Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Redevelopment Agency Main-Pier Material dated 1982 to 1987
Item D-1 JOINT PUBLIC HEARING OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH PROPOSED AMENDMENT AND MERGER OF THE HUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS JOINT PUBLIC HEARING PROCEDURES November 18, 1996 1. Prior to calling the Joint Public Hearing to order, the CITY ATTORNEY will make a statement regarding those City Council/Agency Members who will be abstaining from participation in the Joint Public Hearing and consideration of the Amendment/M[erger due to a potential conflict of interest. 2. Opening of the Joint Public Hearing A. Call to order of the City Council (MAYOR): "This meeting of the City Council will come to order. The record will reflect that all members of the City Council are present together with the City staff." B. Call to order of the Redevelopment Agency (AGENCY CHAIR): "This meeting of the Redevelopment Agency will come to order. The record will reflect that all members of the Agency are present together with the Agency staff." (AGENCY CHAIR): For the purpose of the joint public hearing, the Vice-Mayor of the City will be authorized to act as the Chairman of the Agency." C. Declare joint public hearing open (MAYOR): "This is the time and place for a joint public hearing to be conducted by the City Council and Redevelopment Agency for the purpose of considering the amendment and merger of the Agency's five existing redevelopment projects. huntbch\jphproc 1 3. Introductory Remarks A. (MAYOR): "Madam Clerk/Secretary have all the required notices been given concerning this public hearing?" (CITY/AGENCY CLERK): "Yes, Mr. Mayor, I have here affidavits of mailing and publication which are marked Exhibits A and B." (MAYOR): "Exhibits A and B are accepted in evidence without objection. "The following documents will be under consideration: "(1) The Proposed Redevelopment Plan, and "(2) The Agency's Report to the City Council on the Proposed Merged Redevelopment Plan." B. (MAYOR): "Our order of procedure tonight will be as follows: "(1) The staff will present the Proposed Redevelopment Plan for the Merged Huntington Beach Redevelopment Project and other evidence and testimony in support of the Amendment and Merger. "(2) Next, we will acknowledge receipt and enter into the record any written correspondence received prior to the joint public hearing. "(3) We will then receive any written evidence or oral testimony from the audience concerning the Amendment/Merger. "(4) After all presentations have been made and public testimony and comments received, there may be a short recess, following which responses may be made to any objections raised during the public testimony. "(5) After questions, comments, and objections have been responded to, the public testimony portion of the joint public hearing will be closed. If written objections have been received during the joint public hearing, the action will be continued to a meeting of the City Council and the Agency to be held on December 2, 1996, at which time written responses to the written objections will be presented and the City Council and the Agency will consider and take action on the proposed Amendment/Merger and related matters." hunfth\jphproc 2 4. Staff Presentation A. (MAYOR): "At this time, I will ask the Director of Economic Development to present the staff report concerning the subject to the public hearing." B. (DAVID BIGGS): Summary Presentation (1) Summary of the background and reasons for the Amendment/Merger; (2) Summary of the Redevelopment Plan; (3) Summary of Community Meetings; (4) Summary of Previous Actions by City Council, Agency, and Planning Commission. C. (DAVID BIGGS): introduces Frank Spevacek of the Rosenow Spevacek Group to provide additional presentations. (1) (FRANK SPEVACEK): Presentation (a) Provides summary of the Agency's Report to Council. E. (DAVID BIGGS): Requests to introduce documents into the record of the hearing. Introduces Murray Kane. F. (SPECIAL AGENCY COUNSEL): "Staff and the consultants have prepared, and each of the City Council members has received certain documents relating to the Amendment/Merger. Included in these materials are: "(1) The Report to the City Council on the Redevelopment Plan for the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Project; and "(2) The Redevelopment Plan; "Labeled as Exhibits C and D, respectively. "I would like to introduce these documents into the record of this hearing at this time. If there are no objections, these materials shall be made a part of the record." 5. Written Communications Received Prior to Public Hearing A. (MAYOR): "I will now ask the City Clerk to enter into the joint public hearing record any written correspondence concerning the Redevelopment Plan." n=tbcmpnpra 3 1 � • B. (CITY/AGENCY CLERK) indicates by author and date each letter or statement distributed to the City Council. If letters are received that have not previously been distributed to the City Council members, these letters should be read into the record. 6. Public Hearing A. (MAYOR): "The rules governing public testimony are as follows: All persons wishing to speak will be given the opportunity to do so. Persons making statements and giving testimony must direct questions through the Chair. "Before speaking, please give your name, address, organization (if any)you represent, and whether you own property or operate a business in the Project Area. "Please limit your comments to the subject at hand and to three minutes in length. We will hear comments in the order that speaker cards are received. "I now declare the public hearing open." B. Written and oral comments by persons in the audience concerning the Amendment/Merger. C. (MAYOR): "I now declare a recess of the City Council and Agency." 7. City Council/Agency Recess, if necessary(10-15 minutes). 8. City Council/Agency Reconvene In Session A. (MAYOR): "Do staff or the consultants have any additional comments or responses to the testimony presented before us tonight?" B. (SPECIAL AGENCY COUNSEL): The Agency has received certain written materials which could be deemed to constitute objections to the adoption of the Merged Redevelopment Plan. Pursuant to Sections 33363 and 33364 of the California Community Redevelopment Law, where written objections are received, the Agency is to respond within not less than one week before it may proceed to adopt the Merged Redevelopment Plan. In light of this requirement, I would request that the Agency and the City Council close this public hearing and continue this joint meeting to December 2, 1996, in order for the City Council and the Agency to consider responses of the Agency to the written objections." C. (MAYOR): "Are there any final questions by members of the City Council or Agency?" D. Questions by members of City Council and Agency, if any. h-tbch\jphp— 4 9. Close Joint Public Hearing A. (MAYOR): Closes Joint Public Hearing and continues joint meeting to consider the Amendment and Merger to December 2, 1996 at 7:00 p.m. in City Council Chambers. 10. Agency Actions A. (AGENCY CHAIR): "If there are no further comments, the Agency will act on the agenda items related to the Redevelopment Plan. The Agency will consider and take action on the following: MOTION TO APPROVE: (1) A Resolution Certifying that the Final Environmental Impact Report (No. 96-2) for the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Project Has Been Prepared, Circulated, and Completed in Compliance With CEQA and State Guidelines for CEQA and that the Agency Has Reviewed and Considered the Information Contained Therein." 11. City Council Actions A. (MAYOR): "The City Council will now act on the agenda items related to the Amendment and Merger. City Council consider and take action on the following: MOTION TO APPROVE: (1) A Resolution Making Certain Findings and Determinations Concerning the Environmental Impact Report for the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Project, Making Certain Findings Regarding the Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Huntington Beach Redevelopment Project, Adopting a Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program and a Statement of Overriding Considerations. 12. Agency and City Council Adjourn or Consider Other Items, If Required hwthch\jphprce 5 Hon . Chairman and Members of the Redevelopment Agency City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Re : Pierside Restaurant Project Concept Approval Hon . Chairman and Members of the Redevelopment Agency, In anticipation of our presentation to you on Tuesday; February 20, 1990, I felt it would be appropriate to discuss the basic concept we will be proposing . As all of you know, the Pierside project has had a long history. Starting_, as a Greek oriented retail village of ever 85, 000 sf, with a focus on retail stores, it was followeld by an ever: more :intensive, but West Coast oriented proposal. by Enterprise Development Co. Although the Agency originally supported the Creek Village plan, it ultimately concluded that the successor Enterprise plan was too intense and votec-1 to down scale the project and shift the focus to restaurants . Our original proposal was geared to this end, and had less than 10, 000 sf of retail on the Plana level. . viewzng the plan, however, the Agency/Co-onIc-11 t tee concluded that all retail should be removed f ;;m t_he 421.= .a l -vel., . and that only restaurants should be found in on . The conceptual plan before ;iocl reflects that further change in direction. Dramatically simpler than a.11 prior plans, it is limited to three : ew building_- : the reconstructed Maxwell' s, and c : 11ew buildings tota'_lirn 25, 000 sf . Pursuan� to the si;. a:_-tee' s recoirmend_t ions the boardwalk level r_onr_airs a 6, ,!00 sf casual_ dini.rq establishment, a reconst r octed. J-w .qh, ` s; and atiprc?x i mately 7 , 500 sf of beach related concessi ;is•f'ooc? services . A combination of 1i-mi_ted sur-face parking, and two subterranean levels will provide approximately 500 parking spaces for project vis i to a:�:: goers . It _s our intention to mainta n ,a-rei ol: Pa:i-�_:�.ng, constituting approximately :�c:= t, fr e fir self-park::n`Y and beach goer use . The c�dd� � p �i� level, whJLch ias a self-parking design capac '_- ,, or. i w ,_,, c)x -._mately 225 spaces, will, through the use of to :dern and -vas er ma.na,;emenz pro bab1 house well in excess of 300 cars . i-n _gh of the fact that restaurants' have their highesi- ,--f ac-t i vity Ln the _ J late afternoon and evening, we hel-i_eve that this mix . will provide high use of the pa_ k_nq Lot _t' _oug1hout the day.. As the attached. d acj arras i LI1Asr 1:ate., the current proposal has tremendous pedestri +.r -)CceS_s and minimal v=_cw obstruction . In the view stied only in the darkened areas, are views of the Ocean blockeec . _-n all other areas, and along the entire length of. PCH, a range of Ocean view opportunities is available . Pedestrians access the project at Main and Lake .St.reets, and can walk across the entire length of the Ocean side of the project for free and with a totally unobstructed. view of the Beach, Ocean and Pier, thereby effectively extending the Pier Plaza 800 feet to the South at no cost to the community. Access to the Beach is by huge staircases that double as observation areas . Furthermore., elevator access for the frail and handicapped will. be provided. It is our convictio. that t'r_e instant proposal fully integrates the objectives set forte in the Downtown Specific Plan for District 10, - a copy of which 3.8 attached far your review. Your approval of this concept will allow us to proceed with further refinement -of the plan and submission to the Planning Commission . I look forward to receiving y,—) r unanimous supper . Sin;erewy yGurs, .. Y • Jonathan P . Chodos PIERSIDE RESTAURAINT PRO,-' CT Pacific Coast Highway Lev--J. : Three separate only: Maxwells 15 , O try c t i on Building No . 2 10, 000 S.- c,!e v, '.^,D r..s t r u-.t i o n 2 1700 s f Building No . 3 15, 000 sJ71, if Boardwalk Level fronting on Beach Ac-c-ess Road: Casual Dining 6, 00C, sf Dwight' s 2, 500 �,-IL 1) �,)",I CI Fj f Food Services Beach Related Concessions 5, OCC sr Parking spaces 500+ i n f n A In E•rornp vr.r•m....rnl on 13 n n n A tt E.gbnp Nonu npl bn.1v Cawr y E.;nmp y.rmnp. � m u)fI u rn a .a — c I �; �- yI o Yi a (} o. f/7 J it I Pacific Coast Highway ,, E��+rtr m•'� 4+w 7a aa v 0 I I ar.r ul•puva N•......w. _—Y....il'.B..i.ur and �.• �: __• .. i .. A..Y T I -Ir�w�rMNYI .. - -..._...__-_-. .�._.___.—.,_-__.. 0urrbnp N•.t .- .-. "�'—' .-. BuNbnp Np.] — Y/UV fjAM Y/1M'RAM I ...Be•ci...♦c c..a...4••p ... I ^ ............................. ................. ..... .......•.-. cif 4AdM • _ Site Plan ] � 7J� JJ JJ"` J� (�' Jf JJ� j�' �J j/ J/ J/ //'� �` m l� I! IC 1!b l y !1 D lL' 4" !! !L L 4 tL7 [G CRURNCY .�......... ........... C O O U a n t7 a R ..�.i,.o..M.,,o,•.a•.u,.,. m t,�.ii•a s•.ano• I d d m N 4 � •1� O N. O 0miu �e g a n d p n a m tt Pacific Coast Hinway ' U c I elr+n aso. tom• a.w 4m»po"W N v At /MtA I u�•w•�e w•ea•,un eW.aro w inew/LAm M✓#VASA.1 .. . ......... .... k.•...... ... . .................... ... ..............................._................. ...... I I View Corridors Site Plan • .• 10 • .• I m T 13 7 fj ...... 13 a b a a n JL . ....... ... X ...... 33 u 1:1 ........... Pacific Coast Highway . ............ .. .......... . ........... ...... ........... ................ X . .. ...... .............. ... ... . ---------- ....................!..... . — .. ....... ........ Amw ............."-4.4v 0 OW I ...... ............. ........... ...... ......... . .......... ..... ................... ...... .......... ... ....... ..... ........ ....... .. ... X P!M!OL4 3, OL ... ..... Itl ................................ ................................ ............ .............. .... ....... ...................................... ........ ....... ....... Pedestrian Access Site Plan P I E R S I D E F I L L If G E C-IR CARNEY PIER CONCESSIONAIRE VIII. "All three concessions" - Briggs Family Submitted by Sea Cove Staff from Santa Barbara a. Restaurant open for breakfast, lunch and dinner. b. Open from 7:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. without liquor - 7:00 a.m. to 1:30 a.m. Mth liquor. C. Informal but full service for coffee shop. d. Snack/bait shop sell anything applicable, profitable and tasteful. e. Percentage and terms to be negotiated (Santa Barbara - 6% to 11 1/4%). 0097u QUALIFICATIONS: The Sea Cove staff and owners have the remodel, organizational and creative experience necessary to install a il restaurant from beginning to finish. We have operated the beach restaurant for seven years increasing sales and improving the menu and physical plant yearly while generating commensurate profit. Last year we installed new gas lines and an entire gas kitchen thereby switching over from electric and increasing our speed of food production in keeping with the demands of a growing Santa Barbara waterfront. We are now in the process of adding gas heat heaters outside to increase our nightly sales. We have been successful in increasing sales by ten-fold in the last seven years. We understand that an efficient to go operation is essential to the Huntington Beach plan. From what we gather from the printed material we received, all three points of sale on the pier would include some form of snack and/or to go foods. At the Leadbetter Beach Sea Cover our entire approximately 300-item menu (including breakfast, lunch, dinner) is available to go, and a large percentage of our production is taken away to places like City College and the City College Stadium across the street from us and down the beach to the harbor. At the Huntington Beach installation we propose to offer our entire menu to go at the full service restaurant. Box lunches, convenience snacks such as chips, pretzels, etc. , as well as our trademark health type products including nutburgers (microwaveable) and fruit smoothy drinks would be sold at the snack;bait and tackle shop as well as at the coffee shop. We propose to provide the largest amount of items at the largest possible number of venues, all, of course, within the context of storage, profitability, building and health codes, etc. It has always been the intention of the Briggs Family, especially at the Leadbetter Beach location, to provide an extremely varied menu tailored to any appetite, but at the beach location we felt somewhat limited by physical constraints. In summer of 1988 we opened the Sea Cove Montecito to provide a more upscale gourmet venue with full service. Our combined and diverse experience makes us uniquely suited to your new project. r ITEMS FOR FULL SERVICE RESTAURANT Breakfast, lunch, dinner on premise or to go Non-stop from 7 :00 a.m. until 11:00 p.m. without liquor to 1:30 a.m. with liquor ITEMS FOR COFFEE SHOP We are uncertain regarding the size of, the coffee shop. We perceive it to be larger than the 280 sq.ft. as quoted in your letter. We propose an informal but full or semi-full service venue focusing mainly on breakfast, lunch and light early dinner with full to go capacity. Of course we will tailor our program to fill the specific requirements of physical reality. ITEMS FOB SNACK/BAIT/RENTAL SHOP We propose to provide the aforementioned food items (see cover letter) in addition to suitable tackle sales, rentals and bait necessities as well as quality souvenir clothing, postcards, etc. , and applicable athletic equipment such as boogie boards, surf wax, straps, sunglasses, visors, etc. Again we intend to sell anything applicable, profitable and tasteful within the context of the Huntington Pier project. We have discussed programs like wind-surfing lessons. In short, we need to know more about your plans so that we can apply a myriad of marketing ideas. We will commence, upon your approval, immediately. APPROXIMATE HOURS OF OPERATION Coffee Shop: 7:00 a.m. to sundown Bail and Tackle Shop: 7:00 a.m. to sundown Restaurant: 7:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m, food and until 1:30 a.m. liquor (Serving breakfast, lunch and dinner) PROPOSED TERMS Percentage and Terms of Lease to be negotiated. Leases in Santa Barbara range from 6% to 111% depending on the type of business, with a minimum monthly rent. We hope this somewhat informal plan will interest you enough to allow us time to prepare a complete financial proposal. Unfamiliar as we are of your area we ask to have time to get better acquainted. We are also curious about the availability of liquor licenses. Sincerely yours, ^ Terry M. Briggs Patricia R. Swartz Firm: Sea Cove Cafe Leadbetter Beach 801 Shoreline Drive Santa Barbara, CA 93109 Sea Cove Montecito 1155 Coast Village Road Santa Barbara, CA 93108 Contact: Terry M. Briggs 805/965-2917 Patricia R. Swartz (mother) 805/969-1456 Local References: City of Santa Barbara Waterfront Department 321 East Cabrillo Boulevard Santa Barbara, CA 93103 805/564-5519 Hal Conklin, City Councilman City of Santa Barbara City Hall 735 Anacapa Street Santa Barbara, CA 93101 805/963-0611 Jack Miholik, Police Officer City of Santa Barbara . 215 Figueroa Street P.O. Box 539 Santa Barbara, CA 93102 805/963-3616 PIER CONCESSIONAIRE IX. "End of Pier and Base of Pier" - H.E.G. Enterprises Submitted by Hal E. Griffith a. Locations - Seattle, Washington: 1. "The Bay Pavilion" 68,000 square feet 2. "The Fisherman's Restaurant & Bar" at end of the pier. 3. "The Salmon Cooker Restaurant and Bar 4. "The Bay Fish Market" 5. "Pirate's Plunder 11,9ercantile" 6. "The Alaska Provisioners" 7. "Something Wild" 8. "Images" 9. "Bay Pavilion Carousel and Concessions" 10. "Yukon Jacks' Restaurant & Bar" at the Seattle Center. Sun Valley, Idaho 1. "The Ore House Restaurant and Bar" California 1. San Clemente - "The Fisherman's Restaurant and Bar - (base of pier) 2. Oceansie - "The Fisherman's Restaurant and Bar - (end & base of pier) 3. Newport Beach - "The Fisherman's Restaurant and Bar - (end of pier) 4. Sacramento - "The Fisherman's Restaurant and Bar - (on old Wharf) b. Rental terms open to negotiations (minimum and percentage). C. Hours determined by season, weather and community needs. 0097u .�9 1 ` rl Proposal for Huntington Beach Pier Fisherman's Restaurant To: The City of Huntington Beach , California Submitted by: H.E.G. ENTERPRISES 610 Avenida Victoria San Clemente, CA • H.E.G. Enterprises, Inc. San Clemente Municipal Pier, 611 Avenida Victoria, San Clemente CA 92672 (714) 498-6390 General Office / Miners' banding, 1301 Alaskan Way, Seattle, Washington 98101 206i623.8600 November 24 , 1989 Mr . Dan M. Brennan Director of Real Estate Services City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street P.O. Box 190 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Dear Mr . Brennan: Our company, over the years, has developed a deep understanding in the operation of retail food operations on piers . We currently operate the Fishermans Restaurant in San Clemente, which is located at the base of the pier with easy access for f its patrons , and a Fishermans Restaurant at the end of the Oceanside pier which is approximately 2000 feet from the shore L" and offers less than convenient access . A tram is offered to assist in making the restaurant more accessible. Most recently we opened a Fishermans Restaurant at the end of the Newport 's Beach pier, which is approximately 1100 feet from shore, making it more accessible than our Oceanside facility, but still inconvenient for our patrons . We do not offer tram service in = Newport Beach. Through the experience of operating these facilities we have determined that it is difficult to operate a restaurant by I itself at the end of a pier. We feel it is important to have strong base facility in conjunction with the pier end 1 1.1 • 1.-s�1+ .. operation. It would be our suggestion and desire to incorporate a Fishermans Restaurant at the base of the Huntington Beach pier to operate in conjunction with the pier end facility. The menus for each facility would be varied, with the pier end operation being slightly more casual than the base of the pier. In conclusion, we are very interested in establishing a Fishermans Restaurant, Gift Shop and Concession Facility in Huntington Beach. We feel we have the experience and expertise to do the kind of job that you would expect and desire. It is through that experience that I am making this suggestion. I will be most happy to go over this logic more specifically if you wish. I hope that we will have the opportunity to discuss the details sometime soon. Sincerely Hal E. Griff th HEG/lah 1 I TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGES 1 - 3 Previous Experience PAGE 4 Proposed Terms and Hours of Operation PAGE 5 Local References Page 6 Financial Stability PAGE 7 - 13 Sample Menu - The Fishermans ' s Restaurant Page 14 Sample Menu - Concessions PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE SEATTLE: i "The Bay Pavilion" Bay Pavilion is a festival- retail and office development located on Seattle ' s Historical Waterfront. There are three levels of festival retail shops, office space and food court. Our company has developed and manages the 68,000 sq. ft. Bay iPavilion. There are a number of businesses on the pier operated by our company, as follows: "The Fisherman' s Restaurant and Bar" Located at the end of the pier, the Fisherman' s Restaurant serves primarily Northwest seafood in a family dining atmosphere. "The Salmon Cooker Restaurant and Bar" The Salmon Cooker serves seafood cooked over Alderwood and mesquite and includes a full service sit-down service, as well as an Oyster Bar, a deep fry counter, and a "fast food" Alder smoked seafood counter. "The Bay Fish Market" Located at the entrance of the pier, the Bay Fish Market is a presentation of the fresh seafood used in our restaurants, sold at wholesale prices . "Pirate' s Plunder Mercantile" Pirates Plunder sells imported and domestic gift items as well as souveniers. "The Alaska Provisioners" Specializing in deli foods, candies, ice cream and specialty desserts . "Something Wild" A novelty store featuring stuffed animals and children ' s gift items page 1 Previous Experience, pg. 2 "Images" of Images primarily sells, matts and frames posters and prints. "Bay Pavilion Carousel and Concessions" In August of this year we purchased and installed a 36 ' carousel, featuring old-time hand made horses. To operate in conjunction with the carousel we built a concession area, selling novelty convections . "Yukon Jack' s Restaurant and Bar" At the Seattle Center we operate Yukon Jack' s , a full service restaurant serving continental cuisine weighted towards seafood. SUN VALLEY, IDAHO The Ore House Restaurant and Bar, located in Historic Sun Valley CALIFORNIA The Fisherman' s Restaurant and Bar, San Clemente" Located at the base of the San Clemente Municipal Pier, The Fisherman' s Restaurant provides both inside and outside dining . We also operate concessions at the base of the pier for the beach. "The Fisherman' s Restaurant and Bar, Oceanside" The Fisherman ' s Restaurant at Oceanside is located at the end of the Oceanside Historical Pier, where a tram carries passengers to and from the restaurant. --Concessions located at both the end and base of the pier, and are operated in conjunction with the Fisherman' s Restaurant. "The Fisherman ' s Restaurant, Newport Beach" Located at the end of the pier and offering inside and outside dining, as well as a creative beer and wine menu, the Fisherman ' s Restaurant at Newport Beach is the newest addition to our chain of restaurants . Page 2 Previous Experience, pg. 3 "The Fisherman' s Restaurant, Sacramento" We are in the process of developing a new facility on the Old Sacramento Wharf, consisting of a full service Fisherman' s Restaurant as well as concessions . All of these operations have been successful since their inceptions. What we have experienced is good, healthy, constant growth in both sales and customer count. We coontrol and operate each of our operations with in-house management as well as with area supervisors and operations managers.. In Seattle we have a full accounting staff providing central accounting, payroll, and other management necessary for a food business. In addition to our Seattle office, we have a San Clemente office which provides additional accounting supervision for the California market. We additionally have our own maintenance department to support our Seattle and California operations. In general our company 1 is well versed and experienced at running food operations from the most casual concessions all the way through to the most sophisticated, sit-down full service facilities. We offer in each one of our facilities creative atmospheres as well as menus which appeal to all sectors and income levels. Page3 PROPOSED TERMS Due to our experience and knowledge of the complexities in a new food facility we need to know all of the criteria necessary for determining the investment and amortization schedules for the basis of negotiating terms . Therefore, rental terms are open for negotiations. We are willing to work on a minimum rent and percentage agreement, as we do in most of our other locations. The terms will be determined on the basis of investment requirements, along with options . It is our belief that a relationship between ourselves and the city has to be a fair one for both parties.We feel positive should you select us that we would be able to satisfactorily agree on terms . HOURS OF OPERATION Hours of operation will be determined by the season, weather and community needs. It is our intention to operate any and all of our facilities when there is customer demand, even if marginally profitable due to the season and weather. It is our desire to discuss this further if we are selected. Page 4 u�:t Federal Sav i Bank Pacific First Centre 1420 Fifth Avenue Post Office Box 91029 Seattle,Washington 98M-9129 206/224-3000 November 24, 1989 City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: This letter is written at the request of our valued client, Mr. Hal E. Griffith. Mr. Griffith and his wholly owned company, REG Enterprises, have had a relationship with Pacific First Federal since mid 1988. We have existing crecUt accommodations for HEG Enterprises in the mid six figure range. In fact, we are currently reviewing a proposal which, if approved, will increase our commitments to HEG Enterprises to the seven figure range. Our relationship with Mr. Griffith and his related concerns has been most satisfactory. We are quite familiar with his various operations in southern California. We hold this relationship in high regard. I trust this information will be helpful to you. If you should have any questions. or need for additional information, please feel free to call me at (206)224-3116. Sincerely, Alan Pratt Vice President and Manager Relationship Banking AP:sw LOCAL REFERENCES Lynn Hughes Marine Safety Captain Marine Safety Division 100 Avenida Presidio San Clemente, CA. 92672 ( 714) 361-8260 Kenneth J.Delino Executive Assistant to City Manager 3300 Newport Blvd. P.O. Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA 92663 ( 714) 640-2103 Glenn E. Prentice Director Public Services Department j 307 N. Nevada { Oceanside, CA. 92054 ( 619 ) 439-7143 Page 5 i •t�b/.�• s� .{<M1: •�J ,ra( .f�,�. �'ti� ,Vf �.y3k•!`' .`i. �� .+^r .� J+` r �' -zIG.±;{ Tom, z� t l'h{ J9{'••'�•t� � + ���>tzL•SI�i•• '. :J'f'y... { ,` fa 1 P• j - - i - i .t. z f 9L FISHERMAN ' S BRUNCH * w The Bre akfeast Our"BreakFEASTS-compare to the"Dinner Feasts-were famous for. East FEAST consists of four courses and is served family style for two or more people ordering the same FEAST You'll begin the feast of your choice with a carafe of fresh squeezed orange juice followed by a bowl of fresh succulent fruit and a basket of homemade muffins with butter.Next enjoy crisp bacon and tender sausage with home fries,and finally.. The FEAST of your choice! Fisherman's #1 Fisherman's #2 Fisherman's #3 Seafood Boat Salmon and Ham Steak 'The Boat!"—a light and Scrambled Eggs Two ranch fresh scrambled delicate puff pastry shell Tender Northern Salmon eggs.Ajuicy ham steak Ned with an assortment of covered with a mixture of broiled over Mexican fresh seafood blended in a scrambled eggs,bell peppers, mesquite wood fill In for the light cheese sauce. mushrooms,and green bacon and sausage on this $8-95 per person onions—topped with melted feast Jack and cheddar cheese- $8.95 per person $8.95 per person Other Choices Served with hash browns,fresh fruit garnish,fresh muffins and butter, Seafood Boat . . . . . . . . . . . $7.95 Salmon 6 Eggs . . . . . . . . . $8.95 'The Boar—a light and delicate puff True Pacific Northwest salmon with two pastry shell filled with an assortment ranch fresh eggs. of fresh seafood blended in a light Seafood Omelette . . . . . . $6.95 cheese sauce- Packed full of ocean delights-bay Eggs Benedict . . . . . . . . . . . $7.95 shrimp,clungeness crab,bay scallops, and fresh fish. Traditional Ranch fresh eggs,tender ham and real Mexican Omelette . . . . . . $6.25 Hollandalse sauce on a toasted Bell peppers,mushrooms and melted English muffin. cheese served with salsa,sour cream Seafood . and guacamole. A delicious combination of ocean Two Ranch Fresh Eggs . . . $3.95 delights,ranch fresh eggs,and real However you like them- Hollandalse sauce on a toasted 1,with bacon . . . . . . . . . $5.25 English muffin. 2-with sausage . . . .-,-$5.25 Top Sirloin 6 Eggs . . . . . 19.95 3.with hamburger patty . . $5.75 A tender top sirloin steak served with 4.with ham . . . . . . . . . . $6.25 two ranch-fresh eggs,all cooked to your liking. The Fisherman's House Champagne Bottle — $2.95 Glass — $1.00 Coffee, tea, fruit 'juices - 95C Fresh squeezed orange Juice — $1.25 All items offered according to availability.$3.50 per person minimum.Please,no cigars or pipes. NOW Breakfast Monday thru Saturday--7 a.m-11:00 am. Eggs Egg dishes are served with home hies,toast and Jelly 2 Eggs any style . . . . . . . . . $2.95 2 Eggs any style with 2 Eggs any style your choice of bacon or sausage . . . $3.95 with%pound hamburger patty . . . . $4.75 ` 2 Eggs any style with ham . . . . . $4.95 2 Eggs any style I with mesquite grilled salmon . . . . . $8.25 2 Eggs any style with top sirloin steak . . . . . . . . . . $9.25 Omelettes Omelettes are served with home hies,toast and Jelly Cheese Omelette . . . . . . . $3.95 Mexican Omelette . . . . . . $5.25 With melted Jack and cheddar cheese. Bell peppers,mushrooms and melted cheese,served with salsa,sour cream California Omelette . . . . . $4.95 and guacamole. Fresh vegetables,melted cheese and topped with guacamole. Seafood Omelette . . . . . . $6.50 Denver Omelette $5.25 Paced full with ocean delights-bay Ham,cheese,bell onions. shrimp,dungeness crab,bay scallops, �p�• and fresh fish. Pancakes 6 French Toast 3 Buttermilk Pancakes $3.50 Waffle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $3.95 In a stack with maple syrup. Served with strawberries or blueberries Blueberry Pancakes . . . . . . $3.95 and whipped cream. Served with blueberries and whipped oeam. 3 Slices of French Toast . . . . . . . . $3.75 Served with maple syrup and powdered sugar. House Specialties Fisherman's Breakfast . . . . $5.95. Surfer's Hearty Scrambled eggs with diced ham,bell Breakfast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $6.95 pepper,then filled In a delicate pastry shell.Topped with Jack and cheddar h eggs any style, pancakes,fresh fruit home fries and choice of bacon,ham or cheese. sausage, ExAfas Fresh Fruit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $1,25 Bacon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $1.75 Fruit Juice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ .75 Ham . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2.So 1 Egg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ .90 Sausage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $1.75 Home Fries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ .75 Hamburger Patty . . . . . . . . . . . $2.25 2 French Toast . . . . . . . . . . . . $2.95 Coffee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ .95 2 Pancakes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2.95 Hot Tea . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ .95 -English Mullin . . . . . . . . . . . . . $1.25 Milk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . s .95 Toast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ .95 Fresh Squeezed. Orange Juice . . . . . . . . . . . $1.25 Breakfast Monday thru Saturday-7 a.m:11:00 am. Eggs Egg dishes are served with home tries,toast and Jelly 2 EggS any style . . . . . . . . . $2.95 2 Eggs any stye with 2 Eggs any style your choice of bacon or sausage . . . $3.95 with%pound hamburger patty . . . . $4.75 2 Eggs any style with ham . . . . . $4.95 2 Eggs any style with mesquite grilled salmon . . . . . $8.25 2 Eggs any style with top sirloin steak . . . . . . . . . . $9.25 Omelettes Omelettes are served with home fries,toast and Jelly Cheese Omelette . . . . . . . $3.95 Mexican Omelette . . . . . . $5.25 With melted Jack and cheddar cheese. Bell peppers,mushrooms and melted California Omelette . . . . . $4.95 cheese,served with salsa,sour cream Fresh vegetables,melted cheese and and guacamole topped with guacamole. Seafood Omelette . . . . . . $6.50 Denver Omelette $5.25 Packed full with ocean delights-bay shrimp,dungenes Ham,cheese,bell peppers,onions. s crab,bay scallops, and fresh fish. Pancakes 6 French Toast 3 Buttermilk Pancakes . . . $3.50 Waffle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $3.95 A In a stack with maple syrup. Served with strawberries or blueberries Blueberry Pancakes . . . . . . $3.95 and whipped cream. Served with blueberries and whipped cream., 3 Slices of French Toast . . . . . . . . $3.75 Served with maple syrup and powdered sugar. House Specialties Fisherman's Breakfast . . . . $5.95 Surfer's Hearty Scrambled eggs with diced ham,bell Breakfast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $6.95 pepper,then filled In a delicate pastry 3 eggs any style,3 pancakes,fresh fruit, shell.lbpped with Jack and cheddar home fries and choice of bacon,ham or. cheese sausage- Extras Fresh Fruit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $L2.5 Bacon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $1.75 Fruit Juice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ .75 Ham . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2.50 1 Egg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ .90 Sausage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $1.75 Home Fries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ .75 Hamburger Patty . . . . . . . . . . . $2.25 2 French Toast . . . . . . . . . . . . $2.95 Coffee $ .95 2 Pancakes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2.95 Hot Tea . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ .95 English Muffin . . . . . . . . . . . . . $1.25 Milk . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . $ .95 Toast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ .95 Fresh Squeezed. Orange juice . . . . . . . . . . . $1.25 A�petizAnk ers Crab Cocktail . . . . . . . . . . $6.95. 2-YySltrclesh. rs on the Halfshell . .$5.75 Dungeness,the finesti Bay Shrimp Cocktail . . . . $4.9S Oven Baked Prawn Cocktail . . . . . . . . . $6.95 Oysters AuGratin . . . . . . $6.75 Baked to perfection with parmesan Seafood Cocktail . . . . . . . a6.95 cheese,green onion and bacon. Bay shrimp and dungeness crab in our Oysters Rockefeller $ 7.75 own tangy sauce,garnished with lemon, Baked with spinach,white wine,bacon, and a prawn. and covered with cheese sauce. Crab Sampler $8.50 Bucket of Clams . . . . . . . . $6.45 A delicious combination featuring King, Steamed in herbed nectar with drawn Snow,and Dungeness Crab in the shell. butter and lemon. r Half Cracked Dungeness Crab . . . . . . . . $7.95 P' _ Soups Clam Chowder . . . . . . . . . $2.45 Fisherman's Chowder . . . $2.45 A rich and creamy favorite! A great mix of Puget Sound seafoods with kesh vegetables and a touch of spice In a tomato base(our own secret recipe)[ Salads'�1 Spinach Salad . . . . . . . . . . $6.95 Fisherman's Seafood A bed of kesh leaf spinach topped with Salad . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $9.95 sliced mushrooms,chopped bacon, A fresh deep tried flour tortilla shell filled cherry tomatoes,hard boiled egg,black with garden fresh greens and topped with olives,asparagus spear,green pepper, bay shrimp,dungeness crab,green grated parmesan cheese,and our hot pepper,hard boiled egg,cherry bacon dressing. tomatoes,asparagus spear,black olives, Dinner Salad $3.25 and garnished with a chunk of smoked Tossed greens with croutons,sunflower albacore tuna,a New Zealand mussel, seeds,cherry tomatoes,and your choice and a prawn) of dressing. Side Orders Loaf of Sourdough Bread . . . $1.50 . Coffee, Tea, Soda, Served hot with butter. Milk . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . 95¢ My our Fisherman's house dressing—unique and delicious. �1 cis Lunch Lunch Is served until 4:00 p.m Salads Crab Salad and Chowder . . . . . $5.95 Cracked Crab Tossed salad and Fisherman's chowder, Dungeness crab,served with tossed roll and butter. salad,or cup of soup,roll and butter. Tuna Salad . . . . . . . . . . . . . $7.95 Wholc . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $14.95 A deep filed flour tortilla shell filled with Half $ 9.95 lettuce then topped with a large tomato Crab N' Cheddar . . . . . . . $7.95 stuffed with albacore tuna salad,hard crab n'cheddar on an English muffin boiled egg,avocado,black olives,and served with steak fries and tossed salad fresh lemon. or chowder. Cobb Salad . . . . . . . . . . . . $7.95 A deep fried flour tortilla shell filled with lettuce and topped with an assortment of , chopped ham,turkey,cheddar cheese, tomato,avocado and hard boiled egg. r �- _ +`• Entrees Served with a cup of chowder or tossed green salad,rice pilaf or steak files, and a golden sourdough roll with butter. " Fillet of Cod . . . . . . . . . . . $7.95 Sea Bass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $8.95 Oven baked fillet of northern cod Mesquite broiled with wine,lemon and Shark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $7.95 butter, A coastal favoritel Swordfish . . . . . . . . Market Price Red•Snapper . . . . . . . . . . . $6.95 Mesquitebrolled. Oven baked fillet of Pacific snapper. Prawns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $10.95 Salmon Fillet . . . . . . . . . . $8.95 Mesquite broiled on a skewer. A tender fillet mesquite broiled. Scallops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $9.95 Halibut . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $8.95 Mesquite broiled on a skewer. From the Icy cold waters of the Pacific Lobster . . . . . . . . . . Market Price Northwest Always a favorite,ask your server. Orange Roughy . . . . . . . . $8.95 New Zealand's finest Pasta Served with a cup of chowder or tossed green salad and sourdough roil with butter, Smoked Salmon Clam Fettucine . . . . . . . . . $8.95 Fcttucini . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $8.95 Sauteed baby dams in a rich and creamy Alder smoked salmon in a rich and sauce with a touch of garlic creamy sauce with a touch of garlic Chicken Fettucine . . . . . . $8.95 Seafood Fettucine . . . . . . . $9.95 Tender sliced chicken breast sauteed in Salmon,halibut and bay shrimp,sauteed wine and butter with provolone and with butter,parmesan cheese,garlic, parmesan cheese. parsley and cream. Vegetable Fettucine . . . . . $7.95 Broccoli,cauliflower,zucchini and carrots In a rich and creamy sauce) Other Specialties The Fisherman's The Fisherman's Croissant Hamburger . . . . . . $5.95 Sandwich of the Dayy . $5.95 'A lb.mesquite broiled,with tomato and Served with your choice of salad or a cup onion.Served with steak fries. of chowder. w/cheddar or Jack cheese add . . w/bacon add 8C Teriyaki Chicken Breast $8.95 Served with a cup of chowder or tossed Salmon and Chips . . . $7.45 salad,rice pilaf or steak fries and a Deep fried tender salmon,served with sourdough roll and butter. tossed salad or chowder,steak fries,roll Vegetable Platter $6.25 and butter. . Assorted fresh vegetables steamed and Fish and Chips . . . . . . . . ... 6.95 covered with Jack and cheddar cheese, Deep fried tender fish,served with tossed topped with sunflower seeds. salad or chowder,steak fries,roll and butter. All Items offered according to availability. Split charge per person$4.95. Fi sherman's Feasts OURSPECIALTYI in keepingwith the tradition and style of the Pacific Northwest. the Fisherman's Feast style dinners are served"family style"for two or more people. Each Feast consists of four separate courses.Our Fishermen are delighted to serve you the FEAST of your choice. M Fisherman's #1 , The Clam Feast �r • = Golden sourdough loaf, butter,•crisp tossed salad, dressing, Fisherman's chowder, bucket o'clams steamed in ------ — _— nectar ............ $10.95 per person Fisherman's #2 " Fisherman's #4 The Crab Feast The Salmon Feast Golden sourdough loaf, butter, crisp Golden sourdough loaf, butter, crisp tossed salad, dressing, Fisherman's tossed salad, dressing, Fisherman's chowder, bucket o'clams steamed iri chowder, bucket o'clams steamed in nectar, cocktail sauce, dungeness, nectar, rice pilaf, lemon and butter alaskan king and snow crab sauce, fillet of Pacific Northwest . . ................. . $19.95 per person salmon ......... ... $13.95 per person Fisherman's #3 Fisherman's #5 The Cod Feast The Halibut Feast Sourdough loaf, butter, crisp tossed Golden sourdough loaf, butter, crisp salad, dressing, Fisherman's chowder, tossed salad, dressing, Fisherman's bucket o'clams steamed in nectar, rice chowder, bucket o'clams steamed in pilaf, lemon and butter sauce on fillet nectar, rice pilaf, lemon and butter of Alaskan cod sauce on fillet of Pacific Northwest ... ....... .. ... .. . . $12.95 per person halibut ..... .... .. .. $15.95 per person Ask your server about our special Feast of the Day! Th(-lhnvo rr>latc nro cnrvorl rnr r ..n r mnrn nnnr �n - ti •:�...: s Dinner Dinner Is served anytime. All dinner entrees are served with your choice of tossed salad,or chowder, rice pilaf,steak fries,or baked potato,and sourdough roll with butter. Mesquite Favorites Scallops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $14.95 All selections are broiled over a Mesquite wood fire Mesquite broiled on a skewer. to seal In moisture and produce a delicate, Shark naturally seasoned,mesquite flavor.Be sure to $13.95 Mesquite broiled. check our fresh sheets and our special boards for additional daily catches—our Fishermen are Lobster . . . . . . . . . . Market Price working for you. Always a favorite,ask your server. Salmon Fillet . . . . . . . . . $13.95 Teriyaki Chicken . . . . . . $13.95 A tender fillet broiled to perfection. One pound of boneless chicken breasts Halibut Fillet . . . . . . . . . $13.95 broiled to perfection. From the Icy cold waters of the Pacific Seafood Brochette on Northwest a Skewer . . . . . . . . . . . . . $14.95 Swordfish Steak . . . Market Price Fresh prawns,scallops,and moist tender Mesquite broiled. fish. Prawns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $15.95 Sea Bass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $13.95 Mesquite broiled on a skewer. Mesquite broiled with lemon and butter. Other Seafood Specialties Fillet of Cod . . . . . . . . . . $12.95 Scalone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $14.95 Oven baked fillet of Northern Cod. Scallops and abalone blended together Pacific Red Snapper . . . . $10.95 butter. etttebreaded and sauteed in wine and Always a favorite. Stuffed Prawns . . . . . . . . $16.95 Steamed Clams . . . . . $10.95 True Northwest clams,steamed inn lemon, Deep fried prawns stuffed with crab. wine,and butter. Orange Roughy . . . . . . . $13.95 Baked Oysters . . . . . . . . $10.95 New Zealand s finest Fresh oysters baked In our special wine, Baby Coho Salmon . . . . $13.95 garlic and butter sauce. Pacific Northwest pride(much like Trout) Pasta Served with tossed salad pr a cup of chowder,and sourdough roll with butter. Smoked Salmon Vegetable Fettucine . . . . . $11.95 Fettucine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $13.95 Brow,cauliflower,zucch rt!and carrots Alder Smoked salmon In a rich and creamy in a rich and creamy saucel sauce with a touch of garlic Clam Fettucine . . . . . . . . . $12.95 Seafood Fettucine . . . . . . . $14.95 Sauteed baby clams In a rich and creamy Salmon,halibut bay shrimp,sauteed with sauce with a touch of garlic butter,parmesan cheese,garik,parsley Chicken Fettucine . . . . . . $12.95 and cream. Tender sliced chicken breast sauteed In wine and butter with provolone and Land Lovers r parmesan cheese. Mesquite Broiled The Fisherman's Special Full Crab One pound New York Served steamed or chilled with Steak b22.95 drawn butter and cocktail sauce. Top Sirloin . . . . . . . . . . . $14.95 Alaskan King Teriyaki Top Sirloin . . . $15.95 Crab . . . . . . . . . . . . . Market Price Alaska's finest Combinations Dungeness Crab . . . . . . . $16.95 Traditlonal Pacific Northwest The bestl Top Sirloin with King Crab $19.95 To Sirloin with All Items offered according to availability.Split charge$s.95 per person. Lobster . