Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRedevelopment Agency Work Program and Budget 1984-1985 T MINUTES FEDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Room H-d, Civic Center Huntington Beach, California Monday, June 11 , 1984 A tape recording of this meeting is on file in th.: City Clerk' s Office Chairman Kelly called the adjourned regular meeting of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach to order at 7: 30 P.M. JOINT MEETING OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND CITY COUNCIL Mayor Kelly announced that a joint meeting of the Redevelopment Agency and the City Council had been called. ROLL CALL - REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY/CITY COUNCIL Present : MacAllister, Thomas, Kelly, Finley , Bailey , Mandic Absent : Pattinson STATES OF BOLSA CHICA LAND USE PLAN - RESOLUTION TO BE PREPARED •.II� The Mayor presented a staff report . The Development Services Director presented a report addressing the city' s areas of concern, as outlined in the memorandum from the City Administrator dated June 11 , 1984. Using wall maps lie pointed out the differences and similarities of the county plan and Coastal Conservancy plan. Using overlays he showed the flexibility in the ways the area could be developed. Discussion was held regarding the matter. Mayor Kelly requcisted that members of various government and private agencies introduce themselves : Bob Fisher, County of Orange ; Peter Epstein, Coastal Conservancy; John Zetner, Coastal Conservancy; Harriett Wieder, Orange County Supervisor, 2nd District; and Mel Melkoff , consultant representing Signal Landmark. Mr. Fisher stated that he believed the city and county should be in agreement when the matter is presented to the Coastal Commission. Mr. Zetner gave reasons for the Coastal Coc.servancy' s plan for the rerouting of Pacific Coast Highway. tie stated a public hearing would �e held on the matter on June 21 , 1984 in San Francisco. Mr. Malkoff stated that Signal Landmark' s chief concern was the Wetlands. Discussion was held between Council , staff and Mr. Zetner regarding the proposed acreage of the wetlands. The Council and Supervisor Wieder discussed funding for the Bole, Chica and discussion was held between Council and Mr. Fisher regarding oil production in the Bolse Chica. Page : - Redevelopment flency Minutes - 6/11/84 A motion waA made by ?!acAllister, seconded by Thomas , to direct staff t.o draft a resolution for tranatr.ittal to the Coastal Conserv.incy listing the city' s E ,� concerns regarding development of the Bolsa Ci. ,cA as expressed at the Study Session held Jun? 11 , 1984 . Following discussion , they motion carried unanimously. RECESS - RECONVENE The Mayor called a recess of Council ut 8 :45 P.M. The tne!ting was reconvened at 9 :03 P.M. FY 1984-85 WORK PROGUM b BUDGET The Redevelopment Coordinator presented the FY 1964-85 Work Program. D: scussion was held regarding the: Downtown ..edevelopment Area ; Talbert-Beach Area ; possible uses for the Talbert-Beach Industrial site ; possible development of the Mushroom Para: site as a mobilehome park for use as a relocation point , including Huntingtun Shores residents . Discussion was held regarding future reimbursement to the City by the Redevelopment Agency for staff time used in redevelopment efforts. Kr. Tincher stated that the county a pressed interest in working with tLe city regarding up-grading flood control channels as part of a redevelopment effort . lie suggested :hat the City study the fusibility of the concept . , Mr. Tincher presented a staff report on the redevelopment budget . lie also presented an organization cheirt . The Chief Executive Officer stated that the Redeve,opment Coordi.tatur had tendered his resignation effective J-,1}, 1 , 1984 . Po..ition of Redevelopment Coordinator - Report Requested A motion was made by Mandic , seconded by MacAllister, to direct the Chief Executive Officer to investigate alternatives regarding the position of Redevelopment Coordinator and report to Council with a recommendation. Following discussion, the motion carried unanimously. Discussion was held regarding various aspects of the redevelopment budget , including salaries. Allocation of tax implemen'ation dollars was discussed . Director Finley inquired regarding the status of the periodic reports on redevelopment accounting which had been requested by Council . The Chief of Administrative Services stated that he would look into the matter. The Redevelopment Coordinator presented estimated. costs of protects and sources of funding for the Oak View Project Area and the Talbert Beach Project Area. Discussion was held regarding the matter. Director MacAllister ;ug&ested that staff study the feasibility of including Commodore Circle as a redevelopment project and return with a report to Council. Page 3 - Redevelopmentoxency yinuces - 5/ 11/84 The Chief Executive Officer stated that he would try to have all the revisions to the budget prepared for submission to the Council on June 18, 1984. 1sf ADJOURMNT - COUNCIOREDEVELONENT AGENCY The Mayor/Chairman adjourned the adjourned regular meeting; of the City Council attd the adjourned regular meeting of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach. Clerk of the Redevelopment Agency and City Clerk and ex-officin Clerk of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California ATTEST: City Clerk/Clerk Mayor/Chairman a/ bs01 i REQUEST&R REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY A 0 ON Rif 84-18 Date Tune 1 , 1984 Submitted to: Honorable Chairman and Redevelopment Acjency Xem rs + Submitted by: Charles W. Thompson , Chief Executive Of f i� Prepared by: 92nor:as D . Tincher , 1?edevelopment. Coordinator Sub ect: PROFOSED 1984/85 WORK PROGM-1 AND BUDGET Statoment of lmsie, Recommendation, Analysis, funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attachments: STATEMENT OF ISSUE: The ?c+84/85 Work Program establishes an organizational framework and planning approach w'iich responds to the fact. that the Agency has moved from a planning made into the E121=tation stage . The Work. Program focuses or rspecific potential project sites but at the same time , recognizes :he necessity of cienerat. inq overall planninq for the areas involved . The Redevelopment Budget maintains the same love1 r: sta::f ir.g which currently is used to administer- the cverall prograr.. However , it is r.eco=nended that through the A,, reement which is attached , that the Red•evelopm(�nt Coordinator devote the ma.; uritr of his time on the Downtown Project and relalt -d relocation and hou_;.inc; ! rojects . RECOMtMMNIDATION: 1 . Adopt the 1994/85 RVdrY,'el01)1T1ent Work 11rogram z nd Budoet . 2 . Approl,e Ak, r, ment between Thomas h. T inchrr and 1?edevelopmint ALIency .. A14ALYSIS : The 1984/'85 Work. Proc;ram and Budclet ref lects a further evolution of the overall Redevelopment Poogram . As mentioned above , the Agency is now more in an implementation mode which demands a little different focus than previously being taken in administering the overall effort. As will be discussed duriny tho staff presentation , the primary emphasis is placed upon implementing the Downtown Program by assigning the Redevelopment Coordinator that full-time responsibility. Other Agency responsibilities will be shifted to the Special Projects Coordinator and his staff . It should be noted that the proposed budget simply reflects the acimirlistra.ive costs which must be incurred to carry out the program . Individual budgets will be prepared for each project as they evolve and are acted upon by the Agency. Each must have its own source of iii:anc:ing the Agency' s role at this point in the, Redevelopment Program. • RH 84 -18 June 1 , 19$4 Page Two ALTERNATIVES : 1 . Set special session to further study S-.Drk Program and Budget . . Adopt any appropriate amendments and adjustments . FUNDING : 1 . Existing Rede%•elopment r,c:ene,., funds . ATTACHMENTS : 1 . 1.984/85 tivork Program and Budc.et C'n I'/TT: 1 p r • r BEACH A r . R D VELO MENT 1984 �87 WORK . •r .r PROGRAM ' 1 - • & BUDGETw -� .. __tt • '~ NEIGHBORHOOD •► t inn - 1 • El �i tPROGRAM TAPU OF C MEWS Page I . INTrRODWTIUN AND WEWIEW 1 II . 1984-95 WDRK PROGRAM 3 A. DOWNTI Ass REDEVFZCPFEFNI' ARFA 5 1. 7 Val SQt M SUBAREA 9 a) Town SgLara Associates Project b) Van Derhyden Project c) Town Square Associates Phase II Project d) Future Transition. Blocks ' 2. rtNtrLUM OGRE SUBAREA 16 a) Downtowm Core Site 1 b) Downtown Core Sate 2 c) Downtown Core Site 3 d) Downtown Core Site 4 e) Site 5 Land Bank Pr o j ec t f) Transportation Center 6 Walnut Extension Projects g) Downtown Core Site 7 h) Uam town Core Site 6 3. MNIN-KIM SUBAREA 26 a) Hotel-Public Interest Center Ikoject b) Site 2 Project c) Pier Expansion Project d) State Beach Pier-Head project e) Site 5 4 . HUNTINGICN-IAKE SUBAREA 36 a) Commercial Project b) Residential Project 5. i-CITY SUBAREA 40 a) Commercial Project b) Residential Project 6. ATLAM-EEACIi SikAFFA 44 a) Huntington Breakers Apartment Project b; Atlanta-Beach ShorpirKg Center Project j 7. BU FFMP SUBAREA 48 f6. DOWN7UM HEU=ATICN SITM 50 a) Industrial Relocation Project b) AuLo Dealership Relocation Project c) Mobile lime Relocation Project t B. OAKV I EW REDLVFlOPr0KT ARL'A 59 1. WARNER-HE CH SUBAREA 62 a) Charter Centre Project b) Site 2 Project c) Site 3 & 3a Project d) Site 4 & 4a Projec:t 2 . CENITAL GAKVIEW SUBAREA 69 , KCVO-SLAM SUBARVi 72 a) Koledo Lane Project b) Queers Lane Project Project c) Mandrell-Barton Project d) Jacquelyn La,-!-! Project t C. TAL MP T- SEAC i PEDLV E*1 A)PKWr AREA 79 1. C'y1VNF2r OVAL Ei0LLSTM SUPA.RFA 82 a) Warnsr-Arand.a Project b) Collins -Zweibel Project c) Citadel Service Corporation Project 2. TERFV PARK SENIOR HOUSIZ SL'F.ARIA 89 a) Emerald Cove Project b) Windward Cove Project 3 . INDLZ RIAL PM SLOARFA 93 D. YORK7VeN-LAKE REI)LVELCPMET'T AREA 96 1. CMC-CDMER SUBAREA 99 a) Civic Center Site Consolidation/ Utica Residential Project 2. LAKE STREET SUBAREA 100 a) Lake Street Residential Project E. RELL•VII.CPMWr SUR.Eli ARFAS 101 1. BEACH BOULLVARD CCM EI CIAL C OMDOR 2. OLYI1 3Il= IrIDLS.9TRIAL C0RRIDC)R 3. ASCUN IA EFILL SITE 4. MEADOWLARK AIRPORT 5. FLACCID CCNrKL PRXE CT r F. PRWWr PLANNM AND ACMINISTFATICN 104 1. CMTRACIUAL AGREEMENr 108 III . 