 36 G-36,P-36 933-87-089 • 4 G-4,P-1 • 933-87-042 • 37 G-37,P-37 • 933-87-090 89 G-89,P-89 933-87-043 38 G-38,P-3C 933-87-091 90 C-90,P-90 • 933-87-044 39 G-39,P-39 • 93J-87-092 91 G-91,P-91 • e 933-87-045 • 40 G-40,P-40 • 933-87-093 • 92 G-92,P-92 • ' 933-87-046 41 G-41,P-11 • 933-87-047 42 G-42,P-42 .9 _. 93J-87-0lB 13 G-43,P-41 f' 159_ -14 7��� Tc l3ERT Are. 165-I$ c U O U 7,ALBERr AVENUE t +-: r .,.• / r ' '• ' 17 -� � ,� I lOf♦ LO►e cosh tot/ tort col! [G7♦ [pID (pt 1 Y / l.I ' rl ' ' 1 , I ' 77 r e_ '( ) n // r e 9 ,ro /r r e� �'Ac 17r ,J y B _ 4 ,; /• R__ ^•'C. 4 -- - •/ '' ' �! ��-- --- 'n ��- l'---'�--' --,tr--1rIL_��__.. _d6_f� %��IJt17 "'• ; 1 I IP �\� I ,nO I I 7$ It _^ •6 I , t I , O I I ' ' , ♦• -- --� -- =�- u- -1�'-- 1`�- w - -- ¢-- -- ►'�- +�- -r'- -j- -ate- --�= o ! 3 a:,`; ----j�--u, C. ^.✓y1' •,-,'�: „SJ'♦, _ T' fc, _9 '♦O _ / '41 n !g_ 'J9 ,O_-'"- -;r _�.�__ �♦,SG 'e, '♦6 ♦� '♦e i - I , I♦ C ±♦/.G"/r. I ♦ ,42 ,♦ % O ' ♦ 13 • ' ��e 'DO I*Jo♦Arer '1 gig♦ '_7 J K: r. ty--*�_ _.t- -y�-�'1-- - -r"- -a'-BLN•-�f� _ 6z. b--''t-- r'6--*� :9- 1° _ „ --•'�_ r'a-- •�:� Im :J__ _ rZ 102 "�: /r F• 'c., -n .rO r r,� _w__ I) n .cr a_ 6elp__ !v - 'r'-- -�•-- J° --�-- �-+°L- Ott _ .°i. ,n i--- 'Tr, I I ♦' + , rn 'P! 'P6 'P) II=yPn av,L `.,;.,. Y .1_ 'c N _ r �.- � � _ Q N • ~__ '•� ,� X/ ' 'N _�erlO 1/ r• ;,v - I Lo I YY' 1 '91 - IC n. II n5 _ onr) .� ;c_ _1e �=- -'rG�Cy ,�01 �° --�eslJ�6 _ JAI_ _ :°- _�v ,;p,. ---�'--��--A-- --'9�--ram-�°�- r ,..• .�, o� --'fl' ' _ ,'r -:e -Lob _ r ;nt _�c9 ,ao •7 'Y - 9, 'ao '/(,17 �/(.7 '/!�' 97 0Y�-:�^9 - 27ry_ 3 ✓o _ (r- _Kc - 0& -JoI ' __.�_�C'--1t'--'t'�--'�/z-- �'t- -�°s- �'C- -1//-- �`-- �t- -✓d--',or_ -�G'_ ..1�_ _ ! J.L=_ ! - C J r 1 9- -�7- ��- -V=• 'G"'•. //S 'I/F '�/7 ',✓ 'n9 '/,"O '//� '/6 �i17 'I/e 'n9 '/2': '/1 �i/6 '//r 'M l9 'V ' , 06 �,' I__w_I_ /� m_ Ir+_ /a� 'I .. ,/rr_ r i! I /: ', 1 / 'N♦_ I 1 6 �,. -'- -' - -+ -'-•- -'r - -/� - �-- -'L`�- -12=- 1•i_ .,Ct_ _1CC_-yt-J2�- -..'7- -/�- �' - -�--�= -'- -r - r_ �- It _ P7 7e '!a5 !o C•% t/ x /av ' 'p•_ 'NC • O -,e' _ J _ 1't _ g- -'' Las _ t 6 !� -k�-- _ : 4_ .QI__ifONQ��e90 W - - r: !9 /♦C ! �/♦a /at.• /♦! !9 �I♦o ' / I♦2 I /,♦ '•'+ r • ' • I♦♦ 'A_ '/6! '161 C7 _ .*6 _In6r r , , , , .� 1 N9 � L9 ✓ri ,,;rr, ✓r= ;nl ✓'1. '= S '/♦, .47 a ..� /yI '/♦S ME r•I •/./9 ,:✓.9 ,/.K1 ,�♦ /iS ,Ol 27 MARCH 1975 rRACr NQ /72 M.IV /Z-22 NOTE•ASSESSOR'S BLOCX d ASSESSOR'S MAP PARCEL NUMBERS BOOR 159 PAGE K SHOWN IN CIRCLES •COUNTY Of ORANGE 48 A.P., 1,42-103-20 RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL THIS DEED AND UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN BELOW MAIL TAX STATEMENT TO: Name 1 1 Street Mr. Robert James Warner Address 7882 Alhambra °Su; L Huntington Beach, CA 92647 J r MAIL TAX STATEMENTS TO Name 1 Street Address cltYa Same as above State L TITLE ONOEN NO. ESCROW NO. SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDER'S USE GRANT DEED I THE UNDERSIGNED GRANTOR(S) DECLARE(S) NONE - EXEMPT DOCUMENTARY TRANSFER TAX is$ ❑ computed on full value of property conveyed, or ❑ computed on full valueless value of liens or encumbrances remaining at time of sale. ❑ unincorporated area g3 city of_Hunti ngton Reach ,AND FOR A VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, a Municipal corporation hereby GRANT(s) to ROBERT JAMES WARNER, an unmarried man and JEFFREY JAMES WARNER, a single man as joint tenants the following described real property in the City of Huntington Beach County of Orange , State of California: A portion of Lot 6 in Block C of Tract 522, in the City of Huntington Beach, as shown on a map thereof recorded in Book 19, Page 49 of Miscellaneous Maps , records of said Orange County, California, described as follows : Beginning at the Northeast corner of said Lot 6 for the true point of beginning; thence South 0 deg. 44' 45" East, 120.27 feet, thence South 89 deg. 23' 15" West, 61.65 feet; thence North 0 deg. 44' 45" West 33 feet; thence North 89 deg. 23' 15" East, 4.15 feet; thence North 0 deg. 44' 45"w.87.27 feet; thence North 89 deg. 23' 15" East, 57.50 feet to the true point of beginning. "EXCEPTING therefrom all oil, gas and other hydrocarbon substances and minerals lying below a depth of 500 feet from the surface of said land, but without the right of surface entry at any time upon said land or within the top 500 feet thereof, for the purpose of exploiting for, developing, producing, removing and marketing said substances." City of Huntington Beach (Ord. 2636, 21 Sep 83) Y OF HUNTINGTON EACH, a municipa a ion Dated January 8. 1987 BY: 1a STATE OF CALIFORNIA SS. COUNTY OF y — On before me,the undersigned,a //17 2�r. Notary Public in and for said state,personally appeared i ty Clerk ,personally known to me(or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence)to be the per- son whose name subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged that executed the same. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature NOTARY PUBLIC IN AND FOR SAID STATE (This area for official notarial seal) j REQUE, .' FOR Cri.rY ;COUNC ACTION Date April 16 , 1986 t. Submitted-t0: Honorable Mayor and City Counci 1 App$CD g _ Submitted by: Charles W. Thompson, City Admiinistiatorc� co CIL Prepared by: Paul E. Cook, Director of Public Works n i ' Subject: Street Easement for Heil Avenue Improvements - Sily C7 c g Beach Boulevard Consistent with Council Policy? [X] Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception Statement of Issue, Recommendation,Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions,Attachments: Statement of Issue: To provide the necessary of right-of-way for the future improvements of Heil Avenue, between Silver Lane and Beach Boulevard, the City should provide a street easement to itself. Recommendation: Approve the granting of a street easement for Heil Avenue over a portion of City owned property on the north side of Heil west of Beach Boulevard. Analysis : The completion of a street widening project on Heil Avenue, west of Beach Boulevard, required the acquisition of privately owned real property. Staff has completed the purchase and requests that the necessary right-of-way be legally dedicated for roadway improvements . The attached deed would grant the desired perpetual easement; therefore, the Director of Public Works recommends approval of the document. Funding Source: N/A Alternative Action: None Attachments : 1. Easement Deed 2 . Location Map CWT:PEC:DN:dw t1D PIO 4/84 r -- ' 1 Sad SW r .a hoar a i 14 v � Y�icOTctT L7cAT\v-.i �A /t IfGr . % v `..IV;C w,r I.AAMP �•s � \ YVAIA >bw,v I \ 4,a&ftv .vOi4v e/lYil e O Z -"&WI[ rnr i PROJECT LOCATIONS MAP r FECORDING REQUESTED BY _ r A.P. 142-103-20 ;-< <CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACh 'And when recorded mail to -City Clerk City of Huntington BeachFM `" y� .s P.0. Box 190 C1 Huntington Beach,California 92648 L ce above this line for Recorder's use ' ` CORPORATION EASEMENT 7:�iZ aw- er City of Huntington B c FORA VALUABLE CONSIDERATION receipt of which is hereby.acknowledged, Allcla M. Wentworth * •:::...:. ,,.,...: . _.... .. :.. :..... --.. P.. . ... . _ ._._ .. City Clerk - The City of Huntington Beach, a Municipal Corporation, 8Y1..... t.. Dep Clerk do hereby GRANT to the CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH,a municipal corporation,a perpetual easement .. and .right of way for public street and public utility purposes in, on, over, under .and .across all that real property in the CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, County of Orange, State of Califronia, described as follows: �f The south • 25. 00' feet of the east 61. 65 feet of lot 6 , block C, •'i,'a - Tract no. : 522 as shown on a map recorded in book 19 , page 49 of _:Miscellaneous Maps in the office of the County Recorder of Orange '.County, California. Excepting therefrom that portion previously granted for street purposes. 1'•. `- RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY CALIFORNIA '11 og AM JUN 10'86 COUNFY RFCUHDER ' AI'..'EOUD AS TO FORA, CAIL 110TTON CITY ATTORNEY, By: Deputy City Attorney,. t - • e '' `1n Witness Whereof, said corporation has caused its corporate name and seal to be affixed hereto and this :s instrument to be executed by its $ e[ and X .'.' V ,< thereunto duly authorized: Mayor City "Clerk •STATE OF CALIFORNIA 38. By ;I:oUNTY.OF •: Mayor!. ± ' On `� before me,the under- By BY A�1 C1 d P9_ WPntwOnrth^f 61 Clerk } ? I'M ned.--a--Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared Y eputy ty` d: known jto me(or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence)to he the L President,and known to me to be 1 rsecrelary'of the Corporation that executed the within Instrument, A nown to me to be the persons who executed the within Instrument on behalf of the Corporation therein named,and acknowledged to me that `such Corporation executed the within Instrument pursuant to its by-laws y or a resolution of its board of directors. WITNESS my hand and official seal. 'Signature •�f Name(Typed or Printed) (This area for official notarial seal) i' T =" r! f_ 1 s ' {,a+s.. - - •. .- - ...:1'e.Ac.,,.,.n _._ ,.x -:qo}h-::__._.. „i i1Y":°Es5^t'. 4-�...:':i.�. _. ,. ... 0)1�14J � REQUES , FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTIO Date March 27 , 1986 Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council i Submitted by: Charles Thompson, City Administrator�•� Prepared by: Paul E. Cook, Director of Public Works E Subject: Heil Avenue Widening Project; CC-446 .clry ` Consistent with Council Policy? [XI Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception cLt.. Statement of Issue, Recommendation,Analysis, Funding Source,Alternative Actions,Attachments: Statement of Issue: Council authorization is required in order to acquire right-of-way for completion of the Heil Avenue widening project (CC-446) . Recommendation: Authorize the purchase of privately owned real property (the Milkanlonis 's) on Alhambra Avenue at the appraised price. Analysis : The completion of a street widening project on Heil Avenue, west of Beach Boulevard, requires the acquisition of a parcel of privately owned real property. The owners of this property have agreed to sell it to the city for the appraised price. An expenditure of $100 ,000 for the purchase ($98 ,000) and tenant relocation costs ($2 , 000) is now necessary. Funding Source: City Gas Tax - $100 , 000 budgeted in Account 744460 for this purpose. Alternative Action: Postpone or redesign the project. Attachments : Location Map PEC:JS : lw 1 PIO 4/84 MARK W. LINNES MEMBER [} AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF REAL ESTATE APPRAISERS 9919 SOLEJAR DRIVE _ WHITTIER, CALIFORNIA 90603 (213) 691-64SS December. 10 , 1985 Mr. Dan M. Brennan Real Property Manager °J City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Re: Real Estate Appraisal Residence/7902 Alhambra Dear Mr. Brennan: As requested by Paul Larkin, I have completed a valuation study for a single family residence property referenced above. My' opinion of value is as of December 10, 1985. Based on my investigations and studies, and considering the interests appraised including the property' s existing and best use, I have concluded that the fair market value is: $98,000 NINETY- EIGHT THOUSAND DOLLARS On the following pages will be found a summary of the facts developed, and analysis and conclusions which are the basis of the opinions expressed. Also included are the Certification and the Contingent and Limiting Conditions of this report. Thank you for this opportunity to provide appraisal services. Respectfully submit Mark W. Linnes, M.A.I. MWL:rk ZONING DM 26 pl,•.>NNING ..... SECTIONAL DISTRICT MAP 23-5-11 •CA,( .INT NOTE CITY OF ��� ABO"ED NARCN 7, 1"0 • MT[ND[D r0 ([T[IO TO TN12[,RIR CITT cOUNCIL O DINANCE w0. 7Bs °r•"cN —0: or v '4 of DRum.AwLtgIIs97P.19� yEyp® o„p.m. LEGEND: a-m•m O 11[ a-1•-N—..aa !A N110[MTYL•WIKLL1taYL pnT.ICT HUNTINGTON BEACH 1-. lY •11 a•Na.l.a' I� 1-a-H Np afs •-N••3f 1.31 u-a-u au as a.".N ••e.4.1 u-.-•I III U. Q-Z!•/�[�� © �+e cDIRlUlcl,a DNTRIR 1-n-a m aN 13M 1O2 � p /gDl[rYYLt WO[K(oeTq[f a•1•-a ta[ eN K1-n-)0 AM rID -N-u n. aN 11-u•to wto-Sw cz cowrlprr •ua•NN DnrRlcT a-T-•a a1 •DD !•N-TI a •-n-N aN •a ••a•n w—1-1 rl-I N•O WQ rrdrAwuRuw Lawr A oNTRKT ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA w A =-= �T .•H-N 506 IIN 1-•-n T,•L•nz• Q HATED NYLTPL[ I—aa a ."onfRCT R-a-N EST IN a-•-n n-ac-mo a-I-N ".EaR,. a-1•n NfEA(N1 rR21 TWO f lea 1e1a11R WT1 Y-n-aa M-s.R1. 1•1i1 1s-zu 24. ®FROTESEOtYL-UDI¢°TRAaaI IRIN DNfIlC'T I-a•a N-1•LIT• I•a-n—er zn• I-N••1 N-N NN ••MT(Ta,Dl anf -LZS DEscWns ram[RAN w"man Al,•N(ri 1-N-n ww N•I a-•-11!Er•)01lM :-m-a w.•r R•• :r+• n-sI zx. - cf=(]corruNlTr mumsuouurwNl onrucr 1-la-N war IN. -sa w1•-a RFD.N. a•11-N YR NIa ai.•4•. a." LC�[orruNT♦f• ITN11acR D*TII IT ONTRCT a-R-M •FM Na0 a-NM a.-. !•n CI CDYruNTr fACLITNf ICnq ONTRCr E DINGER AVE �{� JI Qo C4a rff C2 a o i C4 : C2 C2 LDRICN i .»OD n[o TO.( R I DRa cF R3 ca •� BLUESAILS DR 3 R 3 '-m yy J(�VOLGA JR IS RI 1 R 3 STARK --3T g l . rONEW000 DR - R R3 aN wu+Dr R3 R I 3 i R I CF-C AMAZON R 3 °" C F-R G a !Rl LELIGHT CRT '°'"'_' ' M I M I •". RS -us aV.ac as••-O L 3 Lw3LIGHT . MI Y R I R3 CF—E R I R I RI RI e 1 ANITA LN. (su.nE« SChU]L) w00NLIGHT CR R I - L 5T E J � R I R1L N lF( TRACT MD•a. R r] Ca _ •. G VALENTINE DR- pt C R I _ - < J GLENCOE wvERINEWT DR SUNLIGHT R I R I R 2 -'n a:R 1 ALHAwBRA R' NEIL RI - R2 C4 R3 R3 [a•i • nRu.•Naa RI " cam• M I DANUBE DR RI RI u RI RI �6 ]RlR3 R3 R3 R3 ]R3 R3 R3 M I A AI SEINE IYI R �W R C 4 No.aoE _ RI '6Y ° M I RI RI J RI DOwRI G° wrsLER on R3 R3 R3 R3 CF—E Nr C2 (PARK VIE'N SCHOM) - < (7- p. MI MI RHINE 4 �ooq lNE N Vt W N O' rtRA DR' ' R2 u .N p R3 M I 4DDNANDD/ x CF—R R3 R3R R3 Q R2 (w11RD(COMMUNiTTPANK) " 3 MI - - C" - R3 R3 I- Nr.s• dl,r[ VI O. C. F. C. D. O. C. f- C. D C6-1 W N3 ow ml N R3 eo' _ Z A. Roil 2 R IR]3 = 1R2R MI a R3 [ K3p f 1 .: - I m to u u WARNER AVE `r REQUEST FOR=._.EDEVELOPMENT AC:,, NCY ACTION APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL 90 D�i�opy Ac�v; 19._... J Date November 21, 1985 ---' - 1 CITY CLERK Submitted to: Honorable Chairman and Members of the Agency Submitted by: Charles W. Thompson, City Administrator Prepared by: Robert J. Franz, Chief of Administrative Services Subject: Purchase of AP #165-364-07, a Duplex, for DeveloWurposes Consistent with Council Policy? M Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception Statement of Issue, Recommendation, Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attachments: Statement of Issue: The City is purchasing property in the Oakview Redevelopment Project, west of Beach Boulevard and south of Warner Avenue. The City Council's approval is required in the purchase.of this property located in the project area in the amount of $140,000. Recommendation: Approve the purchase at $140,000. Analysis: The City Council, 09/16/85, approved the acquisition of property in the Oakview Redevelopment Project Area on a willing seller basis.. The property in question, a duplex AP # 165-364-07, was appraised by Locke Land Services dated 06/01/84 in the amount of $134,000. The owner of the property has agreed to sell the property for $140,000 which is a 5% increase over appraisal. This seems, today, a year and one half later, not to be an unreasonable sales price. Funding Source: Oakview Property Acquisition Account #B13601. Alternative Action: Withdraw offer to purchase, adjust purchase price. Attachment: Plat map. 1808j PIMI/Rr NNING SECTIONAL DISTRICT MAP 26 - 5 - 11 - wL[ M CITY 'OF � HL T NTINGTON BEACH ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA USE OF PROPERTY MAP � „•s. " tnl„I w' W i I WARNER AVE L IIR� �DR J CAA AVE CF-EEDO ' IK�Tc'353.W r M:1: 9C+�•C_1 • LEA W J O � v CCMR i f I IF-1 BETTY VIEA •. •i,l\ i '/: I it = , I ' I U y _ - CF-C B.RiW•DR I FDRC O- WSL —! ov I �I �hW J wvE J . . - r-1 L SPEE- 1 LIREPT, AVE CF_R ,� I 0 j71 -.. r rr-1 wuwN wE I I li j i j i III' 2 jl I coawnin 1 � I � 1 I ! ^ 1 W p 1: `I ly�.w.•• ! I i + j 1 I I r O 1 J i a F V $0 I j W: IN ......:11,H1 TA�BERT AVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAT �R mr.. 114,iv£.114,N-E.114.sec au. r55,#.jiw 165-36 142-19 IowArvER sMal AVENUE ; tr :� i g rA • ��. O J O O O O O 9 1 I 1 1 1 1 I 1 IOLK. O � 1 I 1 1 I 1 I 1 I OeL e 4 t i « 191 MI 1 10I 01 tl 41 tl ALLEY 1 -5 a ALLEr •O 1 • 1s N 1� IZ 11 l0 1 ; 1 1 1 I � I o..c. �y L. ; NOI I 1 I 1 I r 2 i S►umoRe t AVENUE i .- W M.• ..n• -- --- ------- — --- — r r rR4CT p'N n, l O • , O • r or i O O for O O aor — r,. .,.low -Mow, ---------- O = O Oj .L�oelee ,L�a«Nd `eort I� &o. t 2. ov ,O O S SP�cvicee4 � A PAP AFA34 •., • 0 SLK• C q 363 O ------ 48'm ..w.& • tors Z O ` ors ,,. .. ..... , nor :.W 00-9 Sr'• .O Y —1l O w• a• II � .M,n• • ,y nv C=i NO 44 i .�•_ r i 6 l0 I 9LQr4i ioar, = 10 wr .s• .• u• • � O O O i v- r' r •r ww iw w i 1 t L'rprvESs Td— 3 3 °-=- Q AvEAVE =- 28 NOTE•ASSESSOR'S BLOCK A ASSESSOR'S AAA/ m m M. AA /6-29 A41ACM / f ►ARM NUAOERS y BOOK 165 MGE 36 TRACT MO. 4JC TRACT Alb M. /1-J/ SHOWN IN CAMU COUNTY Of ORANGE • RBRCEL MAPS P M /00-0,ax54 I� imam ;� REQU FOR CITY COUNCftCTION a ��•. 411V Date October 4, 1985 J Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Submitted by: Charles W. Thompson, City Administrato Prepared by: Robert J. Franz, Chief of Administrative Services ✓!.e /�L t o' Subject: S le of Surplus City Property and Acquisition for Right of a "Pu s Poc, Consisten'�with Council Policy? [X] Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception Statement of Issue, Recommendation,Analysis, Funding Source,Alternative Actions,Attachments: Statement of Issue: Administrative Services has determined that Parcel "A" located at the intersection of Detroit and Delaware as shown on the attached exhibit has no present or anticipated use for the City. Public Works has determined that Parcel "B" at the same location as shown on the attached exhibit is needed for street right of way. Recommendation: Adopt the attached resolution declaring the property "A" as surplus and accept 14,000 as sales price. Accept Parcel "B" as a dedication for right of way purposes. Analysis: Mr. George DeLillo, owner of the westerly portion of lots 1 and 2, Block 404 of the Vista Del Mar tract has offered to purchase the City's triangular portion, legal attached, of these two lots contiguous to and east of his property for $14,000. The City's Public Works Department has determined that the ultimate right of way of Detroit Avenue would require the small strip of land from Lot 1, legal attached, belonging to Mr. DeLillo. The City's triangular Parcel "A" is an undevelopable site and has value only to the contiguous property owner. The $7.75 per square foot/$14,000 price plus the dedication of Parcel "B" has been determined to be fair market value by the City's appraiser. The sale would return the triangular parcel to the tax rolls and return revenues to the City and at the same time satisfy the City's right of way need at this location. Funding Source: None. Alternative Action: Retain this parcel and reject dedication. Attachments: 1. Proposed resolution 2. Plat map. 3. Two legal descriptions 1621 j PIO 4/84 BEQUEST FOftREDEVELOPMENT ,0ENCY ACTION - = R.H 55-27 �0�� wvhC� L 7a G ve �iiwvT o STA�-� ate maum 1985 Submitted to: Honorable Chairman and Redevelopment Agency Members �/ Charles W. Thompson, Chief Executive Officer C,W l Submitted by: Douglas N. La Belle, Deputy City Administrator/Redevelopment Prepared by: AUTHORIZATION TO PREPARE EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATING GREEMENT Subject: BETWEEN HUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND SBE DEVELOPMENT INC., - LAKE STREET/OLD FIRE STATION PROPERTY Consistent with Council Policy? [ ] Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception Statement of Issue, Recommendation, Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attachments: STATEMENT OF ISSUE: In February, 1985, staff prepared a Request for Qualifications/Proposals for the property referred to as the Lake Street Property/Old Fire Station site. In the City Administrator's communication of March 22, 1985, staff advised Council that as a result of evaluating the written proposals and holding extensive interviews with the prospective developers, it was recommended that SBE Development Inc. be selected to begin. exclusive negotiations with the Redevelopment Agency. It is felt that SBE Development, Inc., best demonstrates the expertise and resources needed to develop a quality project; therefore, staff requests Agency's authorization to prepare an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement for their consideration at the next Redevelopment Agency meeting in June. This Agreement, if approved, will allow SBE to move ahead with the preparation of development plans and to assess the financial feasibility of implementing such plans. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize staff-to prepare an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement for the Agency's consideration at their scheduled meeting of June 17, 1985. ANALYSIS: SBE Development, Inc. has prepared a proposal which sufficiently addresses all the concerns for the Lake Street/Old Fire Station property. Staff, again, recommends this developer as being amenable to a long-term lease of the property, as opposed to an outright sale. In addition, SBE Development, Inc., proposes to develop a quality, multi-family, apartment project which will serve to set the pattern for future projects within the area. Adopting the 90-day Exclusive Negotiating Agreement, provides the developer the assurance that the property will not be sold or leased to others while negotiating with the City/Agency. With this certainty, SBE is willing to expend the necessary time and money to undertake a market study, prepare a preliminary concept plan and assess the financial feasibility of the project. If such a project is found to be feasible within the 90-day period, a Disposition and Development Agreement would be prepared for your consideration. P1011185 RH 85-27 May 24, 1985 Page Two ALTERNATIVES: 1. Do not authorize staff to prepare an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement and continue to search for development interest. FUNDING SOURCE: 1. Redevelopment Agency Contractual Services Account. ATTACHMENTS: 1. CA Memos of March 7 and March 22, 1985. CWT/DLB/SAJ:lp 0890h �""iff CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH COUNCIL - ADMINISTRATOR COMMUNICATION CA 85-21 f� "uNnNcnxvo�cH Honorable Mayor and Charles W. Thompson To City Council Members From City Administrator LAKE STREET/OLD FIRE STATION March 7, 1985 Subject PROPERTY - REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS Date Pursuant to your direction, of January 21, 1985, staff prepared a Request for Qualification/Proposals for the property referred to as the Lake Street property and Old Fire Station site (see attached Exhibit "1"). By way of background, the request set forth specific parameters and assumptions and established the deadline of Friday, February 15, 1985 for submittal of proposals. The property is within the Town Square subarea of the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area and its early development will facilitate the Agency's objectives for the project area in several important ways. The development of a "quality" project will serve to set the pattern for future projects within the area. The tax increment generated from this project, (projected between $50,000460,000 per year), coupled with the long-term revenue stream generated by the lease of the property, will benefit the City/Agency. With these points in mind, staffs analysis is that the selection of a developer with who to begin exclusive negotiations, is a priority task for the City/Agency. In response to our Request for Proposals, staff received numerous telephone inquiries and mailed out approximately ninety (90) proposal documents. As a result, twelve (12) written communications or proposals were received by the deadline established in the RFP. A staff committee comprised of representatives from my office, Administrative Services, Development Services, and Public Works reviewed each of the written submittals and based upon that review, recommended to me that interviews be held with all interested developers to obtain additional specific background information regarding their proposal. Of the twelve submittals, ten (10)expressed an interest in meeting with staff and those meetings were held on Friday, March 1 and Monday, March 4th. The same information had been requested from each developer prior to the interview and discussed with each developer during the interview process. (See attached Exhibit "211). As a result of the interview process, staffs analysis is that a group of four developers demonstrated the expertise and resources needed to complete the project in a timely fashion;of that group, the committee's consensus in terms of the best proposal,was SBE Development, Inc. Staff is prepared to review with you at your convenience the committee's recommendation regarding a developer and the criteria and assumptions used to arrive at that recommendation. Respect bmitted W. Thompson City Administrator CWT/DLB:lp Attachment Request for Qualification/Proposals Lake Street Parcels - Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency The Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach is soliciting Statement of Qualifications and Proposals from development firms interested in the development of publicly owned parcels located on Lake Street between Indianapolis and Frankfort . Avenues within the Agency's Main Pier Redevelopment Project area. The site is 2.41 acres in size with approximate dimensions of 800 foot frontage on Lake Street and a depth of 132 feet. This site is within walking distance of the beach and the Municipal Pier and is composed of two currently unsubdivided parcels and a public right-of-way which will be vacated. The Redevelopment Agency will entertain proposals for the long-term lease of the parcel (not to exceed 55 years) or the purchase of the site by the selected developer. Additional information regarding the site is as follows: 1. CURRENT ZONING: Old Town Specific Plan - District Two Area (potential 82 units without density bonus); 2. CURRENT LAND VALUE: Approximately 2.250 million dollars (lease hold interests will be considered at a 9% range per year lease payment with such payments adjusted periodically); 3. . SITE LOCATION AND. CONFIGURATION: See attached Site Plan and vicinity map Note development constraints shown on Site Plan); 4. BUILDING SITE CONDITION: Site is currently developed with an abandoned ire station and the site will be sold or leased in "as is" condition. Demolition and removal of existing improvements including street paving within the vacated right-of-way will be the responsibility of the selected developer. .5. FINANCING: The City maintains an ongoing program .of capital finance through the sale of tax-exempt securities. The selected developer may be an eligible participant in this program. 6. DEPOSIT: The Agency will require a non-refundable deposit at the initiation of a 60-day Exclusive Right to Negotiate Agreement. The amount of this deposit will be $25,000 which may be applied to subsequent lease payments or purchase price. 7. CONTENT OF PROPOSAL: Please see sample format for responses as attached. Interested developers should submit an original and five (5) copies of their submission to: Dan Brennan Real Property Manager City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California 92648 (714) 536-5544 THE DEADLINE FOR THE RECEIPT OF RESPONSES IS: FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 1985, 4:00 P.M. TO MR. BRENNAN 0679h SAMPLE Lake Street Parcel Proposals Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency FIRM NAME: ADDRESS: CONTACT PERSON: PHONE: Please attach information on firm's previous experience, financial status, and local references (references will be contacted). Include photos of other projects containing product type similar to that proposed. If to be Leasehold: PROPOSED LEASE TERM: PROPOSED LEASE PAYMENTS: OR PROPOSED PURCHASE PRICE: DESCRIBE TERMS: (include proposed length of escrow) PROPOSED NO. OF UNITS: PRODUCT TYPE: (include rental or for sale, approximate unit size and bedroom mix, type of construction, number of stories) DEADLINE FOR SUBMISSION: FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 1985, 4:00 P.M. 0679h 012 I SL J VM fi rUTANNINO ZONINGRINI SECTIONAL DISTRICT MAP II-6-1I LEGEND a DOPTEO MARC 11 7.1960 M OLYLv[D CLA�i,UrgN D1TT COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO-734 �,rliL Tame so.. CITY OF � ° O �4 TSKCNI M ' I i2 o Tr Ty `-s n 7«> .w ----avror s.Earrc M. •.19-41 ITS • ],T! TS-> •/{ � YDYI—a11T111GT f-b-bi mI ET{ 4]-n ?—m01 E] RATRIED WWLDPY(RT DISTRICT -1-•x 117 ROD -->J TIRISO2m13 p.I.4x 2ff 92S 2•I{+E'OAYOT2ON - —TA Lr uso(Na[DIs—,, Ix-1-•> 2E! ay —'s W3 20C JW TING TAY,LrRE11aENCE DIsrRICT HUNTINGTON BEACH b 1 ., ]Ex ;� �n 19 Zi l UNITED YMINE T.IST RESIDENCE DISTRICT -.1•{! :., ail T«1 2152 -N N : 4-pT OLO,Dw.12m � YULTIR(TILMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT -IT-N !]♦ iIm ZJ•lE il-m ixP GENERAL MINE SS DISTRICT i•EI•N !.! IN •Ins >l.,ziAA '� 1•!-N MQ] A 'z-D•T >*•Irl 'YL LRNr•WaTRYL DIa TR1GT q 1-N M••I IE1{ 2•FNI 1T-12 T2AS f� COYY11arr[ACILITIES HECNE-*AUN.Y.— i�It•E1 .1.5E Imo{ I(-YA 7r IS Z17] ® CDYYVYITT WI,ITIEEI(DUCATIpYLIDISTRICT ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA °=p:a ;„ = 1.� :G OMMERC:DISTRICT {-ii-{� ! �4 II' Common"EMAI[SS DYING, ,t0•To N-SS IS7P r"f-EI EI-! N �-C "IfMY•r COr[RCIAL DISTRICT IY. i-AI-E0GLO CN[21q ® OEaIDNAT(f RRCL11[RAM DI STREET ALIGNMENT J-tl.rf 0.1910 A-q MyO6{i]Wppll.EN] �6y2L�2j{Mwo . �n)ip' m ,i E! /)-iC IENC' �ICOMKD NRN ML gRODUCriaN •-{.1. Ti.p AlS 1-i-N 64T 2>OEI -"- SETYCN LIME "A ll.xE r. ;m ;I-ii:•4•DIN-2:>!E ::� cowlmeD wrx oM.RDoucnaR I ;- :2o•n •l-.1 i.n A AREA ow.o[D E,1NLM •.1a4 q-t{ I[! AK.OR me.AKMT[[.TM,Tr lADAMS AVE. DIM N.,oc[AN AVE ON sr., V U 1_JLJ L _1LJ �1L_1 LL_1 1 _V t f ��I l , 16(EVERT.1T-it. i L %i .. 4 N.RI-0 R'I R-I R-I R E ��7`.��-�LAN -.-n r,iY . ?,J, '? .•y�{• RI-0 RI R 1 ��� � _`.�. ,, RI RI RI RI R2 -0 SPECIEI - r Il . 4.-�,�►,�.' '• AVE ro11lLAND w -0, I - - IDWt••• •.' - R R I . ��a o+oRr ur_-o°aR 1'�r Ia3TRICT 21 -0 130 (IIM " aw I mVi I R2 0RI E RI ` 0 R H eV AVE. R2-PO-p 0HTHIR wG n _CCF R I xwor 9 ""/_R2 -I J1D - � Po-lo.4' RI RI '� RI Imo_ a41a,. it NA3NVILLE I AVL '•'-'N.:-::_i" : NL. 1 ST ', .,V51 of �Z. ' RI 1 .wEl(tf -O.' I .: ,:�• R2 PD•q CF_R PLAN( fRICT TWO) 1 :16e�ML_: R I R 1z1 R2--0-10 l I;,i.:•.:: -CR•.1 MEMPHIS ��� JSY� ♦+ CF_R ELEVENTH 4T ~ Kp� �aoao �a�a a• R I � I•='ara::ll-:R �R2�� R I RI Lr.IL LN Av I R3 ! C4 RI RI - + RIO �a o� oa as RI R2 R2 RI ' !- 1 a HNOxvILLE 1 AVE. R 1 2 n ' +T 1 M SN I Ci ' la R3 R3^ 3IC4 a a -" (LJu j ,oMMlo+ir(clrle. II I RAM•R[I R2 I AVE, - IEacTRJM 01sff - I+ �✓ ti� R3 R2 Y�R2 R1 \ ; �n(; I JIL+) �o R3 R3 Q R3 C A+ a` NL %NA OUI(_JI�---3 ev 3 RS R3 H Liu Ell L� tiAD Tf HAk-IORD AVE. / V. f / -1 •M. - r r VP FRANIJFORT L^� _ Io �. OLDT N ' ' ECIFIC A - 1 E p�1 FQ 3 --A EL( E I 10 PECAN \ ++.• a'` 1 _ Eli� I + N � 1 MH C�9 +��~ Z ♦/. I DETROIITT 1I�I' AVE `y •� #� e dq -CZ I C E� < 1CAGo���•AVE R2-PD R2-PD-CZ m ` < b3L 9^ 1 �T ••`L ? q O? D LTiMORE AVE UM N 3 R2-PD-CZ '�y G- ;a I rr�� G: .. rA c , \ `� `' _L�J R2-CZ N,�.:�iexe.�a1]u�r_--:---'_•-_,r;� a: I lPCi��\O 9 t �r ? ► �;:R2 PD CZ !R2-P6-CZ :..J t is j�d1 e4' _ _ IS ATL ANTA p W)w AVE \\ r / x • r r/�`.• � !GALE IN"IT I\"I.1: / \ NOTE. / /'• / ALLOIYENSIOM9 Aq[iM [E[T O ANY 20.E AOJOIMIw ANY RIGHT 0I WAY •�/'sp IS INTEMDm TD CITING TO THE CENTER -[�f OF SUCN.—I 01.AY .. .. .,.:� F �-.-.v,,;-.>:,.w ax.;s..�:.a-f-s•x--�aF:-. .'r. --,..+w•.+w'�-.mt s-.. n w si.-..:�r-�.. - -- CITY OF HUNTINGTON ' BEACH CA 85-25 COUNCIL - ADMINISTRATOR COMMUNICATION M AMNGMN UACH To Honorable Njayor and From Charles W. Thompson City Council Members _ -.City Administrator Subject Date LAKE STREET/OLD FIRE STATION PROPERTY March 22, 1985 As a follow-up to my memo of March.7, 1985, regarding the Lake Street/Old Fire Station Property - Request for Proposals (copy attached), staff has prepared a matrix which summarizes its evaluation of the top four developers interviewed. As the initial memorandum indicates, staffs recommendation to you, based upon the written proposals submitted and the results of the interview process, is that SBE Development, Inc. be selected to begin exclusive negotiations with the Agency. In terms of the areas of use, improvement costs and project schedule, all four developers were comparable. The proposals differ in the areas of acquisition and experience. Staff's analysis is that a long term lease of the property is preferable to an outright sale. Both Calmark Development Corporation and Lincoln Property Company, while amenable to a long-term lease, indicated a preference for purchasing or an option to purchase. In the case of Tricon Enterprises, Inc., staffs analysis is that their experience is as investment advisors who package projects for development. Respect submitted, Charles W. Thompson City Administrator CWT/DLB:lp Attachment - DEVELOPER PROPOSAL EVALUATION LAKE STREET/OLD FIRE STATION PROPERTY HIGHEST AND IMPROVEMENT CONSTRUCTION LEASE OR DEVELOPER BEST USE COSTS SCHEDULE PURCHASE TERMS EXPERIENCE Calmark Development Senior rental or 82 Units (1 6 months Either approach As stated Developers of numerous senior Corporation Multi-Family Apts. $60,000/Unit= do permits acceptable-Tend in RFQ/RFP rental and multifamily projects y' $4,900,000 3 mo. approx.) to prefer lease in Southern California with option to purchase Lincoln Property Rental-Young 82 Units p Maximum Prefer purchase $25,000-30,000 Developers of numerous apartment-- Company Professionals $36445 sq ft. 9 months would consider Unit= projects in California and fl average unit to 1 Year lease $2,050,000 to throughout the United States size of 780= $2,460,000 $2,303,000 to $2,878,000 SBE Development, Multi-Family 82 Units p 8 to 12 Lease As stated in Developers of Office and Incorporated Apartments $40 sq.ft.p months RFQ/RFP apartment projects in ,. average unit Southern California of 900= $2,788,000 Tricon Enterprises Condos or Apts. 82 units @ 10 to 12 Lease or 55 year lease Investment Advisors-Have Incorporated p 82 units or $40 sq.ft. fl months purchase terms as stated packaged similar projects senior A 144 units average unit acceptable in RFQ/RFP for their investment group size of 900= $2,952,000 r PLANNING IOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS ARTICLE 915 ARTICLE 915 OLDTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS (1912-5/74, 1954-2/75,. 2171-5/77) S. 9150 PURPOSE. The purpose of this article is to establish a specific plan consisting of residential development provisions and require- ments to guide the orderly development and improvement of portions of an area identified as Oldtown. This plan is established to guide the improvement of an area which, by its physical limitations relating to lot size and vehicular access, should not be regulated by zoning district standards applicable citywide. S. 9151 SPECIFIC PLAN BOUNDARY. The property described herein is included in Oldtown Specific Plan and shall be subject to development pro- visions and requirements set forth herein. Oldtown Specific Plan encompasses that area shown on the map in Section 9151.1 except that property which is zoned other than residential remains unchanged as a result of this article. Further- more, property containing oil or civic district suffix zones shall retain such suffix zoning designations. Such zoning districts shall continue to be shown on all official district maps and the permitted uses and regulations pertaining to said districts shall continue.to govern. (This article continues on the reverse side) 2 9151. 1. AREA MAP . ` I III '� • " ,'I ,� � /\ .... ,\ � ,fit' ;' ��'j � 1 I � I •. i CF•C CF-E I I' All i IFi <V' CF-R MONO ®1] J]- lit I 1 LEGEND \ I 1 COMMERCIAL PROPERTY - ® CIVIC DISTRICT COMBINED WITH OIL PRODUCTION' PLANNING LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS S. 9151.2 DISTRICT TWO (continue) the centerline of' Cali'fornia Street; thence—south- 890.17-'21" west 30 feet; thence south 25038'58" west 158.62 feet to the south line of. Lot 5. of. Block 203, as shown on said last mentioned map of Vista Del Mar Tract; thence south 89018' l0" west 54.66 feet along the south line of said Lot 5 to the southwest corner of said Lot 5; thence south 0043'24" east 138 feet to the centerline of Baltimore .Avenue, as. shown on said last mentioned map of Vista Del Mar Tract; thence westerly along the centerline of Baltimore Avenue to the northerly-extension of the west line of the east 1.00 feet of Block 103 of Vista Del Mar Tract, as shown on the last mentioned map; thence southerly along said last mentioned west line and its northerly and southerly extensions to the centerline of Atlanta Avenue, as shown on said last mentioned map; thence westerly along the centerline of Atlanta Avenue to the point of beginning. Excepting therefrom the following: All of Tract No. 73 as shown on a map recorded in Book 10, page 21 of Miscellaneous Maps in the office of the County Recorder of said county. v S. 9151.2 LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS PLANNING ' DISTRICT ONE (continue) LSte New 9, and W ef-1-11-eek-No.