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $19.95 %tee no cigars or pipes Wine Selections Bu 86 Chardonnay Johannisberg Riesling Wines 1 Kendall-Jackson . . . . . . . . . . $37.00 19 Chateau Ste. Michelle . . . . . . $12.00 Lake County,"Proprietor's Reserve" Washington State 2 Robert Mondavi . . . . . . . . . . $28 Napa Valley .00 Blush Wines 3 Cuvaison . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $28.00 20 Robert Mondavi . . . . . . . . . . $12.00 Napa Valley Napa Valley,White Zinfandel 4 Vichon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $27.00 21 Chateau Ste. Michelle . . . . . . $10.00 Napa Valley Washington State,Blush Riesling 5 22 Sutter Home . . . . . . . . . . . . $10.50 Simi Winery . . . . . . . . . . . . 523.00 Sonoma Valley White Zinfandel 6 Rutherford Hill . . . . . . . . . . $23.00 Red Wines Napa Valley,"Jacgaer Vineyards" 23 Robert Mondavi . . . . . . . . . . $28.00 7 David Bruce . . . . . . . . . . . . $22.00 Napa Valley,Cabernet Sauvignon California 24 Beaulieu Vineyards . . . . . . . . $18.00 8 Wente Bros. . . . . . . . . . . . . $20.00 Napa Valley,Cabernet Sauvignon Livermore Valley,"Reserve" 25 Sutter Home . . . . . . . . . . . . $11.00 9 Concannon . . . . . . . . . . . . . $19.50 Napa Valley,Cabernet Sauvignon Livermore Valley,"Estate.' 26 Louis Martini . . . . . . . . . . . $15.00 10 Clos Du Bois . . . . . . . . . . . $19.50 North Coast Cabernet Sauvignon Sonoma Valley,"Barrel Fermented" 27 Clos Du Bois . . . . . . . . . . . $21.00 11 Callaway Vineyards 6 Sonoma Valley,Merlot Winery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $17.50 Temecula"Calla-Lees" Champagnes 12 Chateau Ste. Michelle . . . . . . $17.50 28 Dom Perignon . . . . . . . . . . $110.00 Washington State France 13 Villa Mt. Eden . . . . . . . . . . $16.00 29 Moct Chandon . . . . . . . . . . $45.00 Napa Valley,"Estate' Extra Dry"White Star",France Fume/Sauvignon Blanc Wines 30 Domain Chandon . . . . . $26.00 Napa Valley,Brut 14 Robert Mondavi . . . . . . . . . . $16.00 Napa Valley,Fume Blanc 31 Korbel Brut . . . . . . . . . . . . $22.00 15 Robert PPep . . . . . . . . . . . . . $15.00 Napa Valley Nappa Valley,Sauvignon Blanc 32 House Selection . . . . . . . . . $ 9.00 16 Callaway Vineyards 6 Wine $13.50 House Selection a Temecula,Fume Blanc Chablis, Rose. and Burgundy Glass . . . . . . . . . 52.00 Chenin Blanc Wines 1/2 Litre . . . . . . . $4.50 Litre . . . . : . . . . . $8.50 17 Callaway Vineyards 6 Winery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $11.50 White Zinfandel Temecula,"Morning Harvest' Glass . . . . . . . . . $2.25 1/2 Litre . . . . . . . $5.00 i 18 Simi Winery . . . . . . . . . . . . $11.00 Litrc . . . . . . . . . . $9.50 Sonoma Valley f i 1 I SAMPLE MENU - CONCESSIONS Hamburger 2 .00 Cheese Burger 2. 25 Double Cheeseburger 3 .75 Double Burger 3.25 Ice Cream Cone .95 Vanilla Shake 2.00 Chocolate Shake 2 . 00 Strawberry Shake 2. 50 Malts, van and choc 2.25 Malt, strawberry 2 .75 Chocolate sundae 1.50 Corn Dog 1 .75 Onion Rings 1.25 French Fries 1 . 00 Tater Tots 1.25 Nachos 1.75 Hot Dog 1.50 Cheese Dog 2.00 Kraut Dog 2.00 Fish Burger 3 .25 Fish and Chips 4. 25 Shaved Ice .75 & 1 .50 r P f 1 w Hon . Chairman and Members of the Redevelopment Agency City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Re : Pierside Restaurant Project Concept Approval Hon . Chairman and Members of the Redevelopment Agency, In anticipation of our presentation, to you on Tuesday, February 20, 1990, I felt it would be appropriate to discuss the basic concept we will be proposing . As all of you know, the Pierside project has had a long history. Starting as a Greek oriented retail village of over 85, 000 sf, with a focus on retail stores, it was followed by an even more intensive, but West Coast oriented proposal. by Enterprise Development Co. Although the Agency origin.•.al1V supported 1-he Greek Village plan, it ultimately concluded that the successor Enterpri'se plan was too intense and voted to down scale the project and shift the focus to restaurants . Our original proposal was geared to this end, and had less than 10, 000 sf of retail on the Plaza level . Upon viewing the. plan, however, the Agency/Council sub-committee concluded that all retail should be removed from the Plaza level, and that only restaurants should be found in this location . The conceptual plan before you reflects that further change in direction . Dramatically simpler than all prior plans, it is limited to three new buildings : the reconstructed Maxwell-Is, and tv.,o - new b`1ild!n.gs total.l.ing 25, 000 sf . Pursuant to the sub-committee' s' recomme :dat_ons, the boardwalk level contains a 6; Q 0 0 sf casua 1. dlni_nr establishment, a reconstructed owig:-t' s, and anproximatelly• 1 , 500 sf of beach related co,icessic::_- -good services . A combination of limi-1:ed s u r ce parking, and two subterranean levels will pro-Tide ann.-oximately 500 parking spaces for project visitors ann beach goers . It is our intention to maintain the lower level of parking, constituting approximately 225 spaces, free for self-parking and beach goer use . The middle pc.rr:I ng level, which has a self-parking design capaci y of 0_ro_�in-ately 225 spaces, will, through the use of tandem andlva .et management probably house well in excess of 300 cars . n ligt;t of the fact that restaurants' have their highest pe i; d of activity in the f� late afternoon and everting, we bel-eve that this mix will provide high use of the narkina lot t-hroughout the day. As the attached d _ g _aM , �_us`rate, t1ie current proposal has tremendous : eo.estz _ �: =s:� a.r.a minimal view obstruction . In the view shed d-ac;rat. OI1 1y. li'i the darkened areas, are views of the Ocean ^lo(-.ket: . In ali other areas, and along the entire length of P;,1i, :i Mange of Ocean view opportunities is available . Pedestrians access the project at Main and . Lake. Streets, and can walk across the entire l.engt _ cf the Ocean side of the project for free and wit) a totally unobstructed view of the Beach, Ocean and P�_er, there :y eLfectively extei:ding the Pier Plaza 800 feet to the South no cost to the community . Access to the Beach is by huge staircases that double as observation areas . Furthermore , elevator access for the frail and handicapped will be provided . It is our conviction that the instant proposal fully integrates the objectives set forth in the Downtown Specific Plan for District 10, a copy of wP.ich is attached for your review . Your approval of th_I co.incept will allow us to proceed with further refinement of t.he , pian - ant: submission to the Planning Commission_ . I look forward to receiving yoia.r unanimous support . S;ncere _\% yours, Jonathan P . Chodos r PIERSIDE RESTAURANT PR.OjECT DESCRIP'i 11,-,! Pacific Coast Highway Level : Three separate buildings, r_es-,.aurants only: Maxwells 15, 000 sf-: aeconstruction Building No. 2 10, O1GO sf) vew Construction 25, 000 sf Building No. 3 15, 000 sf} " Boardwalk Level fronting on BeacL- cc-ens Road: Casual Dining 6, 000 sF Dwight' s 2 , 5 00 st Food Services Sf Beach Related Concessions 5, 00.0. sf Parking spaces 500+ j: District Seven is a consolidated parcel under one ownership and is _ approximately 13 gross acres. District Seven should be master planned as a primarily visitor-serving commercial project, which could be implemented -= over a number of phases. Hotel, motel, restaurant and specialty commercial would be appropriate uses. Development in this District is not intended to compete with the Downtown commercial core, therefore, major incentives for development would not be necessary. The commercial uses in this District would be of a more seasonal variety with the District serving as a connecting link between the Downtown area and District Nine. The Plan anticipates visitor-serving commercial can be accommodated with a 20 room el. District Ten incl es the area on the ocean side of Pacific Coast Highway most suited f commercial development. This District includes the pier - sting parking areas on either side, comprising approximately 15 gross acres. The visitor-serving commercial uses most appropriate for this District are beach-related and complementary to activities which occur around the pier, such as fishing, surfing and sun bathing. Additional parking in structures would also be appropriate provided that they do not extend above the level of Pacific Coast Highway and block views. This provision should still provide for the option of multi-level commercial activities in this District. The pier is a prime location for restaurants, which can take advantage of the panoramic views. Equally important as the new commercial activities which may be accommodated is to insure that the major emphasis in this District is public open space. The pier and beach area must remain accessible to the public for free recreational pursuits. District Ten is part of the pier-head node as described previously. This commercial/recreational activity node is of primary importance in the revitalization effort of the City. Development within this District will probably be initiated with City efforts. The extent and intensity of development in District Three and further inland will directly determine the amount of revitalization which can occur -to the pier and the beach-related TV commercial uses which can be accommodated. In addition, the present amount of parking can be approximately doubled without obstructing views or drastically changing the overall character of the District. F 3.2.4 Residential (High Density) The residential designation includes two Districts (District Two and Eight) exclusively for residential uses. District Two extends from Goldenwest Street to 6th Street .between Pacific Coast Highway to Walnut Avenue. District Two is subdivided into numerous twenty-five foot wide lots with very diverse ownerships encompassing approximately 44 gross acres. District Two is intended to develop as a continuation of the type and variety of residential development which exists in the adjacent Townlot area. The development regulations should be similar and compatible with those in the Townlot area, with the exceptiDn that larger projects (one full block or more)' should be provided with additional incentives to encourage lot consolidation. Consolidation of the numerous small lots which are spread throughout the District is one of the objectives of the Plan. In order to accomplish this, the allowed density in 35 r k Hon . Chairman and Members of the Redevelopment Agency City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Re : Pierside RestaurantPro-,; Co.nce:pt Appr:)val Hon . Chairman and Members of the Redeve-1o9ment Agency, In anticipation of our presentation to you on Tuesday.. February 20, 1990, I felt it wou,ld 'oe aynp_,ropri.ate to discuss the basic concept we will be proposir-_c . =�s all of you know, the Pierside project has had a l.c•ng history. Staring as a Greek oriented retail village of ever 85, 000 sf, witr a focus on retail stores, i- was followed by an even more -nt.ensive, but West Coast oriented proposal by Enterprise Development Co . Although the Agency originally supported the Greek. Village plan, it ultimately . concluded that the successor Enterprise plan was too intense and voted to down scale the project and shift the focus to restaurants . Cur original proposal was geared to t.trici end, and nad less than I0, 000 s± of retail on the Plaza :,.pon viewing the plan, however, the AgencyiCoanc.-_ }b ce.nrr :ec concluded t,t:.at all retail should be removed -f--c%m --vel, and that only restaurants should be found ill '_r c:._.t--Dn . The conceptual plan before You reflects that fur-IL---he-- change in direction . Dramatically simpler than al.l prior plans, it is limited r_.o three .e.�a buii_d .�:��is : the reconstructed Max well' S, and ::. ,yew s)uildir_gs totall'na 25, 000 sf . 2 u r s u a n` to t uo- ee' s reco,rmen Jat cns the boardwalk level contai rs ;i 6, nO9 sf casua _ di.nJ__,n establishment, a reconstri ct ed DW-�.g;_` ' s; and ac p2:c? _i hate_- % , 500 sf of beach related services . A combination of 1imJLt.ed -_ c� parkin-, and t:•:o subterranean levels will proviG:� _�n0ro :1 mat ely 500 parking spaces for project vis-_to _ a.-; _ _. goers . It _S our intention to maintain tr:.: 1.. .:.c: ; TTel o`I. Pa' --.r_�, constituting approxirit:ately ._ _. , _ " ee for self- bank and beach goer use , Tl=e ..dc V r_ = _.n ieveL, which :gas a self-parking design c a p a c t yc;:.. -ox ._ ately 225 Spaces, will, through the use o La—,ciern and v.a_ e,: rnar.anemen-c pror)al--�ll% house well in excess of 300 care - I::. _.a'n` of the fact that restaurants' have their h'Lahes'. `:a :3f_ act- ?vlty M. the late afternoon and evening, we believe that this mix_ will provide high use of the parik i.—ng .t-hroughout the day. As the attached. d .arrarrns iIL'.ust,_.ate; the current proposal has tremendous pedestY _a. -.c.-_S and minimal obstruction . In the view shed diagra-ir, on-1y in the darkened areas, are views of the Ocean blockeed In ail other areas, and along the entire length of PCH, a range or Ocean view opportunities is available . Pedestrians access the project at Main and Lake Streets, and can walk across the entire length of the Ocean side of the project for free and. with a tota.11y unobstructed view of the Beach, Ocean and Pier, thereby effectively extending the Pier Plaza 800 feet to the South at no cost to the community. Access to the Beach is by huge staircases that double as observation areas . Furthermore., elevator access for the frail and handicapped will. be provided. It is our conviction that the instant proposal fully integrates the objectives set fortih in the Downtown Specific Plan for District 10, a copy of which i_s attached far your review. Your approval of this concept will allow us to proceed with further refinement -of the plan and submission to the Planning Commission . I look forward to receiving your unanimous suppert . Sincere, yours, Jonathan P . Chodos PIERSIDE RESTAURANT PRO,,-'.,],CT DESC ..'=PTI, ,0,[,,' Pacific Coast Highway Lev.:I - Three separate Maxwells 15, of-, ;: .-truction Building No . 2 20, 00(� -D r.s u Lion 2 000 s f Building No. 3 15, OGG sjfl, it Boardwalk Level fronting on Beach A--cess Road: Casual Dining 6, 0010 sf Dwight' s 2 , 5100 ZIL Food Services 2, 5 s f- Beach Related Concessions 5, 000 sr Parking spaces 500+ Ueld ea,lg i I I I Mary /+env j 1 ....................................................... ...... NO 1I O \—L— _.....____._. AW" A AVfU �.�� .__..._.__.....___. _._ _._... AeMy6iH Iseoo 3WOed I y IC F b I .y a n is m I N � •e. m +w ,. e a S� R .o �• .D�•,. e,,, F i� m��q e.n•�n � �a w�mu�m a.uiq m a a �.�.q � I n n n i R n I f c ' o ' o . n �......n,..,...... ,.. n n n n n _ I m d a _ in I m N IY c I �. i rf 0 0 m� U K p n n n n Pacific Coast fat�way W ` _. C—__ --- _—_ —_ —._.. • U ti .. . aMw n e�fs' 'v .. ---—�♦ 4Mr - - -- _ T CO :, 3 ewano•.a i rieY Ii." VIM Ms. ................ B.. Acc... ..a OG.d/ 1'b1 i View Corridors Site Plan I m P !! E R I.D 11 D 1C. /! !L. !L1 1d G E CRURNEY d 13 tt % 33 13 t 22 a is X. F, V cn X Pacific Coasl Highway ........... • . ......... . ............ A ..................... � WAV POW r was UOO .............. PLIMPI AA&q OL ........... ........ .... ........ A&QY 40954 • Pedestrian Access Site Plan FLT L-mj 7 P I E R S I D E F I L L ,f C E C-F CARWY District Seven is a consolidated parcel under one ownership and is ~'s approximately 13 gross acres. District Seven should be master planned as a primarily visitor-serving commercial project, which could be implemented over a number of phases. Hotel, motel, restaurant and specialty commercial would be appropriate uses. Development in this District is not intended to it.. compete with the Downtown commercial core, therefore, major incentives for development would not be necessary. The commercial uses in this District would be of a more seasonal variety with the District serving as a connecting link between the Downtown area and District Nine. The Plan anticipates visitor-serving commercial can be accommodated with a 20 room el. CE.am. District Ten incl es the area on the ocean side of Pacific Coast Highway g Y most suited f commercial development. This District includes the pier sting parking areas on either side, comprising approximately 15 gross acres. The visitor-serving commercial uses most appropriate for this District are beach-related and complementary to activities which occur =7: around the pier, such as fishing, surfing and sun bathing. Additional parking in structures would also be appropriate provided that they do not extend above the level of Pacific Coast Highway and block views. This provision should still provide for the option of multi-level commercial activities in 51 this District. The pier is a prime location for restaurants, which can take advantage of the panoramic views. Equally important as the new commercial activities which may be accommodated is to insure that the major emphasis in this District is public open space. The pier and beach area must remain accessible to the public for free recreational pursuits. District Ten is part of the pier-head node as described previously. This commercial/recreational activity node is of primary importance in the revitalization effort of the City. Development within this District will probably be initiated with City efforts. The extent and intensity of development in District Three and further inland will directly determine the . amount of revitalization which can occur to the pier and the beach-related commercial uses which can be accommodated. In addition, the present amount of parking can be approximately doubled without obstructing views or drastically changing the overall character of the District. r: ,r 3.2.4 Residential (High Density) r:. The residential designation includes two Districts (District Two and Eight) exclusively for residential uses. District Two extends from Goldenwest Street to 6th Street between Pacific Coast Highway to Walnut Avenue. District Two is subdivided into numerous twenty-five foot wide lots with very diverse ownerships encompassing approximately 44- gross acres. District Two is intended to develop as a continuation of the type and variety of residential development which exists in the adjacent Townlot area. The development regulations should be similar and compatible with those in the Townlot area, with the exception that larger projects (one full block or more)' should be provided with additional incentives to encourage lot consolidation. Consolidation of the numerous small lots which are spread throughout the District is one of the .objectives of the Plan. In order to accomplish this, -the allowed density in 35 a e — .._.___-____.._...- _ __..-_--_.. _____....... ......... .. I I I I ' • I I I I ^AVif Aga. I I I � I I I � I I � 6EAGH ,Ac.CESs LP-yE!_ I L7L .ow77 i Ll L( E R S I D LC.'e F I L L J G /1.a C-R.CARNEY M� � � i tj U1111,—Ii-g!"Pill ColonyP1,11i,,l P-11— t: a o Pacific Coast Highway ....... ... �XA ji lil-1"' .00-- R.I—g VWA�I%OK 7 ..... ....... .............. ........................... Site Plan 11 I E R S I D E I L L 4 G E CR.CARNEY ............. Ia 1 i q a i ...I Eai•llnp Pgr•10•P-..— T1 a E.INnp Ru-Q—Pla W', `y E.--u-'am, d d. d F in ai y t1 v u' A c C � � � a G to � Pacific Coast Highway oRW z.eetor� I :.__._. 1 _—._.___-- i i Pi I i 1 LL I lepee„�« .. ..... _.....I...-�- BWIAnp No 2 -I.. — — I_... Bu1:N^p No.p ....................._........_�......_.................... ...'....••e•.....e.. ....... ...................._............................... ....... ........ .... Beecn • Fo 0 ' i • A5�*y *vm I I �l/ Site Plan1. 10 • D0 • �` � III pJ( ILA 1L D !L' LI L [Ll 6C tL7 CR CARNEY 0 a c ti a tz ar 0 0 ---------- 0- 'D Pacific Coast !421.-Way 7Z ca 4 1,�Ilw .......... 00 F Existing Max ell's ........ ..................... Exlstlngf Dwight'.s ................................... ...... .............. View Corridors' Site Plan Jl I E R S I D Ef I L L J G E CR.CAIRNIFY ................ -1 4 FINAL FOCUSED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE MAIN-PIER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT July, 1982 � V TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION I : DRAFT FOCUSED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT I-1 . 0 SUMMARY 1 I-2. 0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2 I-3. 0 EXISTING ENVIRONMENT 4 I-4. 0 SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS, 5 MITIGATION MEASURES AND UNAVOIDABLE EFFECTS I-5. 0 ALTERNATIVES I-6. 0 SHORT-TERM VERSUS LONG-TERM EFFECTS 14 I-7 . 0 IRREVERSIBLE EFFECTS 14 ' I-8. 0 GROWTH INDUCING EFFECTS 15 I-9. 0 INSIGNIFICANT EFFECTS 16 . I-10. 0 ORGANIZATIONS, PERSONS AND SOURCES 16 CONSULTED APPENDIX A, LEGAL DESCRIPTION 17 APPENDIX B, INITIAL STUDY 18 SECTION II : PUBLIC COMMENTS AND REVIEW II-1.0 DISTRIBUTION OF DRAFT FOCUSED ENVIRON- 28 MENTAL IMPACT REPORT II-2. 0 COMMENTS RECEIVED 28 II-3. 0 RESPONSES TO COMMENTS RECEIVED 28 APPENDIX A, DISTRIBUTION OF THE DRAFT 31 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT APPENDIX B, PUBLICATION AND NOTIFICATION 36 APPENDIX C, COMMENTS RECEIVED 41 � r D R A F T FOCUSED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE MAIN-PIER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT May, 1982 Transmittal authorized by Redevelopment Agency on May 17 , 1982 (Resolution No. 31) r • r I-1.0 SUMMARY The proposed project consists of adoption of a proposed Redevelopment Plan for the 43-acre Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area. The purpose of the plan is to remove existing blight and improve the physical and economic well-being of the City of Huntington Beach. The Redevelopment Plan as presently envisioned will provide for the assemblage and sale of properties and portions of properties to the Redevelopment Agency. However, if owners in these parcels are desirous of participating in the project, such participation will be encouraged in conformance with the Redevelopment Plan. The most direct impact to property owners within the Project Area would be the displacement (except for owner participants) resulting from implementation of the Redevelopment Plan. This impact will be largely attenuated with the Agency's: (1) taking deliberate steps to negotiate the purchase price of properties to be acquired at fair market value, (2) initiating such negotiations as soon as practical both prior and subsequent to the adoption of the Redevelopment Plan, (3) providing relocation advisory assistance and benefits to all who are displaced. and are qualified for benefits, (4) ensuring ample time for purchase of property to be negotiated and sufficient time after to consummate the process of relocation, and (5) keeping all concerned continuously apprised of the Agency's progress and its activities. Although the impact of relocation could be negative, its long-term impact is expected to be positive in that relocation will afford businesses and residences in the Project Area a unique opportunity to move to a more desirable location of their choice with little or no capital outlay necessary from personal cash resources. The impact from project implementation on surrounding neighborhoods is also expected to be positive over the long term. Construction of modern well-planned public, commercial, office and residential developments will provide an economic and aesthetic impetus to the surrounding areas. Furthermore, in achieving such development, existing blighting influences will be irradicated from within the Project Area. Although the project will afford substantial benefits to the community over the long term, it is possible that in the short term existing neighborhoods surrounding the Project Area could experience certain negative impacts during the construction period resulting from heavier truck traffic, noise and dust. However, these impacts will be mitigated by confining construction and trucking activities to daylight hours and by requiring spray watering as necessary to control the impact of dust. Over the long term, positive impacts to surrounding neighborhoods will result in development of modern and well-designed facilities which will have eliminated the blighting conditions of the Project Area while enhancing the total social and economic vitality of the City of Huntington Beach. As presently envisioned, it is the desire of the Agency to construct approximately 300 new residential units and 1,000,000 square . feet of commercial and offices. The total value of improvements could exceed $150,000,000. _ r C z N r..0 ' co a who .pa-r O ^ �7 ------ 30 #AI. �h c •a•LT i1 !MS•DC.• —To SanFrorwisco OJ 7•. S I •Y�[L OTEa.•L[ C__ ....�.,. O [ O.• O O C O j [l caret / ,Te_Y• --- .•••r �I 1•r .[. O 10� , OresT ►o.o.•' a.'o�'• � ! y i � cad,rl " �• � � La .uccs iO� •G r0" `- ,rGusi.f .•a_PVT J -L - -� [O 6 O O 1 ` oc" , Su-a ra.,ca 0 E. usC i p,..•c.e ,� , O[orrE.c[ to 111. i1 I, L .... -I "`*`•"�` O . i /[ 1L�5 ANGELES % coU 41e O OS'■••� ORANGE COuhTY --- —-.i COLLEGE I AT FULi-Er..Q+L 57 W.,i.TTYQJa O •a-[71• /..• •••••�- /Vl�[••O« \V-- CY'i•. \ _ ��� ..-cam:.• — :«rr', 7 � .�L \ .ua .,.c•s.�r.91 s,., 0\F 0 i •;\ aa•[roOD •.�« it I 9\�O RED.D[1c. 1 1{I O yr... .1 O 1' 'tom O►•a a �,' G [sT•r — :_L STATE ' LEGF ►� •• •••••••,•• L (4 u n f i rig t o it yl} Lo.lc c 22 s+.r• f •4 41. C.IRVINE 73 ; \ s a , VICINITY MAP -:L es O 1• 1 � o HUNTItiTGTON BEACH Mitigating development limitations which have resulted in the lack of proper utilization of the Project Area to such an extent that they constitute a serious physical, social and economic burden on the community which cannot reasonably be expected to be reversed or alleviated by private enterprise acting alone. Providing adequate public improvements, public facilities, open spaces and utilities which cannot be remedied by private or governmental action without redevelopment. Providing construction and employment opportunties in the development of these facilities and by providing employment opportunities in the operation of the proposed public and commercial facilities. Implementing the construction or reconstruction of adequate streets, curbs, gutters, street lights, storm drains and other improvements as necessary to maintain the Project Area as a master-planned development and to correct existing environmental deficiencies. - Establishing development criteria and controls for the permitted uses within the Project Area in accordance with modern and competitive development practices, thus assuring the highest design standards and environmental quality. Providing for relocation assistance and benefits to Project Area residences which may be displaced, in accordance with the provisions of the Community Redevelopment Law and the government code of the State of California. 2.4 Project Implementation To implement the proposed project, the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency is proposing the following activities within the Main-Pier Project Area: - Acquisition and sale of property. - Participation by owners, businesses and tenants through the improvement of their properties or through other opportunities to participate in this or other redevelopment projects. - Relocation assistance to displaced residential and nonresidential occupants as required by law. - Development of better parking, landscaping and public improvement concepts and facilities. - Demolition, clearance of properties acquired, provide public improvements, building and site preparation. - Other actions as appropriate, including, but not limited to, actions to assist property owners, businesses and tenants in the improvements of their properties to carry out the objectives of the Redevelopment Plan. -3- 1 The land uses, layout of principal streets, population densities and building intensities and standards which are proposed as the basis for the redevelopment of the Project Area are generally as follows: 2.4.1 Land Uses - Commercial. Principal uses would include visitor-serving retail and office. - Residential. Primarily high density residential uses including condominium development. - Community Facilities. Reconstruction of the City pier, public parking, street improvements and park areas. 2.4.2 Principal Streets Principal streets within the Project Area will be the existing street system. Local street improvements or vacations will be made for each particular development. 2.4.3 Population Densities Population densities will conform to the General Plan as follows: 25 - 35 dwelling units per gross acre for High Density Residential development. 2.4.4 Building Intensities A!l commercial, office and residential uses throughout the Project Area shall conform to or exceed minimum standards of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code and the final Redevelopment Plan approved and adopted by the Redevelopment Agency and the City Council. 2.4.5 Standards t iinimum standards for the Project Area include current specifications for public works construction, building codes, zoning and subdivision regulations and a!1 other applicable local, county and state regulations. 2.5 Project Duration Except for the nondiscrimination and nonsegregation provisions which shall run in perpetuity, the provisions of this plan shall be effective and the provisions of other documents formulated pursuant to this plan may be made effective for 35 years from the date of adoption of this plan by the City Council. Eminent Domain proceedings shall be limited to 12 years from adoption of the plan. I-3.0 EXISTING ENVIRONMENT The existing environment for the City of' Huntington Beach is well documented in the Huntington Beach General Plan, the Huntington Beach Chamber of Commerce Community Profile, the Huntington Beach Miscellaneous Historical Data and several previous environmental impact reports all of which are on file with the City of Huntington Beach Planning Department. -4- I-4.0 SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS MITIGATION MEASURES AND UNAVOIDABLE EFFECTS This section of the Focused Environmental Impact Report will examine the general impacts of the proposed Redevelopment Project and the more specific impacts of the type of development/redevelopment that is presently envisioned by the Agency. As previously indicated, individual projects that are implemented over the next several years will be subject to further environmental evaluation in accordance with C.E.Q.A. 4.1 General Impacts of Redevelopment As stated in the Preliminary Plan for the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project, the general impact upon the residents of the Project Area and on the surrounding neighborhood will be beneficial because (1) blighted areas will be replaced or rehabilitated, (2) relocation of businesses and residents when necessary will be in compliance with local and state regulations, and (3) there will be an upgrading of certain public lands and structure. The proposed development will result in the loss of existing open land. However, as described above, this loss would not constitute a significant impact as the development will be consistent with present zoning and the anticipated uses will be beneficial to the community. In addition to these items discussed in the Preliminary Plan, the Proposed Redevelopment Plan will beneficially impact the Project Area by: - Providing additional decent, safe and sanitary housing to the existing stock within the City of Huntington Beach. - Providing adequate parcels and required public improvements so as to encourage new construction by private enterprise, thereby providing the City of Huntington Beach with a stronger economic base. - Mitigating development limitations which have resulted in the lack of proper utilization of the Project Area to such an extent that it causes a serious physical, social and economic burden on the community which cannot reasonably be expected to be reversed or alleviated by private enterprise acting alone. - Providing construction and employment opportunities in the development of new housing and commercial facilities and by providing employment opportunities in the operation of these facilities. - Implementing the construction or reconstruction of adequate streets, curbs, gutters, street lights, storm drains and other improvements as necessary to maintain the Project Area as a master-planned development. Establishing development criteria and controls for the permitted reuses within the Project Area in accordance with modern competitive development practices. -5- ,1 The Redevelopment Plan as presently envisioned will provide for the assemblage and sale of properties and portions of properties to the Redevelopment Agency. However, if owners in these parcels are desirous of participating in the project, such participation will be encouraged in conformance with the Redevelopment Plan. The most direct impact to property owners-within the Project Area would be the displacement (except for owner participants) resulting from implementation of the Redevelopment Plan. This impact will be largely attenuated with the Agency's: (1) taking deliberate steps to negotiate the purchase price of properties to be acquired at fair market value*, (2) initiating such negotiations as soon as practical both prior and subsequent to the adoption of the Redevelopment Plan, (3) providing relocation advisory assistance and benefits to all who are displaced and are qualified for benefits, (4) ensuring ample time for purchase of property to be negotiated and sufficient time after to consummate the process of .relocation, and (5) keeping all concerned continuously apprised of the Agency's progress and its activities, (6) establishing a business retention program. Although the impact of relocation could be negative, its long-term impact is expected to be positive in that relocation will afford residences and businesses in the Project Area a unique opportunity to move to a more desirable location of their choice with little or no capital outlay necessary from personal or business cash resources. The impact from project implementation on surrounding neighborhoods is also expected to be positive over the long term. Development of modern, well-planned commercial and residential developments will provide an economic and aesthetic impetus to the surrounding areas. Furthermore, in 4 achieving such development, existing blighting influences will be irradicated from within the Project Area. Although the project will afford substantial benefits to the community over the long term, it is possible that in the short term existing neighborhoods surrounding the Project Area could experience certain.negative impacts during the construction period resulting from heavier truck traffic, noise and dust. However, these impacts will be mitigated by confining construction and trucking activities to daylight hours and by requiring spray watering as ne'bessary to control the impact of dust Over the long term, positive impacts to surrounding neighborhoods will result in development of modern and well-designed facilities which will have eliminated the blighting conditions of the Project Area while enhancing the total social and economic vitality of the City of Huntington Beach. * Under Eminent Domain Law (1263.320), fair market value of the property taken is the highest price on the date of valuation that would be agreed to by a seller, being willing to sell but under no particular or urgent necessity, for so doing, or obliged to sell and a buyer, being ready, willing and able to buy but under no particular necessity for so doing, each dealing with the other with full knowledge of all the purposes for which the property is reasonably adaptable and available. When the Agency purchases property, it usually will pay cash. This is of additional benefit to potential displacees when compared to today's "creative financing" type of transaction, where the seller usually ends up receiving monthly payments on a part of their equity. Sellers usually have one additional year to purchase comparable property before they are required to pay capital gains tax, because .most redevelopment transactions, while negotiated, are still subject to eminent domain. -6- The proposed redevelopment of the Project conforms to the Huntington Beach General Plan. The proposed land uses of the Redevelopment Plan conform to and greatly enhance the implementation of the General Plan and its goals and objectives which have guided the development of the City since its adoption. 4.2 Specific Impacts of Presently Envisioned Redevelopment Activities As presently envisioned, it is the desire of the Agency to construct, or cause the construction of, approximately 300 new residential units and to assist in the creation of approximately .1,000,000 square feet of new commercial/office development. The total value of improvements would be approximately $1501000,000. Based upon this proposed activity and the condition of existing buildings, the Agency anticipates the relocation of approximately 25 residences and 40 businesses. The precise location of new development, displacement phasing and level of activity is impossible to predict at this time. As development proposals come before the Agency, individual environmental evaluations will be conducted as required by C.E.Q.A. The generalized impacts of an additional net 300 residential units and a net 1,000,000 square feet of new commercial/office development can be summarized as follows: *Residential - 300 Units - 1,900 vehicle trips per day increase - 500 parking spaces increase - 45,000 gallons of sewerage per day increase - 58,000 gallons of water per day increase - 1,000 pounds of solid waste per day increase - 130 potential maximum student increase *Commercial/Office - 1,000,000 Square Feet - 4,000 vehicle trips per day increase - 2,750 parking spaces increase - 70,000 gallons of sewerage per day increase 100,000 gallons of water per day increase 5,000 pounds of solid waste per day increase A population increase of 900 will probably require the addition of approximately 1 fireman and related equipment, 1 policeman and related equipment, may require additional educational facilities and may require the addition of sewer and water facilities. Many of the costs for providing increased services could be provided by the Redevelopment Agency. It is anticipated that substantial changes will be required in the traffic and circulation system, the water and sewer system and in the solid waste management system. The proposed project would generate about 3,000 pounds of emission per day. More^ detailed information will be required prior to implementation of individual development projects. * Estimates have been prepared by Michael Wagner and Associates using standard usage factors for the proposed land uses. -7- Although it is impossible to project specific activities, it is presentlyenvisioned that Agency assistance will be required to implement up to 300 residential units, and up to 1,000,000 square feet. of commercial/office development. Removal of 25 residential units and 40 businesses will result in a substantial amount of solid waste which will require disposal. This waste material will probably be taken to the transfer facility and then trucked to the Orange County Landfill. 4.3 Mitigation Measures The proposed Redevelopment Plan is a means to mitigate the impact of blight in the Project Area and improve the social, environmental and economic conditions in the City. While the project is beneficial, minor adverse impacts may occur. The following list of mitigation measures are offered at this stage of the redevelopment process: 4.3.1 Future development will be constructed in accordance with provisions of the Uniform Building Code which governs construction relative to seismic movement. Onsite grading and earth removal will be performed to the satisfaction of the Huntington Beach Building Code. Grading, soil, compaction, erosion of soils, geologic hazards or similar hazards will be governed by the proper engineering standards and controls of the City of Huntington Beach. No unusual mitigating measures beyond the regular controls of the City are proposed at this time. 4.3.2 Air As mitigating measures, the Agency will encourage improved circulation, the extension and improvement of major arterials, bus and carpool usage, energy conservation, bike routes, paths and open space and green areas. 4.3.3 Water Development as proposed by the Redevelopment Plan will create an additional demand for water. The anticipated demand for water can be accommodated by the existing major water lines. However, higher intensity development may require expanding capacity and improving local street mains. An analysis of additional water line capacity will not be undertaken until a more specific indication of actual site development plans occur. No specific mitigation measures are proposed at this time. 4.3.4 Plant Life The project will remove no significant vegetation since none is in existence. Landscaping will negate the impact of providing an urban land use on currently vacant and redeveloped property. Landscaping is anticipated to be in excess of City standards. -8- 1 J1 ' • • 4.3.5 Animal Life The Project Area is not known to be a significant animal (or wildlife) habitat. Landscaping of the Project Area at the time of redevelopment can be expected to enhance a suitable habitat for birds associated with urban areas. 4.3.6 Noise Noise levels in the vicinity of the Project Area are not expected to increase significantly. Normal construction of building is anticipated to provide a minimum outside-to-inside attenuation of 22dBA which will reduce the inside noise to a level approaching 45dBA. No additional mitigation measures beyond the requirements of the Uniform Building Code and the City's Noise Ordinance will be required. Noise from traffic within the Project Area will be reduced because of Agency/City improvements to road surfacing, traffic control equipment and removal of mixed land uses. In addition, implementation of Section 27160 (a) of the California Vehicle Code for auto and truck manufacturers will result in a decrease in noise levels from engines and tires; by 1987 all vehicles must be at levels below 70 dBA. 4.3.7 Light and Glare Landscaping will "soften" the visual impact of the possible light and glare resulting from the redevelopment of the Project Area. Landscaping plans for each redevelopment proposal will be prepared by developers for approval by the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency and the City Council. The City will also exercise sign control and architectural control over the new development in the Project Area. 4.3.8 Land Use As previously stated, the land uses of the Project Area are proposed to be redeveloped to mitigate blighted conditions. Existing residential development will be buffered from proposed commercial developments through "development transition zones" which reflect greater compatibility of uses to mitigate any potential conflict from adjacent uses. 4.3.9 Natural Resources Wherever feasible, existing structures and improvements that are scheduled for demolition will be recycled to conserve on the consumption of natural resource. 4.3..10 Risk of Upset No significant hazard of explosion or hazardous substances is anticipated. No mitigation measures are proposed at this time. 4.3.11 Population It is doubtful that the additional population growth caused as a result of this project will be substantially great enough to create a significant adverse impact to the City. -9- With regard to the displacement of persons and families, relocation assistance will be provided. - Relocation Assistance. The Agency shall assist all businesses and persons including families and others) displaced from the project by the Agency in finding other locations and facilities. Should acquisition of occupied residences and businesses be necessary to carry out the project, persons and businesses displaced shall be assisted by the Agency in finding decent, safe and sanitary buildings and homes; within their financial means; in reasonably convenient locations; and as otherwise suitable to their needs. The Agency is authorized to provide housing inside or outside the Project Area for those persons displaced as a result of redevelopment activities. - Relocation Payments. The Agency shall make relocation payments to businesses and persons (including families and others) displaced by the project, for moving expenses for which reimbursement or compensation is not otherwise made. In addition, the Agency will reimburse owners for certain settlement costs incurred in the sale of their property to the Agency, and make additional relocation payments to those eligible therefor. Such relocation payments shall be made pursuant to Agency rules and regulations and the relocation provisions of the Government Code of the State of California. The Agency may make such other payments as may be appropriate and for which funds are available. The Agency shall make every effort to relocate businesses, individuals and families within the City of Huntington Beach. - Temporary Relocation Housing. The Agency is authorized to provide temporary relocation housing on cleared sites within the Project Area. Such action by the Agency will be to provide additional safe, standard and decent relocation housing resources for families and businesses within the Project Area prior to permanent disposition and development of such cleared sites. If feasible and desirable, the Agency may also utilize sites outside the Project Area for providing relocation housing resources. The Agency is also authorized to provide temporary relocation housing in houses acquired by the Agency that are being held for sale and/or rehabilitation. 