1.'n84/85 REDE.VIIAPMNr BUDGET L15 A. DOWNIUM REDEVELMOU PRO= 116 1. Project Revenues 2. Project Expenditures B. OAKV1FW REDEVEMPMERr PRC::r-= 120 1. Project Revenues 2. Project Expenditures C. TALON PRDJ= 121 1. Project Revenues 2. Project Expenditures D. YORKZG-N-IAKE PRC &"r 122 1. Project Revenues 2. Project Expenditures IV. PRELIMIMARY ANALYSIS OF PHASE I PRWECT 123 COSTS b LCNG-TE14M F I NANO I tJG MC G RAM i M I 4 I � , r. r a CrrY OF IMYTIMMICNWka 1984/85 M1 . r � -u . '4r ' � 1- Yet.. • , f • . - ~ , ^- •� I. INTii.'XX7C CN AND OVERVIM A little over two years ago, the City Council adopted the ''Community and Neighborhood Enhancement Prcgram. " That action reflected a ca mitment on the Hart of the City to trove ahead aggressively in several areas to stem the growing appearance of physical decay in targeted neighborhoods. It was also aimee,, at the proriiotion of economic growth in the Downtown, as well as, along the Gothard and B-each Boulevard corridors. the support given to this progr,-vn by ,he City Council, by affected property owners anrj the overall community, now has resulted in significant progress. Paring the short i.eriod cr. ti..m e since the program was established, numerous housing units have been rehabilitated, neighborhood public improvements have been designed or constructed in two target areas, and owner participation agreements have been executed. Ganbiiied, these have resulted in over t-45,000,000 in new residential develoRnent currently under construction. It is anticipato4 that these successful efforts w-:1 be followed by comnercial and residential ® development commitments within the Oakview and Downtown Raievelopment Project Areas during fiscal year 1984/65. 'These improvements will have long-lasting positive Lmpacts on these neighborhr-ods, as well as, the overall. local economic base. 'The RedeveloFnent Agency's 1984-85 Wbrk Program and buaget presents the means by which major strides can be made toward carrying out the related, and previously established, Community & Neighborhood Enhancra*nt Goals. It reflects an "action" program designed to inpleffent. plans and produce development commitments in the redeveloFnent project areas which have been selected for immediate attention. In addition, it reflects the need to examin, other areas of the ccm .unity whe!e redevelop*nt can have a positive impact in future program years. 1 „r. r The activities and pr-)grams included in this document will set thr. stage for what has to be one of the most important and exciting tiw!s in the history of the City. The plans "Mich have been prej:ared and the analyses whi,7h '11ave been made all point to the fact that now is the time for the City, existing property o► rners and the developrnnt community, to take advantage of the community's assets and aggressively pursue viable develorment opportunities within the designated areas. With continued Council and conm_inity support which the redevelopment program now enjoys, the successful implementation of the 1984-85 Work Program and Bulget will have a lasting , positive impact on the future of Huntinoton Beach. CITY OF HUNrING DN SEX-11i AG'Ft�' 158a/85 W7FZK FRflGRAM F.ND BiJ= r r May 29, 1984 j • I. �I r _ I • • - 1 ' y r ►M d ': 8 ' ,r •OF =En-LCPMEW AGEICYt =.{ Td - f e, • - f - r r _ h � 1 P fQ�•y • � r MII. 1984/B5 WORK PPOGW 1 'This Work Program provides the direction needed to pursue development opportunities within the project various areas. It also provides a basis to � assess development constraints, as well as, possible Agency cc its. The Budget, which is included aC the next section, allocates the financial resources needed to implement the Work Program, during the 1984-85 fiscal year . r 'Ib assist in assessing development opportunities and the associated rmsts, each project area has been subdivided into potential project sites. 'Ibis approach makes the overall process more rninaaeab?. , and , as a practical matter, establishes the boundaries from which groupv of property owners, having a catirnon interest, can brought be b ght together to assess existing needs and future � options. 'Therefore, the w-rk Program has been divided into individual sections for each existing redevelopment project area which are further subdivided for discussion and assessnrr_nt of each potential project site. also included is a discussion and recomtended actions for each existing or potential redevelopment survey area. Following the -,e.:tion on "Survey Areas" an assessment of the general administration of the cn,erall prograrr, with specific rec=Tnendations are proposed. These are designed to help implement the overall program in an efficient and effective way. r r 4 1 r •, rr _ - 1 1 y 1 1� r 1 M - r • • • .iA/ /O • E/ C. i , r r - 1 • i Jh w 1984/85 WORK PR-M?AM AREA To help_ focus the Work Program on specific issues ana tasks associated with each po.r en'C iUl project, but at the same time prorrnte a broader corr}orehensive planning effort, the Downtown Area has been divided into seven planning subareas. Zhe subareas have been further divided into potential project sites with the maps for each delineating properties which are 1) likely to rerrain, 2) proposed to be redeveloped, and, 3) which may remain for an interim F::?riod, but mast likelywill be redevelo �d in ttie future. P�- A brief narrative is prcr✓ided which discusses the status or potential of each project. This is followed by a preliminary analysis of possible Agency revenue, casts and the develorxnent potential of the site . Also included, is a list of specific actions reeo-m�--nded as part of the 1984/b5 Work Pr ran, for � 09 ' the subarea area or tfc- specific site involved . However, before focusing on specific issues related to the sutAireas or indiviJua1 projects, it is important to recognize that several challenges transcend the project or sularea hour► iaries. Specifically, these matters relate to the need to promote the consolidation of oil operations in the area, onsure the provision of convenient and accessible pare:iny, provide r,-aningful ' alternatives to owners of unsafe uuildings ender the sei&-Pic safety code and ensure ox,perative and coordinated planning for the overall area. In lxirsuit of these goals, it is proposed that the following recommended actions be adopted As part of the 1984-85 Fbrk program: b 1. During the first six months of the program year, cooperate wit1i Fina or C-her interested firms and the existing oil oW-ratora ir► r_teparing an oil consolidation plan for the Downtown Redevelopment Area. 2. During the first six rnantris of the program year, finalize an overall parking pl&i for the Downtown Red�.veloFn�,-nt Area. e r. ram ►Ear , word, with existing 3. llur i ng the first six month.. of the program } .. property owners to assess development options and prepare an acceptable plan for meeting seismic safety requirements. 4 . Require that each project be consistent with subarea pl,-ns and than -h subarea plan be, consistent with the overall master plan for the each p area. Require tnat each major develo,�er within each subarea prepare an or,�erall master plan for the subarea and participate in developing a planning nodel for the Dc,.ntown Redeveloxx-v-,nt Pr ojnct . r r 7 qrJTq- ACH TowN - - AREA SQUAU - S usAZR co powwr-ow" NU,aTruG"Tou- B EACH-Cl-ry LAKE 5UBAReA UFFTpY 5VBAREA 5UBAREA 505AREA' DoWNTOWN -REDEVELOPMENT PLANNING SUBAREAS CITY OF HUNTINGIO^J BEACH ZC> N SQUARE S(JBARFA Zhe Town Square Subarea is viewr.,i as a transition zone between the active, visitor-serving cormerciai. core and the surrounding residential neighborhoods. For planning and development purposes, the subarea has been r s divided into four potential projects. These are delineated on the rrap which follows, and. are referred as: 1 and l i - T cNn Square Assoc i a t e s F>r o f ec t 2 - Ttwn Square Associates 'Phase II Project 3 by e V � Dot y den Pro, r_t ar 4 - Future Transition Area Under the terms of the executed ri-jotiation agreement Vx_�t wee n the Redevelopment Agency and the Nhla DevelopTa?nt Corporation, Mola must prepare a general master plan for the overall subarea. F� is expected to present a 9 specific develolxrrent proposal for the, Town Square Associates Project Site 1, and perhaps Site la. 'This is to he accomplished within the next forty-five days fer Agency consideration. In addition, it is hoped that he will work with the Huntington Beach Company and ad3oining properties and be in a position at an early date to present a developrment proposal for Site 3. A large portion. of Site 2 was recently purchased for development purposes. W:.hh the proposed realign;mnt of Lake Street, it is hoped that the two parcels located along Grange Avenue, between the new alignment and the old right-of-way, will k>- consolidated into the overall site. Staff has been working with Vx. Nic-ole on a possible exchange for industrial space within 9 r �JE Tko.")`WN SOUARE SUBAREA r \- s� ['ISRARY / \\ ool loll \` � \ I I \ ORi9•�/G E q vEn'v� \\ \ 1 I � C:Far�R the Talbert-Beach industrial area anal has contacted Mr. 'Trainer aLout the possible acquisition of his site . Appraisals are currently being prepared for each parcel. In addition, staff has been advised that t%-oo of the uwners of r parcels on the northerly end of the site are interested in participating in the overall developrwen_ program. Unlike Sites 1, la, ; and 3, which could roe redeveloped during the first phase of activity, the blocks within Site 4 are seen as long-term transition areas. These blocks have a sianifir_ant number of residential owner-occupants who wish ' to remain in the area for some_ t ucr- to corTe . The following pages provide a brief summery of each pi:)tential project which reflects the developer involved, the status of the project, a p oject description, and an estimated, improved value or Agency costs, if it is a public project. r 11 i rIxIff m REDE M��TT AREA I.:M. RWVtEA 7C W SOLARE ASSOCIAM PRWECT (Sites 1 and !a) Developer: Mola Develorm-ent CorpGrat ion ® Status: Nego• ration Agreement Eyecuted April o, 1984' ■ Preliminary Project Description: 17 Acre Project 50, 00040,000 sq.ft. retail com .ercial/office i Improved City Library Site 300-375 Residentiai Condominiums 60-70 Apartment Units Projected Market Value: $50,000,000 - $54,000,000 12 ,S � •; TOW • • 01,TPAREA •1 1 !` r• • y - - QF D• • • •- • w \1 a v N N r � �Mx r 1 1 ti r � � 1 Status: Preliminarj- Concept Drawings Being Preparc-d 13 fr. I A- Y - DC WIrJARV REDEVELOPMENT AREA TOE: SQUARE SUBAREA IVAIN SQLIARE ASSOC IAM MAS'E II PRO.TDCT (Site 3) 1 Developer : (';o Be Determined) Status: Several exi,stirx; ox-ners within the site t,evc, exprc ssed a willingness to sell their property or cooperate w i tr, the Agency in bringing about a develoFrwnt program. " Evaluate acquisition of S.C.E. building to serve as p-tential Connunity Ser•-" s Center or relocation site for rot C ffice branch. 