-SO4-eF Viat_! PR4 v T ot -Rv-sire p ty Ad doa .of_.aid Icownr-y- DISTRICT TWO That portion of Sections 2 and 11 of Township 6 South, Range .11 West in the Rancho Las Bolsas, City of Huntington Beach, County of Orange, State of California, as shown on a map recorded in Book 51, page 14, Miscellaneous Maps in the office of the County Recorder of said county, described as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the centerline of Atlanta Avenue and Lake Street, as shown on a map of Huntington Beach, recorded in Book 3, page 36 of Miscellaneous Maps in the office of the County Recorder of said county; thence northerly along said centerline of Lake Street to the intersection with the centerline of Seventeenth Street, as shown on a map of Tract No. 129 recorded in Book 9, page 13 of Miscellaneous Maps in the office of the County Recorder of said county; thence easterly along said centerline of Seventeenth Street to the intersection with the easterly right-of-way line of the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way, as shown on said map of Tract No. 12; thence southerly along said east right-of-way line to .the intersection with the centerline of Wichita Avenue, as shown on a map of Vista Del Mar Tract, recorded in Book 4, page 15 of Miscellaneous Maps in the office of the County Recorder of said county; thence easterly along said centerline of Wichita Avenue to the intersection with the centerline of Huntington Street, as shown on said map of Vista Del Mar Tract; thence southerly along said centerline of Huntington Street to the intersection with the centerline of Utica Avenue, as shown on said map of Vista Del Mar Tract; thence easterly along said centerline of Utica Avenue to the intersection with the centerline of Delaware Street, as shown on said map of Vista Del Mar Tract; thence southerly along said centerline of Delaware Street to the intersection with the centerline of Memphis Avenue, as shown on a map of Watsons Addition, recorded in Book 3, page 39 of Miscellaneous Maps in the office of the County Recorder of said .county; thence westerly along said centerline of Memphis Avenue to the before mentioned east line of the railroad right-of-way, as shown on a map of Vista Del Mar Tract, recorded in Book 4, page 3 of Miscellaneous Maps in the office of the County Recorder of said county; thence southerly along the last mentioned easterly line to the centerline of Hartford Avenue as shown on a map of Vista Del Mar Tract, recorded in Book 4, page 4 of Miscellaneous Maps in the office of the County Recorder of said county; thence easterly along the centerline of Hartford Avenue to the centerline of Alabama Street, as shown on said last mentioned map of Vista Del Mar Tract; thence southerly along the centerline of Alabama Street to the centerline of Chicago Avenue, as shown on a map of Vista Del Mar Tract, recorded in Book 4, pages 5 and 6 of Miscellaneous Maps. in the office of the County Recorder of said county; thence easterly along the centerline of Chicago Street to the centerline of California Street, as shown on a map of Vista Del Mar Tract, recorded in Book 4, page 5 of Miscellaneous Maps in the office of the County Recorder of said county; thence southerly 50 feet along i PLANNING OLDTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN S. 9152 S. 9152 DEFINITIONS. For the purpose of this article, the following words and phrases shall have the meanings hereinafter set forth: (a) Floor area shall mean the area of all floors of a structure or structures measured from the exterior faces of the exterior walls, or from. the center- line .of walls separating two buildings. All enclosed stairways and corridors are, included as part of the floor area. Attics, garages, parking structures, or uncovered recreation space are not included as floor area. (W Open space shall mean the site area minus the site coverage and the area.of the site devoted to garages or parking structures, driveways and other parking areas. (c) iRecreation space, common shall mean an area .that is set aside exclusively for use by .all residents. (d) Recreation space, private shall mean an area that is used for private outdoor purposes by habitants of individual units, related directly and attached to the dwelling units it is intended to serve. (e) Site coverage shall mean the building area of the site measured from'an imaginary, Vertical projection of the surface area encompassed within the exterior walls or from the centerline of walls separating two buildings. All roofed or covered structures including garages and parking structures , stairways, corridors, balcony projections, and patios shall be included. Lattice-covered patios shall be excluded. (f) Site frontage shall mean the narrowest dimension of the site opposite a rear yard. Further., provided, where property abuts Lake Street, all site frontage dimensions shall be computed. from Lake Street. (g) Unenclosed patios, balconies and decks shall mean a private area attached to ai we ing unit and open at least 50 percent on three sides. A courtyard patio consisting of three walls of the main building and/or accessory building shall be open on one side. ' (2510-11/81 ) S. 9153 ESTABLISHMENT OF DISTRICTS. The following districts are established within Oldtown Specific Plan: That portion of the total area designated as District One shall be developed as Low Density Residential in accordance with the provisions contained herein. The physical boundaries of the above land use designations are delineated upon the map in Section 9151 .1. Except as otherwise provided, development within District One shall be limited to Low Density Residential pursuant to Low Density Development Standards, Section 9157. That portion of the total area designated as District Two shall be developed as Medium Density Residential in accordance with the provisions contained herein. Development within District Two shall not exceed Medium Density Residential pursuant to Medium Density Development Standards, Section 9158. Residential development within District Two may, in the alternative, be pursued under Low Density Development Standards pursuant to the regulations of. Section 9157. Whenever a building or structure is erected or reconstructed in the specific plan area, the provisions of Chapters 97 and 98 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code shall apply unless as otherwise provided by this article, in which case the provisions of this article shall govern. S. 9154. USES PERMITTED CONDITIONALLY. The following uses are permitted subject to approval of a conditional use permit: (a) Planned residential developments pursuant to Article 931 'or 936, provided the density shall not exceed that governed by this article. (b) Unclassified uses pursuant to Article 933. S. 0155 . NONCONFORMING SITES. Existing sites which do not meet the criteria for minimum site area or site frontage shall be subject - to approval of a use permit unless a conditional- use permit is required for uses vermitted conditionally pursuant to Section 9154. t S. 9156 OLDTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN PLANNING S. 9156 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. GENERAL. The development standards con- tained in this article shall apply to all residential developments within the specific plan area. S. 9156.1 MINIMUM SITE AREA. The minimum net site area shall be 2,500 square feet. S. 9156.2 MINIMUM SITE FRONTAGE. The minimum site width shall be thirty (30) feet except that any parcel of land created prior to the effective date of this article need not conform to the required minimum lot frontage. S. 9156.3 MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT. The maximum building height for all main buildings shall not exceed thirty (30) feet. The maximum building height for detached accessory buildings and detached garages shall not exceed fifteen (15) feet. S. 9156.4 SETBACKS. a Front Yard Setback: The minimum front yard setback for main buildings shall be fifteen (15) feet; however, said setback may be reduced to seven (7) feet on any site provided the setback reduction . is on 50 percent or less of the total building width and an average setback of not less than fifteen (15) feet is provided for the total building width. Three-story buildings shall provide a twenty-five (25) foot setback from the front property line for the third floor portion. Archi- tectural features may project into this additional required setback. (2) The minimum front yard setback for garages entered directly from a street shall be twenty-two (22) feet except where the side of a garage is parallel with the street, the setback shall be not less than ten (10) feet. (3) The minimum front yard setback for other accessory structures shall be the same as for the main building. (b) Side Yard Setback: Except as provided herein, the aggregate setback shall be not less than 20 percent of the site frontage and a minimum of three (3) feet shall be provided in each side yard. (1 ) Any side yard abutting a public street shall have a setback of not less than five (5) feet, except for garages located on a sin le twenty-five (25) foot lot, said setback may be reduced to not less than three (33 feet. (2)- Any interior side yard may. be reduced to zero provided that the opposite side yard equals 20 percent of the site frontage. Further provided, where zero side yard setback is used the abutting property must be held under the same ownership at the time of initial construction or the owners of the abutting proper- ties record an agreement or deed restriction and consent in writing to such zero setback. A separation of not less than five (5) feet shall be provided between adjacent structures on abutting sites where zero side setback_ is utilized. This requirement shall not apply where the same interior property line is utilized for zero side yard construction on both properties. (3) Further provided, where the main entry to a dwelling unit is located in the side yard area, such side yard area shall not be less than five (5) feet for the first story. (10/19/81 ) • PLANNING OLDTOWN SPECIFIC P LAN _ S. 9156.4(c) (c) Rear Yard Setback: 1 Rear yards for all main buildings shall have a minimum setback of ten (10) feet except when a lot abuts an alley, the minimum setback may be reduced to seven and one-half-(7 1/2) feet. A cantilever not exceeding five (5) feet into the rear yard setback is permitted for any part of a structure above the first floor double plate. (2) Rear yards for accessory/garage buildings shall have a minimum setback of five (5) feet except those lots where access to the garage is from an alley, the rear yard setback shall be seven and one-half (7 1/2) feet. (d) Fences Walls and Hedges. Fences, walls or hedges may be located on a portion of the lot as follows : (1 ) Fences, walls or hedges which do not exceed forty-two (42) inches in height may be located on any portion of the lot. (2) Fences, walls or hedges which do not exceed six (6) feet in height may be located in the required side yards. (3) Interior lots which do. not 'abut an alley may have fences which do not exceed six (6) feet in height located within the rear yard setback. (4) Lots which abut an alley may have fences not exceeding six (6) feet in height located at the rear ultimate right-of-way if vehicular access to the lots is not located on such alley; or a seven and one-half (7 1/2) foot triangu- lar cutoff at the juncture of the driveways and alley is provided. (5) Corner Site: Fences or walls which do not exceed six (6) feet in height may be erected in the exterior side yard of a corner site provided they are not closer than twenty-five (25) feet to the front property line. (6) Reverse Corner Lot: Fences, walls or hedges not exceeding six (6) feet in height may be erected in the exterior side yard of a reverse corner. lot .if a ten (10) foot triangular corner cutoff, measured along the rear and exterior side lot lines, is provided at the rear exterior corner. (7) Corner Site Abutting an Alley: Within a triangular area, formed by measuring ten 10 feet along an alley and exterior side. site lines, there shall be no structure, fence, wall , hedge, or landscaping erected or maintained over forty-two (42) inches in height. (8 Fences, walls or hedges over six (6) feet high shall be subject to the same yard requirements as the main dwelling. (9) Height Measurement of Fence or Wall : The height of a fence may be measured from either side of the fence except where a retaining wall is combined with a fence, no portion of the retaining wall shall be measured to meet fence require- ments. Any combination of retaining wall and fence over eight (8) feet high shall be built so that the design or material varies between the retaining portion and fence. This section shall not prohibit placement of trash enclosures within the rear yard areas. (2510-11/81 ) �__ (10/19/b1 } _ va,uivwty bet:1,;lr'1C PLAN + PLANNING S. 9156.4.1 STREET INTERSECTION VISIBILITY. On corner lots, in all districts, no fence, hedge, wall, sign, structure, mound of earth, landscaping, or other visual obstruction between forty-two (42) inches and seven (7) feet in height above the nearest street curb elevation, shall be erected, placed, planted or allowed to grow within the triangular area formed by the intersecting exterior property lines, or their prolongation, and a diagonal intersecting the twenty-five (25) foot property lines, when measured along such exterior property lines from the point where such property lines intersect. Trees which are trimmed free of branches or foliage to a height on the trunk not less than seven (7) feet above the nearest street curb eleva- tion are exempt from the above prohibition. S. 9156.4.1 .1 r . •;1► 100, \ (L ,10-11/8l ) SAFETY SIGHT ANGLES S. 9156.5 DISTANCE BETWEEN BUILDINGS. A minimum distance between the exterior walls of a building on the same site shall be ten (10) feet. S. 9156.6 RECREATION SPACE DIMENSIONS AND LOCATION. Required recreation space shall conform with the following: (a) Common recreation space shall have a minimum dinension of fifteen (15) feet; however, said dimension may be reduced to not less than ten (10) feet provided that the ten (10) feet are on 50 percent or less of the total width and does not abut ground floor wall with windows or doors. All required recreation areas shall be located behind the required front yard setback. (b) Private recreation space shall have the following minimum dimensions: (1) Ground floor: ten (10) feet. (2) Above ground floor: six (6) feet. Balconies that serve as entrances or exits for more than one (1) dwelling unit shall not be considered as private open space. Not less than 50 percent of the required private recreation space shall abut areas other than bedrooms of a dwelling. (10/19/61.) :•.,:... ._..., ` vawivwa �Yt:(:irlC PLAN S. 9156.7 LANDSCAPING. All developments except single family dwellings shall be provided with landscaping in accordance with the following: (a) All front and side yard setback areas visible from streets shall be landscaped. (b) A minimum of one (1) twenty-four (24) inch, box size tree shall be provided in the front yard areas for the fifty (50) feet of site frontage. As an alternative, not less than three (3) fifteen (15) gallon trees may be located and grouped in any desired way on the site. (c) A permanent irrigation system shall be provided in all landscaped areas. (d) A landscape and irrigation plan shall be submitted to the Department.of Building and Community Development concurrently upon filing for building permits. S. 9156.8 STREET TREES REQUIRED. Street trees are required within that portion of the parkway area abutting the site frontage of a proposed develop- ment. Said trees shall be twenty (20) inch box type. The placement, location, and specie shall comply with standard plans and specifications on file with the Department. S. 9156.9 PARKING AND ACCESS. (a) Parking Ratios. Each single family dwelling shall be provided. with a. minimum of two (2) parking spaces. enclosed within a garage or garages Apartments shall be provided with the following parking facilities. (1) Each bachelor, single or one bedroom dwelling unit shall be provided with one (1) off-street parking space. (2) Each two (2) bedroom dwelling unit shall be provided with one and one-half (1�) off-street parking space. (3) Each three (3) bedroom dwelling unit shall be provided with two (2) off- street parking spaces. (4) Each dwelling shall be provided with a minimum of one (1) conveniently accessible parking space. Said space shall be enclosed with a garage. (5) Each dwelling unit shall be provided with. one-half ( ) of an on-site quest parking space. The net dimensions of each parking space shall be not less than nine (9) - feet in width by nineteen (19) feet in length. (b) Access. (1) Minimum Turning Radius for Required Parking Spaces. Every garage, entered directly from an alley or drive, shall be provided with a minimum turning radius of twenty-seven (27) feet., The turning radius shall be measured from the opposite side of the alley or drive. (2) Except as provided herein, access to all on-site parking facilities shall be from a public alley. Access from an arterial or local street may only be permitted in the following instances and under the- following conditions: (i) Where no public alley exists or is planned in which case access shall be subject to approval by the Director of Public Works; (ii) Where such access is approved as part of a subdivision; (iii) Where such access is approved under a conditional use permit as entitlement for an unclassified use. S. 9156.10 AREA OF ACCESSORY BUILDINGS AND GARAGES. The total aggregate floor area of all accessory buildings- and garages shall not exceed six hundred fifty (650) square feet per dwelling. Accessory buildings and garages shall not be con-. structed on any site which does not have a main structurd meeting the requirements of this article. S. 9156.11 ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES. Architectural features, including eaves and fireplaces, may project to within thirty (30) inches of the site line and four (4) feet into the required front and rear yards, provided such features maintain a minimum distance of five (4) feet from any portion of any other building on the same site. In addition, an eave return may project to within (18) inches of the side site line for a distance of twelve (12) feet. Said twelve -(12) feet shall be measured From the beginning of the eave return at the front of the house. All eaves shall set back thirty (30) inches when over windows. This provision does not allow other ar^hitectural features to encroach closer than thirty (30) inches to any property .line. S. 9156.12 OPEN, UNENCLOSED STAIRWAYS OR BALCONIES. Open, unenclosed stairways or balconies, not covered by a roof or a canopy, may extend four (4) feet into the required front yard and may extend into the required side yard to within three (3) feet from the side yard property line. Balconies shall be located to provide at least 50 percent offset from balconies, patios or decks of existing, abutting buildings. Such stairways or balconies shall maintain a minimum distance of five (5) feet from any portion of any other building on the site or adjacent sites. S. 9156.13 TRASH ENCLOSURES. Areas shall be provided on site for trash, refusg, or other discarded materials. Such trash areas shall have an enclo- sure of sufficient height to screen trash receptacles from view. All such trash areas shall be constructed of materials which blend with the architecture and aesthetics of the main structure. This section is not applicable to single family dwellings. S. 