4.3.12 Housing. Not less than 20 percent of all taxes which are allocated to the Agency pursuant to Section 33670 shall be used by the Agency for the purposes of increasing and improving the community's supply of housing for persons and families of low or moderate income, as defined in the Health and Safety Code Section 41056, and very low households, as defined in Section 41067, unless one of the following findings are made: - That no need exists in the community, the provision of which would benefit the Project Area to improve or increase the supply of housing for persons and families of low or moderate income households; or -10- That some stated percentage, less than 20 percent, of the taxes which are allocated to the Agency pursuant to Section 33670 is sufficient to meet such housing needs; or That a substantial effort to meet low and moderate income housing needs in the community is being made, and that this effort including the obligation of funds currently available for the benefit of the community from state, local and federal sources for low and moderate income housing alone or in combination with the taxes allocated, under this section, is equivalent in impact to the funds otherwise required to be set aside pursuant to this section. The City Council of the City shall consider the need that can be reasonably foreseen because of displacement of persons of low or moderate income or very low income households from within or adjacent to the Project Area, because of increased employment opportunities, or because of any other direct or indirect result of implementation of the Redevelopment Plan. 4.3.13 Transportation/Circulation Redevelopment will assist in providing adequate interior and exterior circulation to serve the Project Area which will result in improved traffic flow and provide improved access and additional parking. Alteration of streets, parking and other mitigating devices will be necessary to accommodate the anticipated increase in traffic flow. 4.3.14 Public Services No mitigation measures are proposed at this time. However, additional manning of such services as fire protection, building inspections and police protection, etc. will be necessary to maintain the same level of service that now exists. 4.3.15 Energy The following energy conservation measures are recornmended for the new structures: - Use of as much solar and alternate energy as is feasible. - Open gas lighting should not be used in public or private buildings. - Electric lights should be strategically placed to maximize their efficiency. Their size and power consumption should be minimized as much as possible. - Electrical heating in public and private structures should be discouraged. Solar assisted heating systems should be encouraged. - Reflecting and/or insulating glass should be used in structures where windows are not shaded by exterior architectural projections or mature plants. i J -11- 4.3.16 Utilities No mitigation measures are proposed at this time. 4.3.17 Human Health No mitigation measures are proposed at this time. However, it should be noted that human health conditions for Huntington Beach residents will be improved by being relocated into housing that is decent, safe and sanitary. 4.3.1E Aesthetics Architecture and landscaping site plans will be approved by the City. - Incompatible Uses. No use or structure which by reason or appearance, traffic, smoke, glare, noise, odor or similar factor would be incompatible with the surrounding areas, structures or uses shall be permitted in any part of the Project Area. - Subdivision or Consolidation of Parcels. Parcels in the Project Area, including any parcels retained by a participant, will not be subdivided or consolidated. without the prior approval of the Agency. - Limitation of Building Density. The number of buildings in the Project Area will be consistent with building intensities permitted pursuant to existing local ordinances for the City of Huntington Beach and this Plan. - Limitation on Type, Size and Height of Buildings. The height, type and size of buildings shall be limited by applicable state statutes and local zoning, building and other applicable codes and ordinances and. this Plan. Where a conflict exists between such local codes and ordinances and specific provisions of this Plan, the Plan shall supersede. - Open Space, Landscaping and Parking. The approximate amount of open space to be provided in the Project Area is the total of all areas which will be in the public right-of-way, the public grounds, the open space around buildings, and all other amounts of outdoor areas not permitted through limits on land coverage by the Plan to be covered by buildings. Landscaping plans where new construction occurs shall be submitted to the Agency for review and approval to ensure appropriateness and optimum use of living plant material. Within the Project Area, both public and private streets and public and private parking shall be provided for in each development consistent with or exceeding City codes and ordinances in effect from time to time. Any private streets or off-street .parking must also comply with regulations imposed by the Redevelopment Plan. Light, Air and'Privacy. In all areas, sufficient space shall be maintained between buildings and structures to provide adequate light, air and privacy. -12- Signs. Signs which create hazards or unsightly appearance by protruding, overhanging, blinking, flashing, showing animation or other such similar conditions shall not be permitted in the Project Area. The Agency shall permit only those signs necessary for identification of buildings, premises, uses and products associated with the land parcel involved. All signs shall be submitted to the Agency and the City, as appropriate, for review and approval. 4.3.19 Recreation No mitigation measures are proposed at this time. 4.3.20 Archeological/Historical Should archeological artifacts be encountered during construction, a qualified individual will be retained to investigate the significance of the items, catalog and remove same for further study and preservation. No other mitigation measures are proposed. 4.3.21 Development Standards - New Construction. All construction in the Project Area shall comply with all applicable state and local laws in effect from time to time including, but not necessarily limited to, fire, building, electrical, heating, grading, plumbing, sign and zoning codes of the City of Huntington Beach. - Rehabilitation and Retention of Existing Conforming Uses. Any existing structures within the Project Area which meet the standards for rehabilitation may be repaired, altered, reconstructed or rehabilitated, if necessary, in such manner that will meet the following requirements: ° Be safe, sanitary and sound in all physical respects. Shall conform to the seismic requirements and the rehabilitation requirements of the Building Code of Huntington Beach. Shall conform to the Fire Code for the City of Huntington Beach. o Shall be comparable in appearance to the architecture of the-on-site proposed new structures. 4.4 Unavoidable Effects The proposed project should improve the community's overall economic situation and, as a result, bring about more job opportunities, increase population and provide a higher quality of life for the residents of Huntington Beach. These factors, in turn, will place a greater demand on the City's water, sewer, power and land resources, as well as contribute to air and noise pollution. -13- The implementation of the Plan will result in the clearance of selected commercial and housing structures, the construction of new multi-family housing and commercial buildings; the pavement of streets and additional parking lots; and the development of other facilities that will probably result in increased rainfall runoff. During the course of implementing the project, there will be some temporary disruption to normal activities due to construction. Construction, as well as the provision of public improvements, will result in the utilization of certain natural resources, such as sand, gravel, petroleum and lumber. Implementation of the proposed Redevelopment Plan will result in the. acquisition of certain property and the relocation of owners and tenants. I-5.0 ALTERNATIVES 5.1 No Project The "no project" alternative would allow the Project Area to continue in a blighted condition for an indefinite period. The application of existing federal, state and local funds is not adequate to significantly prevent existing deterioration or to significantly improve existing conditions. 5.2 Smaller Project Area Designation of a smaller project area will not achieve the objectives of the Redevelopment Plan or eliminate the blighted conditions. 5.3 Larger Project Area Establishment of a larger project area would require more extensive investigation to document blighting conditions. A larger project area would not necessarily enhance the opportunity for achieving the Redevelopment Plan's objectives. I-6.0 LOCAL SHORT-TERM VERSUS LONG-TERM EFFECTS The Redevelopment Plan provides policy direction in the establishment of land use categories in accordance with the General Plan. The Plan further provides: for the acquisition of property, demolition and replacement of structures; relocation of some families and businesses; installation of reconstruction of streets, utilities and other site improvements; and financial methods for implementing the project. The Redevelopment Plan is designed to provide direction for the transition from present short-term policies to the long-range goals and objectives of Huntington Beach. Many provisions of the Plan will be effective for 35 years. Not to implement the Plan at this time would be to intensify the conditions of blight and deterioration that exist within the Project Area. If implemented, the Plan would arrest these conditions over the long-term, and would help promote the economic and physical well-being of the City of Huntington Beach. -14- • • Concerning underdeveloped or vacant land, the long-term effects will be a loss of open space and some resources, which will be mitigated through development open space standards and development of the public park area. The Project Area will be subject to redevelopment over the planning period. Adverse effects associated with land acquisition, demolition, relocation of households and businesses and reconstruction will be mostly short-term. Based upon existing plans, the intensity of residential and commercial development will increase and will result in additional congestion. Noise and air emissions in the Project Area would likewise increase. I-7.0 IRREVERSIBLE EFFECTS Although the project will result in the utilization of certain resources such as sand, petroleum and lumber in the construction and implementation of its various proposals, and will result in the commitment of some now vacant lands to urban uses, it is unlikely that the impacts of the implementation of the project would result in any more adverse environmental changes than would the continued growth of the City under normal conditions. In fact, by concentrating the development and making the improvements called for in the Redevelopment Plan, there should be less land and resources committed irretrievably to urbanization. This project basically uses land already committed to urbanization. The environmental problems caused by the project should be mitigated by the steps outlined in this report. I-8.0 GROWTH INDUCING EFFECTS The process of regional growth can be generally outlined as a series of events in casual sequence beginning with job creation: The creation of new jobs then leads to job shifts and vacancies, followed by immigration and a demand for shelter. This, in turn, is followed by an ordering of land uses and a shifting of the spatial configuration of the labor supply. The shifting of the location of the supply of labor is a stimulus for the new location of business and other economic activity creating jobs and starting the growth cycle over again. The regional growth cycle constitutes the source of the demand for the construction of private and public facilities. The actual physical pattern of the growth in the City is the result of the chronological order and size in which specific parcels of land are developed. The relatively small size parcels have limited the growth and development possibilities in the Project Area. The consolidation of parcels in the Redevelopment Project Area will broaden the possibilities for more intense development and growth. The implementation of the project will have a growth inducing impact to the City by increasing the population by about 900 persons. The proposed project will expand the housing stock of the City by about 300 units and will increase employment opportunities. -15- I-9.0 INSIGNIFICANT EFFECTS The environmental impacts identified in the Initial Study as insignificant (Appendix B) included primarily those related to land, water; plant and animal life, human health and archaeological/historical. These impacts were dismissed primarily because. they are not affected by the proposed project. I_10.0 ORGANIZATIONS, PERSONS AND SOURCES CONSULTED 10.1 City of Huntington Beach Tom Tincher, Director of Business and Industrial Enterprise 10.2 Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency Preliminary Plan for the Talbert-Beach Redevelopment Project, April, 1982. 10.3 Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency Proposed Redeveloment Plan, May, 1982. 10.4 Air Quality Handbook for Environmental Impact Reports, SCAG. 10.5 Geotechnical Inputs, Leighton-Yen and Associates, February, 1974. 10.6 Scientific Resources Survey and Inventory, Huntington Beach, California, Archaeological Research, Inc., April 10, 1973. 10.7 Land Use Element Amendment, EIR 81-6, Huntington Beach Department of Development Services. 1.0.8 City of Huntington Beach, James Barnes, Associate Planner. -16- ......... -- • �pendix "A" j LEGAL DESCRIPTION MAIN-PIER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA Beginning at the intersection of the northerly line at Walnut Avenue and the westerly line of Sixth Street as shown on a map of Huntington Beach recorded in book 3, page 36 of Miscellaneous Maps in the office of the. Orange County Recorder; thence southwesterly along said westerly right-of-way of Sixth Street and its extension to the High Tide Line of the Pacific Ocean; thence southeasterly along said High Tide Line to a line parallel with and 35.00 feet northwesterly, measured at right angles , from the northwesterly line of Main Street as shown on said Map of Huntington Beach; thence southwesterly along said line 1470 feet more or less to a perpendicular line parallel with and 60.00 feet southwesterly, measured at right angles , from the southwesterly end of the Huntington Beach Municipal Pier; thence southeasterly along said line 145.00 feet to a line parallel with and 35.00 feet southeasterly from the southeasterly line of said Main Street; thence northeasterly along said line to the High Tide Line of the Pacific Ocean; thence southeasterly along said High Tide Line to the southwesterly extension of the southeasterly line of Lake Street (formerly First Street) as shown on said map at Huntington Beach; thence northeasterly along said extension and the southeasterly line of Lake Street to the southerly extension of the easterly line of said Walnut Avenue; thence northerly and northwesterly along the easterly and northerly line of Walnut Avenue to the point of beginning. 1 -17- 400A (4.71) CONTINUATION •NUT HUNG ADMINsTRATIVI RIauLATi Appendix "B" WITH THI starTARY O/ STAT1 (Pursuant to Government Code Section 11980.1) -25- 55• Appendix J is added to read: APPENDIX J NOTICE OF PREPARATION. T0: FROM: Hunti n ton Beach Redevelopment (Responsible Agency (Lead Agency gency 2000 Main Street 2000 Main Street Address Address Huntington Beach, California 92648 Huntington Beach, California 92648 SUBJECT: Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report The Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency will be the Lead Agency and will prepare an environmental impact report for the project identified below. We need to know the views of your agency as to the scope and content of the environmental information which is germane to your agency 's statutory responsibilities in connection with the proposed project . W Your agency will need to use the EIR prepared by our agency when A. considering your permit or other approval for the project . a a The project description, location, and the probable environmental Z effects. are contained in the attached materials . A copy of the Initia * Study /a:7 is , /::�7 is not , attached . oDue to the time limits mandated by State law, your response must be z sent at the earliest possible date but not later than 45 days after $ receipt of this notice . Please send your response to Tom Tincher at the address shown. above . We will need t he name for a con ac person in your agency . PROJECT TITLE: MAIN-PIER REDEVELOPMENT PLAN PROJECT APPLICANT, IF ANY : HUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY DATE Apri 1 28, 1982 Signature Title Executive Director Telephone (7 4) 536-5575 Reference : California Administrative Code, Title 14 , Sections 150;,_ .7 15054 . 3 , 15066 . -18- _ ___.. CC�ff4'�ItIAtlgpl MIlM /ILWO ADUNIMATM UQUILAOS WITH THt SKAUAIIY OP :TATI Mwr.w Is awry two too" IISKI) 74. Appendix I is Added to read: A PPNDIX I ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM (To be completed by Lead Agency) I. BACKGROUND 1 . Name of Proponent Huntin ton Beach Redevelopment Agency 2 . Address and Phone Number of Proponent: 2000_Main Street/P.O. x 190 Huntingtn Beach.--California 9264Q 714) S.16-5542 3 . Date of Checklist Submitted May 5, 1982 4. Agency Requiring Checklist Rpdpyplopment Agency - 5 . Name of Proposal, if applicable Mai -Pier Redevelopment Plan II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required on attached sheets. ) r YES MAYBE NO = 1 . Earth. Will the proposal result in: d a . Unstable earth conditions or in o changes in geologic substructures? X z $ b. Disruptions, displacements, com- paction or overcovering of the soil? X c . Change in topography or ground surface relief features? X d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? e . Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? X f . Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? X -19- c0l1?tM1sAT1oN swrn 1y FILING ADMINISTRATIVE RIOULATIM WIM THI SKRITARY OF STATi thm"M N 0kwMa"1 cede sedi" 11300.1) YES MA YBHE NO Ig . Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure, or similar hazards? X 2 . Air. Will the proposal result in: a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? X b. The creation of objectionable odors? X c . Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? X 3 . Water. Will the proposal result in: a . Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements , in either marine or fresh waters? X = b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage pattersn; or the rate 3 and amount of surface water runoff? X 0 Z c . Alterations to the course or $ flow of flood waters? X d . Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? .. X e . Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to termperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? X f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? X g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations'? X -20- o■M AooA . tOOMUMMON N/lR &a Plum* ADM1"1r ATM UGUA. "s WffH TN! SSCMAKY Of STATi ftww N Ow«,W.«i CW6 s«d.e Mal) YES MAYBE NO h . Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? X i . Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or tidal waves? X 4 . Plant Life . Will the proposal result n: a . Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, microflora and aquatic plants) ? X b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? X c . Introduction of new species of � OL plants into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? X z d . Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? X z 5 . Animal Life , Will the proposal 8 resu in— a . Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic or ani insects or microfauna�? ems, b . Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? _X__. c . Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of Animals? X d . Deterioration to existing fish i or wildlife habitat? _4.._. X 1 -21- •""^ CONYIMUNMON INIff ISFIL1NG ADMINISTRATIVI RIOULATIOP WITH THI SICRITARY ON STATI (Iunee81 1e Oe"Posmi.code swee 11390.0 YES MAYBE NO 6. Noise . Will the proposal result in: a . Increases in existing noise X levels? b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? X 7. Light and Clare . Will the proposal produce new g t or glare? X 8. Land Use . Will the proposal result in as substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an , area? X 9. Natural Resources . Will the proposal resu n: a . Increase in the rate of use of L any natural resources? X "- b. Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? _S z Y 10. Risk of Upset . Does the proposal involve a risR of an explosion or o the release of hazardous substances S (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? X 11 . Population. Will the proposal alter e location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human popu- lation of an area? X 12 . HHo_u_sii_n Will .the proposal affect ex- -3sting. housing, or create a demand for additional housing? X 13 . Transportation/Circulation... Will £Fie proposal result in: a . Generation of substantial addi- tional vehicular movement? X i -22- a.r .00A lOM71MYAttON SHVIT It FILINO ADMINISTRATIVE RroULAii5 AT WITH THE HCRETARY OF STI (hew«M to Oefthw*M CW0 sedloft 1 Iswi) YES MA YEE NO b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? _X c . Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? X d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? X e . Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? X f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? X 14 . Public Services . Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered govern- mental services in any of the • following areas : W a . Fire protection? X r b. Police protection? X 0 8 c . Schools? d. Parks or other recreational facilities? X e . Maintenance of public facili- ties, including roads? f . Other governmental services? X 15 . Energy. Will the proposal result in: a . Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? X b . Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? X -23- � rn.u�rwt.vly OMIT • MI ING ADMINISTRATIVE RRGIJtA"o WITH THII SKRUARY OF STATI Mom"to 09~Code foot** 11310.11 YES MAYBE NO 16. Utilities . Will the proposal result 3n a Feed for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a . Power or natural gas? X b, Communications systems? X c . Water? _.X d. Sewer or septic tanks? __X._ e . Storm water drainage? _.�_.. f. Solid waste and disposal? X 17 . Human Health. Will the proposal result n: a . Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding . N mental health) ? X b. Exposure of people to potential x health hazards? X w 3 18. Aesthetics . Will the proposal result o n the o s ruction of any scenic z vista or view open to the plablic, or 8 will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? 19. . Recreation. Will the .proposal result n an im5gct upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? X 20. Archeological�Hlstorical . Will the proposal result- in an alteration of a significant archeological or historical site , structure, object or building? X -24- o0ir 40QA; VA" M ds1pT 100R HUNG ANDNUNUMATM W1TN TNN3 HtRUARY or STA (hewMf N 060F Mat) . —E NO 21. Mande tore Find rose o,� Significance. (a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species , cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels , threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? x b. Does the project have the poten- tial to achieve short-term, to_ the disadvantage of long-term, environ- mental goals? (A short-term impact - on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while z long-term impacts will endure well into the future . ) X r c . Does the project have impacts °: which are individually limited, $ but cumulatively considerable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant. ) X d . Does the project have environ- mental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? X III. DISCUSSION OF EVVIROWWWTAL EVALUATION -25- .)*W 400A COPMUA"ON unn FILING ADMINIiTRATIVI RIGULATU01% WITH TH1 :1CRITARY Of PAT1 f'vnwM M 04g1LN"11 CW4 stem«, 113KI) i IV. DETERMINATION (To be completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: f7 I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project . A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL HE PREPARED. I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect- on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required . Date gpri 1 20. 1982 S gna ur x Charles W. Thomp on For a _ Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency__! 0 z g i. i -26- PUBLIC COMMENTS AND REVIEW -27- • II-1.0 DISTRIBUTION OF DRAFT FOCUSED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT 1. 1 Mailing and Distribution Copies of the Draft Focused Environmental Impact Report were distributed to the persons and agencies listed in Appendix A. 1. 2 Publication and Notification Notice of availability of the Draft Focused EIR was published in the Hunting- ton Beach Independent Review on May 29, 1982 (see Appendix B) . A Notice of Completion was filed with the Secretary of Resources. The EIR review period was from May 24, 1982 to July 7, 1982. Each last known assessee will be notified of the public hearing on the Redevelopment Plan. 1.3 Public Hearing The City Council will conduct a public hearing on the EIR and the Redevelop- ment Plan. Each last known assessee within the Project Area will be notified of the subject hearing. II-2.0 COMMENTS RECEIVED Comments were received from the agencies and individuals listed in Appendix C. II-3.0 RESPONSES TO COMMENTS RECEIVED 3A General Response The Public Works Department and the Environmental Review Board indicated that the subject Draft Focused Environmental Impact Report seemed to be general in nature and did not provide enough specific information on each proposed develop- ment upon which to base specific comments. At the present time the Redevelop- ment Agency does not have specific development proposals upon which more thorough evaluation can be presented. For this reason, the Draft Environmental Impact Report took a general look at what could happen within each Redevelopment Area and prepared as much information as possible. After adoption of the Redevelop- ment Plan , the Agency will be working with developers and owner participants to attempt to establish specific projects. These specific projects will be subject to further environmental evaluation. The Redevelopment Plan is a legal document which establishes the Redevelopment Area and gives the Agency certain powers and duties within that area. The Redevelopment Plan is a plan to make improvements and establish the mechanisms to initiate those improvements, but is not a specific plan or development or plot plan. 3.2 Comments Received Not Requiring Response Comments providing general information which will be considered by the .Rede- velopment Agency and the City Council or which do not require formal response were received from the following: Huntington Beach Police Department Metropolitan Water District - Environmental Planning Branch Metropolitan Water District - Engineering Branch Orange County Transit District General Telephone Company U.S. Department of the Interior County Sanitation Districts of Orange County Department of Water Resources 3. 2 Public Works Department As specific development proposals are presented to the Agency, traffic and public improvements will be evaluated. 3. 3 Environmental Review Board As specific plans are developed, substantial consideration will be given to required public transportation, public facilities, water availabiltiy, sewering requirements , utilities and landscaping. Where possible, the Agency will encourage the use of solar energy technology and will encourage the water conservation recommendations of the State Department of Water Resources (contained in this Final EIR) . The Agency will support the goals and objec- tives of the Orange County Solid Waste Management Master Plan particularly as those goals affect the recycling of solid wastes. The City Council will continue to take those actions necessary to provide adequate police and fire protection to all of its residents. The taxes that are presently being paid to the City by the property within the proposed project areas will continue to be received by the City. The new taxes paid by more intensive use of the project areas will go to the Agency. These new taxes paid are commonly referred to as tax increment. 3.4 California Coastal Commission Specific development proposals will be assessed and mitigation measures pro- posed as each development is presented to the City Council and the Coastal Commission. As required by State Law, the Redevelopment Plan will conform to the City of Huntington Beach' s General Plan as it may be amended from time to time. The proposed uses for the Main-Pier Project will probably include residential development. The impact of traffic and an evaluation of development standards will be in the Downtown Specific Plan and in the Downtown Specific Plan EIR which is now being prepared by the City of Huntington Beach. 3. 5 State Department of Transportation The Main-Pier Redevelopment Project is located approximately 8 miles south- east of Meadowlark Airport (see Figure 1 ) and should not be affected by noise or safety. Any multi-story buildings which are required to do so will be submitted to the Department of Transportation for approval . -29- o � lilt ♦ i �.I ♦ ��. ti i i ■ ■ J1e� Oa G� /- J J • S M1M Q� ►Acetc cowst Kwr -- 11t14Il:If':11, f'f F'.ft FIGURE 1 MEADOWLARK AIRPORT IN RELATION' TO REDEVELOPMENT AREAS APPENDIX A DISTRIBUTION OF THE DRAFT FOCUSED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT -31- May 20, 1982 SUBJECT: TALBERT-BEACH, OAKVIEW, YORKTOWN-LAKE AND MAIN-PIER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREAS Enclosed are copies of the Draft EIR' s for the above named projects. The review period has been established for 45 days between May 24 , 1982 and July 1, 1982 Any comments you may have will be incorporated in and re- sponded to in the final EIR' s. Thank you in advance for your consideration of these documents. Any ques- . tions you may have can be directed. to me at the number below. Sincerely, . ' 01V�3 "�� Tom Tincher, Director Business and Industrial Enterprise TT:jb enclosures L.. -32- EIR Distribution List: No. Copies Date Sent State Clearinghouse 10 1400 loth Street Sacramento, California 95814 Attn: Terry Roberts County of Orange 1 Environmental Management Agency Environmental Services Division 811 North Broadway Santa Ana , CA 92701 South Coast Air Quality Management District 1 9150 Flair Avenue El Monte, CA 91731 SCAG 1 600 South Commonwealth Ave, Suite 1000 Los Angeles , CA 90005 O.C. Library District 1 431 City Drive South Orange, CA 92668 O.C. Transit District I (1200 No. Main St) P.O. Box 688 Santa Ana, CA 92702 O.C. Vector Control. District 1 P.O. Box 81 Santa Ana, CA 92702 Attn: Gilbert L. Challet Southern CA Edison Co. 1 390 East llth St. , Unit E Costa Mesa, CA 92627 Attn: J. E. Kennedy Pacific Telephone 1 1695 West Crescent, Suite 300 Anaheim, CA 92801 Attn: Art Arthington So. CA Gas Company 1 James Decker, District Manager P.O. Box 1017 Laguna Beach, CA 92652 Michael F. Knapp 1 17692 Gainsford Lane Huntington Beach, CA 92649 U.S. Bureau of Sport Fisheries & Wild Life 1 Attn: Pat Wright Bureau of Sport Fisheries 2855 East Coast Highway Corona del Mar, CA 92625 League of Women Voters 1 Attn: Sherry Baum 815 Catalina Avenue Seal Beach, CA 90740 Hunt. :Bch. Chamber of Commerce 1 18582 Beach Blvd. , Suite 224 Huntington Beach, CA 92647 Downtown Merchants Guild 1 Attn: Larry Recht, Pres. 224 Main St, H. B. , CA 92648 Amigo de Bolsa Chica 1 Attn: Rhoda Martyn 17041 Courtney Lane H.B. , CA 92649 South Coast Regional Commission 1 666 E. Ocean Blvd. , Suite 3107 l P.O. Box 1450 Long Beach, CA 90801 Gen. Tele. Co. of CA 1 Orange Division Headquarters 7352 Slater Ave. H.B. , CA 92647 Connie Mandic 1 1112 Main St. H.B. , CA 92648 City Administrator Charles Thompson City Attorney I Gail Hutton Community Services 1 Vince Moorhouse Police Department 1 Earle Robitaille Fire Department 1 Chief Ray Picard Don Noble 5 Public Works -34- City Clerk 3 O.C. Admin. Offices 1 Alicia Wentworth 10 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, CA 92701 City Library 2 7111 Talbert Av. , N.B. , CA 92648 Attn: Reserve Desk James Palin 1 Development Services Florence Webb 1 Acting Deputy Director Savoy Bellavia 1 Senior Planner Planning Commissioners 7 City Council 7 H.B.E.S.D. 1 735 14th Street H.B. , CA 92648 H.B.U.H.S.D. 1 10251 Yorktown Ave. H.B. , CA 92646 O.C. Flood Control District 1 Environ. Manage. Agency 400 Civic Center Drive West Santa Ana, CA 92702 O.C. Sanitation District 1 Admin. Office 10844 Ellis Avenue F .V . , CA 92708 O.C. Assessor 1 625 N. Ross Santa Ana, CA 92702 O.C. Auditor-Controller 1 630 N. Broadway Santa Ana, CA 92702 Metro. Water Dist.- of So. CA 1 Headquarters Bldg. 1111 W. Sunset Blvd. L.A. , CA 90012 Attn: Glen W. Smith Environ. Planning Branch Ocean View School District 1 Admin. Office 16940 "B" Street / A - nnC A l --- APPENDIX B PUBLICATION AND NOTIFICATION I -36- • '� APIPENM C 1 SWI of CaUfornla The Rewurces Agency SEMTARY POR RESOURCES 1416 Ninth Street, Room 1311 S&crkmeAto, CAUIOftlla 93914 NOIIM OF COMPLETION FORM Pro)eci TItle Main-Pier Redevelopment Plan Pmject UW00n:zPeCIYIZ 5putb of $,,�Avenye; east of 6th St; west of Lake St; inclusive of pier itself Project Location—City Project Locatio unty City of Huntington Beach County of Orange Description o tune, Nipose, and beneficiaries o ect The proposed project consists of redeveloping the project area to remove blight and create new development. Theproject will benefit the City of buntimton Beech and all of its residents. Lead Agency 51vision Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency_ Address Where Copy of EIR 10 Av&Uable 2000 Main Street Funtington Beach, California 92648 Review Period May 24 to July _7 , 1982 Contact Person r�ea a Pqne xtens n Tom Tincher 714 536-5542 103 -37- - 1 I INTHB Superior. Court oFTHe STATE OF CALIFORNIA In and for the County of Orange CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH , PROOF OF PUBLICATION DEVELOPMENT SERVICES NOTICE OF PREPARATION MAL We of Orang e t e t t �_ f l'ounty 4llrenge Iyn� A1[1Tg1�� JEANN I E L. THOMAS MDrMl • Y t�� Ir Iwrrt.al tW a• � . 61 the of in Thnt I Mni nmi Al ell times herein menlmmvd wns n citirrn of CLAAwswk &Not,iyW"6"��IMa�� the I'nitr,l mime,.„%-Pr the Age of twenty ,mv venr.,,Anil that I luCkrls {b P"eti w am not a party to. nor interested in the aMwe entitled metter; Polls""is km that I am the principal clerk of the printer of the Its as hats js�ttt�al yM. HUNTINGTON BEACH IND. REVIEW Pwkuy } a ntwvspaper of general circulation,published in the City of #KM�•�4►�11 t 4 '11 i HUNTINGTON BEACH County of Orange and which newapaper is published for the disemination of local news and intelligence of a general charac- ter, and which newspaper at all times herein mentioned had and still has a bona fide subscription list of paying subscribers, and which newspaper has been established, printed and pub- lished at regular intervals in the said County of Orange for a period exceeding one year, that the notice. of which the annexed is a printed copy, has been published in the regular and entire iasue of said newspaper,and not in any supplement thereof,on the following dates,to wit: May 6 , 1982 I certify for declare) under penalty of perjury that the forego- in`is true and correct. Datedat... GAr.d.cn..G.ro.ve.. ... ._ ... ...... . . . . .. 7lia.thin .7.th..d,y, .Ka.y 19. 2. k E/C E 1 V [ D Signature �1 �.ra' -'I -38- IN THE 1 >r Superior Court o►TH[ STATE OF CALIFORNIA In and for the County of Orange CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY — PROOF OFPUBLII'ATION LEGAL ADVERTISEMENT State of California ) County of Orange r � APRIL L. ELLIOTT trW That I am and at all times herein mentioned wan At citizen of -� thc. 1'mied 4tates.over the age of 1wenly -rne gars,nod that I I NOTKX v " Am 11,11 A pArty to. nor Interested In the Alwnr entitled matter: yam, wy�1a that I am the Itnnnpal clerk of the printer of the W sf HUNTINGTON BEACH IND. REVIEW tmuea(&*Wai' . w��a1�t�rglMy ) s nrw.pAlwr of generAl circulation,published In the('ity of MINCir j HUNTINGTON BEACH st C.,unty if Orange and which newspalwr I. published far the di•rmulnnoo if II,•al nrws and Intelligrnce of A general chArat 4iiraa� rq ter. And which nrw-)IPAper at all Limes herein menlnmed had Holt %till hA+ A N.IIA fide sulau-rlplion list of pAting suhacrilwre. ~MI14�1M And which ne"PAper h►s heen eatahlished, printed and pub a/ L.hed At regular In.tenals in the said l'000ty of llrAnge for a NNW peri—I ezceriing -ne vear. that the noUre. of which the Annexed + a printed copy. hAs heen published in the regular 1 and entirr IMue if Aatd nr"palwr, and nnI in an% Aupplenivot therr,of.on the Gillowing dates,Io wit. MAY 291 1982 I certify for declare) under penalty of perjury that the forego- ing is true and correct. GARDEN GROVE Datedat... ..................... ...... ...... ... ....... .. 1st JUKE 82 C&Iiforn' this ........day of ./..., .... 19...... .. . IL�........... . ... 3iptatlue -39- FEDERAL GRANT ICATION/AWARD NOTIFIC,!1TION� , 1 APPI.IC I„ , IIA'I ^•%, ,tor .. STATE OF CALIFORNIA ATE CLEARINGHOUSE (916) 445 0613 19 22. ._`J.- 24 11 LIS 1 1t TO (%L CVMrL( TEO BY APPLICANT 2 FEDERAL FMP1.0yI n r/an let one n •,tl. _ '1I f `, I DRESS - Strrn or P.O.bow Cit of Huntin torY.tNk� '"I''''' 'J' ���� 2000 Main Street _ E e+COUNTY t 1.STATE s. ZIP CODE �1 PROG TITLE INO.ICatsto4 of FM t)(tr,ptt„ A• Huntin ton Beat ,� r;71r I l cCA 9?_648 10.TY E OF ACTION I tY►E!OM CHANG9 1Complltl H 10b or 10C We$chocked) 14 t)(nIIN(-,I I I 7 •' 1 1 I ;17, t r-1 AM New a 0 Modale111bAi�{{ a; i��)12sNltl'Oo11I1t a �0� 1r{crinadDuralen a t_JOlnorSeop.Cnro b❑Contlnuelll)n ' I` .� Wrl(71kH11hitl'Oblllrl " J1 b1 W�eerened Ouretln^ h (�CancerlaUnn •f11t�C 19. APPLICANT TYPE �uHn3/1FOUF3►In111er Cho got Srrol•O.Iv A-1 of , I Entet Letter : f'1V�i(!>fluvir� 'r A, At/t1' I i�„9ellaot Dltlrlat �=r )o Yrn►�•t 11l s. REQuESTEO FUND SYJ1p1 __. I I'll 16. FUNDS DURATION JuLJ�IMQRttllll' (t �,.InInN11111" t4 �t•Cdr�h+Unity Action Agent 71 SIB r1 I 1$ I 1 7 C�JJ'; tub�11��'t�ltl) NI'�db�(1'f�IW Orpenlretlon I)7 LOCAL ( 1$ _. . 17 ESt. PROJECT STAAT 1 �, nSQ,-I+SUAi .?!',, }J�,ir' 'tlkdf1t�, `21 orw(e f 1$ - (5NI ' tivtbl�lft`'i� ')E, 'C!1 ; Ili' , f",d1 �ttitlr Isdctlr In naml- ) rnrAL 00.)1, ,)11,Fl. EST ►AOJECT DuAAtI 28I8RIEF TITLE OFA. •fi .I , ' 41 ___._ . APPLICANT S.PACIJlC4 26)OE CAIPTION OP P LICA polel` ,�`,(+ tyt The propo5 -N. 1• ` he- project area to remove blight and create ne6� ;'Ir4 tl•r.I '. � �; ' 1 27. AR€A OF PAOJECT.I AC- IRdlditie city,.County(state,/ta,) ; t) t, TAT w11 Hunting ton'i'6_`, ti 'CoUntt' C�111,V, h9a y 28.CO ORE AL DISTRICT t '� ,I 22.F*Irohmentel Attoeement Rtquuea 30 CLF.AnINGHOUSEISI TO wI41CH SUn%I,1 ' O( Aao(leant DIth144 1`tt ",lfPbl�t'� ' �, ' d�!11{ryFltWhl A0/nayl Q I: IL T L (7ilNn 34 • XJ SUte h L J A»e Wide a��Nn^r ,AM rTITLEOP CONTACT A RIESS — Lrle% or P. O. An, r 1 t .t I r Thomas 0 .1 11 ' .1 + y 2000 aTn St. , Huntington Beach �714 ) .111:_ IL 11. 711.d I$ ENV ffNMENTAL,66bUMnWT'A!VIEW AEOUTAED YES X NO [J a w I'•"lwoitct r•nt1•r.. h I Ivn(rrt 11 I,hyi.ml ,At... •,• I Ynt [� EJI n"M"I Irnbect 9tater0int Merlotti A1Nthed 120 00011t) relorAl nn) env,rrinmt,tta'rMcu^�•^t 1•u , D1IEIAL (not EIA Yf"J-..L.J__N CI _ (-,aw,)Q,c Survey ouMlreno'"NV'R Dlflrh'S( �A lSflttO ( OoWall. 1 1 r.,: t Un/t yqul eglnry hove 1 0►01►n 1t loorlttl. • Civil r,p ll a Ir me l,v4 None IrtIL4SyH rO M1M1b11(WI11 130 For*oPd1 11Ji1 I.v " :., Itt on ,xtl,cv enrl nun) AptiM�fIM+111�1 .'•1 t I , '.�.t 1; ,:.1.y�;i'', YES -1 -N0 I-1 .- ,.1� ey ..►i.,sl-, wr.. 114,I• . 0 11�*D !G` 14,Rr1 be, If No 8' Pad voI Irtt f FFlgUlri,��6A ITTTirttfl fJof{�1 �' H• r. �'1 [[I��V� Q ProI1el Ell*n►Pt t •'. tW011 I EItItMClttbnl l�My�pie,Lt1`� Il.Y?Sll�bANOtcutedl Vol}I ,: o• ) tr YES CJ NO 0 ITEMS 32 38 TO BE COMPLETE 0 8y CI-1 AII1I`JGI.ItV`.1 MULTIPLE '32. CLIFAAINGHOUSE 10 Q CLEARINdH000 I I I 13. a CTION BASED ON 33. b ACTION TAKEN �EVIEW OF �—y �—y STATE APPLICATION /nNotlfleatlon 1 Owifheo'hmrnt a LJ1�/elrsd J4. ISAII ��. ._.I--LL-L_J.. I IDENtlrlrn h l�APPIlc/llon b l�l Wlthbul Con'Irrleni d ❑UAIIvoe.A`b I Slot• Nu—he, STATE WIDE County/ City County/ Cllr Cn„^,v/ C,IV CAunly, C,IV Cov_tr' C,tv Cn 14,CLf.AAINGH0U9E Ping Area Ping Ahi ►1nQ Area Ping Arr, P1np Arlo IMPACT CODE I D yet �d ]n.SThTE PLAN AEOUIRED 11. I'll CI 'VINtJ OATL v' ^^ ", 3A a SIGNATURE OF CH OrFICIAI. AT CLEARINGHOUSE IQ— —_ _ 1:1Yet I I No 38. FINAL CH ACTION DATE yr n o n•v L.J 10._ I Tr VS 1n.d2 TO rlf r•,01A4 P I. If Il rtv Arr, (CANT nI I (In( %1141, ". 1 •I,I•n 1,11 t pl lint AIA NCv -.-.. 00. CEf1TIFICATION _ h/ dkolliatitt Allimmot thlt it the hililit Al hit Howled" ehd belief Ih/ebpv%dill ate nu•and ,Chec%box 11 cite,lnahn•,I' aor►eal Ihd IIIIhd d( 114101M his b/wl thJly Aulholllla by Me pavernlAil body of the!1)tllte/rlt. ►Nttantl It Itlacherl aa. • AME {Irinl of TytteloSIONATVA! of A '116(1 A tontattve tl TELE^,+t INI Ad )�TE MAILED TO !0!AA(rJ 'A0%NCY,k, ',9r ' 06 47.N E OF 13h06RAL i 111ATIll AQANCY _ nTOliIHICH TH16 AIIPLICAtION 'SUillil sO _ Y _ ITruS a.1-'ta TO BECOMPILE TE r) ny rr or nAL orr1cr EVALUATING AN 1) 111 CIIk'101 Nil-,'. AC 111IN „N t,11 A''' t • ~11. nr)ANT APPLICATION ID 82. Apolltetlon Rac'd. 93 a E.n Att'ur, rTr,r ,— ;(AtetOned be, Ftadertl ApSACV1 ''•t•I r l', 1 Vr mo day v, ^u "AV �AIIOVAVA Complete i I ''I Rl�(1G ti APPENDIX C COMMENTS RECEIVED -41- CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH :4 I NTE R•DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION \}^\ NUNTINGI(*uAc 11 �\ . To Tcrn Ting F rom Don �k)ble Director of .Business & Industrial Fnt. F'Mineerinq Planner Subject Redevelpanent Project Areas Date :July 13, 1992 11be public Works Department has the following ccxmr.nts anti concerns regarding the Redevelopn ent project Areas: A. General Cx=ents 1. The focused E.I.R. for the Oakview area is somewhat general (i.e. a more descriptive analysis of the public improvements is needed) . B. Landscaping 1. The design of any landscaping for the project areas should be based on the following criteria: ...the greatest Percentage of landscaping should be on private property; .. .all designs and specifications for landscaping should be reviewed by Public works; .. .use of the 1972 Street Lighting and Landscape Act should be con- tenplated relevant to maintaining landscaping within the project area. C. Traffic 1. When will an analysis of traffic impacts, for each project area, be camleted? D. Water 1. Existing water mains in the Oakview area may be inadequate. (i.e. addi- tional water mains may have to be installed, loop systems oanpleted, and the main size of existing facili.ties increased.) 2. Existing grater mains in. the Talbert-Beach area are adecwAte. 3. Existing water facilities in the Yorktown-Lake area are inadequate: —existing 4" line in 11tica will have to be replaced with an 8" line; .. .water main facilities in Lake Street, between Utica and Yorktown, may have to be installed; .. .water mains in Yorktown and Main are of sufficient size. 4. Water main facilities in the Main-Pier area may be iruxleawte for fire protect-ion demands. Specific problems will be identified as Ping progresses. DIN:jy cc: Paul Cook Daryl Smith B J J I Patapof f Les Evans Ralph Leyva Karl Huy • hT Environmental Board July 5 , 1982 Memo to : Tom Tincher , Director of Business and Industrial Enterprise From Environmental Board Regard Proposed Redevelopment Plans and Focussed EIRs for the ( 1 ) Oakview Project , ( 2 ) Yorktown- Lake Project , ( 3 ) Main- Pier , and ( 4 ) Talbert- Beach . The Huntington Beach Environmental Board has reviewed and discussed the above mentioned Redevelopment Plans and EIRs . We find them to be pretty much cut from the same mold and would have preferred to see important factors for each specific case highlighted in some fashion . We find the following comments could be generally applied in each plan and should be specified in much greater detail ( as was the Section on Energy in each of the reports ) ; 1 . Public Facilities - - facilities for public transportation ; bus stops , bike paths , neighborhood parks , and etc . , should be spelled out as a part of each plan . Programs for tree planting , street sweeping , police and fire protection are also not detailed . ' 2 . Resources requirements - -only energy possibilities are detailed ; each plan should call out the need for preserving solar access and observing the State Sunshine Act ; water conservation devices , arid- types of landscapeing , etc . , will be necessary to conserve less sure future water supplies and reduce the need for new sewer and treatment plant constructions . 3 . Recycling facilities- - localized source- separation facili - ties ( e . g . , in houses , tracts , and commercial buildings ) required in new developments will allow future recycling to become reality . 4 . Development standards - - the City should greatly expand on its goals for development ( beyond the uniform building code , div . 9 ) and begin to actively impliment these goals by setting specific standards , especially in energy and water conservation , liquid and solid waste handling , water quality , and etc . . 5 . The financing- -we are informed that the structure of redevelopment financing is such that the tax base is tied- up for 20 years and that this may not provide adequate funds for other city services . -43- The Environmental Board appreciates the opportunity to comment on the. above plans and EIRs . We ask only that greater attention be paid to specific recommendations for wise , future allocations of scarce resources . Re ctively submitted , Irwin Haydock , Chairman irate of California, Edmundrmcn Jr., (;()i c �n��� • California Coastal Commission 631 Howard Street, 41h floor San Francisco,California 94105 (415)543-8555 June 29, 1982 Mr. Tom Tincher, Director Business and Industrial EnLci pi 1 :;r City of Huntington lik"Ich Housing and ComlTIIIII \' IIok".lc,l'm, ;11 2000 Main Stru,�t P.O. Box 190 Huntington Beach, Cali forMi.l `)2h4H Dear Mr. `Pincher: We would like to comment on the Draft VAR for Ow M;Iin-Pier Redevelopment Projuc•t Area. The EIR should identify, assess and nlitigaLe ,Illy r; ignificant effect.+. LI coastal resources and should discuss cow: I:;Luny. c,• with I u.lu i rl2mcnts of the t o,Irt .I l Act and the City 's Local Coastal Program (1,ul,) . Wt.- MILL' :;trvural sucLions wheit, it appears that inconsistencies exist beLwuen thu Rudevvlopmunt Plan Lind the Com- mission's action on the City's Land Use flan (it thy• I.I'1 hit example, wu MIL-• the following: P 4. and page 13 Section 4. 3. 21 of the Land Uau I M t hc• ,Ir oa I :; de.-ilgnatud III t 1w LCP as Visitor Serving Commercial. In its acLitm on Ow [,UP, thu t'otrsmis:;ic,n fokin t that the designation as proposed was not consistojiL wit !; Lhu Coastal Act and :;uq- gested modifications to the Visitor Serving designation regarding residential uses within the designation. Also, the Commission found in its action that the proposed LUP failed to provide intensities of development and suggested modications which specified such limits to the intensity. Section 3. 