14 DC4+It rOW 10MENFIAPtOW AREA T AN SQL AM SUBAREA F UMPE TP.ANSITI(XJ BLACKS (Site a ) F3---;-lops:r : (To B-e Dm-to rr,l nec) State: Fut:,ru Trx-,s1t16n r r t 0 ' OCW?r %N OGRE SU&%R&% The Downtown Core Subarea presents perhaps the greatest challenge to the Redevelopment effort . Its economic future depends upon how successful the development program is within the adjacent Tcrvn Square and the Main-Pier Sabareas and how effective the oil consolid��tion program will be. While these efforts will ta',.e considerable time to develop and evolve, an early develognent plan foi the area must be established because of the seismic safety requiremznts. Therefore, it is ilm),--rative that the City/Agenc'I, move ahead imrn-diately to develop an oil consolidation plan for the overall IDI w town Area. The impact of such a plan, will have its greatest benefit and significances in the Downtown Chre Sub<3rea. Some parcel consolidation is occurring within Site 1 of this subarea. This private sector effort, ca;t)ined with the substantial City holdings, could result in an early development prograiTi being put into place. In response to this potential, the N3ency should work with the Community Clinic to assess relocation options and wori: with the ropurt y owners in preparing alternative F� P � dove loFt-f,rit plans. Site 2 h:,s less o�1 ercwmberances and fewer property owners than most of the sites within the S,,Imrea. Over one half of the site is o%,Tjod by just three entities which are, Parnakian, Taylor and the U.f. Post office. Since the future development potential of the site is very inich dependent upon "tat hapf,ens to the Post Office facility, staff should iiw)edi.ately proceed tc restablish discussion with appropriate Fast Office officials. 16 DOWNTOWN CORE SUBAREAS I O/L OPERA-riaNS I i ( BvfcofNG5 UkCLY ToREMgrAV ORA�v6E' �'vccvfr� � o I I I � II 7 Ili ' I I I I 2 I 2 1 P 411 I ! t I I Q I I I I r l v r �r a� e� � r � � ® ® e■s � � � arr ew III! r � Site 3, perhaps, presents the greatest challenge of any site within the Subarea, as it has a considerable amen`_ of oil facilities and a very fragmented ownership pattern. Staff should commence discussions with existing P property owners to assess development options. Robert Koury has consolidated several parcels withir. Site 4 during the past few years and now stands as the primary property ormer. with the cooperation of the Security Pacific bank, and including the City parcel and the Niccole lot, most of the full block could be consolidated. Staff should carmence evelo discussions with all the existing property owners to assess d _ pTant opticns. Site 5 is viewed as a future transition area because of the numerous owner occupants who have expressed a desire to "retrain as is" or to "wait and see t- e� lc nt potential of this area, it what happens. Because of the fu ire d _ �e � is suggested that the Agency "land bank" parcels, if possible, as they corm on the market and discourage any substantial upgrading of the existing older housing stock. r Site 6 is nearly totally encumbered �e with oil ocrations and its future development potential is directly tied to the oil consolidation challenge. The site is being suggested as a possible location for a transportation center, but should also be evaluated as the potential location for the needed oil island to briny about the consolidation of other facilities throughout the Da-n town. In add iticn to evaluatingthese two potential u:ies, staff should move ahead immediately to establish the precise alignment of the Walnut extn_nsion arid camence acquisition of the necessary right-of-way. ' 1.© Site 7 has the potential to be consoliciatea at an early prase ana planneu to support a low-profile, mixed-use aevelopment which would corrplement the surrounding uses. Site B, on the other hand, is encumayerea heavily uy oil which means its future develoIxTent yotential is ties to the oil consola.aation program. 19 i rDCWNR)WN 11E1) ' AREA DCkVICW CDRE SUBAREA r rSITE 1 PF4ITDC'I' r r Developer : (To be 1ctermined) rStatus: Plan w;.tii prc,�rtS o%,mers ana assess relccation alternatives with Cb,mtunitJ Clinic r r 1 r 1 1 r 1 r 20 DCXKMUfiN RMFVP LAIMEM AREA D(WI'CJM CORE SUBAREA SIZE: 2 Pk0 EVI' Develop--r : (To be W tet mined) Sultus: Flan; wits; Pr owr ty uwnet z, anu assess relcx--3tlon aiterrijtives Post utt ice 21 DCW?IK)W RMLvLZjCPMErdr AREA MRE REARM SITE 3 PROJI 'I' Developer : (Tc, oe Determined) Status: Flan witti Proi-erty Lh ners 22 DMMIFN REDEVELOPMENr AREA DCAMU C CURE SUBNRFA SITE 4 PId1 Wr Developer: (To te beterminea) status: Plan wi tri Property Lk%ners i i t 1 1 23 1 DOWMC M RF1WlE3,�� AREA DQ*TI/44 COM SUBAWA SIT£ 5 IMD BAN( PRW T (Site 5) Developer : Reeevelopient Agenc:1 (Inter:km) Status: Acarlu ire i:k:ircels as they came on market. tiaacole laarce:l to uc acyuirea as part of industrial Lxilldln,j exchange (See Torn -Ikluar c A',') Estimatea Crust : Pruportionate share of construction of incustrial ouiiding tor hiccoiE exchange . 24 DCWNI iuN RS)EVE2iA4F2rr MEA DOWN'ICJW CORE SUBAREA I?MZPORTATIC)N CITIER 6 wm.z,w ExT'ENSICIJ PRLImmos SITE 6 PORTICN Ixweloper: RE►&-jelopwr,t. loenc,i Status: Preliminc-try Planninc 't-hge Est imted Cost : (To Bt Dezermined) 25 `• Y7 r r n REDLWICPWAqr AREA DOWNIORN I • • r 1 C&-veloper : (To Lw-- Determined) • J n r � I y w a , I r a • + I 1 1 t MVIG M REDEVEMPHEW AREA DOWNICM CORE SUBAREA SIDE 8 PRa7DCr Developer : (To be Deter, pined) Status: Plan wiui ProF.urty O�mers r w 27 ' MAIN-PIER SUBAREA The Main-Pier Subarea will play a key and vital role in bringing a new image and improved economic climate to the overall Downtown Area. Major public and ' private investments proposed for this thirty-acre strip of land between Lake Street and 6th Street will establish a new focus for the area and expedite change elsewhere throughout the 300-acre project. Given the existing City holdings and recent acquisitions made by private interests, it is anticipated that the entire Site 1 can be consolidated much ^ooner than originally expected. Proposals from interested developers are curre►Uy being reviewed and it is hoped t;iat a development agreement can be drafted early in the 1984/85 fiscal year . In light of this projected schedule staff must be prepared to begin carrying out the Agency's relocation obligations within the next few months. Thus, staff must not only plan with the property owners in establishing the scope of development, but must also begin working with existing tenants to assess relocation needs and options. While Site la may ultimtely be incorporated into the overall development scheme for Site 1, it is seen as a future transition area given the large residential units involved and the current interests of existing property r t oi,mers. Site 21 has also experienced a considerable effort on the part of the private sector to bring about consolidation through acquisition or cooperation. 'Ihe two major property owners within the site have apparently reached an agreement in a cooperative effort and expanded discussions with adjoining property 28 .gc.vvT A✓E.VvE r I I %fc, Il .................................. oil h 4l I I ! P�q ci F•c Co 4r N OU- Of'ERRT�onrS ® �u,tDiNGS L/10E[Y TD /PE�qmr MAIN - PI SUBAREA owners, are currentiy ;underway. Of considerable importance to the future development potential of this site is ' the relocation of the existing auto dealership. A possible solution to this relocation challenge is the Ca ltrans' site south of Yorktown on Beach Boulevard. Staff is currently working with Caltrans and exploring the possibility of a land exchange for a portion of the Talbert-Beach Industrial Site. Site 3 is the City Pier Project, including the proposed pedestrian tie to t-Lain ' Street. t is important that a coordinated planning effort involving the z � P n9 9 Agency/City and the developers of both Sites 1 and 2 be unaertaken to establish the parameters of sucn a development. It is proposed that the Agency fund this detailed planning and design effort as part of this work program and budget. tIt is proposed that the City aggressively pursue obtainirK3 control of Site 4 from the State and that an improvement plan be prepared and irplEuwnted which will be compatible with the public and private investments pruposea for Uie area. Site 5 is zoned ?residential and it is proPosea that staff work with the existing property owners in an effort to etablish an early development program. 30 DOWICI►N RWEVELCFMENr AREA [FAIN-PIER SUBAREA HOTEL - PUBLIC INTERFM C M£R PWXECr (SITE 1) Developer . (To be Determined) Status: Property being consolidated by ' private sector and developer interest being solicited. Hotel study is being conducted 31 ' AREA NUN-PUM SUBhR A SIZE 2 PRWCr Developer: (To be Determined) status: Property being wnsol idLced by ' private sector and relocation plans for auto dealership being pursue-a 32 r r ARM MAIN-PIER SIIHAM 1 r PIER EXPANSION PFO7FX.T (Site 3) Developer: Redevelopment Agency/City 1 Status: Undertake study of feasibility of providing pedestrian underpass and commercial corridor between Main Street and the Pier. Prepare conceptual r plan for the expansion of the Pier and solicit commercial interest Estimated Cost of Study: $25,000 - $50,000 FA r r 33 r t DOWN C WN REDEVELaPAERr AREA rMl .IN-PIER SUf3hM r r SrAM BEACH PIER-HEAD PA0.7ECT (SUE 4) r Developer : Redevelopment Agency/City Status: Pursue acquisition or long-term management control over this secti on of State beach 1 r r r 34 DCWTIV REDEVELCPHERr AREA MAIN-PIER SUBAREA SIT£ 5 PF4.1 B= Developer: (To be Determinea) r Status: Plan with existing Property Comers ■ 1 35 r r HWUNGMN-LA E SUFAREA t The Huntington-Lake Subarea is owned entirely by the Huntington Beach Company or its rent They have no definite plans for the subarea at this Pa Cott�Y• point in time, but have expressea an interest and willingness to proceed witri development of the cxcrmerci.al frontage (Site 1) , as soon as possible. Development of the residential portion of the Subarea (Site 2) will be dependent upon future oil operation decisions. r Of considerable significance to L•he Agency, at this time, is the pending displacement of approximately 40 mobile homes from Site 1. Recently staff was directed to help identify a site or sites for construction of a new mobile hc%Te park. Progress has been made in this regard with such being discussed in the "Downtown Relocation Sites" section of thy %-brk Program. -16 r r r i i• i i I LAJ I CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH r i H61AI-rlA/G7T0" - L�Q KE PROJECT DOdJIOWN IUMEVELCPEUr AREA HU.