9156.14 MAINTENANCE OF STRUCTURES. For the purpose of upkeep and repair of structures located on an interior property line, a maintenance ease- ment shall be recorded between the owner of the property containing said structure and the owner of the property upon which entry must take place in order to perform maintenance activities. Such easement shall be an irrevocable covenant and shall run with the land. Proof of said recorded easement shall be submitted to the Depart- ment of Building and Community Development prior to issuance of a building permit. S. 9157 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. DISTRICT ONE. Property delineated within District One shall comply with the following specific development standards in addition to general development standards: (a) Uses Permitted. Single-family dwellings, duplexes, and customary accessory uses and structures are permitted. No tent, mobile home, trailer vehicle, recreation vehicle or temporary structure shall be used for dwelling or sleeping purposes. (b) . Development Intensity. The maximum developed within District One of Oldtown Specific Plan shall comply with the provisions of the following development intensity standards: PLANNING OLDTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN S. 9157(bl UISTRICT ONE UEVELOPMENT INTENSITY STANDARDS Site Area (Sq. ft.) Maximum At Less No. of Least BUT Than Units Site Development 2,500 6,000 1 1 . Maximum site coverage shall not exceed 50 6,000 9,000 2 percent of the site area. Sites in excess of 9,000 square 2. Minimum open space shall not be less than feet are permitted one dwelling 40 percent of the site area. unit for every 3,000 additional square feet. 3. Recreation space requirements. The minimum recreation space shall be not less than 25 percent of the floor area. `4'(a) Minimum private recreation space shall be not less than 50 percent of the required recreation space. (b) Minimum common recreation space shall not be less than 50 percent of the recrea- tional space. In the alternative, common recreation space need not be provided where private recreation space has been increased to meet minimum recreation space requirements. S. 9158 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. DISTRICT TWO. Property in District Two shall comp y with the specific development standards of this section in addition to general development standards, or in the alternative, such property may be developed to comply with the low density standards required for property in District One. (a) Uses Permitted. Triplexes, apartments and customary accessory uses and structures are permitted. No tent, mobile home, trailer vehicle, or temporary structure shall be used for dwelling or sleeping purposes. (b) Development Intensity. Except where otherwise provided, the maximum development intensity for each site in District Two of Oldtown Specific Plan shall comply . with the following development intensity standards: (10/19/81 ) PLANNING (ii) Where such access is approved .as part of a subdivision; (iii) Where such access is approved under a conditional use permit as entitlement for an unclassified use. S. 9156.10 AREA OF ACCESSORY BUILDINGS A"ND GARAGES. The total aggregate floor area of all accessory buildings and garages shall not exceed six hundred fifty (650) square feet per dwelling. Accessory buildings and garages shall not be con- structed on any site which does not have a main structurd meeting the requirements of this article. S. 9156.11 ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES. Architectural features, including eaves and fireplaces, may project to within thirty (30) inches of the site line and four (4) feet into the required front and rear yards, provided such features maintain a minimum distance of five (4) feet from any portion of any other building on the same site. In addition, an eave return may project to within (18) inches of the side site Line for a distance of twelve (12) feet. Said twelve (12) feet shall be measured Prom the beginning of the eave return at the front of the house. All eaves shall set back thirty (30) inches when over windows. This provision does not allow other ar^.hitectural features to encroach closer than thirty (30) inches to any property line. S. 9156.12 OPEN, UNENCLOSED STAIRWAYS OR.. BALCONIES. Open, unenclosed stairways or balconies, not covered by a roof or a canopy, may extend four (4) feet into the required front yard and may extend into the required side yard to within three (3) feet from the side yard property line. Balconies shall be located to provide at least 50 percent offset from balconies, patios or decks of existing, abutting buildings. Such stairways or balconies shall maintain a. minimum distance of five (5) feet from any portion of any other building on the site or adjacent sites. S. 9156.13 TRASH ENCLOSURES. Areas shall be provided on site for trash, refuse, or other discarded materials. Such trash areas shall have an enclo- sure of sufficient height to screen trash receptacles from view. All such trash areas shall be constructed of materials which blend with the architecture and aesthetics of the main structure. This section is not applicable to single family dwellings. S. 9156.14 MAINTENANCE OF STRUCTURES. For the purpose of upkeep and repair of structures located on an interior property line, a maintenance ease- ment shall be recorded between the owner of the property containing said structure and the owner of the property upon which entry must take place in order to perform maintenance activities. Such easement shall be an irrevocable covenant and shall run with the land. Proof of said recorded easement shall be submitted to the Depart- ment of Building and Community Development prior to issuance of a building permit. S. 9157 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. DISTRICT ONE. Property delineated within District One shall comply with the following specific development standards in addition to general development standards: (a) Uses Permitted. Single-family dwellings, duplexes, and customary accessory uses and structures are permitted. No tent, mobile home, trailer vehicle, recreation vehicle or temporary structure shall be used for dwelling or sleeping purposes. (b) Development Intensity. The maximum developed within District One of Oldtown Specific Plan shall comply with the provisions of the following development intensity standards: -S. •9158(b) OLUTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN PLANNING DISTRICT TWO DEVELOPMENT INTENSITY STANDARDS Site Area (Sq. ft. ) Maximum At Less No. of Least BUT Than Units Site Development 6,000 9,000 3 1 . Maximum site coverage shall not exceed 50 percent 9,000 12,000 4 of the site area. 12,000 15,000 b 15,000 18,000 7 2. Minimum open space Rhall not be less than 40 18,000 21 ,000 9 percent of the site area. 21 ,000 24,000 10 24,000 27,000 12 3. Recreation space requirements. The minimum 27,000 30,000 13 recreation space shall be not less than 25 percent 30,000 33,000 15 of the floor area. 33,000 36,000 16 36,000 39,000 18 (a) Minimum private recreation space shall be not less 39,000 42,000 19 t an ;50 percent of the required recreation space. 42,000 45,000 21 (b) Minimum common recreation space shall not be less Sites in excess of 45 000 than 50 percent of the recreation space. In the square feet are permitted alternative, common recreation space need not be one additional dwelling unit provided where private recreation space has been for every 1 ,500 square feet incrgased to meet minimum recreation space over 45,000 square feet. requirement. (2510-11/81 ) (10/19/81 ) I CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH COUNCIL - ADMINISTRATOR COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH To Honorable Mayor and FromCharles W. Thompson, City Council Members City Administrator ('Ali Its Subject LAKE STREET/OLD FIRE Date 1�D ON STATION PROPERTY June 12, 1985 The Redevelopment Committee met with staff on Tuesday, June 11, 1985, to review the status of the proposed Exclusive Negotiating Agreement with SBE for the Lake Street/Old Fire Station property. As a result of that review, it is the committee's recommendation to the Redevelopment Agency that the disposition of the Lake Street property be tabled and deferred until a future date. Respectfull submitted, C a es W. ompson �! City Administrator CWT/DLB:lp _ 1 V.- CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH COUNCIL - ADMINISTRATOR COMMUNICATION CA 85-15 HUNTINGTON BEACH Honorable Mayor and Charles W. Thompson To City Council Members From City Administrator Subject RFP - LAKE STREET/OLD FIRE Date February 15, 1985 STATION PROPERTY Following your recent action to request proposals for the Lake Street/Old Fire Station Property, staff prepared and transmitted to a number of potential bidders a Request for Proposal.' The deadline for submitting proposals is today, February 15, 1985 at 4:00 P.M. Based upon the number of proposals sent out and inquiries made of staff, we anticipate a good response. ' Staff will be evaluating these submittals and preparing a recommendation for your consideration at the earliest possible date. It is hoped that we will have completed our .review in time for you to consider this matter as an added item to your February 25th study session. W itted,son r CWT/DLB:lp REQUES-_ FOR CITY COUNCIL CTION Date May 10, 1985 v 0 Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Submitted by: Charles W. Thompson, City Administrator V"`' 1 .10 4/� ti9 ov�4 Prepared by: Paul E . Cook, Director of Public Works Subject: Acquisition of One Property for the Heil ve.. ree ening Project (Barra Property) Consistent with Council Policy? [A Yes ( ] New Policy or Exceptio Statement of Issue, Recommendation,Analysis, Funding Source,Alternative Acti6rls, Attachments: STATEMENT OF ISSUE : The Barra property which takes access off of Heil presents design and traffic safety problems for the street widening project of Heil Avenue. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the City staff to obtain an appraisal and. title information for the Barra property and to negotiate with the owners for a purchase price . ANALYSIS : The rear unit on the Barra property, 7882 Alhambra Street, takes access off of Heil Avenue and is above the street grade . The construction of the interim widening of Heil Avenue will allow only minimal driveable access to the property and creates an undesirable traffic safety condition due to the possibilty •of autos .backing out of the drive into Heil Avenue . As the driveway access problem exists (the rear unit is within the ultimate right of way for the future full - widening of Heil Avenue and the owners have expressed a desire to sell) , it is recommended that an attempt to purchase the property and clear the right of way be made at this time. As a first step, authorization is being requested to obtain an appraisal of the property along -with the title information and to negotiate a selling price with the owner . Should a full take of the property and improvements be eventually accomplished, the remainder of the lot and improvements , after the right of way take, would be sold by the City . The following is an estimate of the acquisition costs: Appraisal and title expenditure: $ 2,000 .00 Land and improvement purchase: 130 , 000 .00 Relocation costs: 5, 000 .00 Subtotal: - $137 ,000 .00 Reimbursement to City for sale of surplus land and improvements: (90 ,000 .00) Total: $47,000 .00 PIO 4/84 Request for Council Action Acquisition of .One Property for the Heil Ave. Street Widening Project May 10 , 1985 Page 2 The removal or remodeling of the rear unit will need to be accomplished either prior to resale or as a condition of sale. Upon successful negotiations with the owner, a final price and a request to purchase will be brought back to Council . FUNDING SOURCE: Appraisal and title budgeted gas tax account #744460 = $2,000 .00± ALTERNATIVE ACTION: Deny recommendation and postpone acquisition. ATTACHMENTS : Location Map CWT:PEC:PN: jy '` • r .� ���' - ..fir. 5 'S r�} _ t kk NE�d. AVF�IC,IE HEEL AVEAvuE. 7 982 ALNAM62A AVE. ---- '7882. At-♦{AMSRA AYE, a socsA R OJEC T LocAT/oAi t we FAogF N v b � urr�P s a W n � p \ Euif 2 v \z GAS ,m"W Z 3 � f \ YOA& TOwm AA6Vf It %NO/.W 4/qL/f ATLAN TA v O �. scams Mm_= $laRt2li �r2oPERT`( 1 1 J c •ALHAMBRA AVEN i FULL WI ING ` _C--JNTERIM WIDEN H E I l [rtsorme "er or IAYE AVENUE f RHINE CIRCLE _ u Q LU m GIrY RiGNt -OP- WP-r Cory Musr AQRulRC f Z/22. /- REQUE .-) FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTIO to3 Date February 7, 1985 Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council a��9lp$ lRe A 4"F� Submitted by: Charles Thompson, City Administrator �� 01� eft:/ .4..� Prepared by: Paul E. Cook, Director of Public Works, ih C0)%^SeS w A-h Di>+t oAu Subject: Heil Avenue Street Widening; CC-446 0 w,1 Consistent with Council Policy? Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception �-0 1, Statement of Issue, Recommendation, Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attachments: Statement of Issue: To widen the north side of Heil Avenue between Beach Boulevard and Silver Lane, two options are available: (1) to widen the street within the existing 20 feet of right- of-way north of centerline; or (2) to acquire an additional 20 feet of right-of-way to provide for the ultimate widening of a secondary highway. Recommendation: Approve option 1, the widening of Heil Avenue within the existing 20 feet of right-of- way north of the centerline. Analysis: 1. Widening within existing right-of-way. By virtue of an. old Sterns Rancho easement, 20.00 feet of right-of-way exists north of the centerline.of Heil Avenue. Widening could be accomplished within this area to provide for one travel lane in each direction, a bikeway in each direction and a painted center median to provide for traffic separation and protected left turns. This is the recommended project as it meets, the traffic volume needs for the next 5-10 years, maintains the established master-planned bike route, does not require purchase or condemnation of land and hones and does not impact proposed gas tax projects in the City C.I.P. The project will have a somewhat disruptive effect on those properties who over the years have placed fences, landscaping and backyard improvements in the right-of-way area. Two (2) properties take access from Heil Avenue and can only be provided minimal driveway approaches as a grade difference exists between the streets and their properties. The duplex just opposite Rhine Drive was constructed in 1961 with one unit taking access off of Heil Avenue. No records are available on the older residence east of Rhine Drive to indicate how long access has existed. As properties redevelop in this area, the City will continue to require right-of-way dedication. This may reduce the number of acquisitions in the future when traffic volumes dictate a full widening of the street. The, pavement width proposed for this project could also provide for two travel lanes in each direction by omitting the bikeways and painted medians. However, staff feels the aforementioned configuration is preferable at this time. The project estimated construction cost is $120,000.00. Funding source would be City Gas Tax Funds which are budgeted for this year. 2. Widening to ultimate requirinn2 right-of7 ay acquisition. To widen Heil Avenue to the ultimate width will require acquisition of an additional 20.00 feet of right-of-way. PIO 4/84 Request for Council Action Heil Avenue Street Widening; CC-446 February 7, 1985 Page 2 Eleven properties would be involved including the taking of three residences along with sheds, a swimming pool and backyard improvements. The cost of the right-of-way acquisition is estimated at $500,000.00. As land purchase or condemnation, severence damages, relocation assistance and demolition are involved, the actual costs cannot be determined until appraisals are obtained and negotiations completed with the owners. The cost of the appraisals would run approximately $10,000.00. The construction cost for the full widening is estimate at $300,000; the total project cost estimate for right-of-way and construction is $800,000.00. Although the project could be funded entirely by the City out of our gas tax revenues, this is not recommended as it would take available. funds from other street projects proposed within the City's C.I.P. The project would be eligible for either the City/County Arterial Highway Financing Program (AHFP) or the Federal Aid Urban Program (PAU) . The AHFP would afford the most reasonable alternate and if approved as a project would be funded on a 50/50 basis between the City and+the County. A greater funding advantage could be obtained through the FAU, 14%- City and 86% Federal. However, this size project would be in competition with-larger projects on a Countywide basis and would not receive a very high priority. Following the procedures of. the AHFP, application could. be made for inclusion of right-of-way in the fiscal year 86-87 program and the construction project in the fiscal year 87-88. Widening projects that include right-of-way acquisition are expensive and reduce gas tax funds for other projects. This project was submitted and approved as an AHFP project in 1978. Due to the high project cost, limited gas tax funds, existing traffic volumes on Heil Avenue and a shift in priorities to rehabili- tation of existing deteriorating arterial highways, the full widening was cancelled in favor of a future reduced scope widening project. The reduced project no longer qualified for an AHFP project and acting upon recommendations from the Public Works Department, the City Council at its January 7th, 1980 meeting authorized a request to the Council to cancel the AHFP project. In the past few years, rehabilitation of our existing arterial highways has been,given the highest priority. The major portion of the arterial system was constructed twenty years ago and have reached, or are approaching the end of their design life. Rehabilitation of roadways by patching and resurfacing produces additional years of service. To utilize $800,000 in AHFP, street rehabilitation projects would upgrade approximately three (3) to four (4) miles of existing arterial roadway. This would equal two (.2) years of projects. Staff feels that projected traffic volumes for the next 5 to 10 years on Heil Avenue do not justify the expense of this alternative or the trauma of relocating people from their hares. Funding 'Source: 1. Widening within existing right-of-way $120,000 City gas tax funds, budgeted 84/85 2. Ultimate widening with right-of-way acquisition Alternative a: $800,000 City gas tax funds Request for Council Action Heil Avenue Street Widening; CC-446 February 7, 1985 Page 3 Alternative b: $400,000 City gas tax funds, $400,000 County AHFP (pending project approval by the AHFP) Alternative Actions: 1. Approve ultimate widening with right-of-way acquisition as a City only funded project. 