4 . 3 and 2.4.4 should reflect this. Page 7. The EIR should evaluate the proposed taffic and circulation changes for consistency with the proposed circulation in the LU11. Page 12. Section 4. 3. 18. The provision that . if conflicts occur the Redevelolxnent Plan shall supersede fails to take into account thL. Local Land Use Plan. . Page 13. Section 4. 2. 21 . The EIR should evaluate the development standards for consistency with policies of the LUP. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Sincerely, Eli beth Fuchs Coastal Analyst ec: Dave 1•()()mi !; , ! .1, -45- i California • •Business and Transportation'Alpincy , emorandum To Steve Williamson Dc++, June 11 , 1982 Executive Officer Fil* State Clearinghouse 1400 10th Street Sacramento , CA 95814 x Ae' D From DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION J U L 1 1a�G Division of A.an.uuc. 9tat� o1�ar>,gspAW,�� .�; Project Review - 1 ) Talbert-Beach Redevelopment Project 2 ) Oakview Redevelopment Project , 3 ) Yorktown-Lake Redevelopment Project - City of Huntington Beach - Draft Environmental Impact Reports (DEIR) - SCH # 's 82052810 , 82052811 , 82052812 The Department of Transportation , Division of Aeronautics , has reviewed the subject environmental documents , focusing upon those issues within the scope of our statutory responsibilities . The -proposals are to : 1 ) construct approximately 470 new residential units and create 100 , 000 square feet of new light industrial development in the Talbert-Beach area of the City of Huntington Beach ; 2) rehabilitate existing housing , develop commercial and office space , and construct public improvements in the Oakview area of the City of Huntington Beach (specifically , 100 residential units will be created either by rehabilitation or new construction ) ; 3 ) construct approximately 150 new residential units or 200 , 000 square feet of office space in the Yorktown-Lake area of the City of Huntington Beach . John Wayne Airport is located six to seven miles. east of the proposed project location , with current traffic patterns resulting in no -overflights over the proposed project . However , the Meadowlark Airport appears to be in the general vicinity of Huntington Beach , and may have a noise and safety impact upon the proposed projects due to airport operations . We are , there- fore , concerned about those impacts , the impacts the proposed projects may have on the ground transportation network serving the airport , and the land use compatibility between the two users . We feel the above concerns ought to be addressed in the. Final Environmental Impact Reports (FEIR) of the above projects . MARK F. MISPAGEL, Chief Division of Aeronautics Burd Miller , Chief Office of Environmental Services A 'Alla CITY Or HUMM SMA CH 0 INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION To T04 TINCHER, Director From VAN BE'THM, Officer Housing and Coftnmity Development Special Operations Division - PD Subl act TALBERT-BEACH, OAKV I EW, YORKPOWN- Dan J1NB 2, 198 2 WE AND MAIN-P I ER REDEVEIAPMEN T PF JEC T AREAS This Department has reviewed the draft environmental impact reports for the above projects. We have noted that there have been some population increase projections for housing units that are inconsistent with our method of determining projected population increases for police service. In order to determine the ability to provide the current level of police servict• in areas of increased population due to development, we utilize the following; formulas. Conmercial areas - one call for service for each one thousand feet of commercial area. Each police officer handles on the average, 225 calls for service each year. Therefore, if the development plan calls for a 300,000 square foot industrial area to be built, it would require 1.3 officers and related equipment to provide the current level of police service. (300 calls for services divided by 225 monthly per w&n workload - 1.3 officers) Residential - we calculate that 2. 5 to 3.0 persons occupy each unit, (depending upon the specific area of development) . We also calculate 1 call for service for every 2. 23 residents in the developmental area. 'Therefore, if the de- Valopment plan calls for 470 new residences and since each officer handles on the average, 225 calls for service each year, it would require 2.34 officers and related equipment to provide current levels of police service to the .1-0 unit residential area. (470 residential units x 2. S ivrsons ■ 117S population 117S divided by 2. 23 residents - S26 calls for service 526 calls for service divided by 22S monthly per man workload - 2.34 officer) Should you need further assistance, feel free to call me of extension S941 . VSB:se -47- C The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California MAY 2 ; 1982 Mr . Tom Tincher Director City of Huntington Beach Business and Industrial Enterprise P . 0. Box 190 Huntington Beach , California 92648 Dear Mr . Tincher: Talbert-Beach, Oakview, Yorktown-Lake and Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Areas Thank you for soliciting , by letter , dated May 20 , 1982 , our comments on the Draft EIR ' s for the above named projects . Metropolitan has no facilities or property near the proposed sites , and would not be affected by the proposed projects. We appreciate your efforts to inform us of your activities that may affect us . If you have any questions, please contact me at ( 213 ) 626-4282 , extension 455 , or ( 213 ) 250-6000 after June 4 , 1982 . Very truly yours, 'I, Glen W. Smith Principal Engineer Environmental Planning Branch DAM/rg L 1111 1,un1M Rnnl,,x vd. I rx Anl;rl'-"<Jirf. ' M.Nll nl;.irlrlr-l"� ftn. 5-M t I„. \• •,1 .I.• •a.•'.1 1• '. ;,h •nr '{l• 1,.`1� 1'R no The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California June 1 , 1982 City of Huntington Beach Housing and Community Development Post Office Box 190 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Attention Mr. Tom Tincher Director Business and Industrial Enterprise Gentlemen: Talbert-Beach, Oakview, Yorktown-Lake, and Main-Pier Redevelopment Projects Thank you for your letters dated May 21 , 1982 , transmitting documents and maps pertaining to the proposed Talbert-Beach Redevelopment Project, Oakview Redevelopment Project, Yorktown-Lake Redevelopment Project , and Main-Pier Redevelopment Project . There are no existing Metropolitan Water District facilities within the boundaries of the project areas , which are within the Original Area of Municipal Water District of Orange County , a member public agency of Metropolitan. We appreciate your cooperation in keeping us informed of your redevelopment activities . Very truly yours , L".1 Frank Aranda Senior Engineering Technician RKY/lb cc : Mr. . Dennis E. MacLain General Manager Municipal Water District of Orange County Post Office Box 15229 Santa Ana, CA 92705-0229 1111 Su!) .vl Boulewrd, Los Angeles,Calif-/Milling address Box 5415J, Los nngOvs,Calif 'XX)54 /Telephone: (213)626-4282 -- _ A ORANGE COUNTY TRANSIT OISTRICT June 8, 1982 Mr. Too Tincher Director, Business and Industrial Enterprise City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Dear Mr. Tinchert SUBJECTt TALBERT-BEACH, OAXVIEW, YORKTOWN-LAKE AND MAIN-PIER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREAS DEIR'S Thank you for sending us a copy of the draft envirooaental impact reports for the four redevelopment areas referenced above. All four project locations are currently well served by OCTD buses. We believe they provide a unique opportunity to integrate transit with land use planning. Better transit service to the residents, employers and customers can be achieved by designing and locating building structures so that they are easily accessible by pedestrians, and by incorporating passenger amenities into the designs. The streets and driveways can be so designed that bus operations do not conflict with autos. Inclusion of transit facilities into redevelopment designs ( i .e. bus turnouts, bus shelters, pedestrian waiting pads, and sidewalks to residences and businesses) will add minimal cost to the project but will increase the likelihood of people using the buses, while at the same time reduce traffic and other negative impacts. A recent example of successful transit/redevelopment planning can be seen in the downtown areas of Anaheim and Santa Ana, and we are currently working with the cities of Orange and Tustin in their redevelopment efforts. i We have had a. very good working relationship with the staff of ! your Public Works and Ccxnmunity Services Departments in coordinating land use and transit planning. Please feel free to contact us in the event that you need consultation on transit related items. We will be glad to provide you more specific information, as the redevelopment plans are being carried out . 1. 11222 ACACIA PARKWAY P O BOX 3005 • GARI)f N 1�11()Vf.. CAL If ORNIA 92642 PHONE 1714)911 6.100 rn Mr. Tom Tincher June 8, 1982 Page Two On a final note, we have moved to a new location and our mailing address is as follows: Orange County Transit District, P.O. Box 3005 or 11222 Acacia Parkway, Carden Grove, CA 92642. Sincerely, Dick Hsu Environmental Coordinator DH:NX -51- '1 i 1�111 t ill,l June 15, 1982 E10. 3A City of Huntington Beach Business and Industrial Enterprise Attention Tom Tincher, Director 200 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Dear Mr. Tincher Subject Talbert-Beach, Oakview, Yorktown- Lake and Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Areas You asked for comments on subject redevelopment project areas. I have reviewed these project areas and find no problems at this time relative to telephone service, both existing and planned. Your cooperation in the following areas require your cooperation however: 1 . Notification, or lead time, for each planned event is essential. 2. Demolition of existing areas in which telephone service exists, must accomodate remaining service. 3. Master Plan for each area as it exists or is upgraded. Particularly, existing and proposed streets. Thank you for this advance notification. If I can be of further assistance, please feel free to call. #W. KIALL Resident Engineer - 3774 .1 I,.ul .d l�rniv,ll Illlydunv' .1 1 i,•, I1;., ., F_ 9— :�F^ United States Department of the Interior a _ FISH AND "'11,I)L E SERVICE, ♦- ECOLOGICAL SERVICES 24000 Avila Road Laguna Niguel, CaLifornia 92677 .tune 16, 1982 Mr. Tom Tincher, Director Business 6 Industrial Enterprise City of Huntington Beach P.O. Box 190 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Re: Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area E. I.R. Dear `tr. Tincher: This responds to your request dated May 20, 1982 in regards to the above referenced project. We are unable at this time to respond to this request due to funding and manpower constraints. This does not preclude input at a later date should significant impacts to public fish and wildlife resources be identified, and funding and manpower resources be increased. Sancer ly yours, I „ r fN-L. Ralph C. Pisapia Field Supervisor 1 -53- COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS ✓ A14CA.CODE 714 ��� 540-2910 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA � � 962.241 1 } P. O. BOX 6127, FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708 10944 ELLIS AVENUE (EUCLID OFF-RAMP. SAN DIEGO FREEWAY) June 28, 1982 City of Huntington Beach P.O. Box 190 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Attention: Tom Tincher, Director Business and Industrial Enterprise Subject: Draft EIR - Main-Pier Redevelopment Plan This project is located within Sanitation District No. 11. The area has been master planned for a combination of commercial, low density residential and recreational/open space development. The flow coefficients used by this office are: 1. Commercial 3230 gallons per day per acre 2. Low Density/Residential 1550 N « 3. Recreational/Open Space 200 " « or 5 gallons per capita per day The low density designation has been assigned to two blocks of the project area and recreational/open space to the beach area. The Districts have adequate capacity in their system and no mitigation measures shall be necessary if the project flows do not exceed the master plan. However , if the flows are expected to exceed the District's planning, it will he necessary to hold discussions with our staff concerning appropriate mitigation. All new connections in the redevelopment area will be subject to the Sanitation District No. 11 connection fee. In addition, industrial and commercial developments may be subject to an industrial waste discharge permit . If you have any questions or require further information, please contact the undersigned. Hilary J. Baker Sr. Engineering Aide AJB:hc -54- ~t:ltl' Of L�lIlf111 '1 I JL• GOVLHNOH'S OPF-IC:L OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH 1400 TENTH SIREET ~ SACRAMENTO 95814 EDMUND G. BROWN JR. GOVERNOR July 6, 1982 Mr. Tom Tincher Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency P. 0. Box 190 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 RE: SCH #82052811 - Oakview Redevelopment Plan, Draft EIR Dear Mr. Tincher: State agencies have commented on your draft environmental impact report (see attached If you would like to discuss their concerns and recommendations , please contact the staff from the appropriate agencies. When preparing the final EIR, you must include all comments and responses (CEQA Guidelines , Section 15146) . The certified EIR must be considered in the decision- making process for the project. In addition, we urge you to respond directly to the agencies' comments by writing to them, including the State Clearinghouse number on all correspondence. A recent Appellate Court decision in Cleary v . County of Stanislaus clarified requirements for responding to review comments, Specifically, the court indicated that comments must be addressed in detail , giving reasons why the specific comments and suggestions were not accepted. The responses must show factors of overriding importance which justify overriding the suggestion. Responses to comments must not be conclusory statements but must be supported by empirical or experimental data , scientific authority or explanatory information of any kind , The court further said that the responses must be a good faith, reasoned analysis. Section _15002(f) of the CEQA Guidelines requires that a governmental agency take certain actions if an EIR shows substantial adverse environmental impacts could result from a project. These actions include changing the project, imposing condi - tions on the project, adopting plans or ordinances to avoid the problem, selecting an alternative to the project, or disapproving the project. In the event that the project is approved without adequate mitigation of significant effects , the lead agency must make written finding for each significant effect (Section 15088) and it must support its actions with a written statement of overriding considerations for each unmitigated significant effect (Section 15089) . If "the project requires discretionary approval from any state agency, the Notice of Determination must be filed with the Secretary for Resources, as well as with the County Clerk. Please contact Terry Roberts at (916) 445-0613 if you have any questions. 4aneSin euty DireProjects Coordination California The Resourcof Ageric,y a m a r a n d u m To 1 1. James W. Burns Date JUN 1 4 1992 Assistant Secretary for Resources File No., 2. ,Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency Post Office Box 190 Subject, Oak View Redevelopment Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Project. SCH 82052811 Attention: Mr. Tom Tincher From i Deportnant of Water Resources Los Angeles, CA 90055 The Department of Water Resources' recommendations related to water conservation and flood damage prevention on the subject document are attached. Consideration should also be given to a comprehensive, program to use reclaimed water for irrigation purposes in order to free fresh water supplies for bene- ficial uses requiring high quality water. RECINI DD Robert Y. D. Chun, Chief JU N M82 Planning Branch Southern District Stag 01061`101house (213) 620-4135 Attachments -56- io reduce water deman3, the following waiter conservation measures should be implemented: Required by law: 1. Low-flush toilets (see Section 17921. 3 of the Health and Safety Code) .' 2. Low-flow showers and faucets (California Administrative Code, Title 24, Part 6, Article 1, T20-1406F) . 3. Insulation of hot water lines in water recirculating systems (California Energy Commission regulations) . Recommend be implemented where applicable: Interior: 1. Supply line pressure: recommend water pressure greater than 50 pounds per square inch (psi) be reduced to 50 psi or less by means of a pressure reducing valve. 2. Flush valve operated water closets: recommend 3 gallons per flush. 3. Drinking fountains: recommend equipped with self-closing valves. 4. Pipe insulation: recommend all hot water lines in dwelling be insulated to provide hot water faster with less water waste, and to keep hot pipes from heating cold water pipes. S. Hotel rooms: recommend posting conservation reminders in rooms and rest rooms*. Recommend thermostatically-controlled mixing valve for bath/shower. 6. Laundry facilities: recommend use of water-conserving models of washers. 7. Restaurants: recommend use of water-conserving models of dishwashers or retrofitting spray emitters. Recommend serving drinking water upon request only*. Exterior: 1. Landscape with low water-consuming plants wherever feasible. 2. Minimize use of lawn by limiting it to lawn dependent uses, such as playing fields. 3. Use mulch extensively in all landscaped areas. Mulch applied on top of moil will improve the water-holding capacity of the soil by reducing evaporation and soil compaction. *The Department of Water Resources or local water district may aid in developing these materials. -57- ;. Preserve and protect ext3tinb trees and shrub;; . Established plants are often adapted to low water conditions and their use saves water needed to establish replacement vegetation. 5. Install efficient irrigation systems which minimize runoff and evaporation and maximize the water which will reach the plant roots. Drip irrigation, soil moisture sensors and automatic irrigation systems are a few methods of increasing irrigation efficiency. 6. Us_e pervious paving material whenever feasible to reduce surface water runoff and aid in ground water recharge. 7. Grading of slopes should minimize surface water runoff. 8. Investigate the feasibility of utilizing reclaimed waste water, stored rainwater, or household gray water for irrigation. 9. Encourage cluster development which can reduce the amount of land being converted to urban Use. This will reduce the amount of impervious paving created and thereby aid in ground water recharge. 10. Preserve existing natural drainage areas and encourage the incorporation of natural drainage systems in new developments. This would aid in ground water recharge. 11. Flood plains and aquifer recharge areas which are the best sites for ground water recharge should be preserved as open space. r r: _2_ • i -58- Department of Water Resources RecomriendatioAs for Flood Damage Prevention i -- In flood-prone areas, flood damage prevention measures required to protect a proposed development should be based on the following guidelines: 1. AU building structures should be protected against a 100-year flood. It is the State's policy to conserve water . Any potential loss to ground water should be mitigated. 2. In those areas not covered by a Flood Insurance Rate Map or a Flood Boundary and Floodway Map, issued by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the 100-year flood elevation and boundary should be shown on the Environmental Impact Report. 3. At least one route of ingress and egress to the development should be available during a 100-year flood. 4. The slope and foundation designs for all structures should be based on detailed soils and engineering studies, especially for hillside developments. 5. Revegetation of the slopes should be done as soon as possible. 6. The potential damage to the proposed development by mudflow should be assessed and mitigated as required. 7. Grading should be limited to dry months to minimize problems associated with sediment transport during construction. I 1 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTIO_,. Date KNAugust 24 , 1983 Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members Submitted by: Charles W. Thompson, City Administrator t Prepared by: 50 Office of Business and Industrial Enterprise Subject: ADOPTION OF MAIN-PIER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 1 3 Statement of Issue, Recommendation,Analysis, Funding Source,Alternative Actions, Attachments: l STATEMENT OF ISSUE: Pursuant to California Community Redevelopment Law, the Huntington Beach City Council and Redevelopment Agency have held a joint public hearing on the Main-Pier Redevelopment Plan Amendment No. 1. On July 18, 1983 , after the public hearing, Ordinance No. 2634 adopting the proposed. plan amendment, was introduced. The ordinance is before you at this time, for adoption. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Ordinance No. 2634 . ANALYSIS : This action represents the final step in the long and complex process which must be undertaken to establish an amended redevelopment project area. Upon adoption of the ordinance, the plan amendment will become effective in 30 days . ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS : 1. Not adopt ordinance. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Ordinance and amended Main-Pier Redevelopment Plan. CWT:TT:lp 1` i PIO 4/81 Authorized to Publish Advertisements of all kinds including public notices by Decree of the Superior Court of Orange County, f . California, Number A-6214, dated 29 September, 1961, and PUBLIC,NOTICE A-24831, dated 11 June, 1963. i LEGAL-NOTICE- NOTICE OFTH U CITY PUBLIC STATE OF CALIFORNIA OFATHE CITY OFCHUNTNGtOIN 010 77Gam/ BEACH AND THE HUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOPMENT AGEN- County of Orange public Notice Advertising covered TCY ON THE PROPOSED`MAIN-PIER by this affidavit Is set In 7 point REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PLAN with 10 pica column width. AMENDMENT,NOA '`. . Notice Is hereby glven that the City Council of lthe City'of the" uht- , e s;C l/ cx��) Beach, Celliornla, and the"Hunt- /C�J a7 I am a Citizen of the United States and a resident of Ington Beach-Redevelopment Agen- cy have set July 5,.1983 at 7:30 p.m. the County aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen as the lima, and. the .Council Chambers,of.City Hell, 2000-Main 7� years, and not a party to or interested in the below Street, Huntington :;Beach, Call- •fornle,92648•ps the place for,a;Joint entitled matter. I am a principal clerk of the Orange 1 public hearing.to be.held by the City Council"And,the Redevelopment Coast DAILY PILOT, with which is combined the Agency to consider the approval and adoption of the proposed Maln-Pier. .I 5246 NEWS-PRESS, a newspaper of general circulation, I Redevelopment Project ,Plan " Amendment No. 1.The Agency will printed and published in the City of Costa Mesa, Implement the adopted': Plan S�- Amendment If,after the Joltlt public , -/'aG 3'/ County of Orange, State of California, and that a I hearing, the City Council approves- and adopts the. proposed Re- / Notice of Joint P13h1 i n Hinri ng I development.Plan Amendment. i 17/e The purpose of`the'joint,public CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH hearingg Is to conalder: r The tiounderies of the proposed; 1. •The',.Redevelopment. Plan I Redevelopment Plan Amendment HUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Amendment submitted by the Agen- I are as follows: cy which proposes as its scope and. 1. A parcel of.land situated partially-1 of which copy attached hereto is a true and complete objective to eliminate.unsafe con In Sections 10,.11,12,13.14,Town- ditions,Improve overall appearance, ship 6 south;Range,-11 west, Sah l copy, was printed and published in the Costa Mesa, encourage participatlon;encourage Bernardino-base `and meridian;) new development, provide needed. County of Orange, State:•of Call- public Improvements and facilities, fornia.Said parcel beln more !! Newport Beach, Huntington Beach, Fountain Valley, and' Increase employment' op- p ll par- ticularly described as follows: portunitles. Beginning at the;intersectloh of Irvine, the South Coast communities and Laguna 9 9 g 2.The report of the,Agency to the. section corners,Sections 11,12,13, Beach issues of said newspaper for three City Council on the proposed Re= and 14,thence north 89 degrees 37' development:Plan.Amendment.In- cludes,but la not limited to,the re-- of east ning feet thence true h 01 7fi�3 issue(s) of port and recommendation of the of beginning;. thence south 0; Planning.Commission on the Plan /� I degrees 40'00"east 89 deg 0 feet 3" a point;thence south 89 degrees;43'I Amendment and the report of the; 00",west 14.955.76•feet to it polnt;� County Fiscal.Review Committee(W thence north 0 degrees 43'15"west I any). -f�' .+ 1,350.04.feet to.a point; thence; June 24 1 All evidence and'testlmony,or 3 south 89-degrees'43' 00" west y 98 ant!"agginstthe adoption oft Ae;w 670.00,feet to a point;thence north 0 develoment.Plan Amendmen+ t degrees 00' 11"west 2,640.00 feet eK—Ho t, At,the'abovesteted.. ur end to a point;thence north 89 degrees place, any and all'persons having 58'15'7"west 282.10 feet to a point; lUT)2 27 198 — ;any objections-an A proposed r to :thence south 0 degrees 00'00'east{{ the-bey repment Plan Amendment or of• '• 294.10 feet to a point;thence north-,, the regularity of any of the prior' i 89 degrees 5T 13"west 375.15 feet.l July 3 3 proceedings,may appear before the• ' to a pint;"thence south 41 degrees') 198 Agency and the councll and show,' 38"18"west.419.78 feet`to-a point;., cause why the proposed Redevelop= thence south 48 decrees 21' 42"•1 ment Plan Amendment should not east 190.00 feet to a"polnl;,thence i be adopted.. south 41 degrees' 38' 18" west 198 At anytime not later than the hour• 1,595.00 feet to a,point;thence north `aforesald set for hearing,any-person.; 48 degrees-21' 42"".west 5A20.00 objecting -to the 'proposed Re I feet to.a point; thehce' south 41 1 deveioprnent'-Dian Amaadmant may.; degrees 38'50"west 714.00 feet to 198 file in writing with the City Clerk a a point;thence south 46 degrees-30' Statement o his objections to the.f00" east 5,628.00 feet to a point; ; proposed Redevelopment Plan thence north 41 degrees 38'18".sea Amendment. .Any.person or or- 990.00 feet'to a point;thence south ganization desiring to be heard will I 48 degrees,21' 42" east 1,330.00 declare, under snail of u , that the be afforded an opportunity to be ' feet to.a.point; thence south 10 P Y P er 1 ry heard. At the aforesald hour the degreet 09'04"east 414.00 feet to e foregoing is true and correct. Council shall proceed'to hear.and .I point;thence south''41:degrees 38' pass upon all written and oral objec-• 18'.y west 690.00,,feet to..'a pint; i tions to the proposed;Redevelop- thence south 52'ddgrees,54' 19" 1 ment.Plan•Amendment. east 4,618.08 feet to a point;thence ' The proposed'.Redevelopment north. 0 degrees;-40G,•00." ;west July 3 1 1983 Plan Amendment and•reiated docu- p 1 EX tiled on 1,947:92 feet to a oint;ahence north � rienta are.now,on.file and open for 89 degrees 36'.56"-east•469:56-feet I o to Mesa CaliforniaAe public Inspection in the office of the tole point; thence'.noith 0 degrees Director of'-Business &.'Industrial 40"00"west2,029.66Yeet,top_point; 1 1Enterprise,2000 Main Street,Hunt- I thence.south 89 degrees:87�06" { 1ngton Beach,California,92848. west 46956 feet to-a point.thence Every property owner,business or south 0:degrees 40'00"e6t.50.00 kSIg tenant Interested in becoming a par; I feet to.the true point of beginning: ticipant, pursuant.to the Partick /s/Alicia M.Wentworth patlon rules adopted by the Agency, City Clerk.; should submit to theAgency acom-; /a/Charles W.Thompson plated"Statement of Interest to Par- Executive Officer ticlpate"within sixty(60)days from- Huntington Beach the date of adoption of the Re- development-Plan Amendment by Published Orange Coast Daily the Adencv Pilot June 24,'.27i July 3, 1983 L 2908-83 PROOF OF PUBLICATION LEGAL NOTICE NOTICE OF A JOINT PUBLIC HEARING — CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH AND THE HUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELO - UgNT AGENCY ON THE -''PROJECT PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 1 Notice is hereby given that the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California, and the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency have set July 5 , 1983 , at 7 :30 p.m. as the time, and the Council Chambers of City Hall, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California, 92648 as the place for a joint public hearing to be held by the City Council and the Redevelopment Agency to consider the approval and adoption of the pro- posed Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Plan Amendment No. 1. The Agency will implement the adopted Plan Amendment if , after the joint public hearing, the City Council approves and adopts the proposed Redevelopment Plan Amendment. The purpose of the joint public hearing is to consider: 1. The Redevelopment Plan Amendment submitted by •the Agency which proposes as its scope and objective to eliminate unsafe con- ditions, -improve overall appearance, encourage participation, encourage new development, provide needed public improvements and facilities , and increase employment opportunities. 2. The report of the Agency to the City Council on the proposed Redevelopment Plan Amendment includes , but is not limited to, the report and recommendation of the Planning Co.;unission on the Plan Amendment and the report of the County Fiscal Rev:aw Committee (if any) . 3. All evidence and testimony for and against the adoption of tho Redevelopment Plan Amendment. At the above stated day, hour and place, any and all persons having any objections to the proposed Redevelopment Plan Amendment or to the regu- larity of any of the prior proceedings, may appear before the Agency anc the Council and show cause why the proposed Redevelopment Plan Amendment should not be adopted. At any time not later than the hour aforesaid set for hearing, any persc objecting to the proposed Redevelopment Plan Amendment may file in writ. with the City Clerk a statement of his objections to the proposed ' RedevL ment Plan Amendment. Any person or organization desiring to be heard w be afforded an opportunity to be heard. At the aforesaid hour the Coun shall proceed to hear and pass upon all written and oral objections to the proposed Redevelopment Plan Amendment. The proposed Redevelopment Plan Amendment and related documents are nov on file and open for public inspection in the office of the Director of Business & Industrial Enterprise, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California, 92648 . �, .. .. ......�-_...._..,., .._. _.,,.Y:w...�s�t�+a�a�m�OtNtsaGl .cd.tisis:...T..,w.. .. _ .. ... .ec...,.=....w�• Legal Notice Page Two Every property-owner, business or tenant interested in becoming a participant, pursuant to the Participation Rules adopted by the Agency, should submit to the Agency a completed "Statement of Interest to Participate" within sixty (60) days from the date of adoption of the Redevelopment Plan Amendment by the Agency. The boundaries of the proposed Redevelopment Plan Amendment are as defined in Exhibit "A" , attached hereto. City Clerk Xe-cutive Officer, ntingtcn a Beach Redevelopment Agency 7 Z� 17 TvIq � PUBLISH : JUNE -9", .16, %2- , a-n-d—jurie 30, 1983 H -I-.NGT-ON—BEACH—INDEPINDE-N-T-� - ... -..--..-s-�-.. _ .. .+++bauY-.`n YxYK'✓+v'.^'/1�7T!r."r'J.Y(Y9ih>fa6'IT.Mb1YWB4.rt7' e -.. 1 • E CHIEIT "A" LETVL DESCRIPTION r1ATN/PIER REDEVELOPIAPOW PTrTCCT A i A A parcel of Ladd situlated partially in Sections 1.0, Il, 12, 13, 1.4, Toumship 6 south, Range 11 wLst, San ].crnardino case and mridi.an, County of Orange, State of CaliFoimia. Said parcel toing more particularly described as follows: P•egimninq at the intersection of section corners, Sections- 11, 12, 13 and 14, thence north 890 37' 06" east 20.00 feet to the true point of beginning; thence south 00 40'. GO" east 1,320.00 feet to, a point; thence south 890 43' 00" vn--st 1,955.7,5 feet to a ;point; thence north 00 43' 15" west 1,350.0= fe,-,t to a paint; thence south 890 43' 00" vx-,st 670.00 feet to a :-:ht; thence rorUh 00 00' .11" t 2,640.00 to a point; trance nocll- h 890 58' 15" west 262.10 feet to a point; thence south 00 O`J' 00" east 29 4.:LO feet to a point; thence nort.;i 89° •57' 1:�" !.pest 375.15 feet to a point; thence south 410 38' '13" st 4.19.76 feet to a point; thence south 48° 21' 42" east 190.00 feet to a point; thence south 41° 38' 18" west 1.,595-00 .feet j to a point; thence north 480 21' 42" west 5,420.00 feet to point; thence south 41.° 38' 50" west 714.00 feet to a point; thence south 460 30' 00" east 5,628.00 feat to a.point; thence north 410 38' 18" east 990.00 feet to'a point; thence south 480 21' 42" east 1,330.00 feet t __point; tlhcnee south 100 09' 04" east .414.00 feet to a point; thence south 410 38' ' i8" west 690.00 feet to a point; thence south 520 54' 19" east 4,618.08 feet to a point; thence north 00 40' 0'0" west 1,947.92 feet to a point; thence north 890 36' 56" east AG9.56 feet to a point; thence north 00 40' 00" west 2,029.66 feet to a point; thence south 890 37' 00" west 469.50 ferret to a point; thence south 00 40' 00" east 50.00 feet to tics tnie point of `&ainnir:g. y IN THE Superior Court OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA In and for the County of Orange CITY OF HUNTINGTON B E A C H v PROOF OF PUBLICATION - CITY CLERK NOTICE OF A JOINT PUBLIC HEARING --- LEGAL NOTICE —_...._..-...�- NOTICE OF A JOINT PUBLIC REARING BY THE CITY OO.UNCIL OF THB. OF j HUNTINGTON BEACH AND THE HUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOP��1EENNTT State of California ) AGENCY ON THE PROPOSED MAW-PIER RE-DEWILOPMENT;PRO7FbT?LAN sa. AMENDMENT NO.1 ! �j County of Orange ) Notice is hereby given that the City Council of the.City-of Huntington Beach, j J E A N N I E L. T H O M A S California,and the Huntington Beach Redeveloppment•Agency have set July 5,M,at i 7:30 p.m.ae the time-and the.Council Chambers;of'CCiity'Hall 2000 Mafia treat;. Huntington Beach;Ce�lfomle,92648 u the plece'for a joint publio heering,to; held` by the City Council and the Redevelopment Agency to coneidgr the app ��II and adoption of-the proposed Main-Pier Revelopment Project Plan Amendment,Jlo. 1. A That I am and at all times herein mentioned was a citizen of The Agency will implement the adopted Plan'Amendment-if,after the joint public the United States,over the age of twenty-one years,and that I hearing,the City Council approves and adopts,the proposed Redevelopmg1k'Plan Amendwent. am not a party to,nor interested in the above entitled matter; The pdrpose of the joint public hearing is to conaider. . that I am the principal clerk of the printer of the I.-The Revelopment Plan Amendment submitted by the Agency which propaso as its scope and objective,to eliminate urtedfe conditions,improve.overall appearance, HUNTINGTON BEACH I N D. REVIEW encourage participation,encourage new development,provide needed public im- pprovemente and facilities,and increase employment opportunities. 2.There rt of the Agency to the City Council on the proposed Redevelopment Plan a newspaper of general circulation,published in the City of Amendment includes,but is not limited to;the report and recommendatiop oqf(the j PlanningCommission on the Plan Amendment.and the report of the County_Fiscal HUNTINGTON BEACH Review Committee(if any). ' 3. All evidence and testimony forand against the adoption of the Redevelo ent Plan Amendment. Count of Orange and which newspaper is published for the At the above stated day, hour and place, any-and all persons havW.any. Y gP objections to the proposed Redevelopment Plan Amendment or to the re¢ulgr' of disemination of local news and intelligence of a general charac- any of the prior proceedings,may appear before the Agency and the council ehhow j ter, and which newspaper at all times herein mentioned had cause why the proposed Redevelopment Plait Amendment should not be adoptedi' At any time not later than the hour aforesaid set for bearing,any person objecting and still has a bona fide subscription list of paying subscribers, to the proposed Redevelopment Plan Amendment.may file in writing with tWCity and which newspaper has been established, printed and pub- i Clerk a statement of hie objections to the proposed Redevelopment Plan Amedd. 'ent._ lished at regular intervals in the said County of Orange fora Any person or organtzation desiring to be heard will be afforded an opportun'ii. be heard.At the aforesaid hour the Council shall proceed to hear and pass Blain all period exceeding one year; that the notice, of which the written and oral objections to the proposed Redevelopment Plan Amendment..: annexed is a printed copy, has been published in the regular The proposedRedevelopment Plan Amendment and related documents` . �e.now on file and open for public inspection in the office of the Director of Busiwm& and entire issue of said newspaper,and not in any supplement Industrial Enterprise,2000 Main Street,Huntington Beach,California,92648.'., thereof,on the following dates,to wit: Every property owner,business or tenant interested in Becoming a participant a: . pursuant to the Participation Rules adopted by the Agency,should submi"the { Agency a completed"Statement of Interest to Participate"within sixty(60)d0irfr`m, ' the date of adoption of the Redevelopment Plan Amendment by the Agency.' -141 J U N E 9 , 1983 The boundaries of the proposed Redevelopment Plan Amendment-are as`1fined in Exhibit"A",attached hereto.. Alicia M.Wentworth t j City Clerk i Charles N.Thompson Executive Officer Huntin on Beach gt Redevelopment Agency LEGAL DESCRIPTION an ' MAIN/PIER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA I certifyfor declare)under penalty of perjury that the forego- - PROJECTAMENDMENT#I P Y P J Y g A parcel of land;ituated partially in Sections 10,11,12,13,14,Township MAuth., ing is true and correct. Range 11 West, San Bernardino base and meridian, County of Orange, State of i California.Said parcel being more particularly described as follows: i Garden Grove Beginning at the intersection of section comers,Sections 11,12,13,and 14 thence) , Dated at................................................ North 89 Deg.37'06"east 20.00 feet to the true point of beginninngg thence South 0, Deg.40'00"East 1,320.00 feet to a point;thence South 89 deg.43'00"Wost'1 if55.76 felit to a point;thence North 0 Deg.43'15"West 1,350.04 feet to a point thanes SSoouth C " o . ,this 1O t h•.day of J n S 3. 98_Deg:43'00"West 670.00 feet to a point;thence North 0 deg.0011"West 2,64"to a point-thence North 89 Deg.58'15"West 262.10 feet to a point;thence South,0.Deg: I / 00'00"�nst 294.10 feet to a point;thence North 89 Deg.b7'13"West 376.15 f@'e"t to a �! !,,, ,I,,, �--�,,,,.. rpoant;thence South 41 Deg.38'18"West 419.76 feet to a point;thence South'48'Deg. 21'42"East 190.00 feet to a point;thence South 41.Deg.38'18"West 1,595.00 feet to a' point;thence North 48 Deg.21'42"West 5,420.00 feet to a point;thence South 41 Deg. Signature , 38'50"West 714.00 feet to a point;thence South 46 Deg.30'00"East 5,628.00 feet to a Point;thence North 41 Deg.38'18"East 990.00 feet to a point;thence South 48 Deg. I 21'42"East 1,330.00 feet to a point;thence south 10 Deg.09'04"East 414.00 IM to a I ppooint;thence South 41 Deg.38'18"West 690.00 feet to a point;thence South 52 Deg. 54'19"East 4,618.08 feet to a point;thence North 0 Deg.10'00"West 1,947.92 gt to a j point;thence North 89 Deg.36'56"East 469.5.6 feet to a point;thence North-0 Deg. 40'00"West 2,029.66 feet to a point;thence South 89 Deg.37'06"West 469.56 feet to a point;thence South 0 Deg.40'00"East 50.00 feet to the true point of nn .att Pub.June 9,1983 .ra Hunt.Beach Ind.Rev.#33977 �„A Form No.POP 92082 r • REQUESTtR REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ACTION 83-21 Date May 26. 1983 Submitted to: Honorable Chairman and Redevelopment Agency Submitted by: Charles W. Thompson, Chief Executive Officer covNCID ^^ &pP$OVZD BY CITY Prepared by: OJTom Tincher, Director of Business and Industri 1 Enterprise Subject: MAIN-PIER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PLAN AMENDMENT NO._T PUBLIC(QAV (C ° _ cl lr Statement of Issue, Recommendation,Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attachments: ` STATEMENT OF ISSUE: California Redevelopment .Law requires .that a public hearing be held at the time the City Council/Redevelopment Agency considers the adoption of a redevelopment pl-an amendment. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Agency Resolution No. 73 and City Council Resolution No. 5272 setting the public hearing date for July 5; 1983. ANALYSIS: During the past several months the City Council/Redevelopment Agency have taken the necessary steps in ,processing the proposed plan amendment.. During the next seyeral weeks staff will be working with the expanded Project Area. Committee, Downtown residents,' Downtown.'property owners, and the Downtown business community to solicit their input and thoughts concening the proposed plan amendment. In addition, the County of Orange will convene a meeting of the taxing agencies affected by the proposed amendment to carry out the fiscal review provisions of the law. The information and input. generated from these meetings, as well as the specific reports which are required by law, such as a relocation plan, en- vironmental documentation and fiscal analysis, Planning Commission recommendations and findings, and the Project Area Committee recommendations and findings, will all be presented to the City Council/Redevelopment Agency at the time the public hearing is held. FUNDING SOURCE: Not applicable. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Delay public hearing to some future date which would preclude establishing the current year as the base roll for tax increment financing; or 2. Not pursue the plan amendment. ATTACHMENTS: Agency Resolution No. 73 and City Council Resolution No. 5272. CWT.:TT:jb - tl7 P10 4,81 RESOLUTION NO. 5272 A RESCOTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL • THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH CONSENTING TO JOINT PUBLIC HEARING WITH THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF HUN- TINGTON BEACH TO CONSIDER FORMAL ADOPTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AND MAKE THE APPROPRIATE ENVIRON- MENTAL FINDINGS FOR THE MAIN-PIER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 1 WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach has by its Resolution No. 73 consented to and requested the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach to hold a joint public hearing to con- sider formal - adoption of a proposed Redevelopment Plan Amendment and environmental findings for the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Plan Amendment No. 1; and WHEREAS , the California Community Redevelopment Law (Health and Safety Code, Section 33355) authorizes a joint public hearing on the proposed Redevelopment Plan Amendment with the Redevelopment Agency and the City Council; NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved that: Section 1: The City Council of the City of Huntington Beach hereby consents to hold a joint public hearing with the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach to consider formal adoption of the Redevelop- ment Plan Amendment and make the appropriate environmental findings for the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Plan Amendment No. 1. Section 2 : The City Council further establishes the date for said public hearing as July 5, 1983 , at the hour of 7 :30 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Huntington Beach City Hall. Section 3 : Pursuant to Section 33359 of the Health and Safety Code action to approve and adopt the Redevelopment Plan Amendment for the pro- posed Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Plan Amendment No. 1 will be taken only by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach at a regular meeting thereof held on the 6thday of June , 1983 . ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: INITIATED AND APPROVED: j_ 3J_1J City Attorney Cf+i�r�_3I Director, Business & In ustria1 Enterprise APPROVED: City Administra r • �. No. 5272 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ) log I, ALICIA M. WENTWORTH, the duly elected, qualified City Clerk of the City of Huntington Beach, and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of said City, do hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach is seven; that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the affirmative vote of more than a majority of all the members of said City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on the 6th day of June , 19 83 , by the following vote: AYES: Councilmen: Pattinson, Thomas, Kelly, MacAllister, Finley, Bailey, Mandic NOES: Councilmen: i None ABSENT: Councilmen: None City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California I d. • RESOLUTION NO. 73 • A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH CONSENTING TO A JOINT PUBLIC HEARING WITH THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH TO CONSIDER FORMAL I ADOPTION OF A REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT AND MAKE THE APPROPRIATE ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS FOR THE MAIN-PIER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 1 WHEREAS , the California Community Redevelopment Law (Health and Safety Code , Section 33355) authorizes a joint public hearing on a proposed Redevelopment. Plan Amendment with the Redevelopment Agency and the City Council; and WHEREAS , the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach desires to hold a joint public hearing with the City `Council to consider adoption of a proposed Redevelopment Plan Amendment and make appropriate environmental findings for the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Plan Amendment No. 1; NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved that: Section 1: The Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach hereby consents to hold a joint public hearing with the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach to consider formal adoption of a Redevelop- ment Plan Amendment and make appropriate environmental findings for the proposed Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Plan Amendment No. 1. Section 2: The Redevelopment Agency requests that the date for said public hearing be July 5 , 1983, at the hour of 7 : 30 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Huntington Beach City Hall. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 6th day of June , 1983 . ATTEST: Agency Clerk Chairman APPROVED AS TO FORM: INITIATED AND APPROVED: AA y Counsel ds 31 Director, Business & Industrial Enterprise APPROVED: Chief Executive Officer • Res. No. 73 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH) I, ALICIA M. WENTWORTH, Clerk of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach, California, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was duly adopted by the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach at a meeting of said Redevelopment Agency held on the 6th day of June 19 and that it was so adopted by the following vote: AYES: Members: lattinson. Thomas. Kelly. McAllister. Finley, Bailey, Mandic �• NOES: Members: None ABSENT: Members: None C�Zprk of the Redeye opment Agency o nf the the City of Huntington Beach, Ca. AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE OF CONTINUANCE OF PUBLIC HEARING STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) SS: CITY OF ORANGE ) AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE OF CONTINUANCE OF PUBLIC HEARING I, Alicia M. Wentworth, declare as follows : of the Redevelo e t A enc That I am the Clerk/of the City Jlunclngyton Beach; that at a regular meeting of the Redevelopment Agency of Huntington Beach held , 198 , said public hearing was opened and continued to the time and place specified in the NOTICE OF CONTINUANCE attached hereto; and that on July 6. 1983 at the hour of 9 :00 A.M. , a copy of said notice was posted at a con- spicuous place near the door at which said meeting was held. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on July 6, 1983. at Huntington Beach; California. ALICIA M. WENTWORTH CLERK BY: -- Deputy Posted pursuant to Government Code Section 54950 JOINT PUBLIC. HEARING - MAIN/PIER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PLAN AMENDMENT NO 1 - The Redevelopment Agency/City Council at its regular meeting held July 5, 1983, continued to July 11 , 1983, a joint public hearing on the Main Pier Redevelopment Project Plan Amendment No. 1 . Dated: July 6, 1983 Alicia M. Wentworth Clerk, Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach BY Dep6ty JOINT PUBLIC HEARING - MAIN/PIER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PLAN AMENDMENT NO 1 - CONT'S TO 7/18/83 The City Council/Redevelopment Agency at its adjourned regular meeting held July 11 , 1983, closed a joint public hearing on the Main/Pier Redevelopment Project Plan Amendment No. 1 and continued the matter to their regular meeting to be held July 18, 1983 at 7:30 P.M. in the Council Chamber. Alicia M. Wentworth City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California BY — . Depu AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE OF CONTINUANCE OF PUBLIC HEARING STATE; OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) SS : CITY OF ORANGE ) AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE OF CONTINUANCE OF PUBLIC HEARING I , Alicia M. Wentworth, declare as follows : That I am the City Clerk of the City of Huntington Beach; that at an adjourned regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach held July8l , 1983 , said public hearing was opened and continued to the time and place specified in the NOTICE OF CONTINUANCE attached hereto; and that on July 12. 1983 at the hour of 9: 00 A.M. , a copy of said notice was posted at a con- spicuous place near the door at which said meeting was held. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on July 12, 1983 , at Huntington Beach, California . ALICIA M. WENTWORTH CITY CLERK BY : Dep ty Posted pursuant to Government Code Section 54950 r J' CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH • ADMINISTRATIVE COMMUNICATION To Mayor Don MacAllister and City From Charles W. Thompson Council Members City Administrator Subject MAIN-PIER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Date July 8, 1983 PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 1 Attached are supplemental materials to your packet for the upcoming public hearing on the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Plan Amendment No. 1. Planning Commission Recommendations Attachment No. 1 is Negative Declaration No. 83-15 which was amended and approved by the Planning Commission on July 6, 1983, and recommended for City Council and Redevelopment Agency adoption by the following vote: Ayes: Winchell , Higgins, Livengood, Mirjahangir, Porter, Schumacher, Erskine Noes: None Absent: None Abstain: None • As you are aware, the Planning Commission elected to hold a public hearing before making its report and recommendation to the City Council on the adoption of the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Plan Amendment No. 1. The public hearing was. hdld on July 6, 1983. Attachment No. 2 is Planning Commission Resolution No. 1309 recommending adoption of the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Plan Amendment No. 1, and reporting on said amendment. The vote on Resolution No. 1309 was as follows: Ayes: Higgins, Livengood, Mirjahangir, Porter, Schumacher, Erskine Noes: Winchell Absent: None Abstain: None Prior to adopting Resolution No. 1309., the Planning Commission took straw votes on each of the areas proposed for inclusion in the amendment. Subareas 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 were approved as presented. However, the Planning Commission voted to recommend to the City Council that Subarea 2 be amended to delete the blocks from Goldenwest Street to the alley between 7th and 6th Streets, between Walnut Avenue and Pacific Coast Highway (see Exhibit A & B). In addition, the Planning Commission recommended that the format of the amended plan be changed to consolidate the separate sections into one document and that, where appropriate, specific reference be made to limitations established in the "Downtown Specific Plan. " •Finally, the Planning Commission took action to support the Project Area Committee's recommendations that the relocation rules and regulations be amended to assure r r Mayor MacAllister and City Council Members July 8, 1983 Page Two • proper assistance to mobilehome residents which may be displaced as a result of redevelopment activities, such assistance would be seen as a supplement to that currently required under the conversion ordinance, and that an aggressive and meaningful program be established which would provide opportunities for retaining existing businesses within the downtown area as new development occurs. Fiscal Review Committee The County's Fiscal Review Committee has met numerous times during the past two weeks to prepare its report to the City Council on the proposed Redevelopment Plan Amendment.. On the morning of July 8, 1983, the Committee finalized its report which will be presented to the City Council at the time of the public hearing scheduled for Monday evening. As part of the presentation to the City Council , Tom Clark will be summarizing the Fiscal Review Committee's activities. Staff Recommendations It is recommended that the City- Council support the Planning Commission's recommen- dations as presented in Resolution No. 1309, except that Subarea 2, as initially proposed, be included in the Main-Pier Project Area. In light of the existing oil encumbrances, the need to provide a funding source to expedite the completion of the Blufftop Park and other public improvements, including upgrading of the • pier and off-street parking, Redevelopment within this area becomes an important resource and tool to support the overall program. It is estimated that the future revenue source to the Redevelopment Agency from development within this area could be as much as $8-900,000 per year. The importance of generating these kinds of revenues will be discussed during the staff presentation of Monday evening. In order to respond to the concerns of several existing residential property owners within the subarea, the Redevelopment Agency could make a finding that the appro- priate parcels are in conformance with the Redevelopment Plan and, therefore, not subject to acquisition through eminent domain. To that end, staff is undertaking an assessment and will be preparing a map for your consideration if this is an op- tion you wish to proceed with. It is further recommended that the, City Council adopt a statement reflecting its commitment to work with the affected taxing agencies in solving any financial problem or burden which might be generated as a result of redevelopment activities. It is anticipated that staff will be working with the various agencies over the next several months in assessing the specific implications that the Plan may have upon each entity and, as a result of its efforts, develop specific recommendations to the Redevelopment Agency in response to these concerns. CWT:TT:jb attachments • CITY Oi' HUNTING rONOAGH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT P. 0. Box 190 Huntington Reach, CA. 92643 Tel: (714) 53&5271 ENVIRONIMLNTAL INFORMATION FORE Fee $115 . 00 77017CIT11' USL-' City 0:1 HuIlLin(PLOI-) 13e"C11 j Date AnnliCant,/AUthorized Agent Received lPro !ect N u mij-D e r 2000 maill SLreet c..: Mailino Address N . C . D . (71-4 ) 536-5271 0 t 11 e r C T-e-T—e-I-)ho—n e :10 r M L r. 0 1. 106-r)E-1-r-tT, Owner -�Ia.i I inci Address/Telephone 1. 0 Project Information �ion (please attach Plot Pla.i and Subm-, t. photographs of subject property) Nature of Project: Give complete description of tile- proposec project. ' pls-1011 of FXal rodevelopment area--oxpa i-.-s ion COVE21'C2CI Ne ti.i a c L- . vc Dec.larations 82-41 , 80-39 , 76-117 kocation of Project: (Address , nearest strc!e+L-. SeC AtLaciied Maps P,-Ircel Number : -'V t-'I)e Present zoning on the proper t% What is the surrounding land use to the : North South 140 S t 1 . 6 If the project- is coiTmiercial or industrial give a c 1— e description of activities and other pertinent lnforman7tic.n including but not limited to estimated e,7-loyment per and any potential hazardous materials which may D?--' USt'E!Q' N/A 1 . 7 If the project is residential , indicate numll-er, types size of units and associated facilities . N/A 1 . 8 1117 the project is institutional, indicate 4--he I:1.1n a.C, I estimated employment per shift and maximum (.,cc-,.:panCy . 1 . 9 Project land area (acres) Num'Oer c.f spaces N/A 1 . 10 Square feet of building area NIA i,"umber of 1:JCr-1: ,3 1 . 11 i1ei.cilit of tallest structure involved in the --)ro-'.)Oct: I Drai nacio and Ploo(I Control '0 (;W!wrihe how nn-site drainaye N/A d l•L)i'fIl • • 1,; t h C, s t o Or0s0ntIv d? t 11 C1 -os-S Cubic Y a r 01 s of q r I nq C, G C--C t.he acres of ian6 to 1.)(., (.-,raded el-irt.h to be, transported on ,the amount of earth to be transported of the sit,_ c 'Nhat will be the maximum height and (;rade of cut 0-- after �,radinq is completed? A 2 . 1 soils a) Type of soils on the subject site? . (Submit soils, -,epcl if available) . N4/A 2 . 4 V e q C t a t 1-0 n a Attach a man indicating the location, t-.Ype and size o.- trees located on, the site . Indicate -',elow the type and size of trees to be removed as a result of ti-c- pro]ect. N/A 2 . 5 Water Quality • a Does any portion of the -0--o J ect ab"I- c r C--1croac;-1 CJ.-" "-"2'!._ estuaries , bays , tidelands , or inlanu areas? b) Describe how the project will effect :-,o"�y of N/A 2 . 6 Air nua 1 i ty a) If the project is. industrial , describe anti li.st a. pollution sources and quantity and types of -pol1uU-,:-.ZS emitted as a result of the project. N/A 2 . 7 Noise Ad jaCC'.Ilt-, Off-s.1-te noise --sources po I- t i I-Idul;t ry , f rcoway-' ) t110 L'C't ti;o ] Pvels in deciblo J ".L. time distribution when noise will be produced . N/A - 3- C iiow will noise produced b•, the project co:�pare existing noise levels? TI I ! f ic, Appr,(-Dxinmtc• ly i)ow much traffic will be generated by tr:e prc,;(.• (check one) 0-50 vehicular trips per day ` 50 - 250 vehicular trips per day 250 - 500 vehicular trips per day over 500 vehicular trips per day 3 .0 Public Services and Facilities i 3 . 1 Water a) Will the project require installation or replacement of new water lines? b) Please estimate the daily .volume in gallons required tc serve the project. N/A 3 . 2 Sewer a) Will the project require installation or replacer.,e::= new sewer lines? N/A b) Please indicate the approximate amount of sewage from the project. N/A 3. 3 solid Waste a) rf the project is industrial , descr.i-be the type L:nd amount (pounds/day) of solid waste generated by tale N/A 4 . 0. Soc- ial . 1 Popu.lat 1c.)I1 Displacement a) Will any residential occupants be displaced by the pro ject activities? N/A ,. h) Dof;c.•.riho )Nriefly the type of buildings or improver,:cnts tc be demolished by the project. N/A 5 . 0 Mitigating Measures 5 . 1 Are there measures included in the project . which may conserve;. nonrenewable resources' (e. g. electricity , gas, water') ? Please describe. N/A 5 . 2 Are there measures included in the project which would protoct` or enhance flora and fauna? Please describe . N/A 5 . 3 Are there measures proposed in the design of the project to reduce noise pollution? Please describe . N/A 5. 4 Are there measures proposed in the design of the project (e . g. architectural treatment and landscaping) which have been coordinated with design of the existing community to minimize visual effect? Please describe . N/A 5. 5 Are there measures proposed in the design of the project to reduce water pollution? Please describe . N/A �6 Are there measures proposed- which would reduce air' poll.�t ion? List any Air Pollution Control District equipment required . N/A s5 . 7 Are there measures or facilities designed into the project to facilitate resource recovery and/or .enexgy conservation (e .g_. solar heating, special insulation, etc. ) ?. Please_ describe . N/A 6 . 0 Alternatives 6 . 1 Are there alternatives to the project which may result i.n lesser adverse environmental effect? Pleaso explain alternatives on an attached sheet. I her•oln, 4--t•rt i fy th,it the information herein is true and accurate tc , 1-he bolt f my knowledge . f . F Si�p�ar��ur Date filed -5- EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION MAIN/PIER REDEVELOPMT PImJECT AREA PRQTECT AL% � #1 A parcel of land situated partially in Sections 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, Township 6 south, Range 11 west, San Bernardino base and meridian, County of Orange, State of California. Said parcel being more particularly described as follows: :beginning at the intersection of. section corners, Sections 11, 12, 13 and 14, thence north 89° 37' 06" east 20.00 feet to the true point of beginning; thence south 00 40' 00" east i,320.00 feet to a point; thence south 890 43' 00" west 1,955.76 feet to a point; thence north 00 43' 15" west 1,350.04 feet to a point; thence south 890 43' 00" west 670.00 feet to a point; thence north 00 00' 11" west 2,640.00 to a point; thence north 890 58' 15" west 262.10 feet to a point; thence south 00 00' 00" east 294.10 feet to a point; thence north. 890 57' 137 ' west 375.15 feet to a point; thence south 410 38' 18" west 419.76 feet to a point; thence south 480 21' 42" east 190.00 feet to a point; thence south 41° 38' 18". west 1,595.00 feet to a point; thence north 480 21' 42" west 5,420.00 feet to a point; thence south 410 38' 50" west 714.00 feet to a point; thence south 460 30' 00" east 5,628.00 feet to a point; thence north 410 38' 18" east 990.00 feet to a point; thence south 480 21' 42" east 1,330.00 feet to a point; thence south 100 09' 04" east 414.00 feet to a point; thence south 410 38' * 18" west 690.00 feet to a point; thence south 520 54' 19" east 4,618.08 feet to a point; thence north 00 40' 00" west 1,947.92 feet to a point; thence north 890 36' 56" east 469.56 feet to a point; thence north 00 40' 00" west 2,029.66 feet to a point; thence south 890 37' 06" west 469.56 feet to a point; thence south 00 40' 00" east .90.00 feet to the true point of beginning. 4 FLJ.C�. .�� o� �C� C��[�C��..�U Cal C,J C�1���� ..� '�� <. .�► . T.�ip IE�Cn mi ca �r r. e 1:9 E n Fri r r_ -1��� 1�� CSC 1[ 4� Ed IUUL�C�LJ�JElF_ =1C�L��—JL=JL� -- -- Existing Main-Pier Project Area • c� c m MAIN-PIER PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 1 J J • t Cn vrtr uCF 4 IN' 11 ail r1 , N B � � � '1 ��r7 �t�. �. „ r� r�,. . '• - 1 -- In;L�w,,.�:. ,;. , , . � - V-r, fe,i •.0 7-.n.On,�^.:.n.., a,} Jq.,..4.t7 S'�-.:r 66.a.: �.a_,r cn..•G,,:n..r,r � i .� B-Itr-erg i1n . r73 Il rrll I I 1'' —, i� I � I~ I I i . � ,: I � � • -. II I ri ti' I I I I I P.i -- 1 � li C4 I I,. i R? - R -- ril I 4 _ R t RI F;I F;1 --I i I I , I' Yf ..rF .,i i �I I.I r:.�i I- - �) i R •..,, II I I_� I I I I I I � } i f. I I I i I - , I•.IR ,'71 {{I - (72�_ 1 ` 1 ' I 1 �i j• 'j I I I f I I 1 I _ - �----- S I ;R3 t i t nl I - __ I I ; I ---t� At C R F74 I I ! I I , 1 1 I hr� (_A"G r".-0 - A" --- -- - `1C� � I M H \ 1 N'12_0 I 1 Q , proprswC prQjrct is W, vxjansi gn of the Main-Pier recovel opmen L arey to include approxinotely 350 acres between Goldenwest Rreet an, Beach Boule- v-rd (Ownlown Specific Plan Area ) and 27. 5 acres at Beach Boulevard allc! Atlanta. The proposed expansion will not in itself constitute any environ- mental impacts , All future development in the expandW area will comply with exintinil zening; kharefore, no increases to density or intensity will occur as a result of the oroposed expansion. There are some environwentil issues within the Specific Plan area ; however, these have been addressed in the Downtown Specific Plan EIR (No. 82-2) . Thr half block area depicted on Attachment 0 was not included in the Specific Plan Area or accompanying EiR. Because these blocks border the downtown area , they are ideally situated to act: as additional buffer between the office/com- narcial use; of the downtown and the existing residential communities . The Specific Plan recowmended some changes in this area ; however, because ,these are not proposed to be implemented at this time, no environmental impacts are expected to occur. A rartion of the area at Beach and Atlanta is approved to be developed ac an apartment complex. The proposed apartment complex received a WOW Rclaratio- (No. 82-41) last year. There is also an existing :ccaercial area on the site. This area was developed Prjor to the adop- Wn of CLA therefore , no environmental documentation was prepared for th , s sity in sumary . LAP wnj"rity of the area within the proposes redevelopmant exwan- sirp Kis I cov-r-d in previous environmental documentation. Under CEQ!'', Secniuq 15067, Were an EIR or Negative Declaration has been preparid , no add ; tiona ; EIR reed we prepared. " In the remaining a-Pa , ro significant changns W ! cccur; therefore, no additional environrTntal review will W reanired. EmpOnations of "Yes" and "Maybe" answers : 3 . and 4 . : Expansion of the redevelopment boundary does not in itsel! constitute any environmental impact; however , eventual. deveiopmcnt within this area could . The Environmental impact R('pwrt ( 32-2) on the Downtown Specific Plan addresses the impacts of wnrs ` case dcvelopment under the proposed zoning . RoCeveloo- Tent projects will be developed within these. zoning; parametors . . , . il,WL STUDY OF 1VTRONiME-1NTA I'll �� ~~ , l . GAC GQ0UND ' P,cdeve t Aqpeoc-y I A { li n 4L. 81cntixLo/1 8oncb Z Address 2000 9LzeoL `�- 1. Yro |�c� Lncati 7\tLa } d �\o 5. Project Title/|)Cs[ripti0D expaiision redevelaixTe-nt 6. Date 12 I983 ----- lI , ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: (Explanations of all "Yes" and ''Naybe" answers are requi ~2� on attached sheet) . l. Physical Environment: Will the project have a significant' impart On the physical environment respect to: a\ hydrology, b\ air quality, C\ geology, d\ flora a/ld fauna , e\ noise, f\ archaeological/historical . Yes Maybe MD Other �l__ 2. Impact of Environment on Project: Will the project be subject to -impacts fr0n the surrounding environment? i .2. , natural �environment; 'manmade environment, Yes Maybe N� X 3, Impacts P bli c Services : Will the project have d significant impacL hi)Vn ` oC re- sult in a need for a new or altered government service in any 0T th8 10� lnoing areas : fire, police, SChO0lS, parks Or other governmental agencies, Yes X Maybe N0 4, Dimacts on Traffic/Circulation: Will project result in SubsCdntiF�l vehicular mCn1, or impact surrounding circulation system, or increase traffic hazard? Maybe No _X� 5. Will the pr0'2Ct result in d substantial alteration or have a negative affect Oo the existing: land use, population/housing, energy/utilities, natural resources, human health*? Yes Maybe M0 X ---- --- Other potential environmental fimpaCt5 not discussed above 'Se2 attached 5h22t) . l { l , 0T14EK RESPONSIBLE AGENCIES AND/OR PERSONS CONTACTED _ / ) See Attached Not Applicable - IV. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE: l, Will project degrade quality Of environment? Yes Maybe NO __lL 2. Will project achieve short-term goals to the disadvantage Of long-tenn enviroom�/�ial goals? Yes Maybe NV X 3, Does the project have impacts which are individually limited but Cu.mu?atively considerable? Yes Maybe NO X 4, Will the project adversely affect human beings either directly or indirectly? Yes Maybe No X V. DETERMINATION / X \ Negative Declaration ( \ Negative UeclJr0b0n With Mitigation / \ Environmental Impact Report DATE SIGNATURE i (! • III I` / � I �� �,`,,.;/` <•• „C\\ III • H H � , I C U ' � i:li li I! I I II II Ii i n1; tI] � ��• l i._...._.l I. _..l 1..... .1 1._....I I�. l i I, .I � � � _ �;� i I it _JI.._-.._11___._II ..._ II_...... 1 l __I I__-._._I I__ I..._..J L....J I_------I I I I._II..I I.____.J I..__.._I I_....._....1 1._.._1 I... _ i i....Ii.. jr I._-...!I_-_I I._.._...I I ......_I 1_........1 I__j!_._� iI . If A7 hCHMCA)7 z RESOLUTION NO. 1309 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY Or HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING .ADOPTION OF '' THE MAIN-PIER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PLAN AMENDMILENT NO. 1 , AND REPORTING ON THE PROPOSED REDEVELOPMIEN. PLAN AMENDMENT FOR SAID PROJECT WHEREAS, the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency submitted the proposed Redevelopment Plan Amendment for the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Plan Amend- ment No. 1 to the Planning Commission for its report and recommendation pu,�suant to the California Community Redevelopment Law;. and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the pro} o:,ed Redevelopment Plan Amendment, NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Planning Commission of t'ne City of Huntington Beach as follows: 1. The Planning Commission' s report and recommendations concerning tl,e proposed Redevelopment Plan Amendment are as follows: a. The proposed Redevelopment Plan Amendment as submitted to the Fl i�- ni ng Co;nmi ssi on conforms to the General Plan of the City of Hupn'-i ng- ton Beach, as it may be amended from time to time. b. The Planning Commission recommends that the C: ty Counc-: 11 adopt the proposed Redevelopment Plan Amendment, with tn:� deletion ;:f t'ie inland area between Pacific Coast Highway and Walnut .-'1 EjeiU i, from the westerly side of the alley east of 7th Street to Gold:.,n:,,es c. The Planning Commission, recommends that the format of th` plan be consolidated into on( document. d. The Planning Comi,lission recommends that, where appropr iT' reference be made to limitations established in the Plan. " e. the Secretary of the Planning Commission is hereby aut:io" ized and directed to file this report and recommendation with tn;: Hur.ti r,gton Beach Redevelopment Agency. REGULARLY PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commissio.� of the t,7 cr Hunting- ton Beach, California, on the 6th day of July, 1983, by the followIrg roll tail vote: AYES: Higgins, Livengood, Porter, Erskine, Schumacher, Mir ' r NOES: Winchell ABSENT: _ None ABSTAIN: None ATTEST: l James a n; ecretary Marcus 7 . Pcrte�, Chaii-mLn EYW517 /t id { i J is tz - -_ - Erb CITY OF i-UNT! gGTON BEACH 112 Till;-P1I r: I: -.�UVI-lopl,41.1 1 l.'RojEf iu.....,i}:•,I:.: r U AREA 2 • Beginning at the most southerly corner of Lot 1 of Block 206 of Huntington Beach, as shown on a map recorded in Book 3 , .-age 36 , Miscellaneous Maps, Records of Orange County, said corner also being the intersection of the northeasterly right-of-way line of Walnut Avenue and the northwesterly right-of-way line of Sixth Street; thence northwesterly. 132 . 50 feet to the most southerly corner of Lot 2 of said Block 206 ; thence southwesterly 285. 00 feet along the northwesterly right-of-way line of the alley located between Sixth Street and Seventh Street t-o a point, .said point being the most southerly corner of Lot 12 of Block 106 of said Huntington Beach; thence continuing southwesterly 125 . 00 feet along the prolongation of said northwesterly right- of-way line of the alley to a point, said. point being on the northeasterly right-of-way line of Pacific Coast Highway; thence northwesterly 5422 . 50 feet more or less along said northeasterly right-of-way line to a point on a line, said line being the northwesterly right-of-way line of Goldenwest Street as it now exists; thence southwesterly along the pro- longation of the northwesterly right-of-way line of Goldenwest Street to the high tide line of the Pacific Ocean; thence sou- - easterly along said high tide lirle to a point on a line, said line being the extension of the northwesterly right-of-way line of Sixth Street; thence northeasterly along said right-of-�.-ay line of Sixth Street to the Point of Beginning. r 1 IV _ \ ! j i I 1 ! I j - j ; - i � � i I � .-� —I i � ;i�i + I j ji '•;�. • '%� �' I,I � _IL IL !S�l! iil-- 3!Ci7CCU1E.� `� ;I: � j •t: � , -r( 0 !Li7 R�iAC b G 1�5�y 7 S',Z:i t F�A Yta 9 I: .��-�' j�� `•�' , �� - r-- -- --- -- --- - I-- i I-_I �-. !! I i - ;Ma yL M-et�er�Ya-��e�y;�l�e�!!ae�e:rne��i — c�a-y- ca3 a r; Exis�irg lain-Pier Project Area • -r1.- • Huntington Beach Fountain Valley Board of REALTORS, INC. R E A LT O R' 8101 Slater Avenue • Huntington Beach, CA 92647 • (714) 847-6093 JULY 11, 1983 GOOD EVENING , MY NAME IS KENT PIERCE, AND I AM HERE THIS EVENING AS THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE HUNTINGTON BEACH-FOUNTAIN VALLEY BOARD OF REALTORS . THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, REPRESENTING MORE THAN 1,500 REALTORS, PASSED A RESOLUTION AT OUR MEETING ON JULY 6, EXPRESSING OUR STRONG SUPPORT FOR THE PROPOSED PLAN TO RENOVATE, REVITALIZE AND REJUVENATE THIS COMMUNITY, OUR COMMUNITY, OF HUNTINGTON BEACH , WE HAVE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AND WHOLE- HEARTEDLY ENDORSE THE CONCEPT AS PRESENTED, WE APPLAUD THE CITY ADMINIS- TRATION FOR THEIR EFFORTS TO INSURE THIS RENEWAL OF ECONOMIC VITALITY FOR OUR COMMUNITY THROUGH A WELL-THOUGHT-OUT PUBLIC SECTOR, PRIVATE SECTOR PARTNERSHIP WHICH HAS BEEN DEVELOPED WITH THE COOPERATION OF LOCAL PROPERTY OWNERS, COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS AND CITY STAFF , SEVERAL MONTHS AGO, THE BOARD OF REALTORS CHOSE TO VISIT SEVERAL OTHER SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA COMMUNITIES WHICH HAVE UTILIZED THE REDEVELOPMENT MECHANISM TO PROCEED WITH THE REVITALIZATION OF THEIR OWN OCEAN-FRONT COMMUNITIES , WITH A RELATIVELY-SMALL REDEVELOPMENT INVESTMENT, THESE OFFICERS NANCY RHYME,President•KENT PIERCE, First Vice President BETTY WILEY,Second Vice President•ELAINE STEPRENS,Secretary-Treasurer DIRECTORS BARRY BLISSIERE*MARK CON LEY*KELLEY ADAMS•STAN SABIN *CHAR LENE ROSSIGNOL WILL WOODS,Executive Vice President OTHER CITIES HAVE ATTRACTED TREMENDOUS PRIVATE SECTOR INVESTMENT TO THEIR COMMUNITIES WHICH HAS BREATHED NEW LIFE 1-0 TIRED AREAS SUCH AS OURS . THIS IS THE PURPOSE OF REDEVELOPMENT. WE WHO ARE ADVOCATES OF CONSUMER PROTECTION AND CHAMPIONS OF PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS ARE CONVINCED THAT EVERY REASONABLE EFFORT IS BEING MADE TO INSURE THAT THE PROPERTY RIGHTS OF LOCAL OWNERS WILL BE PROTECTED WHILE AT THE SAME TIME, THE FUTURE OF OUR CITY WILL BE ASSURED. WE ASK YOU, AS OUR ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES, TO GIVE OUR COMMUNITY THE OPPORTUNITY TO REALIZE ITS POTENTIAL--TO LET HUNTINGTON BEACH COMPETE WITH OTHER BEACH FRONT COMMUNITIES--TO BE AS GOOD AS IT CAN BE . HUNTINGTON BEACH HAS BEEN CONSIDERING REDEVELOPMENT FOR MANY YEARS, TO NO AVAIL , THE TIME TO ACT IS N 0 W . IF NOT YOU, WHO WILL OFFER THIS OPPORTUNITY? IF NOT NOW, WHEN WILL THE OPPORTUNITY BE PRESENTED AGAIN? THANK YOU . REQUE* FOR CITY COUNCOACTION A Date July- 13, 1983 Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council/Chairman and Redevelopment Agency Submitted by: Charles W. Thompson, City Administrator Prepared by: Office of Business and Industrial Enterprise Subject: MAIN-PIER REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 1 ACTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Statement of Issue, Recommendation,Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attachments: STATEMENT OF ISSUE: Each Council member has now received updated copies of all materials which have been submitted as part of our public record for your consideration and pending action on the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Plan Amendment No. 1. It is anti- cipated that staff will conclude its presentation prior to Council deliberation and discussion on the proposed amendment by responding to, many of the questions and concerns which were raised by the public during the public hearing procedure. Following this presentation it is anticipated that the Council will then discuss and consider the various resolutions and introduce the ordinance which is con- tained in your separate notebook. In addition- to these proposed actions, you may wish to consider adopting the following recommendations which are in response both to public concerns recently raised or input from the Fiscal Review Committee. RECOMMENDATION: 1. Consider alternative to Planning Commission recommendation which would exclude a major portion of Subarea 2 from amended area (see Attachment No. 1) . 2. Consider exempting portions of Subarea 6 from the use of eminent domain (see Attachment No. 2). 3. Adopt statement indicating the Redevelopment Agency's commitment to utilize available revenues to support the upgrading of flood control facilities with- in and adjacent to the Redevelopment Project Area, and to offset any non- reimbursable costs which the school-,district, or other taxing agencies, incur as a result of the Redevelopment Program (see Attachment No. 3). ANALYSIS: Subarea 2 Amendment In recommending the inclusion of Subarea 2 as part of the proposed amended.-project area, several considerations and concerns were evaluated. 1. It is recognized that a significant portion of Subarea 2 is underdeveloped. as a result, in a large part, from the oil encumbrances which have existed for many years. PIO 4/81 2.' There are-.portions of Subarea 2 that are a part of the older downtown area where there is a lack of maintenance and upkeep of existing facilities as well as the need for improvements to sidewalks, streets and alleyways. 3. With the adoption of the Downtown Specific Plan and the proposal to limit access into the Townlot area to protect the existing residential neighborhood a considerable amount of public investment must occur for such things as the cul-de-sacing of streets, appropriate landscaping and construction of addi- tional public parking to offset that which will be lost throughout the over- all development of the area and the ultimate upgrading of Pacific Coast Highway. 4. The City and the public have made a substantial commitment to the develop- ment of the Blufftop landscaped area. It was recognized early on in our assessment that the inclusion of Subarea 2 as part of the amended project area could serve as a vehicle to expedite the development and completion of this important entrance to our overall downtown and community. In meeting with the various taxing agencies through the Fiscal Review process, no agency questioned the legality of incorporating this area .into the amended plan. In fact, County staff, after driving through the overall area, confirmed our assessment of the overall need to utilize redevelopment as a vehicle to over- come some of the obstacles and constraints that have existed for years. In our meeting with property owners and in reviewing the testimony that was given at the various public hearings concerning redevelopment and the Downtown Specific Plan it is staff's opinion that the major concern lies with those persons who have recently developed substantial residential improvements within portions of Subarea 2. They are uneasy with the potential ability of the Redevelopment Agency to utilize eminent domain to acquire parcels and, therefore, have concerns about the status of their investments. Because of this concern and a recognition of the importance to the overall financial status of the project, it is recommended that the Council consider an additional alternative to that proposed by the Planning Commission. Therefore, it is recommended that the Redevelopment Agency consider making the finding that those newer and substantial residential units as depicted on Attachment No. 1, immediately following the adoption of the amended plan, be found in conformance with that Plan and that such. a finding. be recorded with the County Recorder's Office, pursuant to Section 2.2.1- of the Main-Pier Redevelopment Plan as amended, and thus eliminate the ability of the City to utilize eminent domain for the acquisition of said parcels. Subarea 6 Several concerns have been raised from property owners who currently reside within Subarea 6 over the prospect of their home being acquired through eminent domain proceedings. Since this area is viewed as a long term transitional zone which is proposed to be incorporated primarily to provide an opportunity for these property owners to participate in the overall planning effort as well as to, perhaps, take advantage of rehabilitation assistance and the provision of appropriate public improvements such as landscaping, sidewalk and street upgradings that could en- hance the overall area, it is not anticipated that there would be any need for public acquisition within these certain designated areas. However, rather than amending the boundary as now delineated which could necessitate the entire plan being returned to the Planning Commission for further report and recommendations and thus delay the process and program, it is suggested that the attached map be' adopted and incorporated into the Main-Pier'. Redevelopment Project Plan as amended which exempts certain properties in Subarea 6 from the use of eminent` domain for acquisition purposes. Commitment to Taxing Agencies Throughout our deliberations with the various taxing agencies involved in the Fiscal Review process we-expressed to them what we felt has 'been an obvious concern and commitment on the part of the City and Redevelopment Agency to be sensitive to their fiscal situations and any potential adverse impact which would result from redevelopment activities. Since we are at a very early stage in the Redevelopment Program and it is recognized that it may be many months and perhaps several years before the full development potential will be recog- nized and thus the implications of that development assessed and the Agency costs determined, it is nearly impossible at this time for any clear determination as to what kind of detrimental impact will take place to these agencies as'.well as what financial resources will be available to help remedy the situation. It is therefore proposed that the Agency adopt the statement which is incor- porated as Attachment No. 3 which reflects the Agency's commitment to respond to these concerns and issues as they become more fully understood and recognized. FUNDING SOURCE: Not applicable. ALTERNATIVES: Subarea 2 1. Adopt as proposed in Main-Pier Project Plan Amendment No. 1. 2. Concur in Planning Commission recommendation and eliminate portions of Subarea 2. 3. Adopt as proposed in Main-Pier Plan Amendment No. 1 and find designated uses in conformance with plan as previously discussed. Subarea 6 1. Adopt amended plan as proposed. 2. Adopt amended plan as proposed incorporating map designating areas exempt from eminent domain. 3. Exclude portions of Subarea 6 from amended area which would possibly require further action by the Planning Commission. Statement 1. Make more specific findings relative to potential detriment and commit specific levels of available funds to affected entities. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Attachment No. 1 2. Attachment No. 2 3. Attachment No. 3 CWT:TT:jb spa_ —gory ul NOME c� o J. 1—A /77 o --# C C -fi CL � X c-+ r i 1Ell, . 1¢rw \, ri IR4 1 n I R 4. . 1�—L4 Mal 1� q n �R�-- �.M Ra �/. 1 r 131E-® 1 MA6. EE FG 1.1 OF F f SE F 14 i 13 ......- Liu L!'D.00 LLJ Flil ZL Lu lb LJ-' LU �; b o \CSC DC� ClICI I F� F. FF i-s a 2 L-i �,',i \ V.•/ i \'. 11 a L [ —, ;;— all,-7 F 'r . 1, M I PI 11 Ul D"F' FIJF,11] ///, r. i F J b L L L "b 28— nil 071, L L kb F7 jL'62 L L a Z23 I b �= b jc b 27 -lift 2ja F :SAL;'. : !,EI•;UE � 3 o I ►767 _ 14 26 !9 COAST H f GI SWAY 2h WALNUT AVENUE LU ISO i I S El ` HW COAST HIGHI.- Y • C!_OCK 2 1 c • f' `0 W-1 NUT AVENUE �O 24 23 b 6 g� 117.5' � b3 '• - 51 ,y (A�- ICJ r ILO 22a Walnut P.venue Xj /b 1,5 --�3 �---7� 12 SUM 6� 7 r\ -- C e : Coast :Iighway 6�/AL NUT AVENUE -------l-1?4 y F, _ --I 22 7- -f v.5 C ;' I LLJ I I - W COAST HIGH I'Ml 024-121-07 �GA'RD1t ER, 024-121-02 R4E C1!LAi.'3 UILLIAN. M 04-001 4729 '.DR-,H ',T: AV-_ 04-001 1115 IWWFIr1010N1 ST P;lOEN:T\, ARIL 13 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 01��L-1C1-Ot Vj'? A-A , ,iC , , ... 024-121-03 TOBIN, H E 04-001 10: 0 ,I,L '.., 04-001 5142 WARNER AVE i!U::CI:: `!; ..-. , C,.L HUNITINGTH BCH, CAL 92649 024-121-09 D:.`•' S `-P;! 024-121-Olt TC3IN, 11 E 04-001 305 04-001 5142 WARNER AVE LUG AINGEL S, I: !. ' HUNT"INGTH L'CH , CAL 92649 024-121-05 T051'1, hl E OAt-001 C9 S GLE•`IRUl" .c 04-001 5142 6!_'QNER AVE LL`5 ;tr!GELES , CAL .� HLINTINSTH BCH, CAL 91,649 024-121-06 0 BRIEN, HONAR0 04-001 f'A1 L , :'HI'(H;-, 04-001 1",42 LA COLD"A DR TUSTIN, CAL 9,,,76 0 ; 1 L ;CK 22c WALNUT ;=.VEr,UE 17 15 - LLI LJ I— - 1— w J 9 B 7 1— 5z/ i I/0C _ u i. F� COAST H I GF R AY 024-122-01 TR;;IHER Erl A 04-001 200 U2APIGE nvE 024-122-07 PAXSO'(, WI LI is R Hu:;, INGTH NCH, CAL 92646 04-001 115 9TH ST HUNTIt;G1N BCH , CAL 17. 024-122-02 GO`IEZ, THOOMAS P 04-OL1 122 1/2 10TH ST C24-122-08 OPAr:GI: COAST S?ECI�LT_,S H'u!ITINGTil BC11, CAL 92643 CT l^ 6:'.0 E CHAPNAH .. ._ OaAl,ct , CAL 024-122-03 CAMPBELL, THONAS G 04-001 116 LOTH ST HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92643 024-122-09 C )L.ii; ,!I .`AT11Or;L' G 04-001 Illy :!i ST 024-12Z-04 SUPERNOWICZ, EDWARD J 04-001 114 LOTH ST HUNTINGTN BCH, CAL 92643 024-12_-1C I"EGL1 , E LIZ;. E (;. ii 04A -01 r;EGL- , ELIZ'.JE'i' I, �- ," IE HL'rn -:;co' BCH , CAL 024-122-06 PAXSON, WILLIAM R 04-001 . 115 9TH ST HUNTINGTH BCH . CAL 92643 23a • �4 b VIAL NUT AVENUE S, ¢ l 20 ti : i3 6 i r � ; ? I C04,57- H1GHlJAY 024-035-01 L`-UNG, AN?! M 024-035-03 SIGN;:L C0:1PAt:IES INC 04-001 20313 ANNIE AVE 04-001 ATT:t H TORRANCE , CA 90503 P 0 CO:: 9I:193 H:.U::TCNI TEX-s 7.:1 024-035-02 AUSTIN, ELIHORE 024-03 -0 9 L::t;L' W1LLI;:;, 04-001 5Y45 E BURNS Ct-001 l e0 S E' `._3:.Y DR L' J ` : ' `. C; 9u. ' TUCSON'r ARIZ 857:1 v �••�� �_ , 02,4-035-1C DI:'_: 5IF1: D R0 ' 4 i=5 LT5 024-035-05 St1ITfI, LON V ,-001 FU':: .... ..:1::; E .,R 04-001 BEACH SUPPLY CO 2363 WALNUT AVE LC 5 A[I'-E LE 9 :.1 LONG BEACH, CAL 90305 02�i-035-05 YORDA OIL COMPANY LTD 024-035-11 "'A!t AT1';., !iENP° L_ D 04-uul 292 '.'iL!.!;A C ir , 04-001 1201 W HUNTINGTON DR SUITE 210 COSTA ri sa, :.L _.. ARCADIA. CA 9100;. ¢ 024-035-07 YCRBA OIL COMPANY LTD C24-C3;-12 ZE!!tiDi_:2 , LO..ELL 'J 04-001 1201 W !!U11TINGTON DR 04-001 !I S'i 5U1TE 2. 0 nRCADIA, CA- 91'C05 ' • _BLOCK ?:'b Walnut Avenue h \- 1 i7 r 1-� 0, J Cli /�I- �I - ✓ l�G I i Pacific Coast Highway BLOCi� 2Sc WALNUT AVENUE - 37 . Ij � r Z.T'`1 Bj I ` 4� r :I TOT I I I I , t; f I ; M COAST HIGH:•IAY A 24a WALNUT- AVENUE v � " 9 � • z LL1 J �... _.. .--- ...—..__... LLI Lil .—_. f E 7 <� 4 3 ZY i I � COAST U I ui-1WAY 023-167-02 ECONOMAKOS, PETER W 023-167-07 IIU"ITII+i,T014 5iG1iAL. G L 04-001 17031 MALTA CIR C '-19 2 -C'!G --- ..,. HUNTINGTN BCH, CAL 92649 LO;IG G ::C}i, CAL vd . 023-i67-^u3 LANOI:,> ldlLl_I.'.., 04-001 1i 3G S L ,LR L'! JR 023-167-03 BOVY, CI;RIS L05 A;i;LLES, C-L 04-001 526 13TH ST HUNTINGTH BCH, CAL 92648 023-16 • -09 SIG;!!•L L:It1!';.., .:5 1t4C 04-001 .1T!! 1! :!!ERLE P 0 DOi: 1;4193 023-167-04 CATHER, CHARLES E 04-001 2292 LONG BEACH BLVD 110US"i0t TEXAS LONG BEACH , CAL 90,506 023-167-10 FRENCH, G-.NE 04-001 202'.2 RI.::i CIP r 023-167-05 BRITALTA VENEZOLANO LTD 04-001 WILSIiIRE OIL CO OF TEXAS 250 BARK AVE NEW YORE, N Y 10017 023-167-06 C,.TI!ER, CII-RLES E 04-001 2292 N LONG BEACH BLVD LOW', BEACH, CA 90001, BLOCK 24b e7. 14ALNUT AVENUE 175 4` �.zs. • j COAST HIGHWAY • B!_C, r: 25a • e ' WALi!L AVENUE LLJ ~ /� /� — w [L, r l LJ COAST HIGHOP 023-137-01 SIGNAL COMPANIES INC 023-137-07 AA CkPl'TAL CORP 04-001 ATTN H J IJ4ERLEY 0 4-G UN II 150� FID@L1TY IO;I T P 0 BOX 94193 HOUSTMI, TEXAS 77018 D LL .S , TX 2CI 023-137-02 BAGSTAD , ELCOII 023-137-08 C f:ES PETROLEI,: CCRP E' 04-001 901 CATALIHA 04-U01 L SEAL BEACH, CAL 90740 :. P U L:,J.. 2707 LCI.G GF.ACFi , CAL 9,"11 023-137-03 HUOSON, JANES T 04-001 818 14TH ST 023-137-09 RAUL,. RA.i:)OL "! 11 IIUNTINGTN SCH, CAL 92648 G`'-GO1 023-137-04 HUNTIHGTOII BEACH COMPANY off-001 TAX OIV 225 GUSH ST SAN FRANCISCO. CAL 94120 023-137-10 CRJIIIIIG, :ITC1ti.EL J ET AL Gt.GC' N GR0`.'C , :;A 023-137-06 Kl." ':ELJ G 04-001 16102 PITMAII PI HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92647 BLOCK 25b WALNUT AVENUE � I moo-; �h COAST H I Gi I'rJAY 023-138-01 MEHLER , MERLE ANDERSON TR 023-133-07 HARIE, NAJ10 04-001 P 0 BOX 869 Ct-D01 2 HLHlTINGTCtl BEACH , CA 9C648 HU AL 023-138-03 ENERGY DEVELOPMENT CORP 04-001 9185 CHARLEVILLE BLVD 1113 BEVERLY HILLS, CAL 90212 023-138-03 FI,'P !lAJI7 .^,CI;, CAL 023-132-04 SICN-L CC!!n%!!1c_c INC 04-001 A f IN H J 14HERLE Y - P 0 BOX 94193 023-138-09 CEH, GEORGE E HOUSTON, TEXAS 77018 04-001 1.18 ^CTH ST 0-23-138-05 CRAWFCRD, JOHN V 023-1.38-10 FLYN'N, TtiOiIAS 04-001 4201 WILSHIRE BLVD oy-001 W;IITERCt>, OP. row, R0011 240 LA h;IRAOA, CA ry- �,�:, LOS ANGELES, CAL 90005 023-138-06 HARP, MAJID 04-001 327 11TH Sr- HUHTIHGTH 3CH , CAL 92648 • aLuC; 25c • WALNUT AVENUE r '-- J 20{ i— WLu v7 L V ` n N _ (n i/3 \ _ 19 uJ LLJ LLJ LL, ol COAST ,;, • BLOCK 25d WALNUT AVENUE 2C 9 /b -�� /3 n J I II s� vc/vrF_ COAST HIGHNA.Y aLOcIK 26a Walnut Avenue i5� I 17 `s i j I 6 5j i J I i I i i j• � ^,,; O i c� PCH BLOCK 26b Walnut Avenue /6` I � I PCH t Fi T r L..._J 1. .�`I'i •� L I l i.. •'' \ .C �^ ice.U� LU pi 11 J Ld J �_� I[-1-1'. [' I LJ 1 1-_1\_J �L1 ) ' �: i ' !� I ; �,r"�( r i�� l+ Ifs ,, 11 , , 1 1 i� . I I ] [ � � ( - g . _ l Dili e&333Bmau8e aeEQ9e,ew11no� -8- ® Existing Main-Pier Project Area Parcels exempted from acquisiton by4eminent domain m z f,JAIiv-PIER PLAN AMENDMENT NO. I o N BLOCK 19a AM PECAN (NAGNOLIA AVEINUE) 17-- —- y. -- �;j -- - r- I J w I�_ _ W - k 14 ORANGE AVENUE 024=132-09 GEORGE , VIRGINIA R 04-001 423 6TH ST 024-132-13 CrZ;::FORD , kILL_T M HUNTINGTN BCH, ' CAL 92648 04-001 1•0: '- LORE-' ^ CA 91 0 024--132-10 EASTERLY, REBECCA G 024-132-14 D•TrI,C pCTTY ` 04-001 305 N SWEET AVE 04-001. 40� 112 6TH FULLERTON, CAL 9263-3 !"UN NGTON B-::CH, CA 3 024-1 i2-11 W`IITFIELO , IFENE C.04-001 LOC,KETT , IRENE C �24-13P-15 STE.^;PN?Ar , HEI:R Y ET 417 6TH ST 153 TONI. HUNTINGTN BCH, CAL 92648 AH,;HEIM, CA 926 2 024-132-19 CHU7?CH CC.,`1UI1I'Y 3=BLE 7 D4- l7 ti_.�C'l DF �.ii�I;i,'r�,� .�.�`: 024-13�-12 FREEMAN, LOIS E 5T0 C Olt-001 tr15 6TH ST P 0 LL OX, b9 4Ut1TINGTON BEACH , CA 92648 HUNTIHGTON BEACH , CA 9::;:,8 BLL''%: 19b /r7 _5' \ rn /1 i.•hr���r / —i 19 LIZ t C--'C Cr 024-131-10 BROWN, LOIS K 024-131- 6 DA."DE , DE',!E : O 04-001 19291 SURFDALE LN 04-00_ P C BCj:r 3.:`" HU:IT, INGTON BEACH, CA 92648 HUNT=1,ST0 :C-!, C 024-1 1-:7 '.•!IL`i0'i, V S 024-131-11 BROWN, LOIS K04-LO1 5 1 6'H T 04-001 19291 SURFDALE LN HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 H r!?1t;GTt: C L _o 024-131-18 HE?.1, HAi`_ :_., TH 024-131-12 ROSALES, OSCAR J T ` 04-601 7546 CONN'.E OR 04-00'_ 163i E E_ _ HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 CP;::;GE ,. CA 55 024-131-15 DERIGO, LEWIE P 04-001 807 MAIN ST HUNTINGTN .BCH, CAL 92648 B L 0 19c PALM AVENUE z 41 ID /.14p , :'ACACIA �✓����� 024-095-01 SELTZER , CAPITOLA H 0q-0C1 7580 RECHE CYN RE) 024-095-06 ;,"^ENS, KART`: L COLTON, CAL 92324 04-OC1 1731 PARK; HU',T INGTC,. ZA ci26•,,_ 024—U9 ) DE .`,UE i, JO_FPii t 024-095-02 NEAL, RONALD G 04-001 609 MAIN ST 04--001 602 7TH ST HUNT I t G T N BC.- , C :L S_L43 ;IUtlT1NGTCN BEACH , CA 92648 024-095-C8 BUf:"';Y, ZCLA _ 024-095-03 SMITH, ROY K 04-001 607 AI!{ ST 04-001 627 7TH ST HU:,TI`.GTCN BEACH, CA ?"'648 HU!;TINGTN ECH, CAL 92648 024-095-09 ALLEN, RC2ERT R 024-095-04 NEWPORT MEMORIAL PARK 04-001 22', 39D ST 04-001 3500 PACIFIC VIEW OR HU';TI';GTN ECH , CAL 5 648 CRONA DEL MAR, CAL 92625 024-095-10 L:,.Y,E , VIC?ORIA J 024-095-0S L'E,.CH CITIES FINANCIAL 04-0C.1 637 FRA!2KFOPT AVE 1 HUIiTINST ,, E d c. CA 2648? 04-OC1 b 9 ";,SIN ST ' HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92643 • MEMORANDUM TO: Huntington Beach City Council and CommuriitN� Redevelopment Agency FROM: Thomas P. Clark RE: Fiscal Review DATE: July 15, 1983 A Fiscal Review Committee meeting was convened on July .1983 during which testimony was taken regarding the potential fiscal . impacts of the implemenatation of the Main Pier Redevelopment Plan on affected taxing agencies . The meeti.r:g was continued until July 7, 19:33 at which ti: e additional • testimony was taken and the committee discussed its 1:rapoS:--1 findings. On July 11, 1983 the fiscal review co=ittee transmitte[ its Report and Findings to the Huntington Beach Comir:i.