+T!'ING"-LAKE SLMUEA SITE 1 OOMMUCIAL PF4WB I' Developer: Huntington Bead Company : Preliminary discussions with en Status ry Agency have comienced with the m oile hame relocation challenge being of greatest concern Estimated cost: See "Downtown Relocation Sites" section 38 ;;N REDE!rELX13MW1! AREA r HLWING'IM-LAKE SMAREA r r SITE, 2 RESIDEMIAL PROJF)Cr Developer: Huntington Beach Company Status: Assessing future oil production requirements 1 1 r 39 BEACH-CITY SUBAREA No area within the Downtown Project has more potential than the Beach-City Subarea to support large scale, new development. rihis, of course, is dependent upon finding acceptable housing alternatives for the nearly 250 mobile home residents who now occupy approximately one--half of the site. With the Agency's recent adoption of the Downtown Implementation Strategy, staff has been actively working with n e Robert Mayer Corporation and the Huntington Beach Company, in an effort to establish a firm mobile home relocation park alternative. It is felt that the development of such an alternative park is a possibility and that the planning should continue. (See "Downtown Relocation, Sites" section) . Site 1 of the Beach City Subarea is designated as visitor-serving cam ercial. Preliminary planning suggests that the area could be developed as a beach-oriented, retail-conv ercial center , with accompanying restaurant and hotel aerations. Site 2 is proposed for residential development and could support several hundred condominium or rental units. This cort.ponent should generate substantial revenue to the developer, as well as, to the City as the property owner. 40 I 1: -- •'1_.� :�� 1 art �_ F 1� j t r ' i .. } n r 1 ;� 1' I � 1 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ; BE�cy- C17-Y �,�p.J46-C T' 1 rDCWNTCW AREA BEACH-C17i SUBAREA r rSITE 1 OQM EW-IAL PRWECT Developer : The RoWrt Mayer Corporation/Agency rStatus: Preliminary concepts are being developed and mobile hme relocation alternatives assessed. (See Downtown Relocation Sites" section) r r r r r 42 DO NIUM AREA BENCH-CITY SLMAREA SIZE 2 RESMENrIAL PF4aJWr Developer: The Robert Mayer Corporation/Agency Status: Preliminary concepts are being developed and mobile home relocation alternatives assessed (See "Downtown Relocatiur, Sites" section 43 M ATLAN,fA--&7ACH SLIBRRFA While the Huntington Breakers Project is currently under construction, the agreement with Wilmore City requires certain actions relatea to improving the adjacent eo�ercial center. 7hese actions include the execution witn Bijan Sassonian to assure the riwa ri nt conveyance of the former hi -ot-way to the Y 9 Y 9 Y City and the construction of the frontage road. Staff has drafted an agreement which, hopefully, will. be executed by the beginning of the new fiscal year . It is felt that through proper planning and the involvement of the existing conmercial owners, the chaNe in the frontage road configuration can serve to leverage substantial inpr avements to the overall shopping center. 9 Pp r e r i 44 i- D.14" M M M 1E LE M M 11 F-1 .1 is CJ I - =Ii ILr] I I �L� [� �J � � �� [�1CJ � _� JC I_ J1__, t M [D H]91 1 10 ILI! 110 lfl I Mn�_ 1 i T1 r r r- rr1 r---- :-- , r ---, � , r�-'r r-.- •. i �- I1 r - - "�r _ CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ATLANTA - BEACH S(15-,9REA �,■ GIs gat ss r r, a m m M � Im s m ■r ' DCWffIV►iV REDEVEILPVENr AREA ATIANTA-BEAC33 SUBAREA HUNTINGvXW BREAKERS PR WELT tsxx� i� 1 Developer : Wilmore City Development Ccrporation Status: Disposition 6 Development Agreement executes March 7, 1983 Project Description: 342 apartment units (80 az£ordaole units with 40 being cx:signated for redevelopmnt relocation) Projectea Market $17, 000,OOU 46 DCRVOWN WMEVELOPMENT AREA AT AWA-BEACH SUBAREA ATLANrA-BEACli SAPPING CENTER PRaUDCT (SIZE 2) Developer: Bijan Sassonian Status: Agreement being drafted for property exchange and meetirvrs with existing owners being schedulers Estimated Costs: (To be Determined) 47 HL.UFF71W SUBARFAX By taking advantage of the available "Jobs Bill" funds, Ph;.se II of the development program has been expe-d i teo. tiowev er, with the pending removal of parking on Pacific Coast Highway and Lbe development of inland sites along Pacific Coast Highway, Phase III should be pursued in the near future. Construction of this phase woula provide some otfsite parking to serve the Blufftop Area and thus, replace some that will be lost through the hiytrwar i t develo nt activities. pro ana pme 48 df f f � CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH I 8L UFf Tom Sl1�f��E� �r r�s rr r err ■r �r r® iss r �s er r rs� r�� �r r �s air DCXQ?rC I REIL) TICK SIZE One of the most critical elements of any successful redevelopment program is establishing a responsive and timely prc.,ram to meet the relocation needs of displaced residents and businesses. In order to "free up" sites for development, the Agency must first solve the basic relocation problems which are pre sent. This will be a part of the Agency's efforts to help bring about significant new developrent in the project area. In response to this early ;nd co►►tinuing challenge, three specific projects are proposed at this time, which are: 1) Industrial Relocation Project 2) Auto Dealership Re_xation Project 3) Mobile Wm. Relocation Project Each of these proposed projects is discussed in general terms, on the following pages, and with Council approval, the more detailed planning will du the early t of the 1 84 85 fiscal year. occur during e r y part 9 / y r 50 INDLS7 RIAL REI=TI C[q PRWE C T AND AUTO rFAIZFMIP REU3ATICN PRCI I= The existing City and Agency land holdings offer resources which can be used to respond to the relocation challenge . The Talbert-Leach Industrial Site has always been viewed wit?-, relocation potential in mind. Under this proposed project, the site would be used to help solve several relocation needs. First, nearly tuo acres of the five-acre site could be used to relocate the Caltrans maintenance yard from prime Beach Boulevard frontage south of Yorktown. By this move two interested auto dealerships might be relocated to , Beach Boulevard from the Downtown Area. The auto dealerships currently occupy w' s Main-Pier Site 2 project. key locations within the Town Square Phase I and the Ma Pie � p � Another portion of the Talbert-Beach Site is proposed to accommodate the needs of Mr. Niccole, a property owner within the Van Derhyden Project Site, and yawner of several other parcels within the Downtown Area. Mr. Niccole proposed to P.xchz, a his Downtown holdi s with the Agency for industrial space within n9 �3 9 �Y Pa the Talbert-Beach site. The developer of the Industrial Relocatiur, Site would be asked to build the required facility, at cost to Agency, to meet Mr. Niccole's needs. ' It is also proposed that this Site he used to meet the needs of the City School District which requested assistance during the fiscal review process. Staff has been working with District representatives during 51 ■r s� . ar r s rr �r rr rr rs ■r rr �r �w �r �r �r rs �, Ur LEX IST'1/t/G 7- C«y -- ------ _ _ Cat L-TRANS15eiwt-...� ' YAK N -i L / 't� ,(� \ /• /�� �`.; - I - l 1 . .. . ( it �� j/ P29 jvj9s4EO -Z412;7(-1S 7-R14 L l 1 fl Ifs7.1��ShlY£ .�:•E J fy L Act/ " . (rf&.l.'7/.ti• '0A be 'Ch yL t L' 1 1 SIDE S4 0 • 94 u i C� , �K SS / lk �- 24 23 22 21 kij _ - 1 •�'.s� V � r�-� y Ld � 1� 07) 25 i .' ►. I2 L fir .VO Q-115 IX / �\ � •�'.�\ �C�� \�`�• ram`' \'�•�\ � `' -i %��` '� � \ �J � ` fit` •�``, •\. � �//� �` ` `. / ;•��. `\`` j. r.� 1.... `I ol - 1♦ • \ C \. \1 l' 1 �•/ �\` •\ \: �•\_` �\ / /.,� �` ,C _ _ f of \` \ ♦�rl /ram 1~•,� •� ,� L-11, .[__i�1 , i1Hi 11 ll:i� :_J j L.....J t' �� ���,; __1 �L�:J C�'!:J (...___.::�•���..:J (��...�J C-AA ... ► !r.~...� 1 ' }� rL:..:_..1 Lij l' 1 F-7,7,I __:l '--.__I C �_.:I l:._ �1 I ........ Tn �iw "jj;` • ! ( u f 't I _...� UlD E 1— . --� ! �L: i .�11 .:.:•:�1 �'_i— .! p[.r N Nt YP j• v the past several months and it is believed that the Talbert-Beach site could be an important catporient of a viable approach to responding positively to the District-., at little or no cost, to the Agency. Each of these projects are in the formative stages, beat must be expedited if the overall program is to progress. Updated appraisals for the Ni_ccole Farcels are expected within the next two weeks and appraisals from Caltrans on their site within the next couple of months. In addition, staff will. be meeting with representatives of the City School District in early June to develop a mire detailed proposal for consideration by the Ardency and the School Board. , rr r rMBII E HOC MLCATIQV PRWWr Zhe 55-acre, City-owned site aM the 33-acre Fturtington Beach Company site, have a tremendous potential to support major new- development in the Downtown Area. As noted in the early sections of this document, planning is currently underway to assess development opportunlLies for Each of these important subareas. As recently stated in the Downtown Implementation Strategy, the true development potential of these areas Rtay never be realized, until end unless, viable :mobile home relocation park are provided. With the adoption of the Downtow» Implementation Strategy, staff has proceeded with assessing various alternative relocation sites. Two sites which appear s support both short-term and to have the greatest potential to s ppor lon g-term relocation needs, are delineated on the map which follows. It is felt that with the cooperation of the Huntington Beach Company, The Robert Mayer Corporation and the existing property owners within the M,.ishroom Farm Project Site, that a majority of the �mobite home relocation needs can be met, as well as the Agency's re lacement housing and affordable housing r irements. A9 'Y P n9 n9 � r MJSHFUM FARM PLQ= CON= r It is proposed that the acquisition of the southerly portion of the Mushroom rFarm and adjoining parcels be pursued through the use of Park Development funds, State Patching funds and Redevelopment funds. Initial costs could be reduced by limiting acquisition to this area and allowing the mushroom Farm to continue operations by using the City landfill area to the north for an agreed upon period of time. The southerly site would be developed as a mobile home park relocati on site which would meet short-term relocation needs. the r 56 I t UI e�ANSIRaaM � ,/ will, r lTES �i udy .ee ov,e \ 1 1 i EXI MUSH FAM IL URE Pqq q I LAKE i USHZOO � 1 2oj Jt My ice I Ellis Ho�nE I � A .... e il ��o- -! R all 1 c .,ecticn of the site purchased with Park Development funds would be used to provide access to the lake and serve as open space for the mobile home residents, as well. As mobile home uses transition out, the site would serve to expand Central Park and possibly function as a recreation vesicle site. Additional Park Develcpment funds could be used to acquire the balance of the site for ?ark purposes at an appropriate time in the future. A large Portion of these funds would be generated by the residential development occurring in the Downtown Area, as a result of the mobile home parks Dr!ing established. MOBILE HOME PARK PFC= SFrT r The Robert Mayer Corporation would acquire the proposed site or an alternative site within the same S�neral area and agree to develop the mobile homE park. The nobile home park would be developed as a modern park facility with appropriate amenities and made available to the displacees at affordable costs. 