2. Approve ultimate widening with right of way acquisition and direct City staff to make application for a project through the AHFP. 3. Pursue no project at this time. Attachments: Location Map CWT:PEC:PN:lw i� 3 eoLSA o R 0TEC T 2 LocA-rlOnl r�1 M V Z f0/H6F h 0 b LAMR v W � 3 TALBERT 2 z u \ Z v GAR F/ELO YO.e.0 TowN / ALbOMS ti g ATL.4N TA m / 2 NAM/L TaN PROJECT LOCATIONS MAP . . . ^ | `~------_'/ ---� / SILVER LANE | Z Fn -- | co cl [— | , | | / � � . � | -.0 It "990 7-9112 -7917 | > rq z c: m | / | | ! | \ -----^ | - ------- ��A� A r A/ V� BEACH. � ^'� , �^ | � / o ' \ Y/ E REQUES i FOR CITY COUNCIrL TION Date April 4, , 1984 Submitted to: The Honorable Mayor and City Council Submitted by: Charles W. Thompson, City Administrate . Prepared by: Melvin M. Bowman, Acting Director, Community ServicVey Subject: HUNTINGTON CENTRAL PARK, WEST BOUNDARY TRUNK SEWER, PROPERTY ACQUISITION; CC-608 Statement of Issue, Recommendation,Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attachments: STATEMENT OF ISSUE In order to construct the proposed alignment of the west boundary trunk sewer through Huntington Central Park, five encyclopedia lots need to be acquired through condemnation. RECOMMENDATION Approve the attached Resolution of Need and Necessity to initiate condemnation proceedings to acquire lots 110-182-11 ; 110-184-06; 110-185-08; ll0-185-14; and 110-185-15 for a total cost of $64,500.. : ANALYSIS In order for construction of the trunk sewer to take place as scheduled early this year, five encyclopedia lots must be acquired by the city. These lots are within the boundary of Huntington Central Park and were scheduled for purchase at a future date as parkland. - The. alignment of the trunk sewer makes it necessary to acquire the lots now. The Administrative Services Department has made an effort to acquire subject lots at their appraised value , but has been unable to do so. FUNDING SOURCE Park Acquisition and Development Unencumbered Fund Balance , $64, 500. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS Postpone purchase of the encyclopedia lots and sewer trunk develop- ment until further direction by Council . ATTACHMENTS Resolution of Need and Necessity /cs PIO 4/81 e7 �3 IN THE Superior Court Y;C00 cYz= OF THE A.PII ED STATE OF CALIFORNIA In and for the County of Orange G1'r� CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH9 PROOF OF PUBLICATION CITY CLERK. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE of INTENTION TO ACQUIRE PROPERTY' IN EMINENT DOMAIN TO ALI,INTERESTED PROPERTY State of California ) OWNERS:YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED that County of Orange pursuant to the Code of Civil Procedure Section l245.235,the City Council of the City of Huntington .Beach intends,to R I TA J. R I C HTER adopt a resolution to commence.eminent domain proceedings to acquire, under i That I am and at all times herein mentioned was a citizen of Government Code Section 373,,50.6, forpublic park'purposes, the following de- the United States,over the age of twenty-one years,and that I scribed real property in the city of Hunt- - am not a art to,nor interested in the above entitled matter; ington Beach: party Lot 47 of Tract No. 8, as per Map that I am the principal clerk of the printer of the thereofa recorded in Book 9, page 7 of. Miscellaneous Maps, records of Orange HUNTINGTON BEACH IND. REVIEW Gduntp;Cahfornie. Lot 18 of Tract No.45,as shown on a map a newspaper of general circulation,published in the City of recorded in Book 9,page 34,Miscellane- ous Maps, records of Orange County, California. HUNTINGTON BEACH Lot Il"of Tract No.'45,as shown onamap recorded in Book 9,page 34,Miscellane- County of Orange and which newspaper is published for the ous Maps,.records of Orange County, disemination of local news and intelligence of a general charac- California. ter, and which newspaper at all times herein mentioned had Lot 56 of Tract No.8,as per map thereof and still has a bona fide subscription list of paying subscribers, recorded in Book 9,page 7 of Miscellane- and which newspaper has been established, printed and pub- ous California.Mapsna. records of Orange County, i ' lisped at regular intervals in the said County of Orange for a period exceeding one year; that the notice, of which the Lgt55 of Tracts,as per Map recorded in annexed is a printed copy, has been published in the regular Book 9 at page 7 of Miscellaneous Maps, Recordti'of Orghge County,California. and entire issue of said newspaper,and not in any supplement And generally located north of Ellie Ave- t thereof,on the following dates,to wit: nue between Edwards and Goldenw•est Streets. A diagram of the property to,be aq; i �uired by condemnation is cn file in thS ffice of the City Clerk. You have a tight to appesr�and„be.- heard'on the foilowing'matters: (a)That the public interest end n es —— ---- — city-require this project; MARCH 297 1984 ) np � il�eeed ttatted iamannerr that wlbthmos compatible with the greatest public good, ' • and the least private injury; (c)That the property described above and sought to he acquired is necessary for ' I certify(or declare) under penalty of perjury that the forego- the proposed project. ing is true and correct. The City Council will consider the res- olution of necessity to acquire the GARDEN GROVE property by eminent domain at the regu D t........... .. d 1> iar Council ncil C• of April 16,30 p. ., ' the City Council Chambers,at 7:30 p.m., i or as sown thereafter as possible,at 2000 Calif 1a,this 2 .1 dayof Ma rC h 19. Main Street,Huntington Beach.You may ` ''' ''''''"''' ''''''' appear end be�heard at that time relative to ph is set forth in(a),(b)and(c) Rita J. Richter above,by filing a written request to be ...... .�.. -:�'. ........................... heard with"thee Coty Clerk, 2000 Main / Street, Huntington Beach, CA 92648, Signature within'Fifteen(15)days after mailing of i this notice. If you do not file a written .request to,appear within fifteen(15)days of the mailing of this notice, the City Council is not required to afford you the opportunity to-appear and'be heard in this matter. If you need additional information on this matter,you may contact Dan Bren- nan,Real Property Agent,City of Hunt- ington Beach,at(714)536-5644 D'ated:3/27/84 Alicia"M.Wentworth,City Clerk City of Huntington Beach Pub.Mar.29,19C4 Hunt.Beach Ind.Rev.935810 ----- 2082 f To Art Folger Dep. City Attorney Date 3/23/84 Attached is a Legal Notice that Cheryl Salas and T put oglather, Please add, subtract or do what you want, but please get it back to me in time to publish ,— for the 4/16/84 meeting 1 1 How m nv times to be published? I must have the finished copy to give to the HB I - Independent by April 2 (Monday) for publisation on April 5, which will be i5xdRyxx 10 days notice. Signed I think it should be 15 days because of the notice that 4 is go �t.thers. If q,e n,—get back \ to me by Ap4a44 23rd (Monday) Connie Clerk's Utfice xb4Ub I . i I I Date Signed Rodifirm 4S 465 SEND PARTS 1 AND 3 WITH CARBONS INTACT. Poly Polk(50 sets)4P465 PART 3 WILL BE RETURNED WITH REPLY. r1 /t/ 6 77I c-e of�v� �c. VkeoL t%i r Y NOTICE OF--INTENTION--TO ACQUIRE PROPERTY IN EMINENT -DOMAIN TO ALL INTERESTED PROPERTY OWNERS: YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED that pursuant to the Lode of Civil Procedure Section 1245. 235, the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach intends to adopt a resolution to commence eminent domain proceedings to acquire , under Government Code Section 37350. 5, for public park purposes, the following described real property in the city of Huntington Beach : Lot 47 of Tract No . 8, as per Map thereof, recorded in Book 91 page 7 of Miscellaneous Maps_ , records of Orange County, California . Lot 18 of Tract No . 45, as shown on a map recorded in Book 9, page 34, Miscellaneous Maps, records of Orange County, California. Lot 11 of Tract No . 45, as shown on a map recorded in Book 9, page 34, Miscellaneous Maps, records of Orange County, California . Lot 56 of Tract No . 8, as per map thereof recorded in Book 91 page 7 of Miscellaneous Maps, records of Orange County, California. Lot 55 of Tract 8, as per Map recorded in Book 9 at page 7 of Miscellaneous Maps, Records of Orange County, California. 4�+d '�,trA1 16cAted t.Ilis 0jV#jW4& w h dw+ 144S4,j41deADJesh%V*- A diagram, of, the property to be acquired by condemnation is& -t-ta-ch-ad--here-to- � You hhaave a right to appear and be heard on the following matters : - 1 - (a) That the public interest and necessity require this project ; (b) The proposed project as planned is located in a manner that will be the most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury ; (c) That the property described above and sought to be acquired is necessary for the proposed project. - The City Council will consider the resolution of necessity to acquire the property by eminent doma�i�n`��a/tithe C��� �ov�ae,L CH b 730: P�Ma O�*S'S0ON tkA444""�vGtv /OOS'Sob regular Counci mee in 'T� at 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach. You may appear and be heard at that time relative to the matters set forth in (a) , (b) and (c ) above, by filing a written request to be heard with the City Clerk, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, CA 92648, within fifteen ( 15 ) days after mailing of this notice . If you do not file a written request to appear within fifteen ( 15) days of the mailing of this notice , the City Council is not required to afford you the opportunity to appear and be heard in this matter . If you need additional information on this matter you may contact Dan Brennan , Real Property Agent, at ( 714) 14 536-5544. 2 _ IOU CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACHWhite City Attorney REQUEST FOR LEGAL SERVICES Canary City Clerk Pink . City Administrator Goldenrod Departmental HUNTINGTON BEACH - 1 / Date Request Made By Department Nov. 22, 711n"33 Xiike Loving Public: Works INSTRUCTIONS: File request in the City Attorney's Office as soon as possible. Print or type facts necessary for City Attorney. Out- line briefly reasons for the request.Attach all information and exhibits pertinent to the subject. Type of Legal Service Requested: [ ] Ordinance [ ] Insurance [ l Other IN Resolution [ ] Bonds [ ] Contract/Agreement [.I Opinion All exhibits must be attached,or this request will be returned to you. [ ] Exhibits Attached This is a. request to have a , "Res'olutior of Need," prepared for the condemnation of ` Fncyclo�?gdi6 .Lc��°° �®r�c� of Ellis Avenue b-tween Edwards and Goldenwest Streeics is, ho' 'on' h4a attached map. The Administrative Services Pelt �ka�s made an effort to acquire the lots in quos�tion at their ap1iafs6d value, bU have been.unable to do so. in order for the ,:.. proceed wf th the construction of the Went Boundary Trunk Serer ,,on . dhedule p condemnation ion proceedings should be initiated as s66n as Por*6 :ble o i i If for Council Action, If not for Council action,desired completion date Signature: 22d 1-083 �r Agenda deadline Pave Council meeting ?/r PIO 12/79 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION o � 3 Date December 22 , 1983 Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Submitted by: Charles Thompson, City Administrator Prepared by: Paul E. Cook, Director of Public Works�� S PC _ Improvement of Heil Avenue at Silver Lane - , - J Statement of Issue, Re ommendation,Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attachments: J tement of Issue : /bequest approval of a project to widen the intersection at Heil Avenue and Silver Lane to improve sight distance from Silver Lane. Recommendation: Apprbve the concept of improving the intersection of Heil Avenue and Silver Lane rather than widening Heil Avenue to its full master planned width. Analysis: Heil Avenue between Silver Lane and 200 feet west of Beach Boulevard exists as an improved half street south of the centerline. A 20 foot street right-of-way exists north of the centerline, but over the years has been fenced by adjoining residences and included in their yards. Presently, the roadway is striped for one travel way and bikeway in each direction. The widening and improvement of the northeast corner of Heil and Silver will improve the sight distance to the east on Heil for traffic entering from Silver. The estimated cost of this project is $66 ,000. Alternative Actions : 1. Right-of-way acquisition and street improvements for widening of Heil to master-planned secondary highway. Right-of-way acquisition would include obtaining land to provide 40 feet north of centerline. Two residences, sheds, swimming pools, patios, walks, fences, trees and landscaping are within the take area. The cost estimate for this project is $800, 000. 2. Utilize the existing 20 feet of street easement north of centerline to widen the street 10 feet and create a 10 foot graded parkway. The grade difference between the street and the adjoining properties would allow only minimal acceptable drives to properties now taking \ access off Heil. Greatest impact -would be to the one house facing Heil. Some owners have disputed City claim to right of way and objection to the project can be expected. PIO 4/81 Request for Council Action Improvement of Heil Avenue at Silver Lane December 22 , 1983 Page 2 This improvement would provide for one travel lane of traffic and a bikeway in each direction and a 10 foot painted median providing left turn pockets. The estimated cost of this project is $170, 000. Funding Source : City Gas Tax Funds. In recent years, gas tax funds have been utilized to rehabilitate existing arterial highways that are approaching the end of their design and useful life. Street widening projects shift funds away from this purpose. Alternate 1 would be eligible for submittal to the City' s/County' s Arterial Highway Financing Programs (AHFP) which provides 50/50 funding. The project would be split into a right-of-way and an improvement project. Earliest possible years would be 85=86 for right-of-way, 86-87 for improvements. As AHFP funds are presently used for street rehabilitation, monies would be diverted by this project. PEC:JFM:lw ^1/ V ti a • dY`f''iW_ REQUESA" FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION w ' /1/yI C���/�2Oy S•��.� Date September 22, 1983-" Wes Submitted to: The Honorable Mayor and City Council Submitted by: Charles W. Thompson, City Administrat 4511 Prepared by: Vincent G. Moorhouse, Director, Community Services Subject: Capital Improvement Projects - Park Acquisition and Development FiveYear Program Statement of Issue, Recommendation,Analysis, Funding Source,Alternative Actions, Attachments: STATEMENT OF ISSUE There is a need to establish a Park Acquisition and Development Five Year Program to set priorities for the development of parklands . The priority list will enable the public to be informed as to the direction set by Council regarding specific park projects . RECOMMENDATION Approve the Capital Improvement Projects Development List (Exhibit B) . ANALYSIS A. Park priority (Exhibit A) was approved by the- .Community Services Commission on April 13 , 1983 , B. A City Council study session was held on June 20, 1983 to review the park priorities . Council took the following actions : 1 . Took Rancho View and Lamb Parks off the priority list and put them on the "back burner. " 2 . Recommended not developing the sports complex through private enterprise, but wait until city funds are available . 3 . Directed staff to investigate new alternative locations and a reduced level for the sports complex, to be developed on a city-funded basis . (Note: Cardoza--DiLallo, the city' s con- tract landscape architects , is currently analyzing the alter- natives . ) 4. Requested Community Services Commission look at priorities , using Council input and report back to Council . Also requested a report on the status of surplus property. C . At its July 13 , 1983 meeting, the Community Services Commission approved Exhibit A priority list with Rancho View and Lamb Parks moved to the bottom of the list . Property recommended for sur- plusing is currently being analyzed by the city' s Real Property Manager. D. Exhibit A priority list was resubmitted to Council at its August 22 , 1983 meeting. Council had some questions regarding the list and requested a study session on the matter within thirty days . PIO 4/81 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION September 22, 1983 Page Two Subj : Capital Improvement Projects - Park Acquisition and Development Five Year-Program E. Staff has modified Exhibit A and formulated alternative Exhibit B. The city gym and pool site acquisition has been removed. When the structural analysis to determine the feasibility of repairing the building is completed, the matter will be brought to Council for action. Rancho View and Lamb Parks have been removed. from the priority list . At its September 14, 1983 meeting, the Community Services Commission approved Exhibit B, Capital Improvement Projects Development List, and divided it into two categories : Neighborhood Parks and Huntington Central Park. This alteration makes it possible to compare like projects and enables the public to determine the priority of development of neighborhood parks . Separation of Huntington Central Park development will enable Council to develop projects at its discretion. The Newland Barn and Grounds Project has been removed from the list since it is in the current FY 83/84 budget . Gibbs Nature Park has been placed behind Bartlett Park - Phase II since there are camping areas available in Huntington Central Park to meet the current demand. FUNDING SOURCE Park development will be funded from the Park Acquisition and Develop- ment Fund as monies become available. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS 1. Revise the Capital Improvement Projects Development List (Exhibit B) ; 2 . Do not approve the Capital Improvement Projects Development List (Exhibit B) and develop parks on an individual basis in accordance with Council direction; 3 . Approve Exhibit A. ATTACHMENTS Exhibit A - Capital Improvement Projects Exhibit B - Capital Improvement Projects Development List VGM:MMB: cs I EXHIBIT "A" COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS (PARK ACQUISITION AND DEVELOPMENT) FIVE YEAR PROGRAM JULY 1 , 1983 - JUNE 30, 1988 FIVE YEAR PROJECT PRIORITY 1 . Newland am - Bartlett Park - Phase I (Acquired April 1974) -To develop Newland Barn/Rest Rooms and Security Quarters as part of the Newland House - Historical Society $ 244,000 -Newland Grounds Landscaping 45,400 SUB TOTAL $ 289,400 2. McCallen Park (acquired June 1977) $ 340,000 -Develop a 5.5 acre neighborhood park located on the east side of Huntington, south of Yorktown Avenue. 3. Wieder Park (formerly Warner Park Site) (Acquired September 1976) $ 280,000 -Develop a 5 acre neighborhood park at the northeast corner of Pearce Street and Lynn Street. 4. Manning Park (acquired July 1978) $ 157,500 -Develop a 2.5 acre neighborhood park located at the southeast corner of California and Detroit Streets. 