-i ity Redevelopment Agency and City Council of the City of Iuntington Beach. It should be noted that although the report discusses revenue loss with respect to each the affected taxing agencies, the fiscal review committee agreed that the appropriate methodology for determining financial burden or detriment would be an analysis of the difference bet ween the actual tax revenues received from property within the project area by eac}: affected taxing agency and the actual incremental costs to each • • MEMORANDUM July 15, 1983 Page 2 such affected taxing agency as a result of the Redevelopment Plan and its implementation. It should also be noted that with the possible exception of the County of Orange and its affiliated taxing agencies the affected taxing entities have conceptually identified potential financial burden or detriment but have not quantified the amount of such detriment or suggested methodology by which this detriment, if it exists, could be mitigated. In addition, we have subsequently discovered that certain assumptions made by the County in evaluating assessed value • increas.es in the project area are erroneous .in the followinc., respects: (To be presented at City Council meeting of 7/18,i83) The evidentiary response to the Report and Finding is as follows: 1. COUNTY OF ORANGE - GENERAL FUND. The Committee indicates, at paragraph 8 of the Report. and Findings, that during the length of the Project, costs to the County general fund will exceed project revenues by approximately $23, 591, 000. This projected detriment is basod, on the assumption that the entire project area will be developed in accordance with properties. Keeping in mind -Ll-_at the fiscal review committee and Agency representatives have • agreed that the Agency should be responsible to the affected • MEMORANDUM July 15, 1983 Page 3 taxing agencies for any net deficits which each may incur due to the provision of additional services to the project area as a result of its redevelompent and that the Agency is not responsible for the revenue loss of the affected taxing agencies, the Agency staff is currently negotiating an agreement with the County which will provide the County with reimbursement for demonstrable net deficit, if and to the extent funds are available, therefor. However, due to the fact that the County did not provide this information until the day of the public hearing on the Redevelopment Plan, the Agency • staff was unable to even discuss a meaningful agreement with the County which would mitigate the potential burden or detriment resulting from the implementation of the project prior to the hearing. The proposed agreement is under the authority of Health & Safety Code Section 33401 which provides, in part, as follows : The Agency may also pay to any taxing agency with territory located within a project. area other than the community which has adopted the project, any amounts of money which in the Agency' s determination is appropriate to alleviate any financial burden or detriment • caused to any taxing agency .by a redevelopment project. • MEMORANDUM July 15, 1983 Page 4 The County has proposed that a ratio be established between the actual burden or detriment (approximately $23, 000, 000) and the total amount of tax increment dollars to be generated by the project during the length of the Plan (approximately. $242100011000) . This ratio would be used as a multiple annually to determine that portion of the taxes allocated to the Agency which would be reimbursed to the County. While we agree generally with this approach, its finalization will require further analysis of the numbers presented by the County with particular attention paid to the impact on the County ' s cost • and revenues as they relate to the phasing of the developm�-nt ' within the project area and the possibility that some of the projected redevelopment may never occur. 2. COUNTY OF ORANGE - FLOOD CONTROL' DISTRICT The County of Orange - Flood Control District indicates that it will incur approximately $275, 000, 000 in costs in connection with the Santa Ana River improvement Project. The District also indicates that the current estimate for improving the Huntington Beach channel is $12, 0001000 to $15, 000,000. There is also a conclusionary statement to the affect that since the District relies primarily on property tax revenues to fund its flood control projects, the use of tax • increment financing will have a severe financial impact in the • MEMORANDUM July 15, 1983 Page 5 District ' s ability to fund the flood control needs adjacent within the project area. We have been unable to identify precisely what this fiscal impact will be, but do agree with the committee ' s recommendation that the Redevelopment Plan be further amended to include the Huntington Beach Channel. In fact, we would recommend that the Agency take action to direct staff to amend the Main Pier Redevelopment Plan to include property throughout the City of Huntington Beach adjacent -to and within the drainage area of the Huntington, Beach Channei. • Commencing this amendment process would mitigate and, in fact, greatly assist the Flood Control District in performing. its statutory obligations. 3 . ORANGE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT The Orange County Water District* at paragraph 13 of the Report and Findings indicates without evidentiary support . . that the redevelopment project will increase .,pater requirements in excess of 204,.000 acre-feet per year without a commensurate payment of tax increment. The District also concludes that. its net loss will be in the neighborhood of $2, 000,000. It should be noted again that this net loss is lost revenue, not the burden or detriment as defined by the Committee. Agency staff has advised the District that we are willing to meet with them • and negotiate an agreement under Section 33401 which would • MEMORANDUM July 15, 1983 Page 6 alleviate financial burden or detriment caused as a result of the implementation of the Plan. Because the District provided us , with very little information regarding fiscal impact and reached some bare conclusions without factual support, we were unable to commence negotiation of an agreement prior to the hearing on the Redevelopment Plan. Ile would recommend that the Agency direct staff to negotiate such an agreement as a method of mitigating any demonstrated financial burden or detriment. 4. SCHOOL DISTRICTS - COAST COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT AND HUNTINGTON BEACH CITY SCHOOL DIS!'RICT. • The school districts have indicated -at paragraph 14 of the Findings and Report that their concern is not so much with the Main Pier Redevelopment Plan as it is with the cumulata.ve impact of all redevelopment projects in the state. In this regard, it was noted at the committee hearings that i.F and to the extent tax increments that would otherwise be paid to the school districts is paid to the Agency that amount is made up through equalization aid by the state. The districts have indicated that this equalization aid has not .in -the recent past been paid in full, thereby leaving a deficit from the state. The districts aid not provide us with precise data on this deficit. However, to the extent that such a deficit exists, we • would agree that a burden or detriment is suffered by the • MEMORANDUM July 15, 1983 Page 7 districts . We would propose to enter into an agreement with the districts which would alleviate, if and to the extent funds are available, the burden or detriment which is directly experienced by the school districts as a result of the implementation of the Plan, with particular attention being paid, on an annual basis to the deficit from the state. The Huntington Beach City District also indicates that the - project will generate additional students for which there will be no additional funding. The record of the committee reports would .tend to clarify this statement which is somewhat • misleading. In this - regard, the District advised that because it is a district .of declining enrollment, the state nonetheless pays equalization aid as though the enrollment did not . decline. Thus, in a year in which they have experienced declining enrollment, but at the same time new students were generated .from the project area, it would not enjoy the windfall by virtue of the fact that the enrollment declined. but the equalization aid remained constant. TPC: sl • 07-15-83 1589R/2273,!00 _ RE t 177"IMLiY 1 L GENCY 91HON RCA 83-19 May 12, 1983 Date CITY CLERK Submitted to: Hono ab e evelopment Agency Members Submitted by: Charles W. Thompson,_ City Administrator Prepared by: )614?om Tincher, Director of Business & Industrial Enterprise Subject: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING TRANSMITTAL OF MAIN-PIER REDEVELOP- dd MEnNTT PROJECT PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 1 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION Statement of Issue, Recommendation, Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attachments: STATEMENT OF ISSUE: Attached for your review and transmittal are copies of the proposed Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Plan Amendment No. 1 and the nega- tive declaration. The action being taken is once again a prelimi- nary step in the overall Redevelopment Plan process which is .required to insure adequate public input and City Planning Commission involve- ment. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize transmittal of the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Plan Amendment No. 1 and the associated negative declaration for public comment and review and to fulfill the procedural requirements of California Community Redevelopment Law and C.E.Q.A. ANALYSIS : The transmittal of these documents to the Planning Commission, the f Chief Administrative Officer of the County and other public agencies initiates the formal review and reporting procedures for generating required input and responses which will be considered at the public hearing when the final Redevelopment Plan will be acted upon. Of greatest concern at the present is whether or not we can follow the required procedures and have the plans effective by August 15 , 1983. j This date is important in that it. is at that time that the base tax role is annually established. If we can have an adopted plan by that date, the tax increment financing of project costs will be expedited by one year; otherwise, we will have to utilize next year' s base role and, thus , lose a year of appreciation in property values and i increased taxes. By transmitting these documents at this time we will be in a position to proceed as rapidly as possible in firming up. development proposals and disposition and development agreements for certain property owners within the areas involved. As you are aware, this is of considerable interest and concern to owners of buildings in the downtown which do not meet seismic safety standards. The schedule which we have established will allow us to. be in a position to respond immediately i to development proposals that will evolve after the Coastal Zone J PIO 4/81 per.._ �� • • Specific Plans is adopted. FUNDING SOURCE: .Not applicable. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS : Not to proceed at this time. However, such a delay would, in all likelihood, preclude our ability to have a project adopted and in effect prior to the August 15 deadline. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution No. 72 transmitting Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Plan Amendment No. 1 and negative declaration. CWT:TT:lp i RESOLUTION NO. 72 A RESOLUTION OF THE HUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AUTHORIZING TRANSMITTAL OF THE PROPOSED MAIN- PIER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 1 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, THE PROJECT AREA COM- MITTEE, AND FOR OTHER APPROPRIATE DISTRIBUTION AS REQUIRED BY LAW WHEREAS, the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency has prepared a proposed redevelopment plan and negative .declaration for the Main- Pier Redevelopment Project Plan Amendment No. 1; and WHEREAS, the proposed Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Plan Amend- ment No. 1 conforms to the requirements of the California Health and Safety Code, Sections 33000 et seq. and the negative declaration with CEQA. NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved that: Section 1. The Chief Executive Officer of the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency is hereby authorized and directed to transmit the proposed Redevelopment Plan Amendment and negative declaration for the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Plan Amendment No. 1 to the Planning Commission of the City of Huntington Beach for its report and recommendation as required by the California Health and Safety Code, Sections 33346 and 33347, C.E.Q.A. , and to the Project Area Committee. Section 2. The Chief Executive Officer of the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency is hereby authorized and directed to transmit the proposed plan for the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Plan Amendment No. 1 to the Chief Administrative Officer of the County of Orange for its report .and recommendations as required by the California Health and Safety Code, Section 33353.5 . Section 3. The Chief Executive Officer of the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency is hereby authorized and directed to transmit the proposed plan amendment and negative declaration for the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Plan Amendment No. 1 to other appropriate agen- cies, organizations, groups and individuals and take. other appropriate actions as required by law. i} I PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS day of , 1983 . ii ATTEST: Agency Clerk Chairperson APPROVED AS TO FORM: REVIEWED AND APPROVED AS TO FORM: Agency Counsel Special Legal Couns STRADLING, YOCCA, CARLS & ROUTH INITIATED AND APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: APPROVED: .01 L✓ Director of Business & Industrial Cie Executive Officer Enterprise • Res. No- 72 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) I COUNTY OF ORANGE . ` ` ) CITY OF HUNTINGTO,N -.BEACH) Lr I . ALICIA M.' WENTWORTH, Clerk of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach, California, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing. . resolution was duly adopted by the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach at a meeting of said Redevelopment Agency held on the 16th day of May 19 83 , and that it was so adopted T by the following .vote: AYES: Members:. Pattinson, Thomas, Kelly, MacAllister, Bailey, Mandic dil NOES: Members: None ABSENT: Members: Finley Clerk of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach, Ca. - IVI � IIV — PIER RE DE I/ ELO P/VIENT PROJECT PLAN o��N�ENT narr�ac�g�o� FED coach PROPOSED MAIN-PIER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PLAN AMENDMENT .NO. 1 1.0 Introduction to the Redevelopment Plan Amendment No. 1 Prepared by the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency, this Redevelopment Plan Amendment No:° 1 is for the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project in the City of Huntington Beach. This Redevelopment Plan Amendment has been prepared pursuant to the California Community Redevelopment Law of the State of California, Health and Safety Code Section 33000 et. seq. , the California Constitution and all applicable local laws and ordinances. The proposed redevelopment.of the amended Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area as described in this Plan conforms to the General Plan for the City of Hunting Beach adopted by the City Council and as. thereafter amended. This proposed Redevelopment Plan Amendment No. 1 is based on a Preliminary Redevelopment Plan Amendment approved by the Planning Commission on January 18, 1983, by Resolution No. 1300, attached hereto and incorporated herein as Attachment "I" and proposes to amend the Project Area boundaries and limi- tations of the Main-Pier Redevelopment Plan which was adopted by the City Council on September 20, 1982 and incorporated herein as Attachment "II ." 2.0 Project Area Boundaries The boundaries of the amended Project Area are set forth on a map attached hereto as Exhibit "B in the Preliminary Plan. The legal description of the overall amended Project Area is attached hereto as Attachment "IIV 3.0 Financing Limitations Consistent with Sections 33333.2 and 33334.2 of the California Community Redevelopment Law, the following limitations are imposed on this Plan. -- Taxes; as defined in Section 33670 of the California Community Rede- velopment Law, shall not be divided and shall not be allocated to the Agency during any one fiscal (tax) year except by amendment of this Plan in excess of $15,250,000. -- No loans, advances, or indebtedness to finance, in whole or in part, the Redevelopment Project and to be repaid from the allocation of those taxes described in the beforementioned Section 33670 shall be established or incurred by the Agency beyond 20 years from the date of adoption of this Plan by the City Council unless such time limitation is extended by amendment of this Plan. However, such loans, advances or indebted- ness may be repaid over a period of time longer than such time limit. -- Without an amendment of this Plan, the amount of bonded indebtedness served by tax increments which the Agency -shall have outstanding at any one time shall not exceed .$77,500,000. • • ATTACHMENT "I" PRELIMINARY PLAN MAIN-PIER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 1 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA JANUARY, 1983 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page 1.0 Introduction 1 2.0 Project Area Boundaries, 1 3.0 General Statement of Proposed Land Uses 2 4.0 General Statements of Proposed Layout of Principal Streets 2 5.0 General Statement of Proposed Population Densities 2 6.0 General Statement of Proposed Building Intensities.and Standards 2 7.0 Attainment of the Purposes of the California Community Redevelopment Law 3 8.0 Conformance to the Huntington Beach General Plan 3 9.0 General Impact of the Project upon Residents located within the Project Area .and upon the Surrounding 3 Neighborhoods LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit A. Plan Amendment No. 1 Project Area Legal Descriptions B. Plan Amendment No. 1 Project Area Maps 1.0 INTRODUCTION This Preliminary Plan for the proposed Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Amendment No. 1 was prepared in compliance with the California Community Redevelopment Law which requires preparation .of such a plan as the basis for subsequent development of a more definitive plan amendment for redevelopment within a designated Project Area. The aforementioned law defines "Project Area" as an area within a community.which has been determined to be blighted and requiring redevelopment to effectuate the public purposes for which the California Community Redevelopment Law was designed to achieve. The proposed Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Amendment No. 1 is part of the ongoing Community.and Neighborhood Enhancement Program by the City of Huntington Beach to revitalize areas within the community. The Redevelopment Program will enable the City of Huntington Beach to remove and mitigate adverse conditions within selected areas of the community and help improve the overall economic climate. On February 1, 1982, the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach designated by Resolution No. 5090 a Redevelopment Survey Area as an area that required further study to determine if a redevelopment project is feasible. On November 15, 1982, the City Council added one additional area at Beach Boulevard and Atlanta Avenue by Resolution No. 5189. Also, on November 15, 1982, the City Council directed the Planning Commission to select a Project Area from within the survey areas and to formulate and adopt a Preliminary Plan for the selected amended Project Area. The following Preliminary Plan .has been prepared as an amendment to the Main-Pier Redevelopment Plan pursuant to this directive. This Preliminary Plan Amendment has been prepared pursuant to the California Health and Safety Code, Section 33324, which.requires the following: . A description of the boundaries of the amended Project Area; . A general statement of the land uses, layout of the principal streets, population densities, and building intensities and standards proposed as the basis for the amended redevelopment project area; . A demonstration of how the purposes of community redevelopment law would be attained by such development; . A demonstration that the proposed redevelopment conforms to the community general plan; and . A general description of the impact of the project upon residents located within the amended Project Area and upon surrounding neighborhood(s). 2.0 PROJECT AREA BOUNDARIES The proposed project consists of one area (with seven neighborhood subareas), the boundaries of which are described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. The area is further illustrated in Exhibit "B" attached hereto. _ 1 3.0 ' GENERAL STATEMENT OF PROPOSED LAND USES Proposed land uses for the amended Project Area include: Commercial: Principal uses would include general commercial, visitor-serving commercial, and office uses. Residential: Principal uses would include low to high density residential uses including condominium development. Community Facilities: Civic and street and highway uses will be improved when feasible. Permitted land uses within the amended Project Area will be those uses as shall be illustrated from time to time in the General Plan of the City. Specific permitted uses within the amended Project Area will be those that are permitted, or conditionally permitted, by the zoning ordinance contained in the Municipal . Code when the zoning ordinance conforms to the General Plan. The number of dwelling units will be in accordance with the provision of the General Plan of the City. 4.0 GENERAL STATEMENT OF PROPOSED LAYOUT OF PRINCIPAL STREETS The layout of principal streets will be as adopted in- the Downtown Specific Plan, or as subsequently amended. Street improvements will be.installed as necessary and financially feasible. Certain streets may be terminated, abandoned, vacated or re-routed to accommodate specific future developments. 5.0 GENERAL STATEMENT OF PROPOSED POPULATION DENSITIES Population densities will conform to the General Plan as follows: 1-7 dwelling units per, acre for Low Density Residential development; 7+-15 dwelling units per acre for Medium Density Residential development; 15+-25 units for Medium High and 25+ units for High Density. 6.0 GENERAL STATEMENT OF PROPOSED BUILDING INTENSITIES AND. STANDARDS It is proposed that all permitted uses throughout the amended Project Area shall either meet or exceed the minimum standards stipulated in the City of Huntington Beach's current zoning ordinances, or subsequent final amended Redevelopment Plan approved and adopted by ordinance of the City Council. Standards for the amended Project Area shall conform t9 or exceed applicable federal, state and local codes, including standards for street layout, design and land subdivision. The construction of buildings shall meet or exceed the provisions of the "Uniform Building Code" as adopted by the City of Huntington Beach and other applicable codes and regulations, including the California Health and Safety Code. 2 . 7.0 ATTAINMENT OF THE PURPOSES OF THE CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT LAW The proposed redevelopment of the amended Project Area is expected to attain the purposes of community redevelopment law of the State of California by: . Providing additional decent, safe and sanitary residential housing to the existing stock within the City of Huntington Beach. . Providing construction and employment opportunities in the development of these facilities and by providing employment opportunities in the operation of the proposed new commercial and industrial facilities. Mitigating severe development limitations which result in the lack of proper utilization of the amended Project Area to such an extent that it constitutes a serious physical, social and economic burden on the community which cannot reasonably be expected to be reversed or alleviated by private enterprise acting alone. Providing adequate public improvements, public facilities, open spaces and utilities which cannot be remedied by private or governmental action without redevelopment. Implementing the construction of adequate streets, curbs,_ gutters, street lights, storm drains and other improvements as necessary to ensure proper vehicular and pedestrian access within and around the amended Project Area. Establishing development criteria and controls for the permitted reuses within the amended Project Area in accordance with modern and competitive development practices. Providing for relocation assistance and benefits to amended Project Area businesses and residences which may be displaced, in. accordance with the provisions of the community redevelopment law and the government code of the State of California. 8.0 CONFORMANCE TO THE HUNTINGTON BEACH GENERAL PLAN The proposed redevelopment as set forth in this Preliminary Plan conforms to the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach. 9.0 GENERAL IMPACT OF THE PROJECT UPON RESIDENTS LOCATED WITHIN THE PROJECT AREA AND UPON THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS The City's objective in pursuing the Main-Pier Redevelopment Plan Amendment No. 1 is to mitigate the severe development limitations that are now, and will continue to be in the future, constraints to proper utilization of the amended Project Area. The plan as presently envisioned will. provide for the sale of properties and portions of properties' to the Redevelopment Agency. However, if the owners of these parcels are desirous of participating in the project, owner participation arrangements will be made available. The most direct impact to businesses and property owners within the amended Project Area will be the displacement (except for owner participants) resulting from implementation of the Redevelopment Plan. 3 • • This impact will be largely attenuated with the Agency's: (1) taking deliberate steps to 2L,gotiate the purchase of properties to be acquired at fair market value; (2) initiating such negotiations as soon as practical subsequent to adoption of the Redevelopment Plan amendment; (3) providing relocation advisory assistance and benefits to all who are displaced and are qualified for benefits; (4) ensuring ample time for purchase of property to be negotiated and sufficient time thereafter to consummate the process of relocation; and (5) keeping all concerned continuously apprised of the Agency's progress and its activities. While the impact of relocation could initially be negative, . its long-term impact is expected to be positive in that relocation will afford businesses and residents in the Project Area a unique opportunity to move to a more desirable location of their choice with little or no capital outlay necessary from personal cash resources. The impact of the project on the existing neighborhoods is also expected to be positive over the long term. Development of new residential uses will have a beneficial impact on the existing, newer and rehabilitated residential units.. During the short-term construction period, it is possible that the existing neighborhoods surrounding the amended Project Area could experience certain negative impacts resulting from heavier truck traffic, noise and dust; however, these impacts will be mitigated by confining construction and trucking activities to daylight hours and by requiring spray watering, as necessary, to control the impact of dust. Over the long term, positive impacts to surrounding neighborhoods will result with the construction of modern and well designed development which will have eliminated the blighting influences in the amended Project Area. . 4 • Exhibit "A" Area #1 LEGAL DESCRIPTION o Existing Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area That portion of Huntington Beach, County of Orange, State of California as shown on a map recorded in Book 3, page 36 of Miscellaneous Maps in the Office of the County Recorder of said County described as follows: Beginning at the centerline intersection of Pacific Coast Highway and Lake Street shown as Ocean Avenue and First Street respectively on said mentioned map; thence along the centerline of Pacific Coast Highway South 480 21' 42" East 37.S feet tcrthe intersection with the southwesterly extension of the- southeast line of Lake Street; thence along said mentioned extension South 410 38' 18" West 50 feet to the True Point of Beginning, said point being distant Southeast 48° 21 ' 42" East 165S feet along the southwest line of Pacific Coast Highway to the intersection with the southwesterly extension of the northwest line of Sixth Street; thence continuing South 410 38' 18" West 52S feet more or less along said extension to Lhe High Tide Line of the Pacific Ocean; thence northwesterly 910. feet more or less along said High Tide Line to a line parallel with and 3S feet southeasterly - mea-tired at right angles from the southwesterly extension of the line of Main Street as shown on said Map of iluntington Beach; thence. alQng said mentioned parallel line South 410 38' 18" .West 1470 feet to a line parallel with and 60 feet southwesterly, measured at right angles from the southwesterly end of the Huntington Beach Municipal Pier; thence North 480 21' 42" West 14S feet along said parallel line to a line parallel with and 35 feet northwesterly measured at right angles, from the southwesterly extension of the northwest line of Main Stre( : ; thence North 410 38' 18" East 1470 feet to the }Iigh Tide Line of the Pacific Ocear„ thence northwesterly 600 feet more or less along said High Tide Line to the. Southwesterly extension of the northwest line of Sixth Street; thence along said extension and northwest line of Sixth Street North 41° 38' 18" East 1035 feet more or less to the intersection with the- northeast line of Walnut Avenue, being 60 feet in width, 30 feet either side of centerline, said point being distant North 41.0 38' 18" East along said northwest line S10 feet from the southwest. line of Pacific Coast Highway; thence along said northeast line of Walnut Avenue South 480 21' 42" East 1330 feet to an angle point in said line, said point also being on the southeast line of Second Street being 60 feet in width, 30 feet either side of centerline; .thence continuing along said northeast line South 100 09' 04" East 414 feet to the southeast line of Lake Street; thence along said southeast line South 41-° 38' 18" West 254 feet to" the True Point of Beginning. . . _ Exhibit "A" Area #2 LEGAL DESCRIPTION Blufftop Subarea Beginning at the most southerly corner of Lot 1 of Block 206 of Huntington Beach, as shown on a map recorded in Book 3 , page 36 , Miscellaneous Maps, Records of Orange County, said corner also being the intersection of the northeasterly right- of-way line of Walnut Avenue and the northwesterly right-of-way line of Sixth Street; thence northwesterly 5555, 00 feet along said northeasterly right-of-way line of Walnut Avenue to a point on a line, said line being the northwesterly right-of-way line . of Goldenwest Street as it now exists; thence southwesterly along said northwesterly right-of-way line of Goldenwest Street and its extension to the high tide line of the Pacific Ocean; thence southeasterly along said high tide line to a point on a line, said line being the extension of the northwesterly right-of-way line of Sixth Street; thence northeasterly along said right-of-way line to the Point of Beginning. • • Exhibit "A" .Area #3 LEGAL DESCRIPTION Oceanview Subarea Beginning at the southwest corner of. Lot 20 of Block 103 of Vista Del Mar Tract, as shown on a map recorded in Book 4 , page 5, Miscel- laneous Maps, Records of Orange County said corner also. being the intersection of the north right-of-way line of Atlanta Avenue and the east right=of-way line of Huntington Street; thence southerly 1375 feet more or less along said east right-of-way line to a point; thence southwesterly along the southeasterly right-of-way line of Huntington Street and its extension to the high tide line of the Pacific Ocean; thence northwesterly along said high tide line to the southwesterly. extension .of the southeasterly right-of-way line of Lake Street (formerly First Street) ; thence northeasterly along said extension and said southeasterly line of Lake .Street to an angle point in Lake Street;. thence north along the east right-of-way line of Lake .Street to a point, said point being the southwest .corner of Block 301A of Huntington Beach, Main Street Section, as shown on a map recorded in Book 3, ' page 43 , Miscellaneous Maps, Records of Orange County, said point also being the intersection of the north right-of-way- line of Atlanta Avenue and the east right-of-way line of Lake Street; thence easterly 842 .10 feet along the north right-of - way of Atlanta Avenue to the Point of Beginning. • • Exhibit "A" Area #4 LEGAL DESCRIPTION Ocean-Beach Subarea Beginning at the southeast corner of Tract 9580 as shown on a map recorded in Book 444 , pages 29, 30 and 31, Miscellanous Maps, Records of Orange County; thence North 89043' 00" east 50. 00 feet along the easterly prolongation of the south line of said tract to the True Point of Beginning, said point also being on the survey centerline of Beach Boulevard; thence southerly along said centerline and its extension to the high tide line of the Pacific Ocean; thence north- westerly along said high tide line to the southwesterly extension of the southeasterly line of Huntington Street; thence northeasterly along said extension and the southeasterly line of Huntington Street to an angle point in Huntington Street; thence northerly along the east line of Huntington Street to the westerly extension of the south line of said Tract 9580 ; thence easterly along said extension and south line to the True Point of Beginning. • • Exhibit "A" Area #5 LEGAL DESCRIPTION Downtown Core Subarea Beginning at the most southerly corner of Lot 2 of Block 206. of Huntington Beach, as shown on a map recorded in Book 3, page 36, Miscellaneous Maps, Records of .Orange County, said corner also being the intersection..of the northeasterly right- of-way line of Walnut Avenue and the northwesterly right-of-way line of the alley located between Sixth Street and Seventh Street; thence northeasterly 760. 00 feet along said northwesterly right- of-way line to a point, said point being the most easterly corner of Lot 28 of B1ock . 306 .of said Huntington Beach, said corner also being the intersection of the southwesterly right-of-way line of Orange Avenue and .the northwesterly right-of-way line of said alley; thence southeasterly 1422. 50 feet along said southwesterly right-of-way line of Orange Avenue to a point, said point also being the most easterly corner of Lot 27 of Block 302 of said Huntington Beach, said corner also being the intersection of the southwesterly right-of-way line of said Orange Avenue and .the northwesterly right-of-way line of Second Street; thence southerly 96 feet more or less to a point, said point being the north corner of Lot 20 of Block 301 of said Huntington Beach,. said corner also being the intersection of the southeasterly right-of-way line of Second Street and the westerly right-of- way line of Lake Street; thence southerly along said westerly right-of-way line to a point which is the westerly prolongation of the north right-of-way' line of Atlanta Avenue, thence easterly 90 feet more or less to a point, said point being the southwest - corner of Block 301A of Huntington Beach, Main Street Section, as shown on a map recorded in Book 3, page 43, Miscellaneous Maps, records of Orange County, said corner also being the intersection of the easterly right-of-way of Lake Street and the north right- of-way line of Atlanta Avenue; thence southerly along said easterly right-of-way line of Lake Street to a point, said point being at the terminus of the northerly prolongation of the southeasterly right-of-way line of Lake Street; thence southwesterly 648 feet more or less . along said prolongation and said right-of-way line l to a perpendicular line; thence northwesterly 75. 00 feet along said perpendicular line to a point, said point being the south corner of Lot 1 of Block 201 of said Huntington Beach, said corner being also the intersection of the northwesterly right-of-way line of Lake Street and the easterly right-of-way line of Walnut Avenue; thence northerly along said easterly right-of- way. line to a point, said point being the easterly terminus prolongation of the northeasterly right-of-way, line of Walnut Avenue; thence northwesterly along said prolongation and said northeasterly right-of-way line of Walnut Avenue 1482. 50 feet more or less to the Point of Beginning. ' l • - • . Exhibit "A" Area #6 LEGAL DESCRIPTION Old Civic Center Subarea Beginning at the most easterly corner of Lot. 28 of Block 306 of -Huntington Beach, as shown on a map recorded in Book 3 , page 36 , Miscellaneous Maps, Records of Orange County, said corner also being the intersection of the southwesterly right- of-way line of Orange Avenue and the northwesterly right-of- way line of the alley between Sixth Street and Seventh Street; thence northeasterly 835. 00 feet along said alley right-of-way to a point, said point being the most easterly corner of Lot 28 of Block 5.06 of said Huntington Beach, said corner also being the intersection of the northwesterly right-of-way line of said alley and the southwesterly right-of-way line of Acacia Avenue; thence northwesterly 192. 50 feet along said southwesterly right- of-way to a point, said point being the most easterly corner of Lot .27 of Block 507 of Huntington Beach, Main Street Section, as shown on a map recorded in Book 3 , page 43, Miscellaneous Maps, Records of Orange County, said corner also being the intersection of the northwesterly right-of-way line of Seventh Street and the southwesterly right-of-way line of Acacia Avenue; thence. north- easterly 410. 00 feet along said northwesterly right-of-way line to a point, said point being the most easterly corner of Lot 27 of Block 607 of said Huntington Beach, Main Street Section, said corner also being the intersection of said northwesterly right- of-way line of Seventh Street and the southwesterly right-of-way line of Palm Avenue; thence northeasterly 95 feet more or less to the intersection of the north right-of-way line of Palm Avenue and the northeasterly right-of-way line of Main. Street; thence easterly along said north. line to the intersection of said north right-of-way line and the west right-of-way line of Lake Street; thence north along said west right-of-way line to a point at the . west prolongation of the north right-of-way line of Indianapolis Avenue; thence east 90 feet more or less to a point, . said point being the southwest corner of Block 804 of Huntington Beach, Wesley Park Section, as shown on a map recorded in Book 4 , page 17, Miscellaneous Maps, Records of Orange County, said point also being the intersection of the north right-of-way line of Indiana- polis Avenue and the east right-of-way line of Lake Street; thence east 167. 10 feet along said north right-of-way. line to a point, said point being on the east right-of-way line of the abandoned Pacific Electric Railroad right-of-way, said point also being the southwest corner of Lot 1 of Block 901 of Vista Del Mar Tract as shown on a map recorded in Book 4 , page 3, Miscellaneous Maps, Records of Orange County; thence south 2631 feet more or less along said east right-of-way line of the railroad to a point on the north right-of-way line of Atlanta Avenue, said point along being the southeast corner of Lot l of Block 101 of said Vista Del Mar Tract; thence westerly 262 'feet more or less along said north right-of-way line to a point on the west right-of-way line of Lake Street; thence northerly 350 feet more or less to the most easterly corner of Lot 27 'of Block 302 of said Huntington Beach, said point also being the intersection of the northwesterly right-of-way line of Second Street and the southwesterly - right- of-way line of Orange Avenue; thence northwesterly 1422.50 feet to the Point of Beginning. I • • Exhibit "A" Area #7 LEGAL DESCRIPTION Beach-Atlanta Subarea The north 1980. 00 feet of- the west 489.56 feet of the northwest quarter of Section 13, Township 6 south, Range 11 west, as shown on .a map recorded in Book 51, page 14 , Miscellaneous Maps, Records of Orange County. EXHIBIT. "B." -J-c; I rft 0 lid� SLC _T iONAL DiSTRIP MAP 3-6 r C.I..I of ORMN,IINCe NO. 754 CITY COUNCIL L L P4 AULMIU. OKI N(I A_.k_TtuLR O-'T2Ll r -, T w Tg� 4 -1? 1 t17 62 C,-19 .330 9110 _GTON A.Ct. ll ] NI'l N P I i2 DOB 4t "..'et 2 4 63 . 99 1 b It A N G E ("Olf NTY , C k L I It N I it �00101' 71 :,132 20" 1 7 �,�20 2•;7.64 03 1:14 17 Cf: a. —itt ! �041 11 AMENDLD BY ZONE CASE: 1-5-. 6. 055 ?336 i 471 SGLF Ly RE—-'I D-'-'qt ,29, 131,2 7��53 34o.360.390,404.4C?,419,443,464,66-33.66-67.66-66.68-IZ 66-26,69-43.71-13. 6 5 64 IO6z �_1_80 2"25rr F 1 . 7 c-,78 23,00-2. lq�'6 4 1079 1 � P7 3.72 11 7 .3 8 SUFF X E 66 1234 4"oTo6iVik _jI AVE 11 L R3 % 5 Rl R R3 R3-C I RI R3 R3 RI n R3 R3 R3 > RI IRI R! . R! �j I,. I TE,� RI R3 ��V.'— !TV ;5 C4 R3 R2 RI RI L R2 w - 3 �L,4 R3 J� RI R3 R3 iR I RI RI R2- 0 7 R I CF-E RI nc RI t ""R3 d lRi! R2RI I I RI R3 R3 Z, Ri RI R2 ;�J J-L-ju R3 RI R I L_ R I R3 R I I R R3 16L J'5 R 3 R?_ RI R:5- -R3 RI RI C-F-R R A RI RI j u LR I RA-0. MI-A-0 ....... ...... R I -, �o MI-A-0 MI-A-0. ILI, 0 C. F C aM I-A-0 0 cl RA-0 0 1 MH N, 11 M2-0 ,� I t s �-\\ < M2-0 -Z PACIFIC OCEAN \ \ a )/ Mullff&E Pu lfl C 0 1E lfl M ID L59 ID 10 01 m M 10 10, 11,11 I'D PIT!]' [fl[0[fi[E ml ❑ CB[E[fl M[0 Cfl Ci11 ["1C IT]110❑40 [H B, 01 ffl, PH PO I 0 � ,.- F9 � EII C'!] Ulr l CTl❑Cl C_7 l -1 Cal L �l F1111, 1 4 -- r'nmi if Existing Main-Pier Project Area i m x s J. J. C-t MAIN-PIER PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 1 = _ • ATTACHMENT II 1 REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE MAIN-PIER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA September, 1982 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Introduction to the Redevelopment Plan 1 1.2 General Definitions 1 1.3 Project Area Boundaries . 2 1.4 Administration and Enforcement of the Plan 2 1.5 Duration of Plan 2 1.6 Procedure for Amending Plan 2 2.0 REDEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES AND PROPOSED ACTIONS 2 2.1 General Objectives of Redevelopment Plan 2 2.2 Participation of Owners and .Tenants 4 2.3 Rehabilitation and Conservation of Structures 5 2.3.1 Rehabilitation of Structures 5 2.3.2 Moving of Structures 6 2.4 Acquisition of Property 6 2.5 Relocation Assistance to Displaced Residential 7 and Nonresidential Occupants 2.6 Demolition, Clearance, Public Improvements 7 and Site Preparation 2.7 Disposition and Redevelopment of Agency 9 Property -for Uses in Accordance with this Plan 3.0 REDEVELOPMENT PLAN IMPLEMENTATION 10 3.1 Cooperation with City 10 3.2 Cooperation with Other Public Jurisdictions 11 3.3 Land.Uses for the Project Area 12 3.4 General Development Standards and Requirements 12 3.5 Methods for Project Financing 16 3.5.1 General Description of the Proposed 16 Financing Method 3.5.2 Tax Increments 16 3.5.3 Issuance of Bonds and Notes 17 3.5.4 Loans and Grants 18 3.5.5 Relief of Financial Burdens 18 3.5.6 Financing Limitations 18 List of.Exhibits A. Redevelopment Project Area Map 20 B. Redevelopment Project Area Legal Description 21 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Introduction to the Redevelopment Plan Prepared by . the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency, this Redevelopment Plan is for the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project in the City of Huntington Beach. This Redevelopment Plan has been prepared pursuant to the California Community Redevelopment Law of the State of California, Health and Safety Code, Section 33000 et seq., the California Constitution and all applicable local laws and ordinances. The proposed redevelopment of the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project "Area as described in this Plan conforms -to the General Plan for the City of Huntington Beach adopted by the City Council and as thereafter amended. This Proposed Redevelopment Plan is based on a Preliminary Redevelopment Plan approved by the Planning Commission on April 20, 1982. 1.2. General Definitions The following definitions will govern in the context of this Redevelopment Plan unless otherwise indicated in the text. "Agency" means Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency, Huntington Beach, California or any successor in interest (e.g., C.D.C.). "City" means the City of Huntington Beach, California. "City Council" means the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California. "County" means the County of Orange, California. "Legal Description" means a description of the land within the Project Area prepared in accordance with map specifications approved by the California State Board of Equalization and attached hereto as Exhibit "B". "Map" means the Redevelopment Plan Map for the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project, attached hereto as Exhibit "A". "Person" means any individual, or any public or private entity. "Plan" means the Redevelopment Plan for the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project in the City of Huntington Beach, California. "Planning Commission" means the City Planning Commission of the City of Huntington Beach, California. "Project" means any undertaking of the Agency pursuant to the Redevelopment Law, and this Plan, or any amendments thereto. "Project Area" means the area included within the boundaries of the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project area as described on the map attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and the legal description attached hereto as Exhibit "B". "Redevelopment Law" means the Community Redevelopment Law of the State of California (California Health and Safety Code, Sections 33000 et seq.), as amended to date. "State" means the State of California. "Tax Increments" means .taxes allocated to a special fund of the Agency in the manner provided by Sections 33670 to 33677,.inclusive, of the Community Redevelopment Law and Article XVI, Section 16, of the California Constitution. 1.3 Project Area Boundaries The boundaries of.the Project Area are set forth on the map attached hereto as Exhibit "A". The legal description of the Project Area is attached hereto as Exhibit "B". 1.4 Administration and Enforcement of the Plan The administration and enforcement of, this Plan, including the preparation and execution of any documents implementing this Plan, shall be performed by the Agency and/or the City. The provisions of this Plan or other documents entered into pursuant to this Plan may also be enforced by court litigation instituted by either the Agency or the City. Such remedies may include, but are not limited to, specific performance, damages, reentry, injunctions, or any other. remedies appropriate to the purposes of this Plan. In addition, any recorded provisions which are expressly for the benefit of owners of property in the Project Area may be enforced by such owners. 