'Ihe Robert Mayer Corporation would evaluate born lease and purchas- options. The Huntington Beach Conpany's, Zhe Robert Mayer Cn-uoration's, and the Agency's actual relocation costs could possibly be reduced by this approach as the number of buyout situations would be reduced significantly or eliminated. a' ' • r r y • ■ � I y • • I I 59 1 � Y • � A A • 4r- i .I I 1984/85 WMK PRUM M in general, the Oakview Redevelopment Area is a neighborhood in transition. Its a direct result of the public investments which have hr.an n►ade during the past several years and now with the significant private sector investments and cormtitments which are prov..sed, this previously declining are%i is on the verge of making major strides towards reflecting ;he overall quality of the unity. Tb help continue this progress, the proposed «ek Program focuses on .specific issues and tasks associated with conditions and circumstances within three rplanning subareas. The subareas have been further divided into proposed or existing project sites, each of which are discussed in the following paragraphs. A brief narrative is provided ccncerr,ing the status or potential of each project within the subareas which is then followed by a preliminary d analysis of possible Agency re•.?enue, costs and the development potential of the site. Also included are specific actions which are recommended as part of. the 1984/85 %brk Program for the subarea or the specific site involved. 60 � w .� . `•..,11. �.� .ice �.;i�.; ... �• �i•ti�!l l i i it +1.� --�•. . ' . _ � `' "' •�' 1 �ssis�if»iwiwaarsts�� J _ .o .ram/� //� f Same bMD. we 1TI 710 ff}} [� MU-; ID J L� Oil? G •V' J 1 t i•1 ut rN �a'1r\ 1r( . I�r=. -.I,•: ,J �� �_r �2� � -�---�3 i �� I � � -. 1 1 ©-- _•_f-_s-t. r�� + - vp kIzAr r.r � — ry •(r� 1 — fh • — � F _ r�,4VI c — _ M�l am=ti .— ...._,. 1 ..o �... ..mammfFls�fas��� ysf �r�al�e�_ •a��t � i hARER-BEAD: SUEARFA Me Warne[ -Beach subarea encompasses primarily the commercial portion of the project :area. Site 1 holds the promise of supporting a major eorTmaerCial/office project which will not only upgrade this commercial corner , but the entire Beach Boulevard Corridor, as well. Mola Development Corporation is currently proposing to develop over 20U,000 suare feet of offi:.:c space!, two restaurants, a health spa and a 5-plex theatre on this site. Known as the Charter Centre Project, it will have an estimated completed value of over $35,000,000. The crx plea will provide many jobs for local residents and will serve as a model for future development along :his important commercial strip. Site 2 has a prominent Warner Avenue frontage, but is very much underdeveloped today. It is hoped that staff can work with the existing propsrL,- owners to rassess development options and opportunities in light of the pending Charter Centre development. eSite 3 and 3a are comprised or a mix of xisting improvements and vacant. parcels. Appraisals are oeing conducted for several parcels within Site 3, and it is proposed that as much of the overall area as possible be consolidated into a single development program or plan. At a minimum, ; t is felt the three corner parcels south of the Lighter Building Site 3 should pa g l ) be consolidated to ensure direct Charter Centre access to Cypress. It is horned that a firm development proposal will be established for the Site by the first few weeks of the new fiscal year. 62 ---- --� _ ti �_ �L 2 s _1�! .- I -- -1 �:y c- ., tr 1 Y� � ��•1 - .. � { I^I I � r - _ .. � , I fr--_.a- - w- / �_ Iy � � I '- � 1 � � 1� 1 �r • i., a ` ^I , i= � ..._ f __ - -- --� - c__ 1,. _ � � �' f —, � � — T !„� / - •* 1 � ,it • �. ��• � �/�t �. �--_�._—�. + _sir=i f1�1� ^�• � -il ': -i� � -- r� ; + �~ ,"j ti,i•- r- r�. -, 'f=;� '- }+ �•- , � •1 �.. j i, �� y� � ll -.�r�--I _S••ri�i.._i -J --- ' U� �� � i � � t .: r I y I ( -� !•i ,.. � � t, �, tip; �h I ��`� I I - g U . :-, � . . "'� � h 1, I , ,: • __._� �,�. .,• �.' '`> ..,�i r�- ,�, .. ' ; '-�1 --- _ b f I _ imf it Ism �s+f . f f�"I �(SR! f fffi i !Tum t I om t oa I am I mll� Ik • — Site 4 contains two parcels which currently support an auto tine shoi) and a residential unit . It is proposed that the Age,icy consider expanding the e Project Area to ss the site shown as 4a. Zhe overall site, including 7 �� 4a, is very much underdeveloped and shvo:s signs of laCll of maintenance arr:' E deterioration. Such a consolidation cculd axorir-odate a st:bstantial development more in keeping with the balarce of the area including Qiarter Centre and the new shopping center to the south. i 64 OAWIE: REIN fFIJ PMEM AREA WAF04U-BEAfi SUBAREA 09kr IF.R �R . PRaTEOr (SITE .1) Developer : nkla Development Corporation Status : Cw,, Part iclpation Agreement sukxnitted concurrently With 1 / Wok r and Budoet 9 a 4, r Pr oy arc Project Description: 8 acre I1:oject Phase I: 210,000 sq. ft. office building 5-plex Edwards Theater 15,000 sq.ft. Holiday Health Spa Two, 7,OOC sq.f t. restaurants 6 level parking structure Phase II: 75,000 rq.ft. Office Building Projected Market Value: $35,OOO,000 - $45,000,000 65 • • D. . FEDWIMOPMEM . . WARNER-BEAM SMAREA SITE 2 FM P%eveloper : Determined) - et with Property . w assess develoFrDeent potential uptions •j " F / � 4 i . l • OAKVIIN MM �A e W�_BEAOI SSUMREA SIMS 3 & 3a PFC TWr Developer : Phil Zisakis Status: Apt?raisals are being conducted for the three corner parcels andd d lu ant options ar i eve p� e be n~, assessed Project Description: (8, 000 so, ft.+ commercial develop;i--nt on Site 3 with Site 3a possibly providing future parking facility) Y 67 t OAKVT-94 REDEVEMPMENr nRL.. WARNER- 1 Sc.%-dIEA SIB 4 & 4a PRW= Developer : (To be Determined) ■ Status: Consider e.n:anding project area boundaries and meet with property owners Project Description: (To be Determined) 68 CENTR.kL aNKVIDi SUBAREA This subarea is seen as being a long-tern transition area. Some recycling has taken place in recent years alory.j with some new develoFment on vacant lots. It, is proposed that an evaluation Lt, made of the costs involved and the ces;.acles to providing the rrruch needed public improvements. Funding for this project could corny from both the H.C.D. program, as well as, future tax increment dollars. r i 1 69 sow I�tffiwl C': ' ? :------•-...�—�—t— � r`� - . 0�.. ►� • �._ ��_ �r. �� sJ1 � 1+I _� ,_? � -.If i!!`l i.11f}` �.�� r.. � CL I � --`y t-�� •!) ---� I M; Gr�J �-1r—, .. — •1 "." 1 ���— -- -----_tom___ —� hl • �_ �w..1•�t�_J-_. I • .� f� • Z + p �„ =- -{sue _ � Me l s tom/ - 'J 1�i �'1!� ,•) �j --;._—� ( F ��.._ f1Z.t�. L1�r•1 �1 (:� I� :� -.�. I W -• , , ' ~� �' I •I �_ liter' .,40 IL •r�L." ;ids lT � .si �n 9 mull _ ' f � � � � � � � � ���-- ® �--■l--ice . � � � -' ® � � CAW Ell REIZVELOPMU AREA C-EIMRAL OAK%IFA S'OBAJTA PUBLIC IMPRO ' PRa7DC.T Developer: RedeveloFxmnt Agen4y Status: Conduct engineering study of costs and feasibility of pro- viding needed public improvements Project Description: Construct needed street, curt and gutlzrs, storm drains, sidewalks, etc. to serve area Project Cost : (To he C>,.termincd? 71 � KC UMO-SLATER SLMAREA The Koledo-Slater Subarea has been divided into our project sites. Whale individual improvement program, are beirg prop;:.-bed in each or these sites, there is a nee to develop an overall master plan to complement the successful of€cut being currently undertaken on Koledo Lane. 'Ibis will ensure proper aece�;s and circ ilation through the area and :.o the Day Care Center. Thus, as 3 priority, it is proposed that such a study be made immediately after the start of the new fiscal year. r1he Koledo Lane Project (Site 1) is underway with most of sixc� -four housing units already being rehabilitated. It is anticipate that the o1►: -:arports will be torn doom in the near futurc -Pnd construction will cr)Rnence on the new garages, housing units and parking/landscape area. This project has already received some regional attention for its unique approach and the collective ca mitment which is being made by the Agency/City and the thirteen individual property owners. While Koledo Lane has been a very corn{;lex project, it appears simple when compared to the obstacles which must be overcome in order to make meaningful improvements in Site 2 . 'ithis site is referred to as the Queens Lane Project which is comprised of a densely populated rental housirtg complex. We should axnnence immediately to assess alternative approaches to establishing long-term plans and progress to ensure maximum positive inpacts of any ptrysical improvements or public services rendered in the neighborhood. 72 :;m I mr.l L rm 1"1 m I EiA I ■A ton$ fm I NE I w I m ' I•,uM/ 1 I� I r 1 1 • --.Tus If1RIZo�f l;1E11 �. ..,...• p OV FR 1 ., B Y I; r �MO ' C.4IJ ' 9 r r •. + r y I . O I J • S I R A I I T �; •�' ~' LIZ IMIlIIIIIIAI WIN @K,� 4111111MI WWI Iml3 ll �j ■ 9— OAKV191 RIDEV V.M Mqr APLA "Koledo-.Slater Subarea" Site 3 is the Mandrell-Marton Project which could respond to an approach similar to that used on Koledo Lane. it is co►TV►•ised of numerous four-plea f > > rental units with _r.agn�nted ownership ar�d no c�x�mon rorrrn�trr�.n _ to the area.. Staff should meet with the property owners to explore the various alternatives which might tv available. , r Site 4 is the Jo -quelyn Lane Project wliicr. probably calls for an aggressive il' '� on am to n rticular , clean �� the ap arance along the rehab i .