5. Lambert Park - Phase II (acquired September 1976) $ 151,100 -During first phase development of this neighborhood park, 1 .5 acres was developed in 1976. The second phase consists of development of remaining two acres. Location - west side of Newland Avenue, between Ellis and Talbert Avenues. 6. Irby Park - Phase II $ 107,800 (3 acres - 1964; balance of 7.6 acres - acquired December 1971 ) -Phase I was developed in 1966 as a neighborhood park. At its meeting of October 25, 1982, the Council overruled Planning Commission's decision and found the sale of 6 acres of undeveloped Irby Park site to be in conformance with the General Plan. Council directed City staff proceed to develop the remaining two acres of parkland to provide for a 5 acre park, declared the excess property to be surplus and directed staff hold in abeyance the sale of the excess property. 7. Gibbs Nature Center (acquired February 1975) $ 177,300 -To develop a 5 acre eucalyptus tree grove into a nature park located on the west side of Graham and south of Heil Avenue. 0079E August 29, 1983 8. Bartlett Park - Phase (acquired January 1973) $ 843,000 -Phase I will be th- development of the Newland House and grounds. To develop a 30 acre open space natural park on the west side of Coldwater Lane from Adams to Yorktown Avenues. 9. Huntington Lake Improvements (acquired November 1969) $ 250,000 -To improve water quality. Reconstruct shore line. Construct boat and fishing pier. The pier will provide aeration to the lake and enhance concession operations. 10. Sports Complex - Huntington Central Park (acquired November 1969) $ 2,557,000 -The following is a cost breakdown for proposed development of the 25 acre sports complex for Huntington Central Park. 1 ) 6 ballfields $ 2,042,275 2) Parking for 600 vehicles $ 514,725 11 . City Gym and Pool Site Acquisition (Agreement June, 1967) $ 250,000 -To acquire .783 acre site of City-owned Gym and Pool located at 16th and Palm. Property is owned by Huntington Beach City School District. Agreement with District for use of facility expires June 6, 1987. If this agreement is canceled, the City must demolish the building and clean the property. 12. Fishing Lake Development - Central Park (acquired November 1969) $ 975,000 -To convert former Sully Miller gravel pit to a public fishing lake in Huntington Central Park. 13. Rancho View Park (School Opened 1959) $ 147,900 -Proposed development of 3 acre neighborhood park site located on Ocean View School District property at the northeast corner of Warner ' Avenue and "B" Street. Property is presently being used as off street parking for Little League baseball . 14. Lamb Park (School Opened 1964) $ 62,800 -To develop a one acre neighborhood park at Lamb School located on Yorktown Avenue, east of Brookhurst Street. Property is owned by the Fountain Valley High School District. The property is presently open space. TOTAL DEVELOPMENTAPROGRAMISITION $ 6,588,800 NOTE: Approximately $350,000 will be budgeted annually for the acquisition of encyclopedia lots for Huntington Central Park. An estimated $100,000 will be utilized yearly for architect fees, appraisals, landfill operations and other operational expenses. 0079E August 29, 1983 s ' EXHIBIT "B" COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS DEVELOPMENT LIST JULY 1 , 1983 - JUNE 30, 1988 NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS 1 . McCallen Park $340,000 2. Wieder Park $280,000 3. Manning Park $157,500 4. Lambert Park $151 ,100 5. Irby Park $107,800 6. Bartlett Park-Phase II (Open Space) $843,000 7. Gibbs Nature Park $177,300 HUNTINGTON CENTRAL PARK 1 . Huntington Lake Improvements $250,000 2. Sports Complex *(Six Fields - 600 Parking Spaces) $2,557,000 3. Fishing Lake Development (Sully Miller) $975,000 * Size of complex is being re-evaluated. NOTE: Approximately $350,000 will be budgeted annually for the acquisition of encyclopedia lots for Huntington Central Park. An estimated $100,000 will be utilized yearly for architect fees, appraisals, landfill operations and other operational expenses. 0079E September 19, 1983 REQUE FORv Y i. AC ON to August 11, 1983 1TY CTUP.. Submitted to: The Honorable M n C' cil Submitted by: Charles W. Thompson, City Administrator Prepared by: Melvin M. Bowman, Deputy Director, Community Servic Subject: Capital Improvement Projects - Park Acquisition and Development Five Year Program Statement of Issue, Recommendation,Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions,Attachments: STATEMENT OF ISSUE There is a need to establish a Park Acquisition and Development Five Year Program to set priorities for the development of parklands . The priority list will enable the public to become informed as to the direction set by Council regarding specific park projects . RECOMMENDATION Approve the Capital Improvement Projects list as set out in Exhibit "A" . ANALYSIS At its June 20 , 1983 study session, the City Council directed staff to resubmit the five year priority list for park development to the Community Services Commission for final review. Council stipulated that Rancho View and Lamb Parks should be low priority developments . The Community Services Commission. at its July 13, 1983 meeting reviewed and approved the attached Capital Improvement Projects list which has been revised to make Rancho View and Lamb .Parks low priorities . Staff is in agreement with the park priorities list . FUNDING SOURCE Park development will be funded from the Park Acquisition and Develop- ment fund as monies become available . ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS 1. Do not approve the Capital Improvement Projects list and develop parks on an individual basis under direction of the Council. 2 . Revise the Capital Improvement Projects list at the discretion of Council. ATTACHMENTS Exhibit "A" - Capital Improvement Projects - Park Acquisition and Development Five Year Program. MMB :cs - 3 . . -a- PIO 4/81 - - r EXHIBIT "A" COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS (PARK ACQUISITION AND DEVELOPMENT) FIVE YEAR PROGRAM JULY 1 , 1983 - JUNE 30, 1988 FIVE YEAR PROJECT PRIORITY 1 . Newland Barn - Bartlett Park - Phase I (Acquired April 1974) -To develop Newland Barn/Rest Rooms and Security Quarters as part of the Newland House - Historical Society $ 244,000 -Newland Grounds Landscaping 45,400 SUB TOTAL $ 289,400 2. McCallen Park (acquired June 1977) $ 340,000 -Develop a 5.5 acre neighborhood park located on the east side of Huntington, south of Yorktown Avenue. 3. Wieder Park (formerly Warner Park Site) (Acquired September 1976) $ 280,000 -Develop a 5 acre neighborhood park at the northeast corner of Pearce Street and Lynn Street. 4. Manning Park (acquired July 1978) $ 157,500 -Develop a 2.5 acre neighborhood park located at the southeast corner of California and Detroit Streets. 5. Lambert Park - Phase II (acquired September 1976) $ 151 ,100 -During first phase development of this neighborhood park, 1 .5 acres was developed in 1976. The second phase consists of development of remaining two acres. Location - west side of Newland Avenue, between Ellis and Talbert Avenues. 6. Irby Park —Phase II $ 107,800 (3 acres - 1964; balance of 7.6 acres - acquired December 1971 ) -Phase I was developed in 1966 as a neighborhood park. At its meeting of October 25, 1982, the Council overruled Planning Commission's decision and found the sale of 6 acres of undeveloped Irby Park site to be in conformance with the General Plan. Council directed City staff proceed to develop the remaining two acres of parkland to provide for a 5 acre park, declared the excess property to be surplus and directed staff hold in abeyance the sale of the excess property. 7. Gibbs Nature Center (acquired February 1975) $ 177,300 -To develop a 5 acre eucalyptus tree grove into a nature park located on G the west side of Graham and south of Heil Avenue. 4432G/787B August 11 , 1983 -8. -Bartlett Park - Pha. II (acquired January 1973) $ 843,000 -Phase I will be ,e development of the Newland House and grounds. To develop a 30 acre open space natural park on the west side of Coldwater Lane from Adams to Yorktown Avenues. 9. Huntington Lake Improvements (acquired November 1969) $ 250,000 -To improve water quality. Reconstruct shore line. Construct boat and fishing pier. The pier will provide aeration to the lake and enhance concession operations. 10. Sports Complex - Huntington Central Park (acquired November 1969) $ 2,557,000 -The following is a cost breakdown for proposed development of the 25 acre sports complex for Huntington Central Park. 1) 6 ballfields $ 2,042,275 2) Parking for 600 vehicles $ 514,725 11 . City Gym and Pool Site Acquisition (Agreement June, 1967) $ 250,000 -To acquire .783 acre site of City-owned Gym and Pool located at 16th and Palm. Property is owned by Huntington Beach City School District. Agreement with District for use of facility expires June 6, 1987. If this agreement is canceled, the City must demolish the building and clean the property. 12. Fishing Lake Development - Central Park (acquired November 1969) $ 975,000 -To convert former Sully Miller gravel pit to a public fishing lake in Huntington Central Park. 13. Rancho View Park (School Opened 1959) $ 147,900 -Proposed development of 3 acre neighborhood park site located on Ocean View School District property at the northeast corner of Warner Avenue and "B" Street. Property is presently being used as off street parking for Little League baseball . 14. Lamb Park (School Opened 1964) $ 62,800 -To develop a one acre neighborhood park at Lamb School located on Yorktown Avenue, east of Brookhurst Street. Property is owned by the Fountain Valley High School District. The property is presently open space. TOTAL FIVE YEAR PARK ACQUISITION AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM $ 6,588,800 NOTE: Approximately $350,000 will be budgeted annually for the acquisition of encyclopedia lots for Huntington Central Park. An estimated $100,000 will be utilized yearly for architect fees, appraisals, landfill operations and other operational expenses. 4432G/787B August 11 , 1983 7q A. REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION RCA 83-9 s Date February 18, 1983 Submitted to: Honorable and City Council Members Submitted by: Charles W. Thompson, City Administrator Prepared by: Office of Business & Industrial Enterprise Subject: PROPERTY EXCHANGE TO ACQUIRE LINDBORG-DAHL SITE H2O Statement of Issue, Recommendation,Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attachments: STATEMENT OF ISSUE: On February 7, 1983, the City Council approved the property exchange with Lindborg- Dahl , and authorized the City Administrator, City Attorney, City Clerk and Mayor to draft and execute the appropriate documents so that the necessary conveyance of property could occur, and authorized the expenditure of necessary Housing and Community Development Block Grant funds to carry out the transaction. As we pro- ceeded with finalizing the agreement with Lindborg-Dahl , it became advantageous to the City and the Participant to make an adjustment in the terms of the agree- ment. While the initial transaction provided- full compensation to the Lindborg-Dahl Company for their expenses incurred as part of the Lake Street project, through the conveyance of additional property as part of the Old Public Works Yard site, it was preferable that Lindborg-Dahl receive reimbursement and, in fact, an up- front cash settlement for a portion of their costs rather than the compensating exchange in land. While this approach will result in approximately $12,000 in additional HCD funds being expended upfront, it will result in savings to the City and generate additional revenues in the future. RECOMMENDATION: Approve the revised terms of the agreement as depicted in Attachment 1, and authorize the .expenditure of an additional $12,000 in HCD funds to cover additional upfront costs associated with the transaction as described above, and authorize the City Administrator, City Attorney, City Clerk and Mayor to draft and execute the appro- priate documents to implement the project. ANALYSIS: The ini.tial terms of the proposal called for the resubdi.vision of the Old Public Works Yard site into nine 30' parcels and the exchange of those parcels wi:th the Lindborg-Dahl Company for its equity portion in the Lake Street site. This trade reflected compensation to Lindborg-Dahl for all previous expenses which it had incurred in carrying out the Lake Street project and a commitment on the part of the City to assume or pay off the balance of $450,000 of the mortgage which Heritage Bank holds on the site. Subsequent to the Council approval and -further negotiations with Lindborg-Dahl , an agreement has been reached whereby the City PIO 4/81 ti RCA 83-9 February 18, 1983 Page Two would resubdivide the Old Public Works Yard site into seven 30' parcels and one 33' parcel and exchange said eight parcels to Lindborg-Dahl with additional compensation coming from .the payment of approximately $16,000 in reimbursable fees and a $14,000 cash settlement to cover other expense. This approach will generate:_:upfront cash to Lindborg-Dahl which they desire, but most importantly, it will reduce the City's overall costs to acquire the site by approximately $45,000. FUNDING SOURCE: 1. Housing and Community Development Block Grant Funds previously budgeted for_land dcquisition purposes. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Maintain original agreement which results in additional overall costs to the City. TT:lp attachment �> ATTACHMENT 1 s. City of Huntington Beach P.O. BOX. 190 CALIFORNIA 82648 OFFICE OF THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR February 161 1983 Leonard O. Lindborg 17720 Newhope Street, Suite 226 Fountain Valley, CA 92708 Dear Mr. Lindborg: This letter is written as confirmation of our agreement of ` February 14 , 1983 to exchange property owned by you for property owned by the City of Huntington Beach. The exchange will be your Tract #9388, containing 15 lots located on Lake Street in the City of Huntington Beach, for lots #1 through #8 of Tentative Tract #11933, located on Alabama Street in the City of Huntington Beach, commonly known as the old City Yard. s TERMS: - Lindborg to deliver Tract #9388 free and clear of all encumbrances. - Lindborg to pay normal escrow and policy of Title Insurance fees. - City to deliver lots #1 through #8 of Tentative Tract #11933 free and clear of all encumbrances. - City to pay normal escrow and policy of Title Insurance fees. - City to deposit $480,000 cash in escrow, minus $16,090. 70 refund for unused fees which will take place outside of escrow., - City to give Lindborg two 'year option on the four remaining, adjacent lots at old City Yard property at $65,000 per lot. - City to pay interest on Lindborg outstanding loan of $400,000 on his property held by Heritage Bank at the rate of 16 percent per year or $177. 78 per day if escrow not completed by March 4, 1983. - Escrow to be opened at Orange Coast Title Escrow and to close on or before March 4, 1983. - If escrow fails to close, due to the fault of Lindborg not being able to deliver clear title at the agreed closing time of escrow, the City would be released from this interest demand payment until title can be. delivered. Telephnne (714) 536-5202 Leonard 0. Lindborg Page Two City to provide letter concerning possible pending condemnation of Lindborg property. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Dan Brennan at 536-5267. Sincerely, Charles W. Thompson City Administrator By: Jte,44 Frank B: AW'ello Acting City'Administrator CWT:FBA:DB:cgs RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND EN RECORDED MAIL THIS DEED AND LESS OTHERWISE iNOMN r Mf MAIL TAX STATEMENT TO: � �} Name F 1 street Mr. Leonard 0. Lindborg ,Address 17220 Newhope Street, Suite 226 titre Stets Fountain Valley, CA 92708 ! I MAIL TAX STATEMENTS TO i I ri Name Street Address Same as Above cltr a Style L TITLE ORDER NO Eit"W NO SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDER'S USE GRANT DEED THE UNDERSIGNED GRANTOR(S) DECLARE(S) DOCUMENTARY TRANSFER TAX is$ ❑ computed on full value of property conveyed,or ❑ computed on full valueless value of liens or encumbrances remaining at time of sale. ❑ unincorporated area [g city of Huntington Beach ,AND FOR A VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, a municipal corporation hereby GRANT(s)to LEONARD 0. LINDBORG, an unmarried man the following described real property in the City of Huntington Beach County of Orange , State of California: Parcel A: Lots 1 , 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8- and 9 of the Summit Tract, in the City of Huntington Beach, as per map recorded in Book 7, Page 1 of Miscellaneous Maps, ! in the Office of the County Recorder of said County. Parcel B: Lot B of Watson's Addition to Huntington Beach, in the City of Huntington Beach, as per map recorded in Book 3, Page 39 of Miscellaneous Maps, in the office of the County Recorder of said County. EXCEPT THEREFROM the Southerly 30 feet and the Northerly 27 feet of said Lot. 1 THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, A municipal corporation �y March +1-, 1983 Dated MAYOR STATE OF CALIFORNIA Ss, COUNTY OF , On bebre rite,the undersigned,a Notary Public in for said state,persona appeared i ally known APPROVED. AS TO FORM : { to me(or proved to me on the basis of sa' dory evidence)to a per- G A I L H U T O N C i t t t o r n e y (` son whose name scribed to the wl in instrument and acknowledged that executed the same. WITNESS my hand and official seal. B y OBERT C. STER Deputy- Nty.-Attorney i i + Signature NOTARY PUBLIC IN AND FOR SAID STATE (This area for official notarial seal) REQUE&-, FOR CITY COUNCIL kCTION Date December 9 . 1981� Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council APPROv%D BYJ CITE COUNOIL , Submitted by: Charles W. Thompson, City Administrato' / -a 19r Jl Prepared by: Paul E. Cook, Director of Public Works Acquisition of Ri ht-of=Wa for Atlanta Oran a Co �y a BBC .Subject: q g Y / g Statement of Issue, Recommendation,Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attachments•/ STATEMENT OF ISSUE: In order to implement Precise :Plan of Street .Alignment 79'.2 which is the realignment of Atlanta Avenue to connect with Orange Avenue at Lake Street, it is necessary to acquire property at the northwest corner of Atlanta and Alabama Street. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the purchase of Lots 1 & 2, Block 101 of the Vista Del Mar tract from Mary :Alice .Fraux at the appraised value of $160, 000. 