1.5 Duration of Plan Except for the nondiscrimination and nonsegregation provisions which shall run in perpetuity, the provisions of this -Plan shall be effective and the provisions of other documents. formulated pursuant to this Plan may be made effective for 35 years from the date of adoption of this Plan by the City Council or until all outstanding indebtedness of the Agency shall be retired, whichever is later. 1.6 Procedure for Amending Plan This Plan may be amended by means of the procedure established in the Redevelopment Law or by any other procedure hereafter established by law. 2.0 REDEVELOPMENT.OBJECTIVES AND PROPOSED ACTIONS 2.1 General Objectives of Redevelopment Plan In creating the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency, the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach declared its desire to improve, upgrade, and revitalize all areas of the City and in particular those areas within the City which have become blighted because of. deterioration, disuse and economic, physical and social maladjustments. As a part of the City's ongoing redevel pment efforts the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency has prepare od this Plan for t�e Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area. -2- Accordingly, the objectives of this Redevelopment Project are as follows: -- Eliminating blighting influences, including deteriorating buildings, incompatible and uneconomic land uses, inadequate public improvements, obsolete structures, and other physical, economic and social deficiencies; improve the overall.appearance of streets, parking areas and other facilities, public and private; and assure that all buildings are safe for persons to occupy. -- Encouraging existing owners, businesses and tenants'within the Project Area to participate in redevelopment activities. -- Providing adequate parcels and required public improvements so as to encourage new construction by private enterprise, thereby providing the City of Huntington Beach with an improved economic base. -- Mitigating development limitations which.have resulted in the lack of proper utilization of the Project Area' to such an extent that it constitutes a serious physical, social, and and economic burden on the community which cannot reasonably be expected to be reversed or alleviated by private enterprise acting alone. -- Providing adequate public improvements, public facilities, open spaces, and utilities which cannot be remedied by private or governmental action without redevelopment. -- Providing construction and employment opportunities - in the development of these facilities and by providing employment opportunities in the operation of the proposed commercial and recreational facilities. -- Implementing the construction or reconstruction of the City Pier, public parking, adequate streets, curbs, gutters, street lights, storm drains, and other improvements as necessary to assist development of the Project Area to conform to the General Plan as a master-planned development and to correct existing environmental deficiencies. -- Establishing development criteria and controls for the permitted uses within the Project Area in accordance with modern and competitive development practices, thus assuring the highest design standards and environmental quality. -- Providing for relocation assistance and benefits to Project Area residences which may be displaced, in accordance with the provisions of the Community Redevelopment Law and the government code of the State of California. To obtain the objectives of this Plan as set forth, the Agency is authorized to undertake most or all of the following implementing actions: -- Acquisition of property. -- Participation by owners and tenants in the redevelopment project. -- Relocation assistance to displaced residential occupants as required by law. -3- -- Development of adequate parking, landscaping, public improvements and facilities. -- Demolition clearance of properties acquired, and site preparation. -- Other actions as appropriate, including,- but not limited to, actions to assist property owners and tenants in the improvement of their properties to carry out the objectives of the redevelopment plan. -- Assist in providing financing for private and public development in the Project Area. 2.2 Participation by Owners and Tenants 2.2.1 Rules for Participation Opportunities and Re-Entry Preferences Participation opportunities shall necessarily be subject to and limited by such factors as the land .uses designated for the Project Area; the provision of public facilities; realignment of streets if required; the ability of owners to_finance acquisition and development of structures in accordance with the Plan; and any change in the total number of individual parcels in the Project Area. In order to provide an opportunity to owners and tenants to participate in the growth and development of the Project Area, the .Agency shall promulgate rules for owner and tenant participation. . If conflicts develop between the desires of participants for particular sites or land uses, the Agency shall establish reasonable .priorities and preferences among the owners and tenants.'Some of the factors to be considered in establishing these priorities and preferences should include present occupancy, participant's length of residency or occupancy in the area, accommodation of as many participants as possible, similar land use to similar land use, conformity of participants' proposals with the intent and objectives of the Redevelopment Plan, ability to finance the implementation, development experience and total effectiveness of participants' proposal in providing a service to the community. Owner participant priorities shall. take effect at the time that the Redevelopment Plan is adopted by the Huntington Beach City Council. In addition to opportunities for participation by individual persons and firms, participation to the extent it is feasible shall be available for two or more persons, firms or institutions, to join together in partnerships, corporations, or other joint entities. The .Agency shall upon the request of any conforming owner issue to such owner within the first twelve months after the adoption of the Plan a certificate of conformity in a form suitable for recordation with the County Recorder's Office. The Agency shall not use eminent -4- domain to acquire property owned by conforming owners 'so long as use conforms to Plan. In the event that the Redevelopment Plan is amended after . a duly noticed . public hearing to change the requirements for the property, such otherwise conforming owners may be required to enter into an Owner-Participation Agreement with the Agency. In the event any of the conforming owners desires to construct additional improvements or substantially alter or modify existing structures on any of the real property previously described as conforming, or acquire additional real property within the Project Area; then such conforming owner may be required to enter into a participation agreement with the Agency in the same manner as required for other-owners. . 2.2.2 Participation Agreements The Agency may require each .participant to enter into a binding agreement with the Agency by which the participant agrees to rehabilitate, develop, or use the property in conformance with the Plan and to be subject to the provisions in the Participation Agreement. In such agreements, participants who retain real property shall be required to join in the recordation of such documents as is necessary to make the provisions of this Plan applicable to their properties. 2.3 Rehabilitation and Conservation of Structures 2.3.1 Rehabilitation of Structures The Agency is authorized to rehabilitate and conserve or to cause to be rehabilitated any building or structure in the Project Area owned or acquired by the Agency. The Agency is also authorized and directed to advise, encourage and-assist in the rehabilitation of property in the Project Area not owned or acquired by the Agency. The Agency and the City will conduct such a program to encourage owners of property within the Project Area to upgrade and maintain their property consistent with City codes and standards developed for the Project Area. Properties may be rehabilitated provided: (1) rehabilitation and conservation activities on a structure are carried out in an expeditious manner and in conformance with this Plan and applicable City building codes and ordinances, and (2) where applicable, rehabilitation is completed pursuant to an Owner-Participation Agreement with the Agency. In the event an owner-participant fails or refuses to rehabilitate or develop his real property pursuant to this Plan and an Owner-Participation Agreement, the real property or any interest therein may , be acquired by the Agency if acquisition funds are available. -5- 2.3.2 Moving of Structures As is necessary in carrying out this Plan and where it is economically feasible to do so, the Agency is authorized in its discretion to move or cause to be moved any standard structure or building which can be rehabilitated to a location within. or outside the Project Area and dispose of such structures in conformance with the Law .and this Plan: 2:4 Acquisition of Property Except as specifically.exempted herein, the Agency may acquire, but is not required to acquire, any real property located in the Project Area, by gift, devise, exchange, purchase, eminent domain, or any other lawful method. It is in the public interest and may be necessary in some instances, in order to eliminate the conditions requiring redevelopment and in order to execute the Plan, for the power of eminent domain to be employed by the Agency to acquire real property in the Project Area. The Agency. shall commence eminent domain proceedings to acquire property within the Project Area -within twelve (12) years after the adoption of the Plan. The Agency is not authorized by law to acquire real property.owned by public. bodies which do not consent to such acquisition. The Agency is_ authorized, however, to acquire private property which_ was formerly public property by being transferred by deed, lease, or otherwise to private ownership or control before the Agency completes land disposition. within the entire Project Area if the Agency and the private owner do not enter into a participation agreement. The Agency shall not acquire real property to be retained by an owner pursuant to a participation agreement if the owner fully performs under the agreement. The Agency is authorized to acquire structures without acquiring the land upon which those .structures are located. The Agency is also authorized to acquire any, other interest in real property less than a fee. The Agency shall not acquire real property on which an existing building is to be continued on its present site and in its present form and use without the consent of the owner, unless (1) such building requires substantial structural alteration, improvement, modernization, or rehabilitation to assure that such building is safe for people and/or businesses to occupy, or (2) the site or lot on which the building is situated required modification in size, shape or use, or (3) it is necessary to impose upon such property any of the standards, restrictions and controls of the Plan and the owner fails or refuses to participate in the Plan by executing a participation agreement. The Agency shall define.the circumstances to which this section is applicable. —6— The Agency may, in its sole and absolute discretion, determine that certain real property within the Project Area and the owners of such property will be . permitted to remain as conforming owners without an owner participation agreement with the Agency, provided such owners continue to operate, use and maintain real property within the requirements of the Plan. However, conforming owners may be required by the Agency to enter -into an Owner Participation Agreement with the Agency in the event that such owners desire to (1) construct any additional improvements or substantially alter or modify existing structures or any of the real property described above as conforming, or (2) acquire additional property within the Project Area. Generally, personal property shall not be acquired. However, where necessary, in the execution of the Plan, the Agency is authorized to acquire personal property in the Project Area by any lawful means, including eminent domain. 2.5 Relocation Assistance to Displaced Residential and Nonresidential Occupants The Agency shall assist all families, individuals, or other entities displaced by the project in finding other locations and facilities. In order to carry out the project with a minimum of hardship to persons displaced from their homes, the Agency shall assist individuals and families in finding housing that is decent, safe, sanitary, within their financial means, in reasonably convenient locations, and otherwise suitable to their needs. The Agency may provide by acquisition, construction leasing, rehabilitation, loans and grants, or other means, housing inside or outside the Project Area for displaced persons, and to meet housing replacement requirements of state law. The Agency shall make relocation payments to persons (including families, business concerns, and others) displaced by the project, for moving expenses and direct losses of personal property (businesses only) for which reimbursement or compensation is not otherwise made. In addition, the Agency will reimburse owners for certain settlement costs incurred in the sale of their property to the Agency, and make additional relocation payments to those eligible therefor. Such relocation payments shall be made pursuant to Agency rules and regulations and the relocation provisions of the Government Code of the State of California. The Agency may make such other payments as may be appropriate and for which funds are available. The Agency shall make an extensive effort to relocate existing residential tenants within the City of Huntington Beach. 2.6 Demolition, Clearance, Public Improvements and Site Preparation The Agency is authorized to demolish and clear or move buildings, structures, and other improvements from any real property in the Project Area as necessary to carry out the purposes of this Plan. -7- If in implementing this Plan any dwelling units housing persons and families of low or moderate income are destroyed or removed from the low and moderate income housing market as part of the redevelopment project, the Agency shall, within four years of such destruction or removal, rehabilitate, develop,.or construct, or cause to be rehabilitated, developed, or constructed, for rental or sale to persons and families of low.or moderate income an equal number.of replacement dwelling units at affordable rents within the Project Area or, within the territorial jurisdiction of the Agency, in accordance with all. of the: provisions of Sections 33413 and 33413.5 of the State Health and Safety Code. The Agency is authorized to install and construct or cause to be installed and constructed temporary public improvements and temporary public utilities necessary to carry out the Plan. Such temporary public improvements may . include but are not . limited to traffic signals, streets, and utilities. Temporary utilities may be installed above ground. The Agency is authorized to install and construct or to cause to be installed and constructed with the consent of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach the public improvements and public utilities (within or outside the Project Area) necessary to carry out the Plan and to pay for part or all of the value therefor, if the City Council finds and determines (1) that such public improvements are. of benefit to the Project. Area or. to the immediate neighborhood in which the project. is located, and (2) no other reasonable:means .of financing such public improvements are available to the Community. Such public improvements may include,. but are not limited to, pedestrian walkways, bikeways, streets, curbs, ' gutters, sidewalks, street lights, sewers, storm drains, traffic signals, electrical distribution systems, water distribution systems, plazas, parks and playgrounds. It is anticipated that the Agency will construct and provide. the streets, sidewalks, curbs- and gutters, street lights, underground utilities and landscaping within the public rights-of-way .which are within the. Project Area. In addition, it is anticipated that the Agency will assist in the reconstruction or construction of the City Pier and adjacent public parking facilities. The Agency is authorized to prepare or cause to be prepared as building sites any real property in the Project Area owned by the Agency. When the value of such land or the cost of the installation and construction of such .facility, structure, or other improvement, or both, has been or will be, paid or provided for initially by the City or other public corporation, the Agency.may enter into a contract with the City or.other public corporation under which it agrees to reimburse the City or other public corporation for all or part of the value of such land or all or part of the cost of such facility, structure, or other improvement, or both, by periodic payments over a period of years. -8- 2.7 Disposition and Redevelopment of Agency Property for Uses in Accordance with this Plan For the purposes- of this Plan, the Agency is authorized to sell, lease, exchange, subdivide, transfer, assign, pledge, encumber by mortgage or deed of trust, or otherwise dispose of any interest in real property. To the extent permitted by law, the ,Agency is authorized to dispose of real property by leases, trades or sales by negotiation without public bidding. All real property acquired by the Agency in the Project Area shall be sold or leased to public or private persons or entities for development for the uses permitted in the Plan. Real property may be conveyed by the Agency to the City or any other public body without charge. Property containing buildings or structures rehabilitated by the Agency shall be offered for resale within one year after completion of rehabilitation or an annual report concerning such property shall be published by the Agency as required by law. The Agency shall reserve such powers and controls in the disposition and development documents as may be necessary to prevent transfer, retention, or use of property for speculative purposes and to ensure that developments are carried out pursuant to this Plan. All purchasers or lessees of property shall be made obligated to use the property for the purposes designated in this Plan, to begin and complete development of the property within a time which the Agency fixes as reasonable, and to comply with other conditions which the Agency deems necessary to carry out the purposes of this Plan. To provide adequate safeguards to ensure that the provisions of this Plan will be carried out and to prevent the recurrence of blight, all real property sold, leased, or conveyed by the Agency, as well as all property subject to participation agreements, shall be made subject to the provisions of this Plan by leases, deeds, contracts, agreements, declarations of restrictions, provisions of the zoning ordinance, conditional use permits, or other means. ' The leases, deeds, contracts, agreements, and declarations of restrictions may contain restrictions, covenants running with the land, rights of reverter, conditions subsequent, equitable servitudes, or any other provision necessary to carry out this Plan. All property in the Project Area is. hereby subject to the restriction that there shall be no discrimination or segregation based upon race, sex, color, age, religion, marital status, national origin, or ancestry, in the sale, lease, sublease, transfer, use, occupancy, tenure, or enjoyment of property in the Project Area. All property sold, . leased, conveyed, or subject to a participation agreement shall be made expressly subject by appropriate, documents to the restriction that all deeds, leases, or contracts for the sale, lease, sub-lease, or other transfer of land in the Project Area shall contain such nondiscrimination and nonsegregation clauses as are required by law. —9— To the extent now or hereafter permitted by law, the Agency is authorized to pay for, develop, or construct, any building, facility, structure, or other .improvement either within or outside the Project Area for itself or for any public body or entity to the extent where such improvement would be of benefit to the Project Area. During the period of development in the Project Area, the Agency shall ensure that the provisions of this Plan and of other documents formulated pursuant to this Plan are being observed, and that development in the Project Area is proceeding in accordance with disposition and development documents and time schedules. For the purposes of this Plan, the Agency is authorized to sell, lease, exchange, transfer, assign, pledge, encumber, or otherwise dispose of personal property. 3.0 REDEVELOPMENT PLAN IMPLEMENTATION 3.1 Cooperation with City Subject to any limitation in law, the City shall aid and cooperate with the Agency in carrying out this Plan and shall take any further action necessary to .ensure the continued fulfillment of the purposes of this Plan and to prevent the recurrence or spread of blight or those conditions which caused the blight in the Project Area. Actions by the City shall include but are not necessarily limited to the following: -- Institution and completion of proceedings for opening, closing, vacating, widening, or changing the grades of streets, alleys, and other public rights-of-way, and for other necessary modifications of the streets, the street layout, and other public rights-of-way in the Project .Area. Such action by the City may include the abandonment and relocation of public utilities in the public rights-of-way as necessary and appropriate to carry out this Plan. - Institution and completion of proceedings necessary for changes and improvements in publicly-owned public utilities within or affecting the Project Area. -- Revision of zoning, if necessary, within the Project Area to permit the land uses and development authorized by this Plan. -- Imposition wherever necessary (by conditional use permits or other means) of appropriate controls within the limits of this Plan upon parcels in the Project Area to ensure their proper development and use. Provision for administrative enforcement of this Plan by the City after development. The City and the Agency shall develop and provide for enforcement of a program for continued maintenance by owners of all real property, both public and private, within the Project Area throughout the duration of this Plan. -10- -- Performance of the above, and of all other functions and services relating to public health, safety, and physical development normally rendered in accordance with a schedule which will permit the redevelopment of the Project Area to be commenced and carried to completion without unnecessary delays. -- Referral to the Agency for review and recommendation of all conceptual plans and substantial amendments to said plans pertaining to land use and development in the Project Area. Referral shall be made to the Agency prior to application approval by the City. -- The City is authorized, but not obligated to provide and expend funds to ensure the completion of the project as a whole in accordance with this Plan. The obligation of the City to perform the actions indicated in this section shall, except for the obligation to provide administrative enforcement of the Plan as described in Section 3.1 hereof, be contingent upon the continued availability of funding for this project primarily from tax increment revenues as defined in Method for Financing herein. In the event that such funds, at any time, become unavailable for the carrying out and completion of this project, the obligation of the City shall thereafter be limited to providing assistance in the form of funds necessary to pay administrative and overhead costs in connection with the termination or completion of the project. Such termination or completion shall be limited solely to those activities previously commenced. pursuant to this Plan. -- The undertaking and completing of any other proceedings necessary to carry out the project. 3.2 Cooperation with Other Public Jurisdictions Certain public bodies are authorized by state law to aid and cooperate, with or without consideration, in the planning, undertaking, construction, or operation of this project. The Agency shall seek the aid and cooperation of such public bodies and shall attempt to .coordinate this Plan with the activities of such public bodies in order to accomplish the purposes of redevelopment and the highest public good. The Agency, by law, is not authorized to acquire real property owned by public bodies without the consent of such public bodies. The Agency, however, will seek the cooperation of all public bodies which own or intend to acquire property in the Project Area. .The Agency shall impose on all public bodies the planning and design controls contained in the Plan to ensure that present uses and any future development by public bodies will conform to the requirements of this Plan. Any public body which owns or leases property in the Project Area will be afforded all the privileges of owner and tenant participation if such public body is willing to enter. into a participation agreement with the Agency. —11— During such time as property, if any, in the Project Area is owned by the Agency, such property shall be under the management, maintenance, . and control of the Agency. Such property may be rented or leased by the Agency pending its disposition for redevelopment. 3.3 Land Uses for the Project Area -- Private Uses Permitted land uses within the Project Area are those residential, commercial and public uses as shall be illustrated from time to time in the General Plan of the City. Specific permitted uses within the. Project Area are those that are permitted, or conditionally permitted, by the zoning ordinance contained in the Ordinance Code when the zoning ordinance conforms to the General Plan. The number of dwelling units will be in accordance with the provision of the General Plan and zoning ordinance of the City. -- Public Uses, Public Street Layout, Rights-of-Way and Easements The public rights-of-way, principal streets and streets that may require improvements as proposed for the Project Area are illustrated in Exhibit A. Streets and rights-of-way may be widened, altered, abandoned, vacated, or closed by the Agency and the City as necessary for proper development of the project. Additional public streets, alleys and easements may be created by the Agency and the City in the Project Area as needed for proper development, circulation and access. -- Semi-Public, Institutional, and Nonprofit Uses The Agency is authorized to permit the establishment or enlargement of public, semi-public, institutional, or nonprofit uses, including, but not necessarily limited to, educational, fraternal, employee institutions, and facilities of other similar associations or organizations in appropriate portions of the Project Area. All such uses, if allowed by the Agency, shall conform so far as possible to the provisions of this Plan applicable to the uses in the specific area involved. The Agency shall impose such other reasonable. restrictions upon such uses as are necessary to protect the development and use of the Project Area. 3.4 General Development Standards and Requirements All real property in the Project Area is hereby made subject to the controls .and requirements of this Plan. Furthermore, the Agency may, if it deems appropriate and/or necessary, specify requirements in excess of those described herein or specified by state and local laws. No real property shall be developed, rehabilitated, or otherwise changed after the date of the adoption of the Plan except with approval of the Agency and in conformance with the provisions of this Plan. —12— -- Construction All construction, whether new or rehabilitation, in the Project Area shall comply with all applicable state and local laws in effect from time to time including, but not necessarily limited to, fire, building, housing, electrical, heating, grading, plumbing and mechanical, sign and zoning codes of the City of Huntington Beach. -- Rehabilitation and Retention of Existing Conforming Uses Although the Agency anticipates that few, if any, existing structures within the Project Area will. meet the standards for rehabilitation, they, with Agency approval, may be repaired, altered, reconstructed, or rehabilitated, if necessary, in such a manner that will meet the following requirements: -- Be safe, sanitary, and sound in all physical respects; -- Shall conform to the seismic requirements and the .rehabilitation requirements of the building code for the City of Huntington Beach. -- Shall conform to all codes for the City of Huntington Beach. -- Shall be comparable in appearance to the architecture of the on-site proposed new structures. Retention of Existing Nonconforming Uses The Agency is authorized to permit an existing use to remain in an existing building in decent, safe, and. sanitary condition, which use does not conform to the provisions of this Plan, provided that such use is generally compatible with the developments and uses in the Project Area. The owner of such a property must be willing to enter into a Participation Agreement and agree to the imposition of such reasonable restrictions as are necessary to protect the development and use of the Project Area. The Agency is also authorized to permit an existing use in an existing building not indecent, safe, and sanitary condition, which use does not conform to the provision of this Plan, provided that such buildings are rehabilitated to a decent, safe and sanitary condition, as determined by the Agency, and provided that such a use is generally compatible with development and .uses in the Project Area. The owner of nilcii it property must be willing to enter into a Participation Agreernma. soul agree to the imposition of such reasonable restrictions as are necessary to protect the development and use of the Project Area. —13— -- Incompatible Uses No use or structure which by reason of appearance, traffic, smoke, glare, noise, odor, or similar factors would be incompatible with the surrounding areas, structures or uses shall be permitted in any part of the Project Area. -- Subdivision or Consolidation of Parcels No parcels in the. Project Area, including any parcels retained by a participant, shall be subdivided or consolidated without. the prior approval of the Agency. -- Limitation of Building Density The number of buildings in the Project Area will be consistent with building intensities permitted pursuant to existing or revised local zoning ordinances for the City of Huntington Beach and this Plan. -- Limitation on Type, Size and Height of Buildings The height, type and size of buildings shall be limited by applicable state statutes and local zoning, building, and other applicable codes and ordinances and this plan. Where a conflict exists between such local codes and ordinances and specific provisions of this Plan, the Plan shall supersede. All new buildings built within the Project Area shall complement the overall aesthetic and physical scale of the existing buildings within and adjacent to the Project Area. -- Open Space, Landscaping, and Parking An approximate amount of open space is to be provided in the Project Area as required by City codes and ordinances and the Plan. Within the Project Area, both public and private streets, public and private parking and private streets shall be provided for in each development consistent with or exceeding City codes and ordinances in effect.from time to time and this Plan. In all areas sufficient space, including open spaces, shall be maintained between buildings and structures to provide adequate light, air,. and. pri vacy. -- Signs Signs which create hazards or unsightly appearances by protruding, overhanging, blinking, flashing, showing animation, or other such similar conditions shall not be permitted in this Project Area. The Agency shall permit only those signs necessary for identification of buildings, premises, uses and products associated with the land parcel involved. All signs shall be submitted to the Agency and the City, as appropriate, for review and approval. - -14- -- Nondiscrimination and Nonsegregation There shall be no discrimination or segregation based upon age, race, sex, color, creed, religion, marital status, national origin, or ancestry permitted in the sale, lease, sublease, transfer, use, occupancy, tenure, or enjoyment of property in the Project Area. -- Employees and Contract Awards from the Community Contractors and others engaged in construction and rehabilitation. activities in the Project Area shall be encouraged to hire and train the maximum number of employees and trainees from within the community consistent with the objectives of this Plan. Likewise, where feasible, the Agency shall make distinct efforts to award contracts to business concerns which are located in, or substantially owned by persons residing in, the Project Area if they meet requirements stipulated by the Agency and this Plan. -- Minor Variations Under exceptional circumstances, the Agency is authorized to permit minor variations from the limits, restrictions, and controls established by this Plan. In order to permit such minor variations, the Agency must determine that: -- The strict application of the provisions of the Plan would result in practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships inconsistent with the general purpose and intent of this Plan. -- There are exceptional circumstances or conditions applicable to the property or to the intended development of the property which do not generally apply to other properties having the same standards, restrictions and controls. -- Permitting a minor variation will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or _ injurious to the property or improvements within or outside the Project Area. -- Permitting a minor variation will not be contrary to the objectives of this Plan. No such minor variation shall be granted which changes a basic land use or which permits substantial departure from the provisions of this Plan. In permitting any such minor variation, the Agency shall impose such conditions as are necessary to protect the public health, safety, or welfare, and to assure compliance with the purposes of this Plan. Nondiscrimination and nonsegregation restrictions shall not be subject to minor variation. -15- No minor variation permitted by the Agency shall be effective until conditional uses, variances, or other zoning changes, if any, have been effectuated by the City to the extent necessary to obtain consistency with such minor variations permitted by the Agency. 3.5 Methods for Project Financing 3.5.1 General Description of the Proposed Financing Method Upon adoption of this Plan by the City Council, the Agency, if it deems appropriate, is authorized to finance this project with assistance from the City of Huntington Beach, Orange County, State of California, Federal Government of the United States of America, any "other .public agency, donations, special assessment districts, property tax increments, interest revenue, income revenue, Agency-issued notes and bonds, loans from private institutions, the lease of Agency-owned property, the sale of Agency-owned property, or from any other sources of financing which are legally available and do. not conflict with the objectives of the Plan. The City may supply advances and expend money as necessary to assist the Agency in carrying out this project. Such assistance shall be on terms established by an agreement between the City of Huntington Beach and the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency. 3.5.2 Tax Increments Tax increment financing may not be the only source of funding for the Redevelopment Project. However, the project assessed valuation base will be established in accordance with state law as described herein. Any tax increments will be used to defray project expenses to the . extent the increment by itself or from the sale of tax allocation bonds allows. All taxes levied upon taxable property within the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area each year by or for the benefit of the State of California, County of Orange, City of Huntington Beach, any district, or other public corporation (hereinafter sometimes called "taxing agencies") after the effective date of the ordinance approving this Redevelopment Plan, shall be divided as follows: -- That portion of. the taxes which would be produced by the rate upon which the tax is levied each year by or for each of said taxing agencies upon the property in the,redevelopment project as shown upon the assessment roll used in connection with the taxation of such property by such taxing agency, last equalized prior to the effective date of such ordinance, shall be allocated to and when collected shall be paid into the funds of the respective taxing agencies as taxes, by or for said taxing agencies, on all other property are paid (for the purpose of allocating taxes levied by or for any taxing agency or agencies -16- , which did not include the territory of the project on the effective date of such ordinance but to which such territory is annexed or otherwise included after such effective date, the assessed roll of the County of Orange last equalized on the effective date of said ,ordinance shall be used in determining the assessed valuation of the taxable property in the project on said effective date); and -- That portion of said levied taxes each year in excess of such amount shall be allocated to and when collected shall be paid into a special fund of the Agency to pay the principal of and interest on ,bonds, loans, monies advanced to, or indebtedness (whether funded, refunded, assumed, or otherwise) incurred by the Agency to finance or refinance, in whole or in part, this redevelopment project. Unless and until the total assessed value of the taxable property in the project exceeds the total assessed value of the taxable property in the project as shown on the last equalized assessment roll, all of the taxes levied and collected upon; the taxable property in the project shall be paid into the funds of the respective taxing agencies. When said bonds, loans, advances and indebtedness, if any, and interest thereon, have been paid, all monies thereafter received from taxes upon the taxable property in the project shall be paid into the funds of the respective taxing agencies as taxes on all other property are paid. -- That portion of taxes discussed in this Subsection are hereby irrevocably pledged for the payment of the principal of and interest on the advance of monies, or making loans, or the incurring of any indebtedness, (whether funded, refunded, assumed, or otherwise) by the Agency to finance or refinance in whole or in part the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project. -- The Agency is authorized to make such pledges as to specific advances, loans, and indebtedness as appropriate in carrying out the project, subject to the limitations on allocation of taxes, debt creation, and bonded indebtedness contained in this Subsection. 3.5.3 Issuance of Bonds and Notes The Agency may issue bonds or notes when a determination has been made that such financing is appropriate and feasible. Such bonds or notes shall be issued only after the Agency has determined that funds are, or will be, available to repay principal and interest when due and payable. In any case, the issuance of bonds or notes shall be subject.to the limitations stipulated below. Neither the members of the Agency, nor any persons executing the bonds are liable personally on the bonds by reason of their issuance. -17- The bonds and other obligations of the Agency are not a debt of the City, the State, nor are any of its political subdivisions liable for them, nor in any event, shall the bonds or obligations be payable out of any funds or properties other than those of.the Agency; and such bonds and other obligations shall so state on their face. The bonds do not constitute an indebtedness with the meaning of any constitutional or statutory debt limitation or restriction. 3.5.4 Loans and Grants Any other loans, grants, or financial assistance from the United States, or any other public or private source will be. utilized. if available as the Agency deems appropriate to its corporate_purposes. 3.5.5 Relief of Financial Burdens The Agency may in any year during which it owns property in a redevelopment project pay directly to any city, county, city and . county, district, including, but not limited to, a school district, or other public corporation for whose benefit a tax would have been levied upon such property had it not been exempt, an amount of money in lieu of taxes. The Agency may also pay to any taxing agency with territory located within the Project Area other than the City, any amounts of money which in the Agency's determination is appropriate to alleviate any financial burden. or detriment caused to such taxing agency by the project.. 3.5.6 Financing Limitations Consistent with Sections 33333.2 and 33334.2 of the California Community Redevelopment Law, the following limitations are imposed on this Plan. -- Taxes as defined in Section 33670 of the California Community Redevelopment Law shall not be divided and shall not be allocated to the Agency during any one fiscal (tax) year except by amendment of this Plan, in excess of $2,250,000. -- No loans, advances, or indebtedness to finance, in whole or in part, the Redevelopment Project and to be repaid from the allocation of those taxes described in the beforementioned Section 33670 shall be established or incurred by the Agency beyond 20 years from the date of adoption of this Plan by the City Council unless such time limitation is extended by amendment of this Plan. However, such loans, advances, or indebtedness may be repaid over a period of time longer than such time limit. Without an amendment of this Plan, the amount of bonded indebtedness swerved by tax increments which the Agency shall have outstanding at any one time shall not exceed $22,500,000. -18- -- Not less than 20 percent of all taxes which are allocated to the Agency pursuant to Section 33670 shall be used by the Agency for the purposes of increasing and improving the community's supply of housing for persons and families of low or moderate income, as defined in Health and Safety Code Section 41056 and very low income households as defined in Section 41067, unless one of the following findings are made: -- That no need exists in the community, the provision of which would benefit the Project Area to improve or increase the supply of housing for persons and families of low or moderate income or very low income households; or -- That some stated percentage less than 20 percent of the taxes which are allocated to the Agency pursuant to Section 33670 is sufficient to meet such housing need; or -- That a substantial effort to meet low and moderate income housing needs in the community is being made, and that this effort, including the obligation of funds currently available for the benefit of the community from state, local and federal sources for low and moderate income housing alone or in combination with the taxes allocated,. under this section, is equivalent in impact to the funds otherwise required to be set aside pursuant to this section. The City Council of the City shall consider the need that can be reasonably foreseen because of displacement of persons of low or moderate income or very low income households from within or adjacent to the Project Area, because of increased employment opportunities, or because of any other direct or indirect result of implementation 0 of the Redevelopment Plan. -19- .vr � .vnart y r/cnvr � �s PSI ALI — +5OMNI 17 Lim / c s s • •n;. „$�!7 �sT 7ft id. `o sI i s a / ~ ti a' -. Nwr awsr - MWK-- �- r Ac 1 l ze. •` i ` d Oo •r NM hu-iwv - J• 1cti cr e _ 1 - n MAIN - PIER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA 0 • ` .• Exhibit "B" 111:GAI., P,.SCRIPTION e MAIN-PIER REDIVELOPMENT PROTECT' AREA T1iat portion of Huntington Beach, County of Orange, State of California as shown on a map recorded in Book 3, page 36 of Miscellaneous Maps in the Office of the County Recorder of said County described as follows: Beginning at the centerline intersection of Pacific Coast Highway and Lake Street shown as Ocean Avenue and First Street respectively on said mentioned map; thence along the centerline of Pacific Coast Highway South 480 21 ' 42." East 37.5 feet to the intersection with the southwesterly extension of the southeast line of Lake Street; thence along said mentioned extension South 410 381. 18" West SO feet to the True Point of Beginning, said point being distant SoutheIst 480 21 ' 42" East 16SS feet along the southwest line of Pacific Coast Highway to the intersection with the southwesterly extension of the northwest line of Sixth Street; thence continuing South 410 38' 18" West 52S feet more or less along said extension to [-.he Iligh Tide Line of the Pacific Ocean; thence northwesterly 910 feet more or less along said High Tide Line to a line parallel with and 3S feet southeasterly measure( at right angles from the southwesterly extension of the line of Main f"' Street as shown on said MTV of 11LIn tington Beach; thence a]Qng said mentioned parallel line South 410 38' 18" l,'est 1470 feet to a line parallel with and 60 feet southwesterly, measured at right angles from the southwesterly end of the Huntington Beach Municipal Pier; thence North 480 21' 42" Best 14S feet along said parallel line to a line parallel with and 35 feet northwesterly measured at right angles, from the southwesterly extension of the northwest line of Main Strek-: ; thence North 410 38' 18" East 1470 feet to the high Tide Line of the Pacific Ocear.. thence northwesterly 600 feet more or less along said High Tide Line to the southwesterly extension of the northwest line of Sixth Street; thence along said extension and northwest line of Sixth Street North 410 38' 18" East 1035 feet more or less to the intersection with the northeast .line of Walnut Avenue, being 60 feet in width, 30 feet either side of centerline, said point being distant North 410 38' 18" East along said northwest line 510 feet from the southwest line of Pacific Coast Highway; thence along said northeast line of Walnut Avenue South 480 21' 42" East 1330 feet to an angle point in said line, said point also being on the southeast line of Second Street being 60 feet in width, 30 feet either -i.