- ti prcgr , i pa p . pe g alle; which backs onto the Koledo Lane site. Pon early effort should De made to make these improvements -s they could reinforce and complement the uverall positive irra:.t which the Koledo Lane Project will have. r 74 OAKVIE W -M hREA Kota-SLATER SUBAREA KOI EDO LAKE PFtQM= i (SITE 1) Develoier : Koledo Lane Property Corners Association Status : Impraveuv.nts are Urxierway b a - �1 ProjectINscriF Description: Reha alit ticn of lE, four plex units construction of new 5-car garages and 16 ney- units, and develop rent of central par►cing area and green belt Inproved ValL4?: $720,000 r 75 f QAKVIW REDEVIUkPMERr AIWA Kot EDD-SrATI-M svPA QMENS LAN.L PRWE)CT ' (SIZE 2) Developer: (To be Determined) Status: 1984/85F H.C.D. Priority Project Prcjec:t Descr:Dtion: Rchabilitation of existing rental snits and appropriate neighborhood inprovewnis Est irnateq-1 Costs: (To be Determined) 7(1 r e CPXVIEW REOLNEWPHEM ARE i KOL DO-SLATER SUBAREA 1 1 MANDRELL-BARICN PFWWr (SIM 3) r Developer : (To be Determined) Status: cinsl Phase of Subarea Inprovements Project Description: Rehabilitation of existing rental e unite and appropriate neighborhood inpr ovemen is Estimated Costs: (To be Determined) r e 1 77 IIIRTIM REDEVEL CPMF.%T AIJ1 KOLEDD-S'IA ER SUBAREA JACJQt MYN LN E PFWEICT (SITE 4) Developer: (To t*� Determined) aStatus: 1984/85, H.C.D. Priority Project Project De;r_ription: Rehabilitation of existing rental units and appropriate neighborhood inprovements F.stimted Costs: (To be Determined) 78 4 , 1 • • 1 I r� 1 j. I' i i TALEERT-BEACH • YI •Mr • • • l � 1 - 79 N V y ter r1984/85 WORK PROGMt TALBERT-BEACH REDEVELCPMENT AREA The Talbert-Beach Redevelopment Area has been divided into three subareas r-,r planning and development purposes which are: I� 1) Conventional housing Subarea 2) Terry Park Subarea 3) Industrial Park Subarea Development within the Conventional Wmsing Subarea arid the Terry Park Subarea has tormented, with the Industrial Park Subarea being proposed as a resource o u in responding to the enc-I 's relocation challe es. 'fie success that t use po ng t+�g , ng the Agency has had in bringing about redeveloprr►ent in this area and the use cf the Industrial Site as proposed, are reflective of what can and will be accuTlished through public-private cooperation and meaningful owner participati,- *he planning process. The following is a discussion of each of the projects currently underway or proposed within each of the subareas. Also included is a financial analysis for the establish.--d projects or a prel irninac-r financial analysis fnr those p3nding. 80 •�. 1 -•----�. - '-_ - � - -fir �_7L 1 �•' � --�_ -orb � � �1�-, LL 094 ST �/G .T�v�j�-T.Q/fIL , ►.__-�' I� U� f�' ...5� _� a _� - -- . I< - 1. -- . , •, 7-,IZ,6&e T- &E4 7 � -- -- R'jEOEVElOP*IEA17- 4REyq Im pi 1)46i� SW M CCENEWICNAL HOLSING SUBAREA The Conventional Housing Subarea is caTrised of three separate project sites. These sitc::5 are delineated on the map which follows and are identified ,3s Warner-Aranda Project Collins-Zweibel Development Project Citadel Service Corporation Project while each of these sites is wing, or will be, developed separately, the Agency's financial analysis encam asses all. It was the Redevelopment Agency's efforts to acquire the right-of-way, develop the streets assemhle and consolidate the encyclopedia lots, and provide t e public improvc.;hments that opened the site up for develoftTwnt which will now allow each project to move forward. 11,)e Followira is a brief description of each potential project: and an overall financial analysis for the subarea. WART M-ARANDk FFEITTEOr (SITE 1) 'n Warner-Aranda site reoresents the only remnant parcel. in tho entire twenty acre site which has nit, at this point i., tine, teen consolidated for development purposes. The three property owners within the site include the two families after which the site is named and the Agency. Both of the nark,-d owners occupy their respective housing units within the site. The Aranda's have a large family and would have a difficult time replacing what they have c without experiencing increased housing costs. Zherefore, the only possible way for these parcels to be consolidated and redevelopment to finish the } entire project would be for the Agency ..o structure a special program which would be responsive to, in particular , the Arranda family circumstances. 82 i 1 - , LA - - �._ __ - •-. .�'" te. 3 till *41 r__ ITZZ co Lpi -,INN C01Vj1e-1V7-1oA1A t2r1s1AIGS615,IRE t 7 EReY�Ro<,. 34 PEL coo<p- PROJECT vim M, a® wo om an m m Ewa" rftm M ""bm As a favor to the Agency and a public service to the community, a local developer has agreed to build out the Agency -1-nd Aranda sites, at cost, so that the total profits generated from the sale of the finished units could t.--- applies: to the acquisition of the Aranda parcel. Zhis coopertaive approach could generate enought capital to allocate the Aranda family into a cocrraarablc or upgraded home and generate an ongoing income stream for tliem, as %ell. Mr . Warner has previously expressed a willingness to sell if an acceptable relocation alternative is found. Both of tr,ese possibilities are being pursued. 84 CCUINS-ZWEIBM. PFQ7WT Collins-Zweibel Developwnt is proceeding with preparing develorwenL plans for Site 2, at this time. It appears that the project will include approximately forty-five family condom iniuri units, and as many as, forty-eight senior housing units on Site 2a . CITADEL SERVICE OOFJ.'CMTIC N Citadel Servic Corporation is moving ahead with the devekc ro nt of fifty-four family condominium units on Site 3 . Grading has cu1Tn)enced and it is exp?cted that build ng construction will follow in the very near future. Citadel r particpated in last year Is revenue sfngle-family m�rtag� e band program arx' as a result, must provide at least eleven affordable units within Lh,! project . 85 T aDM-BEADi FUMEVEIOPMENP AREA OONVENPIONAL HCIUSING SUBS (SITS 1) I Developer : (To be DF=termine Status: Pr el imi.nary discussions ,lave been held Frith (participants. Need tc exTxeditc as part of the 1964/85 Work Pro:3ram. Project Description: Al-proximately 16 corx3umini,s •, units Projecte<3 Market Value : 31, 400, 000 I Au TAIL'-BEA:.M AREA CQW UrICNAL HOUSING SUBAREA j COLLINS-ZW.IBEL (SIZE 2) DeveloFer: Col'ins-Zweitw_ Development Status: Concept Plans are being Prepared Preliminary Project Description: 44 Senior Citizen Condcxninium Units 45 Family Cor:irnminium Units Projected Market Value: $5,O00,000 r 87 T.AIBM-BEADI REDEVEMAOPMW AREA CONVEI MMM, HOUSING MAMMA CIMEL SERVICE CM110FATIM PFC17kXT (SITE 3) ' Developer: Citadel Service Corporation Project Description: 54 Family Condominium Units Projected .farket Value: "t500,000 88 iFt�f PARK SUBAREA The Terry Park Subarea is the location of the Agency's unique and nationally recognized senior citizens hmising project. Site 1 will provide one hundred and sixty-four affordable rental units when om pleted. Site 2 will support ninety-six senior citizens condominium units which are currently under construction and being sold by 'Ihe William Lyon Company. The following financial analysis -,::lects the establishrreent of the Emerald Cove Housing F%u-d. 'this fund will not only serve as a reserve and an investment pool in support of the project, but will also be the source for depositing Agency housing funds for the future payoff of the entire project financing obligation. 'This approach will ensure the maintenance of affordable rents and eliminate any uncertainties about future financing. -Ayr'. _ Ll -- rs LIAM L M�'C � • — ERI�� � �C .SUB �� jE�v�o�e_> �izj�oo � i .� EMER,9L-O COYC SCA11OR --- Cl rizeovs Ap4RTMf r 2. WINOW 4RD Co vE 3CA.11OR ENS Co D 1 1MnI S TALEERT-BEACH REDEVELAWMEW A WA TERRY PARK SUBMEA LLD DOVE PA0= (SITE 1) Developer : Redevelo nt en pe : P� Agency Status: Under Construction Project Description: . 164 Affordable Senior Citizens Rental Units . Comnon Recreation Building Project Cost: $4j6000000 91 TAIBERT-BEACH REDEVEU32NEW AREA 1 TERRY PARK SUBAREA WINDWARD COVE PIaTDC`T' (SITE 2) rDeveloper: William Lyon Company Status: Under Construction Project Description: 96 Senior Citizen Condominium Units Projected market Value: $5,000, 000 r e r � 92 IND(b`1'RxAL PARK SUBAREA As noted in the analysis of the Downtown Area section, the industrial Park site is seen as an important resource in addressing several relocation challenges. First, providing space to accommodate the property exchange with Caltrans will support the relocation of auto dealerships from the Downtown. Second, promoting the construction of industral space for Mr. Niccole will support consolidation of parcels in the Van Derhyden Project and other area s of the vowntown. 'Ihird, responding to the City School District's need for storage facilities will offset a suggested Fiscal Review obligation and possibly remove industrial uses from a primarily residential neighborhood adjacent to Downtoum and single-family homes. In addition, the balance of the for other compatible industrial uses. site would be developed 9� us = � � � m m w P f 5 ir 1 1 � t l7RML P4,ql< 3&J,3Aq6q 1 W/L LIA � LYoi1/ o ! t - l�ELDCg7'�ON `�/TE� 1 TAIL'-EEACH nOUSMAL AREA INDUSTRIAL PAM StJBAREN , DCLSTPJAL RIIACATION PF4aTE Cr Developer: (To be Determined) Status: Appraisals are being undertaken to estalbish values for the Caltran' s site and the Niccole parcels. Pre- liminary discussions have been held with City School District officials on conceptual plans are being prepared and feasibility studies made. Project Description: 1 1/2 - 2 acres Caltrans Maintenance Yard 1 - 1/2 Acres City School District bus storage and maintenance enance facility 2,000 - 3,000 sq. ft. industrial building for Niccole Balance of site light industrial use 95 LL �. �� ._ -- �, s ,� , �� , �' ���. . ; . r' r Y t ,. �� r i {• � _ • f, e • d • - •• • • �_ - I i • 1 ,' �. � - _ � • _~�� - 0 -. i ~•��_ � i ! � � i 1 1984/85 WORK PAOGHAM YORRIOW-LAM FdMEVELLPHERr AREA The York Rpdevelopment Area has been divided into subareas for planning and developrront purposes. These are the Civic Center and the Lake Street subareas. the primary redevelo nt. objectives in this area are to P Y P� J promote an appropriate reconfiguration of the Civic Center and adjacent Rintington BFach Corga.ny sites, and to support an ultimate development plan which will remove the industrial blight and isolate, buffer and/or consolidate the existing oil operations. of equal concern is to establish a development program which provides an appropriate interface with the adjacent residential neighborhoods. r 97 1 AV K TP Wly-Z_A <5 ;QEpcm66o1;1 1E1v7 A REA a I =I Ii11 t iii Tilili i lip s _. a *4'% r w CfVIC CENTER S I'TE y� CONSOLIVATION ,.