00. ANALYSIS: Several months ago,. City staff was approached by the Vanderwood Corporation and their attorney regarding the City' s purchase of the subject property for which they are in escrow to purchase from Mary Alice- Fraux. It was their contention that- the adoption of -Precise Plan of Street .Alignment -79-2 , the connection of ,Atlanta and .Orange at Lake Street,_ precludes the issuance of building permits for development of the two parcels at -the northwest corner of Atlanta and Alabama. The attached legal opinion from the City Attorney substantiates the Vanderwood .Corporation claim- that the City should either purchase the two lots or allow development on them. Because the Atlanta/Orange connection is an integral part- of the C"ity' s plans to revitalize the downtown, staff feels that the lots should be purchased at this time while they are still vacant. An appraisal report was done by Locke Land Services which established. the value of each lot at $80, 000 for a total value of $160 , 000. 00. Staff and the Vanderwood Corporation agree with this value. FUNDING SOURCE: Gas Tax Funds. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: Do not purchase the two subject lots at this time. ATTACHMENTS: lZap City Attorney Memo Appraisal Report F.I.R. CWT:PEC: jy P10 4/81 t.rjNtNG N ZONING DM 12 1 T I0NAL DISTRICT MAP I I-6-I I LEGEND ;1' ots slr.uss.,.•aw n.w..w..•l ar.1":n CITY O N.T,1 ADOPTED Y1RCN T. 1980 ttT1 COUNCIL ORDINANCE tlJ.T51 :Afl A•M,ru K.l:olwi 6r "I �.+y Vl- 4fi rro[D �;'e_q1 !Y(Mrp DRO Ro R'' s"w! ••rt•"t a�n.rl�n�sr.�er �.ze-60 t,a }blq�.f..��tYO� !M» p,.Ds fit, IRO p•rr,.Rl 6,OC.te u�slpKr 1 lJ N�I'INGTON BEACH f-H6i S rt<a �rJr, P)9. i .Hill.rWS... •.r.Uat,gi.a .,•pR. i-f-61 .7. 1 6-1i ro]f 5i: relT-lE r•ril` A-.-61 Yr+ :7p 2 :19• L(.tlR4 6uf�"1'f9�� 2-1.62 eft 2,013 e"l !91' 'p'eO11)TRr4 D•ti•!:r f-,-.3 .92 a-,-14 191)410 Er4 Op1Y11DTY r•C�L1T�r.11RCCR[f`IOrAU❑I,lRKT l i :� \ (� l: COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Q..ts .,, 6.,.T. IY9 � CGrbprTY ISSCkracka ,m"K,,T,CT �:-66 �l60 R]-t] tODi (p,j R•1t{peUr[]SCR4 peTRKT 1 5-6E TO r, Mq ICt: rCypR.".OW tO.WR -.L[431.WI t,ULUDEU BY ZONE CASE' f 6 a �e Q 111 lzfe :G l: ra..awm nnpuu wsrR,:T Tf-s ton I+T-6l qte ]1-» t111 "L•t wr6w+R. TP1KKut .rin.tl •:.c.i.!.731266,79+.262,N2,3f7,f91.536,3R5,98•Y3,88-41,e6-68,67-D, s-�6 f1 .)•e .-)-n rM2 'm OEIr✓lA4,RRECKf M•YW fTR[il AlbrrleT 1-fie 61 1)+1 .O T W. 66 19,69-1f•69.13 69 15.°70-2,70-iO,MiO•�,7i-3,T-i0,71-$9,12-33,72-e3,73.26,74-7,T5.3C,75-T,70-3,76•i9 1-e-/9 1.6s 1.61.1 P2s+, l�'}ca9"ao�.1.oll n.00uclrD" T-D•6e !e!1 a 2Nl � • "5.:I.la.Ir.f.',17-L9,7R-18.1D-21,PPA79-3. f-.d9 i6A 1t�r2-f/ --- 1[TeAte l44 _ - . 1 PIOiO !,72 ..... V 1 l.6-l. 4" -11 a533 ': CDI[/eQD M[1M 06.11.1KTlDr 1\\VI nH 1. MOf ii"r•» a)) r!pR[•W.SIW II wLr A9L OY IC A.ry 9 CO.S. -It 1 l ADAMS AVE. or.liDCtAR� w fR. V U UL_J LJl_J U ( -1 l-1 U 1 a=( I st.r 17; L TM f RI RI. R-1 „ R-1 „R-1 R2 .! IB _----C4- I (0)OLOTO tl Cil >,Iw bi •'`4 Oa-, D RV RI RI RI RI R2 � � -0 �fISPECIFIL PLAN T•'1• +�7. LOMA AV rtlRiL1R0 _ -D 1 ,...�_P (TIE IDRtl4. t" (DISTRICT 2) ec _ RI 1 RI RI z RI R2 O ?t. uo ,4T' . 0InCCH Dsw Av. Av . 1 RY•PO Cr-G RI RI ��-0 0 0'~ .0 -0 1 ::u1oP'_ral Y 1 RI RI `d R I I 1 1,v•.;q g ::1 R • -NA NV.LL AV. M I � • 1•C9� L ST - oP R I R I z . t N R 2 p1 A (Ey 1� T1.I i t R2-PDD eF "• rggL1 -O - r`F1N11J1 RN,1 TWO) 1 ..:.:.: :........19 l %`•. 1 I I `iF—R 1 tia'PD-1p. E CLVCNTN CF—R 3T R2 RI CC CC�C CC a R3 .f C4 A l I „a RI RI t II ii TR2 N � ��-HLJ. .��Cal RI R2 61 a >r + lyti R2 RI I pI ! p R 2 ' UN" F T R3 R3" 3 C4 11—T-11 ►V .R3 R2 R2 Ri u / •f f �/ ~ ua , I O(H_ Nt�c) DUE R3 o R3 C' / / 1 R3 R3 U0 E.F MAI. r 3RD AVE / f !.�.cL 0 a f I Z t 'ra.Nnroar 1 oCCC� I ` - C. e u J U- ELMINA f0+ 1oCCCMH Z DEtaar �A c. ` < O C� ` V'7 `;``� 4 `� 1 mL—J�la, Mrryr - ¢O!`• '1�• :MCJ.:'tt„ ''E� '.1 C CD �� 4� G ,y + DA17 MURC -AVE y oR2-POD R2-PD:" -Pt)� O `a O L' CR2 - i i R2-D R2 PD .O� o� r O Z 4 .+O AT:_ANtA boo AVE . sce11. lr rrtl u ll-j ND O i 2 � � ' �,9.11•p 4rY!O 1eMOW1rD•rl RbNI p RAY ^— " R- 1,MItrDED t0 9.19W TO Ir CtrTCR EXHIBIT A 22 26 _ — 24-20 a H[dVT/NGTON — —' STREET i z/00' I —� c7W.7 .• �, ,-• r, a -- - — T :,. .. - - zs g J 2 8 7 3 * ik 14 1 21 rl _ x� is i+ -- -- ff TV ZI e: g .9 4 - ' Lw LP 41 f 4 6 7:1 6 A 41 3 li 1 '211 t1l /1/9 87 4 3.� 1 j .9 7 CT I��l S -jp Q _ jar IIr-JID-/J.-�Mr SacI,r-JO-rJi-PC.'r P �, /h HUNT/NGTUN 402A —'� E BEACH ` �� LAKE STREET MARCH/94B REDBURN TR. -MM. 4-/c`. •vOT£ - ASSESSOR'S BLOCK B•-- VISTA DEL MAR T.R. M.M. 4-5,6 PARCEL NUMBERS 500-- 24 20 HutmNGmN BEACH, MAIN ST.Samm dL M 5-41 SHOWN /N CiRCL£S •:OUN" -'F ORANOE 13 16 ,.K 1 x. ��3>r,� ��;.• ,,,�ter.-�,> _ _ _ _ t 1 .. F. • 1 b�b C ILd 8 - W 7 U) 12 5' .; Q 6 = Q 1 m Q 5 1721 + TO E SIDE OF LAKE STREET J 4 = ZOC.¢e .. 44a 6 of S�wcceo 3 ►n N 1251 2 _ C N Subject 1 in fV 1 a ATLANTA AVENUE PORTION OF BLOCK 101, VISTA DEL MAR TRACT, M.M. 4/5&6, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIF. THIS SKETCH IS SUBMITTED FOR ORIENTATION AND GENERAL INFORMATION ONLY; IT IS BASED ON INFOR• PARCEL: PLAT MATION WHICH MAY HAVE BEEN PUBLISHED BY OTHERS. THE DATA IS CONSIDERED RELIABLE BUT IT IS NOT DATE: SEPT 9, 1981 SCALE: 1" =40' INTENDED AS A SURVEY. NO RESPONSIBILITY IS AS- SUMED BY THE APPRAISER FOR INADVERTENT OMIS- SIONS OR POSSIBLE INACCURACIES. CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HOOINGTON BEACH To PAUL COOK From GAIL HUTTON Director, Public Works City Attorney Subject Van Derhyden/Wood Purchase Date August 7 , 1981 of Property from Gaylord, Gardner and Fraux In your Request for Legal Services dated July 8 , 1981 you posed the following question: " . . .whether theoCity should purchase lots 1 and 2 from Van Derhyden and Wood under the threat of an inverse condemnation suit . " The facts seem to be that an agreement to sell the property in question was entered into on June 28, 1979 , with a contin- gency that the sale would close sixty ( 60) days after issuance of building permits for the three lots in question. The vendee has requested issuance of building permits . Issu- ance has been denied on the ground that the master plan calls for a street through a large portion of the lots , leaving remnants of no economic value . Analysis : A permit for a legal use may not be refused for reasons extra- neous to the zoning ordinance . The administrative officer charged with the duty of examining applications and issuing permits is bound by the restrictions of the ordinance and may not .refuse a permit for matters not within the scope of discretion. Con- sequently, a permit, otherwise complying with the requirement of the ordinance, cannot be refused by reason of the fact that the property to which it pertains is required by the muni.cipali.t,y for the construction of a ttreet . The city may not compel an owner to keep his property in a nonproductive state . The fact that the purchaser does not have record title it of no consequence, as he has the absolute right to compel conveyance of title upon the happening of certain conditions . This is more than an adequate interest upon which to issue a building permit. Memo to Paul Cook Page Two August 7 , 1981 . re: Van Derhyden/Wood Purchase of Real Property The City, therefore , has the option of either purchasing the property or granting the permit to the applicant . Inverse condemnation is not the remedy available to the owner. Writs of Mandate are routinely issued to compel ministerial acts such as issuance of a building permit . The fact that the purchaser knew of the possible future use of the property as a street on the master plan does not impinge on his right to purchase the property or to seek to utilize the property or to receive fair market value for the property upon the City ' s acquisition. The fair market value is its use as situated and zoned, not as a street; and, merely because the City master plans a street across a property neither enhances or decreases its value in legal theory. Conclusion: If the building official fails to issue a building permit when the criteria for issuance are met , the courts will order the issuance on pain of contempt of court . The applicants ' remedy is not in inverse condemnation but by mandate and damages could be imposed in a proper case. Knowledge of a proposed City use does not foreclose the possibility that damages could be awarded . Alt� GAIL HUTTON City Attorney GH: AJF:bb • � i � I j I : I PARCEL: SUBJECT OWNER: FRAUX , MARY A. (REPORTEDLY NOW IN AN OPEN, SALE ESCROW TO: VAN DERHYDEN, JIM) TITLE ACQUIRED: BY MS. FRAUX ON MAY 7, 1976 . PROPERTY ADDRESS: NONE. VACANT LAND. a LEGAL DESCRIPTION:A LOTS 1 AND Z, BLOCK 101, VISTA DEL MAR TRACT, M. M. 4/5 & 69 RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Y OPINION OF VALUE THIS APPRAISAL REPORT CONTAINS AN OUTLINE OF THE HELPFUL INFORMATION CONSIDERED BY THE APPRAISER IN FORMING HIS OPINION OF VALUE, IT IS THE APPRAISERS OPINION THAT THE FAIR MARKET VALUE OF THE PROPERTY, DESCRIBED HEREIN, AS OF THE DATE OF VALUATION, IS: ONE HUNDRED SIXTY THOUSAND ($160, 000. ) DOLLARS .1 ,if BASED ON THE DIRECT SALES COMPARISON APPROACH. THE INCOME APPROACH ;I AND THE COST APPROACH ARE NOT APPLIdABLE TO THIS STUDY. I , 'fff r * THIS MAY BE AN ABBREVIATED DESCRIPTION. IT SHOULD NOT BE USED IN LEGAL DOCUMENTS WITHOUT ADVANCE APPROVAL. ,C�OC� .�QK.d JE'lrlJlCQ.d • CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH To Charles W. Thompson From F. B. Arguello City Administrator Chief of Administrative Services Subject Acquisition of Right-Of-Way Date December 10, 1981 for Altanta/Orange Connection FIR # 81-86 In response to the Public Works Department, I am hereby submitting a Financial Impact Report relative to the requested funding for the acquisition of property at the north- west corner of Atlanta and Alabama Street. It has been suggested by the requesting department that an appropriation in the amount of $160,000 will be adequate for this purpose. Sufficient monies are available in the Gas Tax Fund for this expenditure. Should the City Council approve the acquisition, the balance in the fund will be reduced to $543,099.90. F. B. A uello Chief of Administrative Services FBA/AR/cg CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH FINANCIAL IMPACT REPORT Project Name Requested Funding for,Purchase of Two Lots Description Acquisition of right-of-way for Atlanta/Orange connection. 1 . DIRECT PROJECT COSTS 1 . 1 One-Time Costs Mna Turn, aci i- Acqui'sition Construction. ties; Equj-2 ment- Other t_. Total ,Cost 160,000 : - I60,000 1 .2 Recurring Annual Costs Additional. Materials & Outside — Payroll Personnel Supplies Services Revenues Total Cost 1 .3 Replacement/Renewal Costs N/A 2.' INDIRECT COSTS Loss of potential for generating interest on these funds. I Financial Impact Report Page 2 - 3. NON-DOLLAR COSTS N/A 4, BENEFITS TO BE DERIVED FROM THE PROJECT 'As per comments noted by the requesting department, the Atlanta/Orange connection is an integral part of the City's •plans to revitalize the downtown area - and that the timing for the purchase would be appropriate now, while the lots are still vacant. 5. PROJECT .USAGE N/A 6, EXPENDITURE TIMING Timing on this project is predicated upon City Council approval . 7. COST OF NOT IMPLEMENTING THE PROJECT The failure to acquire this property - as per information included in the department's RCA - will detrimentally impact the implementation of Precise Plan of Street Alighment 79-2. REQUEfT FOR CITY COUNCILGAITI .� D Submitted'by Paul E. LC Department Public Works Date Prepared September 26 , 19_Q Backup Material Attached 2 Yes No Subject Condemnation of Street Right of Way, Heil Avenue City Administrator's Comments Approve as recommended. Id ,r r' Statement of Issue, Recommendation, Analysis, Funding Source, Alternate ctions: " I Statement of Issue: Negotiations with the property owner at the northeast corner of Heil Ave. and Silver Lane have thus far been unsuccessful. It is now necessary to file condemnation in order to establish a date of value and proceed with acquisition of the required right of way. Recommendation: Adopt the attached resolution and authorize the subject condemnation. Analysis: The City Council, upon approving the Gas Tax budget, instructed staff to acquire subject right of way due to the traffic safety hazard which exists from lack of visibility at the intersection of Heil Ave. and Silver Lane. To date, the property owner has not agreed to accept the City' s offer to purchase and condemnation should be filed at this time to set a date . of value as we continue negotiations. Funding Source: City Gas Tax Funds. Alternative: Discontinue the project. PEC CBD': j y �3 NO 3/78 S TOP OF FL/rURE NORTp-CURB- ro �. -_-_.-_ _.___ .-_._.�-- -_.--^_lam'_.-__-_---_-_- -9I EP/I V/O 01 fKa 0 Eo to ,.c I �PROR]SE CRCh7NL1N6 B'6/0 sn'�re+Ne I I � a1 P.ROf+75EO TOP OA-rvALl-� All . 20._-____\ .'.V,+�P, §I��' "-_ � � • ___ o � t rn Ic - t -mir AIVEAFEkr 5"6.q t L N4 uRAL 6A"UlJ0 0 It rrmri�sEo eec^cr t!�LR EX/57 rC i 3P'5/17 vh' wbomecO•o '� - - - PROF"ICC SCALE MWRE7E BLOCK RMINLNG WALL VERY I 1 o 1 4u,e Rc RNaA.rA, .t e-. WG1YD RC7AMLNC+ — t,G 95 - ^ x _ BARRICADE T _ y /1 • ' �':.11 TINS I!c A "� _-_� F !.e '.Y(. •t<I. ' [:qPP/NC {P_L ANING L�'rA/L SIL VCR LANE e• n=as -^`'-i i4--1 CONSTRucrl I NOTES: >'YP/CA Lq- ELL AVE.. �` ° Di-B,K[UT ANO REMOVE fMrSr Ac Anfd+Evr slAr e-u.lo ll J - $ECl/O N - r r.�ra�r �;( i "y ` '•.1�Jv' �.,S!MSC/r•JG 0,1 �ONCRfT£,^&O(K RETA/NIFJ WA(�• �_To a'�ocArco By orwERs , 0-- cURP/NO OUrrER TER[uB <To VC<ol n G�co", r✓PE I-I - (� ,-CO:VSr W,acovc puss u Tr r,[R CNP. r. e '____COUSI COAL.[Ro55 t.VFME R o r,uA.'•)P `D f E (E}C0.'0 RANf Etl$T FA7NEVT O R1 AT( ARD."C'ArR[R To Do DrEp Ar CRorVVL.VE '•y; _ '_ .l, � ... � �� p '' v„'iy'l tlse'.re n(S�./Fr r Ci2er� r r.!^. nL r.. •• A. ✓ve - .. ,• I. i_'. - '—e % l i i d s ,. YI�" • ° (t t q c nc•Ar le,nd'c SMz ;.r n.-rI ✓�A..r I fz ... cl .. „FY t.; �' Ld_A ° zy- Vtti�'Q -I/ �' Ir --c0V5r OLS'ACGMRtAY JJ " l@,-CVV5T J'AC OVER NATIVE$OIL Ife_ y (�(EAr4ER OVER EXIST I%VEME.VT£IM 6Noor-.,o,,J E d _ (�� _ ,� �_--._To BE AONJ5rTD M 6?AOF. By OTHERS /.o -� �I.- I �� t 1-=- $ � ;55-/.SrKCW7t1LR OG1/BR% 2'Ci F<•NC W.C wRacrA7ED �,._,� l '!t/Q 1 L� �. ♦ - W �-",F nVOO WE Wltk BARB aE TALY CuB -'Atl�l !—T CMMT COAMIC' i C OCk cus..,D Nb zt _\� _I / - ;i P. a4•,.•SKr:.M(� .—� .-- —' \_,.�,r c<, J'-LtYV$rc? tO MU B[OCt AvrA:NS Not! :R Ti�•T[4', / ,.a,..< e.r^tw �•`r OR AFOV£D f(W.�L RER cNB 5.. .110 !. �� 41F ,,.,. - I' � 3idlf NI�Ao' 7 � II111 -i. i HE AVfNL/J l� SCE$AKCr A fL P 510R 0'AV SIGVIN6 /THAAfES LINE) �f'' . 2 P_F2:0 V: =MwN T cc#16 REVISIONS REFERENCES Hf/L AVENUE - _ R 252 '. B£ACM BOULEVARD SILVER LANE tG _ - -- - __- — _ ---y-- --- - — -----_ — -- -- - CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH --. ''- -_—.-- — _ _ - MMRf11EM PV WpR�d 1 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION �© Paul E. Cook�t5-- Public Works Submitted by Department Date Prepared June 4 , 1980 Backup.Material Attached nx Yea No Subject Acquisition of Property @ Warner & Lynn Streets ' City Administrator's Comments �- � , �-7 0 Approve as Recommended Statement of Issue, Recommendation, Analysis, Funding Source,Alternative Actions: ✓ a ement of Issue: The City Council on January 1, 1980 sustained Board of Zoning adjustments approval of Tentative Parcel Map #79-579 and instructed staff to pursue acquisition of a contiguous parcel of property to be included in the street improvements constructed by the subdivider. Recommended Action: Approve the attached resolution of need and necessity to acquire property by condemnation. Analysis: The City Council conditioned approval of TPM. #79-579 to require the .off- site improvement of a contiguous parcel of property and instructed staff to pursue acquisition of said parcel. The property, however, is the subject of an escrow dispute which has proceeded to litigation precluding the City' s ability to negotiate its purchase. It is now imperative that the City condemn the property as expeditiously as possible and obtain an order of immediate possession. Funding Source: City Gas Tax Funds. PEC:CBD: jy Pio 3na STATE OF CALIFORNIA--BUSINESS AND TRANSPORTATION AGENCY EDMUND G. BROWN JR., Governor DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT 7, P.O. BOX 2304, LOS ANGELES 90051 r" t 2. April 2, 1980 ORA-1 DD-011783-01-01 City of Huntington Beach P. 0. Box 190 Huntington' Beach, CA 92648 Attn: Floyd G. Belsito Gentlemen: '. � Enclosed is your copy of the above-described Director 's Deed which has been executed and recorded. Very truly yours, I-ZIAL GARDNER Senior Right of Way Agent Excess Land Sales Enclosure vb I C lVt .I CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE ',IAtf 0 c A[IFORNIA--BUSINESS %ND TRANSPORTATION AGENCY EDMUND G. BROWN JH., Governor DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRW 1 7. P.O. BOX 2304, LOS ANGELES 90051 �® C February 25, 1980 7-ORA-1 DD 011783-01-01 City of Huntington Beach p C E Q V E P.O. ,Box 190 Huntington Beach, Calif. 92648 1980 Attention: fir. Floyd G. Belsito, City AdministratorCM OF NUfdTIPdGTON BEACH ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE Dear Mr. Belsito : Enclosed is original executed Director' s Deed No. 011783-01-01 conveying the parcel of land on Beach Blvd. Please review this Deed, attach the City' s formal acceptance document and return said Deed, together with your remittance of $818,200.00 to the undersigned for recordation by this Depart- ment. Subsequently, the recorded Deed will be returned to you by this Department. , Very truly yours, Dean Edwards Right of Way Agent Excess Land Sales (213/620-3614) DE:gmb attach. CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED' OFFICE OF sn•�/ CITY ATTORNEY P.O.BOX 190 2000 MAIN STREET HUNTINGTON BEACH CALIFORNIA 92648 GAIL HUTTON December 12 , 1979 TELEPHONE City Attorney (714)536.6555 Mr. Dean Edwards Right of Way Agent Department of Transportation District 7 , P . O. Box 2304 Los Angeles, California 90051 Re : Property at ' Beach Boulevard & Pacific Coast Highway, 07-ORA-1 DD 011783-01-01 Dear Mr. Edwards : Enclosed are the various documents relating to the purchase of the above surplus property by the City. They include (1) original letter agreement dated October 30, 1979, executed on behalf of the City, (2 ) Resolution number 4813 of the City Council declaring the property is being acquired for use by the City for public purposes, (3) statement of the action of the Council of December 3 , 1979, and (4 ) Resolution of the Planning Commission on conformance to the General Plan. Please return the agreement as soon as it has been approved by the Commission and executed. Thank you for your cooperation. GAIL HUTTON City Attorney By y ROBERT C . S , G "TER Deputy City Attorney RCS : lm Attachment cc : City Administrator City Clerk Community Services Director Charles Davis CITY OF HUNTING TON BEACH INTER-DEPARTMENT COWUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH To City Clerk From City Attorney Subject Agenda Item M-5, Date December 4, 1979 Resolution 4813 Please find attached the Exhibit A for Resolution No. 4813. ZBERT SANG E Acting City Attorney RS:bc Attachment �i CONFIDENTIAL J4 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH rpjj INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH - To City Administrator From City Attorney Subject Acquisition of State Date 3 December 1979 Property, Northwest Corner of Pacific Coast Highway and Beach--Agenda Item M-5 Several questions have been raised concerning the proposed acquisition of state surplus freeway property at Pacific Coast Highway and Beach. First , can this property be purchased on an installment plan? In our opinion, it cannot because of Constitution Article XVI, §18 which pre - cludes incurring indebtedness on future budgets without the consent of two-thirds of the electorate. Traditionally, such installment purchases are made by bond issues approved by the voters . No indebtedness in- curred in one year shall be paid out of the revenues of a future year. Starr v . San Francisco (1977) 72 C. A . 