�t • ,� Pit0i EC T ks 11: w�C a AVE HIGH SCHOOL UTI � JJ17 111) 110� 1J07 r Roy T vE'Vll;� AVF. lilt lily V »ol• tons .; a ltot (~ Ir/s 11 we J1 `�♦ lilt Jail I111 Io11 1111! lot? loll rrls roll i11^ tool M i loll Irll oak• loll 1r+0s Ills I I t I1041 to I a so 1• too P .ri M /i ' Ilia loot Isla loll loot TOAONTO list loll loll toll 11121 Ilia t111 1411 1411ft I�It Illy , •. o • 1717 1111 Ills loll It to 1011 I'/ll �• :S ti •� toll lost NNW OLM �� 1/11 tell is its loll Isla loll 1'+07 tfor loll toot LB Dill trod, lsor tMf >y ^ +, ts0i I 1107 rAd 17a 1'L�I '� .� .� � •i 10e1 I dn! lu1 l 1111 SPRINGFIELD �I Ill! Ills ' list Ito 1 1►r1 I►o& r W. Ill d 1141 lids t+dt I +dl I'd: t 7I71 alit 1 d flat tot+ Illr 1►1► Ilia +r► too$ w goes 1904 1►I1 Iltd l ►II 1►11 111+ R' .�..� 98 YUPIMUM-IA.K'E 'r AREA CIVIC CENT R SU@AMA �k CIVIC MUER SME CCbEaJMMCN WICA RESIDENTIAL PFY,1Tk7CT Developer: Huntington Beach Ccvpany Status: Consolidation agreement has been discussed in concert with the railroad right-of-way conveyance which needs to be consummated in the very near future Project Description. (To be Determined) Agency Costs: Node anticpated to accomplish consolidation 99 r YCFWIUPN-IAKE REDEVELAN14DU AM LAKE SrFMFr SUBMEA LAKE PrWwr r r r r Developer: Huntington Beach any Status. Commence discussions to asses r potential of relocating industrial use and development residential project Project Description: (To be Determined) r i r r 100 1984/85 C . PFCGFAM •k. 1 J r 1984/85 WORK PFCGPAM SURVEY AREAS . 1 The sucxcessful redevelopment projects which we are currently pursuing and the ' tional effort which is slated to City s aggressive economic development promo peak in October with the Business to Business publication, have, and will continue to, attract growing investment interest into the City. We must be prepared to respond to this interest if we are to takes advantage of the times. e selective expansion of the redevelo nt program into areas where a need � �cpan pme p og exists and expressed interest has been shown will go a long way toward establishing our ability to respond to the opportunities which are evolving. Since it takes many months to process a redeveloFmer,t plan, it is suggested that we move forward imnediately in the early months of the next fiscal year to identifyadditional potential project sites and get the paperwork moving. Fp P 7 Areas which should be included in this study are: 1) Beach Boulevard Commercial Corridor including Huntington Center (currently under study) 2) Gothard Street Industrial Corridor (currently under study) 3) A-%mn Landfill Site 4) Meadowlark Airport Site (potential mobile home relocation r park site) r 5) Flood Control Areas S102 * It has been suggested that the City study the feasibility of using redevelopment as a tool to focus additional resources on addressing the flood control channel funding problem. 7he concept would be to incorporate qualified areas adjacent to the flood control channels into redevelopment project areas and use a large portion of the future tax increment funds to irprove the channels. r N r 103 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1984/85 WORK PAOGRAM PFCU= PIANNIM & ACHMSrRATIM To successfully implement a conprehensive redevelopment program, it requires the active participation and support of the City Council, impacted property owners, the community at-large, and most City departments and divisions. We have been successful in promoting such participation, and as a result, we are f' t 's redevelopment and making substantial progress toward fulfilling the Ci y p� economic development goals. Because we are now moving rapidly out of the planning mode into the implementation mode, it is even more important that such participation and involvement continue. Therefore, several organizational changes are proposed to ensure that proper attention is given to the priority projects and that the basic planning and coordination takes place between the various parties which need to be involved. The principle purpose for these proposals is to ensure that the Downtown Project receives priority attention and to allocate sufficient personnel staff resources to get desired results. / a One change recommended is that the Redevelopment Coordinator will be retained on a contractual basis rather than as a full-time Agency employee. In this way his primary, but not exclusive, duty will be primary to coordinate the implementation. of the Downtown Redevelopment Plan. This shift will assure that undivided attention will tr directed at this priority project. It will e relieve this position of the other responsibilities and tasks with which that Noffice is involved. The contractual arrangement would require a minimum of thirty to fort l hours per week, as required to be devoted to the Downtown Project. ConT ensation would be based on adherence to this minimum commitment (See Attac:hrrrnt 1, Exhibit A) . 105 Zhe basic responsibility for ongoing staff operations dealing with other redevelopment programs, other than for the Downtown Area , will be shifted will . r the Special Projects Coordinator position. Both of these operations it continue to be directed by the Agency's thief Executive officer (City Administrator) , as in the past. Since much of the remaining work in these areas relate directly to the Neighborhood Enhancement activities and involve H.C.D. funds, it is a natural shift in responsibility. In addition, the k Special Projects Coordinator has a strong planning background and some economic development experience which will assist him in pursuing his expanded role. 7bere may be the need to add one additional position under the Special Projects Coordinator as other projects develop. The following flow chart reflects the proposed organizational change and the source of administrative funds. r ].06 CITY OF HUIJrIIVION BEACH �E"VELOPA¢Nr OBI ZATICNAL CHART & ACMINISTRATIVE FUNDING SOURCES r rEXECLY1.nic OFFICER AS H.C.D. FUMS ' .rwwwwrwwww.ww w�wrww.�r.wwww.�.wwwww� �ww wwwww�wwwwwwrwawww� 1 I 1 I SPDCIAL VEIUPrt rr t PFCJECI5 ' (COQNTFtALT)R COORDINAMR 1 I 1 PIA *,n NG j I I C�lSULTI " ! (CON'I' ic"2) I I t I I 1 1 SECRETAM t t I 1 I i ! 1 1 1 r1 ADMI1 1 RATIVE i ! 1 ! �rwwww.�.wwrwwwwwr� I I I I 1 I � �wwwwww w..r ww www w+ 1 I � t SPECIAL 1 I SENIOR CCMMUNITY r LEGAL COUNSEL t ! UOI�M. L�'Vr'�I.AP. DE�1EIlJPt Nr t (MERZACTI I I SPDCI.ALIST SPECIALIST I s�wwwww a�rwwwrwi I r r�wwwwwr. u.w+�ww+�w1 ! ' � I 1 1 1 1 ' I I I I 1 1 I Clot"ZILNNI"rY REEIABILITATICN BOND COUNSEL. I D�'�`�T ASSISMVrr j Cam=AM j ! AIDE �) j I I �wYrw..ww..Mw..rrwwwYw� �rwwwwrrww.�..��Twru.�wwwesw......�N....�...w.. ....+.rwr/ BCtD FUNDS 107 ATTACHMERr 1 AGF1111Nr BY AND B 7 : TI THE CITZ OF AGENCY AND THC S D. TINCHM, VEDOPMERr ooORDINA7M THIS AGREEMMr, is made and entered into this day of 1984, by and i between the City of Huntington Beach Redeve�oFment Agency (hereinafter called "Agency") and Thomas Dale Tincher (herein after called "Coordinator") with respect to the following facts: a A. Coordinator, at the time of execution of this Agreement, is a a full-time employee of the City of Huntington Beach 9 servin as Redevelnpment Coordinator . B. As of July 1, 1984, the Agency will retain Coordinator per the terms of this Agreement, who will continue to carry out his designated functions and tasks. 1 ribp parties to this Agreement therefore agree to the General Provisions attached hereto, and incorporated herein, as Exhibit "A" and to the following: 1) Commencing with the execution of this Agreement, Agency hereby retains Coordinator to perform various functions and tasks on behalf of the Agency n as are detailed on the Scope of Services and Wipansakion Provisions which is attached hereto and incorporated a herein, as Exhibit "B." 2) Agency shall provide normal office accomrodations and secretarial services at no cost to C000rdinator in support of the inplementation of the designated functions and tasks. 3) Agency shall compensate Coordinator" for all work conducted under this i Agreement as specified in Exhibit B." a 108 4) Coordinator shall submit monthly status reports d-9scribing the nature and amount of authorized work completed under the terms of the Agreement during the prior month. 5) Coordinator shall be reimbursed for extra ordinary, out-of-pa%:ket expenses, incidental to services performed by Coordinator, as approved by the City Adn:inistrator/Chief Executive Officer. 6) With respect to carrying out the functions and tasks as designated under this Agreement, Coordinator shall be an independent contractor who shall consult with, and be directed by, the City Administrator/Chief Executive Officer in carrying out the desiqnated functions and tasks -,,!thin the established compensation provisions as set_orth by Exhibit B. 7) Coordinator will not acquire, hold or retain any financial interest in any property or project which may be the subject matter of any action taken by the Agency or services performed by Coordinator under this Agreement. 8) Coordinator shall serve at the pleasure of the Agency and this Agreement may be terminated by the Agency or Coordinator with thirty (30) days written notice to the other party. IN WIlMSS WHEREOF, the parties beret, have executed this Agreement the day and year first above written. ATT Sr: CITY OF HUNFUNGION BEACH REDEVELC PM N - AGENCY ' Agency C:ler k Chairperson 109 4 b MiCIMS • �ER % CoordinatorAYPFDJED AS TO FUN: ^ i u AgencyC)Dunsel .. •.• III city • Chief Executive Officer y i 'o t1;} y � EXHIBII, "A" COAL PROM S: ' 1) LIWTATICNS. Coordinator shall have no power to incur obligations on behalf of the City/Agency for labor, materials, services oc other costs, without prior written ccisent of City Administrator/Chief L:ecutive Officer. 2) N=ISCRIIMINATICN. Coordinator agrees that in the performance of the i terms of this Agreement, he will not engage in discrimination in ' employment of persons necause of race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical handicap, medical condition, marital status, or sex of such persons, t as provided in Labor node Section 1420. except Violation of this provision may result in the imposition of penalties referred to in Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1 of the California Labor Code. 3) INCMMMIT It is further understood and agreed that Coordinator is, and shall bee , acting at all times as an independent contractor herein and not as an employee of City/Agency. Coordinator shall secure at his expense, a.,d be r--sperosible for any and all payment of irxame tax, social security, stat:-_ disability, insurance compen sation, runemployment compensation, and pay.ol.-I deductions for Coordinator and its officers, agents and employees and all business licenses, if any, in connection with the services to be performed hereunder. 4) DEEMIFICATICN, ; HOLD HARMLESS. Coordinator shall defend, a inde7t�nify and hold harmless City/Agency, its officers, gents, and employees, from and against any and all liability, judgments, damages, costs, losses, clailmLs, including Workers Compensation claims and expenses resulting from or connected with Coordinator's negligence or other tortious conduct in the performance of this Agreement. 111 EXHIBIT "B" 90(PE OF SEWICES AND IQV PFtWISIr*S She basic responsibilities of Ocard inator as outlined hereir, and as may be subsequently assigned by the City Administrator/Chief Executive officer, shall he to supply professiDnal services to promote anti establish viable development alternatives for sites within the Main-Piet Redevelopment Project Area. In addition to the specific tasks outlin--d below, Cberd.inator will attend City Council and Agency d Redevelopment Agen meetings as required and prepare and r coordinate with City staff, agenda materials for those activities with which he is involved. A. 90CPE OF SP.WICES. 1) C:oordinato,7 shall assist Agency staff in establishing and impl2rren'_-ing , inprovement projects within the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area. As a for p • -)city, oc�ordinator shall work with property owners within the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area and potential users to for.-sulate development proposals for City/Agency consi6eration. 2) Coordinator will take all actions necessary, at the request of the City/Agency staff to coordinate, the relocation of property owners and tenants displaced as a result of redevelopment project activities. Said actions shall include, but not limited to, the following: a) attend meetings at the direction of the Chef Executive officer to provide expert information and assistance on relocation issues. b) meet with relocatees to discuss said relocatees' interests and re relocation plan-, and rights relevant to relocation and preps p strategies for specific development opportunities. 112 e c) coordinate relocation plans, services and assistance with Agency acquisition and business retention efforts. e B. COMParAMM PR)VISICts. I Services performed by Coordinator shall be first authorized, monitored and approved by the City ?administrator/Chief Executive officer. e Coordinator .hall be c 1pensated for authorized services by payment of a monthly retainer fee of $5, 800. Said compensation shall be , -- *d with bi-weekly installments. e2) For said compensation, Coordinator agrees to provide, at a minin m, 180 hours per month, k~:c in no case shall the hours be less than 32 hours in e any ore week, in-house. Dotal monthly hours shall include required meetings of the Agency, City Council, property owners, and others, as ne-�essary to meet the requirements of the overall program. Coordinator shall be compensated at ean hourly rate of $50 for any authorized and pre-approved service provided in excess of 180 hours per month. 1 e e e e e e 113 e • I f • Y 1984/85 BUDGET CITY OF HWj:, .21W BMCH 'IJD •• MyAGEMY 114 r � ti 1984/55 BUDGET CITY OF HUNrINMUN BEAM AGENCY The 1984/85 Redevelopment Agency budget has been developed with separate sections for each of the four recently established project areas. Under redevelopment law, these areas are distinct legal entities for which the tax increment revenues and expenditures nrust be accounted for separately. Given the proposed app.roach to administering the overall program as described in the "General Administration and Planning" section, the area being given top priority consideration and receiving direct Pedevelopment Agency fuming to administer is the Downtown. The other Redevelopment Agency activities will be administered by the Special Projects Coordinator, whose position and support e it y Develo nt Program. staff are funded under the Fio�.sing b (lxmun } pme og Redevelopment activities administered under the Special Projects Coordinator 's office are reimbursable expenses which will be paid to the City out of future tax increment dollars generated within the respective project areas. Following is a proposed budget for each of the four areas which reflect the ebasic administrative expenses which are anticipated during the 1984--85 Fiscal ' Year. 'Ihe specific project expenditures will be detailed separately at the time that development programs within each area are consummated in the form of development agreements. Also included, however, is a general assessment of what the overall financial picture of ;he Agency might be it the anticipated projects do move forward in a timely manner. 115 AGENCY 1984/85 All"191%MON AiJL Wr DOWNP-dd (MAIN-PUM) REDEVELCRMENr AREA The Downtown Redevelopment Area Administrative Bucket reflects the total � 3 awunt of anticipated Agency carryover from the current year, which amounts to $156,000. The budget would support the services of the Redevelopment Coordinator , his secretary, the Special Redevelopment Counsel, and limited ' panning/graphic arts consulting services. It also provides dollars needed to carry out the associated administrative tasks. In addition to approving this budget, it is asked that $25,000 in previously r allocated Housing & Community Development planning funds be used to support the Downtown and overall economic development promotional program as previously outl4red and approved. Also, it is recommended that the Housing & Community Development planning funds be the source to finance the design and planning studies called for under the Main-Pier Site 3 discussion of Pier Expansion Project. It is estimated that the costs could range between $25,000 450,000. These expenditures of housing & Community Development funds, which have previously been allocated for Downtown planning purposes, would be viewed as advances to the Agency and subject to future reimbursement under the cooperative agreement. 1 116 DEPARTMENT FUNCTION PROGRAM NO. PROGRAM NAME Administration Special Projects 810 Downtown Redevelopment Area PROGRAM OBJECTIVE To encourage, support, and administer the implementation of the City's Redevel- -Iment efforts with priority being given to the Downtown Redevelopx-nt Program. SERVICE ACTIVITIES Encourage property owner participation, coordinate overall planning, coordinate relocation assistance pro!ram, draft and Implement development agreements, provide public Information and community outreach, and coordinate overall administration. r TABLE OF ORGANIZATION BUDGETED PROD. RECOMMID PROJECTED RANGE CLASSIFICATION F Y 82/83 F Y 83/84 F Y 84/85 F Y 85/86 F Y 86/87 F Y 87/88 425 Redevelopment Project Coordinator 112 1 1 • l • I • I • 255 Administrative Secretary 1/2 1 1 I 1 TOTALS 1 2 2 2 2 2 ' Contract 0006E/pg—'S L' 0 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH P ROGRAM DETAIL - FY 94/85 DEPARTMENT FUNCTIR:� PROGRAM 140. PROGRAM NAME Administration Special Projects 810 Downtown Redevelopment Area F Y 82/83 REVISED REVISED ACTUAL BUDGET ESTIMATE RECOMWD PROJECTED Personal Services FY 82/83 FY 83/04 FY 83/8, FY 84/85 FY 85/86 FY 86/87 FY 97/39 110 SALARIES, PERMANENT 32,744 69,662 70,678 200856 21 ,949 23,040 24,156 120 SALARIES, T:.'APORARY 0 1,000 0 0 0 0 0 130 SALARIES, GizRTIME 64 500 0 0 0 0 0 140 SALARIES, HOLIDAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ISO SALARIES, ED. INCENTIVE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 161 RETIREMENT 5,963 12,954 12,756 3,858 4,060 4,262 42468 162 INSURANCE COMPENSATION 33 69 68 21 22 23 24 163 INSURANCE, EMPLOYEES 1.481 3,346 4,562 1.777 2,011 2,255 28531 165 INSURANCE, UNEMPLOYMENT 5 69 72 21 22 23 24 Total Personal Services 40.790 87,500 880095 26,533 28,063 29,603 31,203 m Operating Expenses 251 Auto Allowance 2,100 2,925 2,925 0 210 Comm., Telephone 0 250 3 50 50 50 50 211 Comm., Postage 6 500 100 500 500 500 500 221 Supplies, Special Department 179 1,300 700 1.300 1 ,300 1,300 1,300 '24 Supplies, Film 250 825 600 900 900 800 800 250 Travel Costs ISO 1,000 0 500 500 500 500 321 Periodicals 193 750 100 250 250 250 250 390 Contr. Svc. - Plannir+; 3•j,432 20,000 9,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 391 Contr. Svc. - Legal i ,024 46,000 250000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 395 Contr. Svc. - Auditing 0 2,500 2,500 2,500 2,500 2,500 2,500 396 Contr. Svc. - Appraiser, Etc. 0 0 0 9.000 9,000 9.000 9,000 400 Contr. Svc. - Printing 0 2,000 500 500 500 500 Sot- 401 Contr. Svc. - Advertising 983 48000 0 1,500 1,500 1.500 1.500 427 Property Management 0 333,000 0 5,000 5,000 5,000 5.000 460 Meetings 48 750 750 1,000 1 ,000 1,000 1,000 461 Conferences 595 1,000 1.000 1,000 1 ,000 1,000 1,000 464 Confe.-. & Meetings - Board 0 4,000 0 7,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 500 Dues dr Memberships 700 18000 860 1.200 1,200 1,200 1 ,200 550 'transfer From Central Stores 0 500 0 500 500 500 S00 589 Agency Members Expenses 0 68000 940 1.500 1,500 1,500 1 ,500 593 Misc. Conti;..3eney 60,600 0 4,867 5,G30 5,000 5,000 M ® M Me r s%vopi",t�A o%n vid-vf nsen K r M CMOF�TIINBONMCI w PROGRAM DETAIL — FY 34185 DEPARTMENT FUNCTION PROGRAM NO. PROGRAM NAME t:driinistration Special Projects 810 Downiown Redevelopment Area i-� TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES 45.660 489,400 44,875 128,967 129,100 129,100 129.100 TOTAL CAPITAL COSTS 5,420 19,500 199500 500 Soo 500 500 GROSS PROGRAM COST 9, 1370 595#400 1520470 156,000 157,663 159,203 1(,'�,303 PROGRAM REIMBURSEMENT 14ET PROGRAM COST 91,370 5951400 152,470 156,000 157,663 159,203 160,803 00068jpa—lI & 12 t lc REDEVEIfJPM?r AGENCY .. • M • • • ,. I, • •'. , }� 1 • - 1 ' : • • • -• i • .• = EM)EMMIRES County1. orange 2. 1 percent Housing Fund - • 3. Reirbursement to Mity for Koledo • expenditures an .•ministrati%,e costs �• per O>operative • • r • � w r �J r f 1 ' . . - •�' • . ' - 4V 1984/85 r , ^ d ADMINISTRATIM ELMGET 1 1 i- EnSrDG I"EVEME 1. Ora.-qe CountyDistrict 3. Peimbursement to City for project expenditures tdnd .d pursuant to do . f. i Operative AgreementNo. • • .33 • r $589.44 X-1 r r _ • 4 • Y r , ti � . w - ♦ hIF1 _ to `* _ ,` • • � r .. � h � ., � •_ r. ` • _ , I � r M • • y K •�aD •• .a ra '. z Mn RMZVffDR4ENV AMA -� EXISrM FMVE2%JE 1 � a 1 . 2.12 11983/84 tax incrementallocation 3 78. 06 40 I. Orange cownty Water District �. • •0 .48 1 Percent • Fund 4. -o City for planning -and _ _ • • .•• ,..• Cooperption Agreement t 1 . 2.12 4w • M a, J+' —1 ♦ \ 11 122 a • . 1 • / y , 1 • 1 14 • t PFELIMINARY ANALYSIS OF • , ., CFM 1' M t 1 s ' 1 r I ti i� - r f ,