3d 175 , 140 C . R. 73, 78, which states in relevant part: "California cases make it clear that the pur- pose of the constitutional provision is to ensure that the legislative body of a municipality not be allowed to impose upon the general revenue of the city a long-term indebtedness , without approval by two-thirds of the electorate." However, nothing precludes purchasing the property out of currently available funds . Second, is the city restricted to holding the property for public pur- poses? The letter agreement provides that the property will be used for public purposes and contains a reversionary clause. Cal Trans informs us that this clause remains in effect for ten years . We con- tacted them and requested waiving the clause or reducing its duration, , arguing that it is of doubtful validity as an improper restraint on alienation . The "public purposes" clause would cloud the title as long as it lasts and would limit the ability of the city to convey effective title . Cal Trans has now agreed to waive the clause if the Council passes a resolution that it is acquiring the property for public purposes. Once property is acquired for public purposes , there are no restrictions against later, nonpublic use. There will be no deed restrictions . We have prepared and attach the resolution. The property is being purchased under a statute that provides for purchase at fair market value . In fact , the real property agent informs us that ' appraisal does not reflect substantial appreciation since the date of valuation. It would be best not to publicly state (as the RCA does ) that the purchase is for less than fair market value since this could result in some embarrassment to Cal Trans and perhaps place it in a position where it would have to withdraw the offer. 17 ROBERT C. SA ER Acting City Attorney RCS: ahb Attachment CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH To City Administration From City Attorney Subject Acquisition of Surplus PropertyDate 3 December 1979 Planning Commission Review Any motion to accept the state ' s offer and authorize the purchase of the surplus property at Pacific Coast Highway and Beach Boulevard, as in the agreement as modified to delete the deed restriction on public pur- poses , should be subject to a report from the Planning Commission as to conformity with the general plan. The Development Services Director informs us that the zoning (RA) is consistent with the general plan designation (mixed development ) . The Planning Commission will need to find that the location, purpose, and extent of the acquisition is consis- tent with the general plan. (Government Code §65402) iG --- ROBERT C. S SANG Acting City Attorney RCS :ahb �f I.VA All , r a 2, SE. //4. SEC. /1, T 6 S.,R.//W 24 -25 OF E. //2, -SEC 14, T 6S.,R. //W ; i Q j Q 148 -02 148-01 y_ 400 - t / / Q 114 - 15 / c (H"PSH/RE) BOULEVARD ° 69.GC /29089' s93./2' ' F. 1 :T ?c Ac.. i 70 .h fJ16. 65AC W h ti Op REQUES I FOR CITY COUNCIL mCTI®N Submitted by Vincent G . Moorhouse Department Community' Services Date Prepared November 26 , 1979 Backup Material Attached 0 Yes FJ No Subject Acquisition of Surplus State Property- Pacific Coast Highway and Beach Boulevard City Administrator's Comments Approve as recommended . Statement of Issue, Recommendation, Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions: STATEMENT OF ISSUE .The. State of California has forwarded an "Offer to Purchase" to the City of the excess parcel of property at Beach Boulevard and Pacific Coast High- Way, approximately six acres . This matter was first brought to City atten- tion in early 1978 when the price quoted was. $800,0.00 : The State is again o.ffering. the property to the City at its appraised value of $818 ,2003, which the City' s real property agent , Charles .Davis , assures is an extremely under market value for six acres of coastline ,.property . RECOMMENDED ACTION Accept State ' s offer and purchase the property pursuant to terms of State of California. ANALYSIS On October 4 , 1961, the City conveyed subject six acre . site by grant deed to the. State for freeway purposes . This property was.. a part of the original property on which. the Sheraton Inn and Driftwood Mobile Home Park are located . Since , the State, no. �longer requires this property for freeway purposes , the City should acquire it .in that it is contiguous to city-owned property (.the Sheraton lease) and also provides Beach Boulevard access to the total parcel . This would preclude strip development on a very inddnveniently contoured piece of property ,which would certainly not be in the best interest of this. key intersection.. I would also return this property to the original large parcel. The State is requesting 10 percent downpayment up to a ,twenty year contract at the current FHA rate of 1142 percent . Therefore , after A downpayment of $81,8205 the annual cost to the .City would be approximately $95 ,500 on a twenty year loan. If we were to pay it--off in ten years,, the annual payment would be $127 ,675 . We feel it would be best to pay. it off in ten years and ` utilize parking meter or beach parking revenue to offset this annual cost . P Request for Council Action - Page Two November 26 , '1979 If the property were acquired, it could . be put. .into seasonal, temporary parking and help offset some of those costs , In acquiring this property, we can provide much needed off-street parking, adjacent to the beach for the ensuing years , With the current status of the Sheraton property, it is important to acquire this, property . At some. future date, the total master plan of t.he ,entire fifty plus acres. will prove to be a very sound investment for the City and its taxpayers . FUNDING SOURCE General Fund, Unappropriated Fund Balance ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS 1 . Do not purchase property . 2 . Offer to purchase property, on other terms , CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH 21 To Floyd G. Belsito From F. B. Arguello City Administrator Director of Finance Subject Financial Impact Report # 80-7 Date November 26, 1979 State Surplus -Property - PCH & Beach As requested by Mr. Moorhouse, Community Services Director, I am hereby submitting a Financial Impact Report relative to possible acquisition of State surplus property at Pacific Coast .Highway and Beach Blvd. If the City Council desires to proceed with the purchase of this property., the funds could be provided from one of the following sources: 1 . Could utilize funds from the City's general fund appropriated fund balance for the entire amount - $818,200. This would have the effect of lowering the amount of appropriated fund balance set aside to fund accrued .employee vacation and sick leave costs by $818,200 and would leave balance of $949,333• This procedure would also save some $540,000 in interest by paying the total amount as opposed to fi- nancing over a 10 year period. 2. Could utilize funds from the projected general fund unappropriated fund balance for the entire amount .- $818,200. This procedure would leave a projected unappro- priated fund balance of $626,032 as of 6/30/79. and would also save some $540,000 in interest costs. 3. Could utilize existing funds in the general fund unappropriated fund balance to make an $81 ,820 down payment. The remaining ten annual payments of $127,675 (cost of financing $736,380 @ 11 .5% for 10 year period) could be made from the Capital Outlay Fund and could be partially offset by any .net increases in revenue generated by converting the acreage to revenue producing function - parking lot, etc. To utilize $127,675 of presently projected annual parking meter or parking lot revenue would be possible only if a like amount in other proposed expenditure areas could be eliminated as all parking meter and parking lot revenue is already committed to general fund operation. 4. Could utilize $818,200 from appropriated fund balance to purchase the property and an additional $288,700 from unappropriated fund balance. to develop the acreage into a permanent parking lot which would now generate some $78,000 in additional annual revenue, or a net of $69,500 in net revenue after operational costs. This net revenue could then be utilized to help defray future general fund operation costs. In light of the City's present fiscal position and .with anticipated economic trends , I would recommend that we use Alternative #1 above. This would mean that we purchase the property outright from the State and use funds available in the appropriated fund . FIR # 8D-7 Page 2 balance. We should, in addition, convert. the property to a seasonal , temporary parking lot so as to generate as -much additional annual revenue as is possible. If we must . pay 11 .5% interest, we may as well pay it to the City and -this can be accomplished '. by utilizing existing funds and, therefore, not enter into any' long term agreement as a method of funding this purchase. F. B. Arguello Director of Finance FBAIcg CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH FINANCIAL IMPACT REPORT Project Name State Surplus Property Description Acquisition of surplus state property on Pacific Coast Highway and Beach Blvd. I . DIRECT PROJECT COSTS 1 . 1 One-Time Costs Land urn. , aci i- Acquisition Construction ties, Equipment- Other Total Cost $ 818,200 $ 818,200 1 .2 Recurring Annual Costs Additional Materials Ounside Payroll Personnel Supplies Services Revenues Total Cost 8,500 > 8,500 # 1 .3 Replacement/Renewal Costs Property may be purchased with 10% down and annual payments over a 10 -year period at 11 .5% interest. # This would be estimated annual operational costs if the acreage were to be fully developed into a parking lot. If a temporary or seasonal approval is utilized, the costs would be significantly lower. 2. INDIRECT COSTS Not determinable until final usage is set. • Financial Impact Repc Page 2 3. NON-DOLLAR COSTS None 4. BENEFITS TO BE DERIVED FROM THE PROJECT City would eventually reap the appreciation benefits of this prime coastline property However, the gain,would materialize only if property were to be sold. The real__ long term benefit would be realized if the property is converted into a revenue providing function as suggested by Mr. Moorhouse, i .e. if converted to a, full fledged parking lot, it would generate some $78,000 per year. However, to do this . would require an additional outlay of $288,700 to develop sa'177ot. 5. PROJECT USAGE To be held by City and to be included in a total package with the presently owned Sheraton property once that property' s status is settled. In the interim, may be used as a parking lot to both enhance City's revenue picture and to provide needed beach oriented parking. In any instance, the property should be ultimately utilized at its highest and best use. 6. EXPENDITURE TIMING $818,200 to be paid prior to 12/27/79 if paid in full . If installment method used, City would pay $81 ,820 at time of purchase and $127,675 at the end of each of the next 10 subsequent years. 7. COST OF NOT IMPLEMENTING THE PROJECT 1 . Loss of considerable amount of revenue (over the long term) . 2. If purchase not authorized .before December 27, 1979, the property will very likely be appraised at a higher value. 3. If property were to be utilized in a strip zoning mode, the City would Be t e loser from a development and planning viewpoint. CITY OF HUHTINGT®N BEACH %ram? INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH To City Administrator From Vincent G . Moorhouse Director,. Community Services Subject State Excess Land - Beach Date November 13 , 1979 and PCH I have attached a memo of Charlie Davis' concerning our continued negotiations with Cal Trans for the surplus property at Beach and PCH . We have an alternative availa- ble to us , to buy the property on an installment contract or deed of trust with only 10 percent down. I seriously feel that . the City should buy this property back at the $800 ,000 figure and utilize parking revenue to pay for it . This .matter needs to be discussed with Council as soon as possible and a commitment made . In evaluating the inflationary factor on property along the coastline in recent years and projecting that. inflationary factor into the future, plus the fact that the City owns the adjacent trailer park operation (Driftwood Inn) , we, in fact, would greatly improve..the value of the entire parcel . As you will recall , the property that the State is selling as surplus was originally part and parcel of the City' s property which. was taken for freeway purposes . For us not to acquire this property, we are allowing strip zoning and development in a key intersection of the city . We have sufficient revenues generated from parking meters which would more than make -the payment for this property. If you are in agreement with this proposal, I would ask that we discuss it with Council as soon as possible . . With their approval, we could negotiate a contract with Cal Trans prior to December 27, 1979, when an appraisal update would be required . I sincerely recommend we purchase this property as outlined by Char e Davis and finance it through parking meter revenue . Vincent G'. Moorhouse Director. Community Services VGM: cs Attachment I— CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH To Vince Moorhouse From Charles Davis Subject State Excess Land--Beach Blvd. Date November 1, 1979 @ P.C.H. I have been continuing negotiations with CALTRANS regard- ing the subject property and finally got a commitment from them to sell to the City on either an installment contract or Deed of Trust with only 10% down payment (see .attached letter) . This offer expires December 27 , 1979 after which an appraisal update would be required and the purchase price would surely increase. If you have any intention of acquiring this property, I recommend you do so before this opportunity passes us by. i� Charles Davis Real Property Agent CBD: jy Attach. STATE OF CALIFORNIA—BUSINESS AND TRANSPORTATION AGENCY EDMUND G. BROWN JR., Governor DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT 7, P.O. BOX 2304, LOS ANGELES 90051 October 30, 1979 07-Ora-1 DD 011783-01-01 Mr. Charles B. Davis Real Property Agent City of Huntington Beach P. 0. Box 190 Huntington Beach, CA 92768 Dear Mr. Davis: Pursuant to our telephone conversation of yesterday, I am forwarding to you the enclosed "Offer to Purchase" appli- cable to the State 's excess parcel at Beach Boulevard and Pacific Coast Highway. As you know, the Department of Parks and Recreation had placed a "hold" on the parcel under the provisions of Proposition #3. However, they are apparently not in a position to acquire at this time and as a consequence the property is once again being offered to the City at fair market value . If the City chooses not to purchase, a public sale will be scheduled shortly after the first of the year. Terms for a governmental sale can be by cash payment, installment contract or by Deed of Trust. The term may be for up to 20-year period at-.the current FHA. rate of 11� with a 10% down payment. A ten year public use reversion- ary clause would be included in a Directoris Deed or installment contract. Since our appraisal has not been updated recently and property values have escalated so rapidly, the offer cannot be extended beyond the December 27, 1979 date indicated in the enclosed contract without an appraisal revision. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact the undersigned. Sincerely, DEAN EDWARDS Right of Way Agent Excess Land Sales Phone (213) 620-2141 DE:mm/Encl. STATE OF CALIFORNIA—BUSINESS AND TRANSPORTATION AGENCY EDMUND G. BROWN JR., Governor DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Z DISTRICT 7, P.O. BOX 2304, LOS ANGELES 90051 / 4 6"ivl- Is S.4 #4 V October 30, 1979 SfaV 07-ORA-1 DD 011783-01-01 City of Huntington Beach P. O. Box 190 Huntington Beach , CA 92648 Attention : Mr. Floyd G. Belsito City Administrator Gentlemen : The Department of Transportation hereby offers to sell the above-referenced property. to the City of Huntington Beach for the appraised value of $818,200.00. The following portion of this letter, when the duplicate copy is executed and returned to you , will constitute. the agreement for the purchase. # - i "rrd a rs-t-o o d.. -t h� . p _ 1 er- aiH a ice_v e r � on a Fie-en _d dedu-ty t'he= G��rdFi This transaction will not be processed for the California Trans- portation Commission ' s approval until the duplicate copy of this letter is fully executed and returned. If this document is not returned to the undersiged by December 27, 1979 then the above property will be processed for sale by other means . The City of Huntington Beach, hereinafter known as purchaser, offers to acquire from the California Department of Transpor- tation that certain property referred to above and depicted on the attached .nap for the State ' s appraised value of $018 ,200.00 , to be paid upon demand and prior to the State 's forwarding a fully executed and recorded Director's Deed. Please indicate exactly how title is to be vested : City Of Huntington Beach, a Municipal Corporation, State of California It is expressly understood by the purchaser -that the right title and interest in the property to be transferred by this sale shall not exceed that vested in the State of California and that no Policy of Title Insurance will be furnished or escrow fees paid by the State of California in this transaction. City of Huntington Beach Page 2 October 30 , 1979 It is expressly agreed by the purchaser that the State of California shall retain unto itself all additional reservations including but not limited to access rights to the freeway or highway, slope, and/or drainage rights as indicated on the enclosed map. It is further understood that the purchaser shall not have use of the property until a Director' s Deed has been recorded. The purchaser agrees to the above terms and .conditions of sale. Place of execution Huntington.Beach, California . Date of execution December 3, 1979 ATTEST: CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH Mayor ice r w o has ne-N-uthority City Clerk to commit the CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH to the acquisition of this property. The terms and conditions of the above offer are hereby accepted subject to the approval of the California Transportion Commission. or Department of Transportation DEAN- ED4IARDS Right of Way Agent Excess Land Sales Phone (213 ) 620-2141 DE :mjI Enclosures