(Ic of centerline; thence continuing along said northeast line South 100 09' 04" East 414 feet to the southeast line of Lake Street; thence along said southeast line South 419 38' 18" West 254 feet to the True Point of Beginning. • ATTACHMENT• " Y ," LEGAL DESCRIPTION , MAIN -- PIER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA PROJECT AI,IINDMENT #1 A parcel of land - situated partially in Sections 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , Township 6 south, Range 11 west, San Bernardino base and meridian, County of Orange, State of California. Said parcel being more particularly described as follows : Beginning at the intersection of section corners , Sections 11 , 12 , 13 , and 14 , thence south. 00 40 ' 00" east 1320 . 00 feet to a point; thence south 890 43 ' 00" west. 1955 . 76 feet to a point thence . north 0° 43 ' 15" west 1350 . 04 feet to a point; thence south 890 43 ' 00" west 670. 00 feet to a point; thence north 00 00 ' 11" west 2640. 00 feet to a point; thence north 890 58 ' 15" west 262 . 10 feet to a point; thence south 00 00 ' 00" east 294 . 10 feet to a point; thence north 890 57 ' 13 west 375 . 15 feet to a point; t'.,ence south 410 38 ' 18". west 419'. 76 feet to a point; thence south 480 21 ' 42" east 190 . 00 feet to a point; thence south 410 38 ' 18" west1595 . 00 feet to a point; thence north 48.0 21 ' 42" west 5420 . 00 feet to a point; t::cnce south 410 38 ' 50" west 714 . 00 feet to a point; thence south 460 30 ' 00" east 5628 . 00 feet to a point; thence north 410 38 ' 18" east 990. 00 feet to a point; thence south 480 21 ' 42" east 1330 . 00 feet to a point; thence south 100 09 ' 04 " east 414 . 00 feet to a point; thence south 410 38 ' 18" west. 690 . 00 feet to a point; thence south 520 54 ' 19" east 4618 . 08 feet to a point; thence north 00 40 ' 00" west 1947 . 92 feet to a point; thence north 890 36 ' 56" east 489. 56 feet to a point; thence north 00 40 ' 00" west 2029 . 66 feet to a point; thence south 890 37 ' 06" west 499. 56 feet to a point; thence south 00 40 ' 00" east 50 . 00 ,feet to the point of Beginning. , t y STATE OF CALIFORNIA ' STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION CONWAY H. s First District,Los AngeAngelles 1020 N STREET, SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA ERNEST J. DRONENBURG, 1R. (P.O. BOX 1799, SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 95808) Second District,San Diego 916/322-2323 October 18s T Thirdd 1983 hirDi M. BENNETT District,KenHield RICHARD NEVINS Fourth District,Pasadena KENNETH CORY Controller,Sacramento DOUGLAS D. BELL Executive Secretary Ms. Alicia M. Wentworth, City Clerk City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California 92648 Dear Ms. Wentworth: This is to acknowledge receipt of Ordinance No. 2634, adopting and approving Amendment No. 1 to the redevelopment plan for the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project within the City of Huntington Beach. Also received were the map and corrected description of the amended project boundaries. Your filing is hereby accepted. These documents have been transmitted to our mapping unit for processing. They will establish the tax-rate area codes needed to identify this project amend- ment. This will facilitate the future computation of tax increments. We find that the final boundaries are not identical to the preliminary ones and that the ordinance was not adopted within the time frame specified in the Statement of Preparation. The 1982-83 base-year values of state-assessed properties contained in our letter of June 22, 1983 to the Orange County Auditor are therefore not valid. Because of the delay in adopting Ordinance No. 2634, the 1983-84 roll will be the base-year roll . The deletion of some 48 acres from the project will also nullify the property inventories made by our assessees. To initiate the recomputation of the tax base, we will need six prints of the large final map and an additional fee of $300. Please see Section 3(c) in the enclosed schedule. Sincerely, " _"Z'f44,rW (- a Q Martin C. Rohrke Utility Roll Analyst VALUATION DIVISION MCR:jb Enclosure cc: Orange County Assessor Orange County Auditor Mr. Ray Jansen w/filing STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION REQUIREMENTS FOR BOUNDARY DESCRIPTIONS, STATEMENTS, MAPS and SCHEDULE OF PROCESSING FEES for REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS Sections 33327, 33328, 33328.3,33375 and 33457, Health and Safety Code. Effective January 1, 1983 1. GENERAL APPLICATION. All statutory references herein are to the Health and Safety Code. The prepa- ration of the report required by Section 33328or 33328.3 will not commence until the filing is accepted. Writ- ten notice of acceptance will be provided by the State Board of Equalization. Subdivision maps, assessor's maps and deeds are not on file with the State Board of Equalization, nor are such documents readily available to its staff in Sacramento where all processing at the state level is per- formed. Boundary descriptions that merely cite recorded documents or refer to assessor's parcels are of very limited value to the Board's draftsmen. The maps filed pursuant to Section 33327 serve a dual purpose. First, they are transmitted by us to the public utility companies whose property is assessed by the Board. Nearly 88% of all state-assessed property consists of improvements and personal property. Much of this is in the form of "continuous structures" — power lines, telephone cable, gas mains, and is located over or under' streets and alleys. It is most important that the relationship of project boundaries with streets is clearly and accurately delineated on the maps. In many cases, state assessees will have to make measurements on these maps. Because of this, the accuracy of the base year assessed values will be directly related to the quality of the maps sent to us. Secondly, the same maps can be used for filing under Section 33375, when they will be used in conjunction with the legal descrip- tion to delineate the project boundaries on the Board's tax-rate area maps. This map work makes possible the automatic derivation of subsequent changes in assessed values for tax increment funding purposes as a by- product of future assessment rolls. The requirements given in Section 2 herein were developed with the foregoing points in mind. In many cases, these same requirements have existed for city or district boundary maps and descriptions for several years. We are merely applying them to redevelopment projects. Please mail all filings and amendments to: Valuation Division, State Board of Equalization, P.O. Box 1799, Sacramento, CA 95808. Inquiries concerning maps, legal descriptions or fees should be sent to Mr. Martin C. Rohrke. Questions concerning the determination of base year assessed values should be sent to Mr. Jay Hubert, Valuation Division, State Board of Equalization, P.O. Box 1799, Sacramento, CA 95808. Please call Mr. Hubert or Mr. Rohrke at 916/322-2323. 2. BOUNDARY DESCRIPTIONS, STATEMENTS AND MAPS. All documents filed with us are microfilmed and then recycled or destroyed on an annual basis. Any document that will not produce a readable photographic image must be rejected and returned to the sender for replacement. (a) BOUNDARY DESCRIPTIONS. Every boundary description should be self-sufficient within itself without the necessity of reference to any extraneous document. A boundary description making reference only to subdivisions or lots within subdivisions is not acceptable unless all dimensions needed to plot the bounda- ries are given on the accompanying project area map or copies of such extraneous documents accompany the description. When a description refers to a deed or recorded document, such references should be secondary in nature. Our draftsmen should be able to plot the boundaries from the legal description. For an amendment of boundary, the entire perimeter of the added or deleted land must be described. Assessors' Parcels shall not be used to describe a project boundary without prior written consent of the assessor. (b) The centerline of a railroad right-of-way shall not be used to define the boundary of a redevelopment project. An exception will be granted if an existing political boundary (city or district boundary) lies on such a centerline. - 2 - (c) STATEMENTS. The statement shall be in the form and style shown below. This form of statement is also designed to satisfy the requirements in Section 33328 with respect to the selection of the base year assessment roll. STATEMENT OF PREPARATION OF REDEVELOPMENT PLAN OR AMENDED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR (Name of Project) TO: Auditor, Assessor, Tax Collector of County, to all other affected taxing entities and to the State Board of Equalization. Pursuant to Section 33327 of the California Health and Safety Code, you are hereby notified that the Redevelopment Agency of the (Name of city or county) is in the process of completing a redevelopment plan for the (Name of project) . It is the intention of the Agency to complete said plan and to have it adopted pursuant to the California Community Redevelopment Law. It is the intention of the Agency to use the (fiscal year) roll as the Base Year Assessment Roll for the allocation of taxes pursuant to Section 33670 of the Health and Safety Code. Dated: Redevelopment Agency of Check one only (Name of city or county) (Signature) Initial plan Nome Amended plan Title (d) MAPS (1) Every map must clearly show all existing streets, roads, and highways lying within or adjacent to the boundaries of the project area, together with the names of these thoroughfares. The relationship of the project area boundaries with street rights-of-ways must be clearly and accurately delineated. New boundary lines must not obliterate right-of-way, subdivision or property lines. Suggested boundary line symbols are shown below. If a map is being filed for an addition to an existing project it is preferred that the map cover only the immediate vicinity of the addition. A marginal key explaining boundary symbols is necessary. Do not show future street alignments or zoning on the project area boundary map. The boundary of any existing project must be shown on the map. 4i a 5 T. ��. Existing boundary 411111111111111111 New boundary (Most predominant line on mop) R 5 T. f- a+ (2) Maps of project areas shall be drawn to these standard minimum scales: ACREAGE WITHIN PROJECT AREA MINIMUM MAP SCALES under 10 acres 1" = 100' 10 — 40 acres 1" = 200' 40 — 200 acres 1" = 300' 200 — 1000 acres 1" = 400' or 1" = 500' over 1000 acres 1" = 600' to 1" = 1000' If any segment of the boundary is shorter than 1140 of the map scale (i.e., 10 feet on a 1" = 400' scale map) that segment should be shown enlarged on a marginal sketch. (3) If the county assessor consents to the use of assessors' parcels in the description of a project boundary, the assessor and the State Board of Equalization shall be furnished with copies of all affected assessors' maps. The project boundaries shall be accurately delineated on such assessors' maps. The filing of assessors' maps shall be in addition to the map required in this section. (4) Every map shall bear a scale and north point. If a reduced map is to be filed, the original map shall have a graphic scale affixed to it before the reduction is made. The reduced copies must meet the scale requirements given in Section 2. The name of the project shall appear on every map. (S) All maps must be professionally drawn. Rough sketches or pictorial drawings are not acceptable. (6) Redevelopment agencies filing pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33327 shall send one copy of the map of the proposed or amended project area boundaries to county and taxing agency officials. The redevelopment agency shall furnish the State Board of Equalization with an unfolded reproducible map (sepia or duplicate tracing). If facilities for making such a reproducible map do not exist, fifteen copies of the original map may be furnished. (7) If the proposed boundaries are significantly amended prior to final adoption, a revised sepia or fifteen revised copies of the map shall be filed. The county officials designated in Section 33327 shall also be furnished with revised maps. 3. PROCESSING FEES. The entire initial fee indicated below shall accompany the Statement of Preparation. If the proposed project or amendment is terminated prior to formal adoption, the mapping portion of the initial fee will be refunded. A written notice of termination is required before a refund can be made. Please make checks payable to the State Board of Equalization. (a) INITIAL FEE. Single area project or amendment. ACREAGE WITHIN PROJECT OR BASE YEAR MAPPING AFTER TOTAL INITIAL AMENDMENT CALCULATION ADOPTION FEE 0 — 10 $ 30 + $ 130 = $ 160 11 — 20 $ 60 + $ 150 = $ 210 21 — 60 $ 100 + $ 220 = $ 320 61 — 100 $ 150 + $ 320 = $ 470 101 - 660 $ 300 + $ 430 = $ 730 661 — 1500- $ 400{ ` + $ 600 = $ 1,000 1501 — 3000 $ 480 + $ 790 = $ 1,270 3001 — 6000 $ 600 + $1,000 = $ 1,600 over 6000 $ 850 + $1,500 = $.2,350 (b) INITIAL FEE. Multiple area project or amendment. Add $50 to the fee as calculated above for each area over one. Every excluded island shall consti- tute one additional area for the purpose of computing the fee unless such an island consists of an existing redevelopment project. (c) ADDITIONAL BASE YEAR CALCULATION FEES. (1) If boundaries are significantly changed after initial boundaries are filed, the additional fee shall equal;the.initial base year calculation fee: (2) If the base year values must be recomputed because the base year assessment roll as specified -`;' In"Sactioh-33670 is different than the one specified in the statement of preparation,the addi- tional fee shall equal the initial base year calculation fee if it is necessary for the affected_ state assessees to rejjlUntorX their property. If a reinventory is not required, the additional fee Nall equa one alf of the initial Bose year calculation fee. SUMMARY COMPARISON REPORT MAIN-PIER PHASE I PROJECT Amended D.D.A D.D.A. 1985 1986 Agency Responsibility Water line improvements Water line improvements (Pier Side and 1,000,000 max.) (Same) Inland Side) Relocation costs Relocation costs ($1,000,000 max.) ($1,000,000 max.) Underground utilities Undergrounding utilities. ($35 0,000 max.) (Same) Transient Occupancy Tax The construction of 200 parking Pledge back for 10 years. spaces adjacent. Tax Increment Transient Occupancy Tax Pledge back for up to 15 years. Pledge back for up to 10 years. Tax Increment Pledge back for 3 years. Sale of "City Parcel" Sale of "City Parcel' for for a min. of $1,512,500 $1. or a reuse appraisal value. 2888h AMENDED SUMMARY COMPARISON REPORT MAIN-PIER PHASE I PROJECT.; Pier Side D.D.A Lease 1985 1986 Developer Min. 75,000 sq. ft. Min. 75,000 sq. ft. Responsibilities Speciality commercial complex. Speciality commercial complex (Pier Side Village) w/min. 500 parking spaces. w/min. 600 parking spaces. Approx. 25,000 sq. ft. expanded Approx..25,000 sq. ft. expanded pier decking and pier rehab. pier decking. w/min. cost of $2,500,000. Relocation cost for Beach Emergency vehicle access Division Headquarters up to ramp to pier from Beach $500,000. Safety Facility. Pedestrian overcrossing of PCH up to S250,000. Emergency vehicle access to pier from Beach Safety Facility. Amended i D.D.A D.D.A. 1985 1986 Developer Proposal Min. 300 room first rate Approx. 280 rm. first rate hotel Inland side of PCH) w/min. 2 05,000 sq..ft. w/approx. 205,000 sq. ft. including retail shops, including retail shops, meeting meeting rooms, banquet room, banquet facilities and at facilities and at least least one high quality full one first-class restaurant service restaurant w•/approx. w/a min. of 300 parking 450 parking spaces. spaces. Min. 15,000 sq.ft. Min. 15,000 sq. ft. commercial building. commercial building. Approx. 20,000 sq.ft. Approx. 20,000 sq. ft. public plaza with public plaza with pedestrian overcrossing pedestrian overcrossing at PCH. at PCH. I 10/27/86 • 10-6-86 SUMMARY REPORT • This summary Report has been prepared for the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency ("Agency") pursuant to Section 33433 of the California Health and Safety Code. This Report sets forth certain details of a proposed first amended Disposition and Development Agreement ('Agreement") between the Agency and Huntington Pacifica, I, doing business as Huntington Pacifica Development Group ('Developer") for the development of a complex including a first class hotel, related commercial/office uses, entertainment and recreational facilities, and related ancillary improvements in the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area in the City of Huntington Beach. This report describes and specifies: 1. The cost of the proposed Agreement to the Agency, including land acquisition costs, clearance costs, relocation costs, costs of improvements to be provided by the Agency, and the expected interest on any loans or bonds to finance the Agreement; 2. The estimated value of the interests conveyed and leased, determined at the highest uses permitted under the Redevelopment Plan; and 3. The purchase payments to be paid by the Developer. This Report and the proposed Agreement is made available for public inspection prior to the approval of the Agreement. . A. SALIENT POINTS OF THE AGREEMENT. 1. Developer Responsibilities: Under the proposed Agreement, the Developer agrees to develop and construct, or cause the development and construction of, at a construction cost of at least Thirty-Three Million Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($33,500,00, exclusive of land value), the following: a) A first-rate high quality hotel of not less than 280 rooms with a minimum gross leasable floor area of 205,000 square feet including associated retail shops, meeting rooms, banquet facilities and at least one (1) high quality, full service restaurant. b) A retail commercial and office building or buildings with a gross leasable area of 72,000 square feet, including at the developers option an approximately 25,000 square foot theatre complex. c) Parking with a minimum of 450 parking spaces beneath and adjacent to the hotel. The Developer shall pay for any shortfall in required parking beyond that which is.provided; exclusive of the first 200 spaces of any shortfall which shall be the responsibility of the Agency. d) A Public Plaza of approximately 5,000 square feet at the corner of Main Street and Pacific Coast Highway which would include open passive rest and landscaped areas, plus an elevated connecting pedestrian walkway to Pier Side Village. e) The Dever . shall be responsible for 0 on-site and off-site improvements relating to the development of the Property and in accordance with the terms and schedules as. set forth in this Agreement including, but not limited to, the following. All on-site and off-site improvements -- sidewalks, street lighting, curbs, gutters, street trees, street improvements, surface parking lot improvements, parking structures, etc., shall conform to the design and materials as approved by the Agency. Sanitary sewers, storm drains, fire hydrants, water supply, gas lines, telephone and electrical power facilities, (if required) to be brought to, modified, or relocated from the perimeter of the Property, All such existing underground utility lines will be capped by the Developer within the public right-of-way as close as possible to building locations to be served by such utilities and to be attached and connected by the Developer. Improvements required in connection with and as a result of review by the Agency and the City of plans, drawings, or environmental assessments relative to the Developer Improvements or this Agreement. 2. Agency Responsibilities: The Agency is responsible for and shall commit to the project the following: a) All construction costs experienced for water delivery facilities upgraded and constructed . in connection with the Developer Improvements; (approximately $1,000,000). In addition, all utilities shall be provided to the site in sufficient capacities to accommodate the proposed development; b) Funding to a maximum amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) for the relocation of persons or entities, and the acquisition of surface entry rights in association with oil resource recovery.; c) All costs incurred by the Agency or the City in undergrounding utilities and relocation of any lines to be abandoned within the project area, (approximately $350,000); d) The construction of a public parking structure, on about the same time schedule as the proposed project and located within a reasonable walking distance of the project. 200 spaces within .the structure may be used to offset any shortfall of the projects required parking. Additional parking for a project shortfall may also be accommodated within this structure at a cost to the Developers. The Agency shall make available to the Developer the following: e) For a period of ten 0 0) years commencing with the, opening of the hotel for business, one hundred percent (100%) of transient occupancy tax ("TOT") received by the City generated by the hotel development. However, if after the 5th full year of operation a cumulative sum of gross room revenues is in excess of $180,000 per room then the pledge back shall be terminated. f) For a period of two (2) years commencing with the completion of all of the Developer Improvements, one hundred percent (100%) of the "Net y°• Property T4crement,'.' which is that-amount Ormined as follows: from (i) the property0ax revenue received by the Agency pursuant "to Section 33670(b) equal to that paid or caused to be paid by the Developer in connection with the Developer Improvements, deduct (ii) twenty percent (20%) of such amount (consistent with Section 33334.2 of the California Health and Safety Code), (iii) all funds payable'to affected taxing agencies pursuant to between 33401 of the California Health and Safety Code or agreements heretofore entered into by the Agency, and further deduct (iv) an amount equal to three percent (3%) of the total tax increment generated by the Developer Improvements, which shall be retained by the Agency for its administrative overhead and expenses. In the 3rd year only fifty percent (50%) of the Net Property Tax Increment shall be pledged back. In the 4th year the remaining fifty percent (50%) of the 3rd year increment shall be pledged back. 3. Method of Financing: The proposed Agreement provides that the Developer will acquire all parcels within the "Remaining Portion of the Walnut Main Portion." The cost of.any land acquisition by the Agency will be borne by the Developer. The cost of acquisition, lease or other means of securing the "Northeast Portion" of the "Walnut Main Portion" will be borne by the Developer; however, inclusion of this portion is optional and will require authorization by the existing property owners. The City shall have constructed underground utility improvements in conjunction with the Developers Project and pay actual costs. Funding to come from the Underground Utility District Funds. The City shall have constructed improvements to the water delivery facilities in the Downtown area and shall make all connections with the Developers Improvements and shall pay actual costs. Funding to come from various City funds including the City's General Fund. The City shall provide to the Agency funding for the relocation of residents and businesses and the acquisition of surface entry rights for oil resource recovery within the Project Area up to $1,000,000. Funding to come from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Community Development Block Grant Program and other fund balances. B. COST OF AGREEMENT TO THE AGENCY. The estimated cost of the Agreement to the Agency is as follows: Land Acquisition Costs $-0- Value of City Parcels (27,500 sq. ft. @ $55/sq. ft.) $1,512,500 Demolition, Site Preparation, and On and Off-site Improvement Costs $1,350,000 Relocation Costs $1,000,000 Public Pig Facilities Costs 0500;000 (200 spat @ $7,500/space) Loan for Demolition and Site Clearance $6,275,000. Administrative Costs • $-0- (3) Bond Issuance $-0- (2) Interests on Loans and%Bonds to Finance Agreement $-0- 11.637.500 1. Any land acquisition on the part of the Agency either through purchase, option, lease or eminent domain, shall be .as an interim step prior to conveyance to the Developer. The cost of any such transaction shall be borne by the Developer. 2. Although not directly part of this project, the Agency recognizes the need for additional parking in the Downtown area and will begin the development of public parking facilities. These structures will be within a reasonable walking distance of the proposed development and will be designed to accommodate an anticipated parking. demand greater than just the proposed improvements. The Agency will be responsible for the development of 200 spaces in one of these facilities for this project. The cost .for the bond issuance used to develop these' structures has been calculated into the $7,500 per space cost. 3. Although no figure has been identified in this calculation, three percent of the tax increment revenues received by the city have been identified for project administrative costs. C. ESTIMATED VALUE OF THE INTERESTS TO BE CONVEYED TO THE DEVELOPER DETERMINED AT THE HIGHEST" USE PERMITTED UNDER THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN. The determination of the estimated value of the interests to be conveyed to the Developer pursuant to the proposed Agreement are made by Keyser Marston Associates, Inc., (KMA). In this analysis KMA has estimated the market value of the "Main-Pier Portion." The analysis determined that the highest and best use of the "Remaining Portion" of the "Main-Pier Portion"' would be development of a hotel and retail commercial complex. Given such magnitude of development, privately constructed parking for 450 cars and the inclusion of public amenities such as a plaza and pedestrian overcrossing, KMA has estimated the fair market value of the "Main-Pier Portion" to be $1.5 'Million, assuming development at its highest and best use and without consideration of Agency goals in Project implementation. D. PURCHASE PRICE BY DEVELOPER AND REASONS FOR DIFFERENCE IN FAIR MARKET VALUE FOR THE HIGHEST USE UNDER THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN. 1. The Developer shall purchase from the Agency the "City Parcel" upon execution of the Agreement for the price of one dollar ($1). The City agrees to convey and the Agency agrees to accept conveyance of the City Parcel promptly upon the exercise of the Developer Option to accommodate the conveyance to the Developer. � The terms and deitions of sale by and between tl*Agency and the City are a matter of no concern to the Developer. Health and Safety Code Section 33433 provides that if the sales price and lease payments for the Site are less than fair market value for the highest and best use consistent with the Redevelopment Plan, the Agency shall explain the reasons for the difference. i In order to assist the project at the start of development the Agency has to write down the land value. This differential of $1.5 million will be well offset over the life of the project through an increase in the amount of tax increment monies generated by the project. By subsidizing the project on the front end, through a write down in the value of the City's parcels the Developer has agreed to a reduction in the amount and time frame for tax increment pledge back to the project. This reduction will amount to approximately $3.6 million over the first 15 years. Therefore, the highest and best use-value is being achieved through a write down in land value and an increase in the amount and years of tax increment provided to the Agency. 0372H-A 10-6-86 SUMMARY REPORT This summary Report has been prepared for the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency (��Agency ) pursuant to Section 33433 of the California Health and Safety Code. This Report sets forth certain details of a proposed Pier Side Lease ("Lease") between the Agency and Pier Side Development ('Developer") for the development of a complex including a specialty retail commercial village and related ancillary improvements in the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area In the City of Huntington Beach. This report describes and specifies: 1. The cost of the proposed Lease to the Agency, including land acquisition costs, clearance costs, relocation costs, costs of improvements to be provided by the Agency, and the expected interest on any loans or bonds to finance the Agreement; 2. The estimated value of the interests conveyed and leased, determined at the highest uses permitted under the Redevelopment Plan; and 3. The lease payments to be paid by the Developer. This Report and the proposed Lease is made available for public inspection prior to the approval of the Lease. A. SALIENT POINTS OF THE AGREEMENT. 1. Developer Responsibilities: Under the proposed Lease, the Developer agrees to develop and construct, or cause the development and construction of, at a construction cost of at least Twenty-Five Million Dollars 323,000,000), the following: a) A Pier Side Village consisting of speciality commercial uses with a minimum gross leasable area of 75,000 square feet, plus a multiple-tiered parking structure of not less than 600 spaces. Part of the minimum gross leasable area of 75,000 square feet shall consist of deck area added to the Pier; such added deck area shall approximate 25,000 square feet. All improvements shall be in conformity with Conditional Use Permit No. 86-43 and Coastal Development Permit No. 86-27 as approved by the City or as may be. subsequently amended. b) The Developer shall pay the costs for relocation and reconstruction of the existing lifeguard facility within the project site to a location outside of the project area. This obligation shall not exceed $500,000. c) The Pier Side Improvements shall include access for emergency City vehicles to the Pier from the City Beach Safety Facility. d) The Pier Side Developer shall provide a pedestrian overcrossing of Pacific Coast Highway to the proposed hotel location, the cost of which shall be shared with the Hotel/Commercial project in an amount not to exceed $250,000. e) The Developer shall be responsible for all on-site and off-site improvements relating to the development -of the Property and in accordance with the terms and schedules as set forth in this Lease including, but not 1 limited to, the following: All on-site and off-site improvements -- sidewalks, street lighting, curbs, gutters, street trees, street improvements, surface parking lot improvements, parking structures, etc., shall conform to the design and materials as approved by the Agency. Sanitary sewers, storm drains, fire hydrants, water supply, gas lines, telephone and electrical power facilities, (if required) to be installed to, modified, or relocated from the perimeter of the Property. Improvements required in connection with and as a result of review by the Agency and the City of plans, drawings, or environmental assessments relative to the Developer Improvements or this Lease. 2. Agency Responsibilities: The Agency is responsible for and shall commit to the project the following: a) The actual construction costs of all off premise improvements constructed in connection with the Developer Improvements; b) The costs incurred to maintain and repair the existing City Pier in good and safe condition and open to public access; c) The costs incurred by the Agency ,or the City in undergrounding utilities on the Property; The Agency shall make available to the Developer the following: e) For a period of two (2) years commencing with the completion of all of the Developer Improvements, one hundred percent (100%) of the "Net Property Tax Increment," which is that amount determined as follows: from Q) the property tax revenue received by the Agency pursuant to Section 33670(b) equal to that paid or caused to be paid by the Developer in connection with the Developer Improvements, deduct (ii) twenty percent (20%) of such amount (consistent with Section 33334.2 of the California Health and Safety Code), (iii) all funds payable to affected taxing agencies pursuant to between 33401 of the California Health and Safety Code or agreements heretofore entered into by the Agency, and further deduct (iv) an amount equal to three percent (3%) of the total tax increment generated by the Developer Improvements, which shall be retained by the Agency for its administrative overhead and expenses. In the 3rd year only fifty percent (50%) of the Net Property Tax Increment shall be pledged back. In the 4th year.the remaining fifty percent (50%) of the 3rd year increment shall be pledged back. 3. Method of Financing: The City shall provide improvements as needed to all utility delivery systems to assure sufficient capacities to adequately service the project and shall make all • i connections with the Developers Improvements and shall pay actual costs. Funding to come from the various.City funds including the General Fund. The City shall have constructed underground utility improvements in conjunction with the Developers Project and pay actual costs. Funding to come . -from the Underground Utility District Funds. The income received by the Agency as rent, for replacement parking will be use to. partially finance the construction of new parking facilities within the Downtown area. B. COST OF AGREEMENT TO THE AGENCY. The estimated cost of the Agreement to the Agency is as follows: Off-site Improvements and $-0-(1) Relocation Costs Public Parking Facilities Costs $-0- (2) Administrative Costs $-0- 0) Bond Issuance $-0- (2) Loan for Demolition, Site clearance, etc. $6809000. Interests on Loans and Bonds to Finance Agreement $-0- 1. All costs associated with off-site improvement have to be accounted for in the First Amended Disposition and Development Agreement with Huntington Pacifica I doing business as Huntington Pacifica Development Group for the hotel and related commercial development; therefore no further itemization is necessary in this project. 2. Although not directly part of this project, the Agency recognizes the need for additional parking in the Downtown area and will begin to pursue locations for parking facilities. These structures will be within a reasonable walking distance of the proposed development and will be designed to accommodate an anticipated parking demand greater than just the proposed improvements. 3. Although no figure has been identified in this calculation, three percent of the tax increment revenues received by the city have been identified for project administrative costs. C. ESTIMATED VALUE OF THE INTERESTS TO BE CONVEYED TO AND LEASED BY THE DEVELOPER DETERMINED AT THE HIGHEST USE PERMITTED UNDER THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN. The determination of the estimated value of the interests to be conveyed to the Developer pursuant to the proposed Agreement are made by Keyser Marston Associates, Inc., (KA In this Analysis, KMA has estimated the market value of the Pier Side area. The. analysis determined that the highest and best use of the site would be development of a specialty retail commercial complex. Given such magnitude of development, privately constructed parking for approximately 600 cars • and the inclusion of public amenities such as a pedestrian overcrossing, KMA has estimated the fair market value -of the site "to be equivalent to the'compensation identified in Section "D" of this report, assuming development'`at its highest and best use and without consideration of Agency goals in Project-_implementation: D. SUM OF LEASE PAYMENTS BY DEVELOPER'AND REASONS FOR DIFFERENCE IN FAIR MARRET VALUE FOR THE HIGHEST USE UNDER THE KLUMLOPMENT The total sum of the lease payments during the term of the lease to be'paid"by the Developer for-the interests conveyed in the "Pier Side" Lease are: 1. The Developer shall pay to the Agency rent in the form. .of "minimum annual rent," "Percentage rent," and,"parking replacement rent," for each accounting'year: a) Minimum Annual Rent:" LESSEE shall pay to LESSOR during the lease term (55 years) a minimum annual rent of $1 per year plus existing rent from Dwights, during the first threeyears. Beginning with the third anniversary of the completion of the "Pier Side Improvement," and continuing until the sixth anniversary the minimum annual-rent-shalt be in the-amount equal to $4 per square foot of gross leasable area of improvements.on the Premises. Beginning with the sixth anniversary of the commencement of this • lease, the Minimum Rent shall automatically be annually increased_ by seventy five percent :(75%)" of the increase in the .Consumer Price Index for the Los Angeles - Long Beach - Anaheim - Metropolitan areas, provided that such inflationary increases shall not exceed 6% with respect to any year. b) -Percentage Rental: in addition to' the minimum annual rent,_ the Developer- shall pay a.percentage rent with respect to each year after the third anniversary at twelve percent (12%) of the gross rental receipts received by.the Developer during such accounting year-'or partial accounting year; less" the minimum annual rent payable- with respect to such period. When the rents received by the Developer equal 'Six -Million Dollars ($6,000,000) or the sixth anniversary,--whichever first occurs, percentage rent shall be fifteen percent (15%), less the minimum annual rent payable. c)- Parking Rental: In'addition to the minimum annual rent and the percentage rent, the developer shall pay to the lessor as parking replacement rent the sum of $100,000 per year; subject to annual inflationary'increases. Beginning with the"third anniversary of the commencement of this lease, the parking replacement rent shall be adjusted annually by a figure equal to the percentage change in the CPI from the previous year; provided that such annual adjustments shall not exceed six percent (6%) per year. Health and SafeSafef Code Section 33433 provides that'if the sales price and lease payments for the Site are less than fair market value for the highest and best use consistent with the Redevelopment Plan, the Agency shall explain the reasons for the difference. The "Pier Side" lease begins at a rate equal to the rent presently received by the City for the existing parking. In addition the City will continue the lease with Maxwell's at the current rate. The beginning rent at a minimum rate will allow the Developer a period of stabilization after which the Agency will receive a percentage of sub-lessee sales receipts. Therefore, the better the project performs, the greater the Agency benefits. This type of lease agreement should produce a greater value over the life of the lease than any other reuse which is consistent with the Redevelopment Plan. 1 • 0372H-A .�. _ .8%-452906 EXEMPT When Recorded, Please Mail to: C 2 City of Huntington Beach RECORDED FREE PER GOVERNMENT 2000 Main Street CODE SECTION 6103 Huntington Beach, California 92648 ATTENTION: ALICIA M. WENTWORTH RECORDING BENEFITS CITY BY PROVIDING FOR REDEVELOPMENT AREA RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY,CALIFORNIA DESCRIPTION OF THE LAND WITHIN -429 PM OCT 1 3 '83 THE MAIN-PIER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA LEE A. BRANCH, County Recorder PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 1 and STATEMENT THAT REDEVELOPMENT PROCEEDINGS HAVE BEEN INSTITUTED Proceedings for the redevelopment of the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Plan Amendment No. 1 Area have been instituted under -'the California Community Redevelopment Law pursuant to a Redevelopment Plan approved and adopted, September 6r 1983 , by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach by Ordinance No. 2634 . The description of the land within the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Plan Amendment No. 1 Area is attached as Exhibit "A" . Date: September 27 ,- 1983 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH Alicia M. Wentworth, City Clerk �c �'► g3-452906 STATE OF CALIFORNIA) SS COUNTY OF ORANGE ) On September 27 , 1983before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said County, personally appeared Alicia M. Wentworth, known to me to be the City Clerk of the City of Huntington .Beach, and known to me to be the person who executed the within instrument on behalf of said City, and acknowledged to me that such City executed the same. Witnessed my hand and official seal. r OFFICIAL SEAL BROCKWAY x' iVOrf,R FUSLIC - c,`•LIFCRNIA ` Notary Public' sSignature). Fr. NCIF,=,i_ OFFICE IN ORANGE COUNTY MY CO/MMISSIOi•1 EXPIRES OCT 10 1985 Vc� C 4 • .D iE'O�C LUG¢ J Name - Typed or Printed) (Seal) Notary Public in and for said State Page 12 - Council Minutes - 7/18/83 AYES: Kelly, MacAllister, Bailey NOES: Finley ABSENT: Pattinson, Thomas (out of the room) , Mandic (out of the room) ORDINANCE NO 2634 - INTRODUCTION APPROVED - ADOPTING A REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT FOR THE MAIN PIER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 1 AREA The City Clerk presented Ordinance No. 2634 for Council consideration - "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH APPROVING AND ADOPTING A REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT FOR THE MAIN PIER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 1 AREA AS THE OFFICIAL REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR SUCH PROJECT AREA". Discussion was held regarding the number of votes necessary for introduction of an ordinance. Acting City Attorney De La Loza and the City Clerk concurred that four votes were only necessary for adoption. On motion by Bailey, second Kelly, Council approved introduction of Ordinance No. 2634, after reading by title, by the following roll call vote: AYES : Kelly, MacAllister, Bailey NOES: Finley ABSENT: Pattinson, Thomas (out of the room), Mandic (out of the room) REQUIREMENT REGARDING PARTICIPATION IN PROJECT AREA CHANGED FROM 60% TO TWO-THIRDS A motion was made by Bailey, seconded by MacAllister, to change the requirement of the sixty per cent for participation in a project area to two-thirds. The motion carried by the following roll call. vote: AYES: MacAllister, Finley, Bailey NOES: Kelly ABSENT: Pattinson, Thomas (out of the room), Mandic (out of the room) SYSTEM OF RECORDING FINANCIAL PROGRESS OF REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS - TO BE BROUGHT BACK IN SEPTEMBER Councilwoman Finley thanked Robert Franz, Chief of Administrative Services, for the proposal for a system of recording financial progress of redevelopment projects. A motion was made by Finley, seconded by MacAllister, to direct staff to bring back a refined form of_. the system of recording financial progress of redevelopment projects in September. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: i AYES: MacAllister, Finley, Bailey NOES: None ABSENT: Pattinson, Thomas (out of the room, Mandic (out of the room) REQl1ESTR REDEVEL ENGENCY A5TI19,N4.Y CITY C©UNGIL APYbtOVED BY RH 89-41 ! i9 <at� Date May 15, 1989 ITY ERS x z Submitted to: Honorable Chairman and Redevelopment Agency Members '�^^ Submitted by: Paul Cook, Executive Director — Prepared by: Douglas La Belle, Deputy City Administrator/Economic Development 4'�';� co Subject: CONSIDERATION OF EXPANSION OR ADOPTION OF A REDEVELOPMEW PROJECT AREA DOWNTOWN Consistent with Council Policy? bQ Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception Statement of Issue, Recommendation, Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attachments: STATEMENT OF ISSUE: In December of 1988, Council/Agency first directed staff to explore the feasibility of expanding the existing Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area, or the adoption of a new project area downtown. The area in question is the two blocks bounded by the alley between 6th and 7th Street, Pacific Coast Highway, Walnut Avenue and 8th Street. RECOMMENDATION: At this time, staff recommends that the Agency not expand the Main-Pier Project Area, or create a new Project Area for the site in question. ANALYSIS: Because of the risk of monetary loss and its extremely small size, staff is not recommending that the Agency consider this area as an addition to the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area. In order for a redevelopment project area to be considered, three conditions must be met. The area must be at least 80% urbanized, it must be characterized by conditions of blight, and that problems within the area cannot-be resolved by private enterprise acting alone. The subject area is predominantly urbanized, and a recent windshield survey has found some blighting influences, but the survey has also revealed rehabilitation and new construction in and around the subject area, indicating that blighting conditions maybe resolved by private enterprise acting alone. An expansion of the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area would subject the entire project area to fiscal review. At this time the Redevelopment Agency has-no pass-through agreements or other tax increment sharing agreements. An amendment to the project area would likely result in new agreements with other tax entities to share increment from the entire project area. PIO/1/85 Staff invited all property owners in this proposed project area to a meeting on February 7. At this meeting, staff discussed the Redevelopment Agency's plan for the Main—Pier Redevelopment Project Area, and asked the property owners to express their concerns, ask questions, and discuss their plans for their respective properties. Subsequently, staff met with property owners on PCH frontage, the block between 6th and 7th Streets, and those owners are presently negotiating with developers for the development of a condominium project. Staff is currently meeting with the property owners on PCH frontage, the block between 7th and 8th Streets, to review their development plans and offer Agency assistance, as appropriate. ALTERNATIVES: 1) Direct staff to proceed with s new project or project area amendment. FUNDING SOURCE: 1) None as a result of this action. ATTACHMENTS: 1) Site map. 2) City Administrator's memorandum of January 31, 1989. PEC/DLB/KBB:lp 4711h I AVENUE g WALNUT -O--24 ' •s- - - vs _ h 4. I E4 .` s` 'G , 6I'- -20 /9 9 - J n.i 4 w ` 2 6 p r ,•r' M /J -^,rs� -- _IS /a /J _� -- ---" /B .,/7 - _ -h \ 8) 9 •pr9 B J 16 J ,4 rJ 2 ,/ i 7 ,6 5 ,4 ,J .,2 ,/ S-- YL- --_O - � tC r8 1 � , , ' t B1iK. /GIB , I ; 2 L' ro,9. 6 7 5 r4 J i2 6 4 IF 1 1 'OI W g 2 e `. . I O HIGHWAY COAST o v..: G33-•o' P. AM. B-Z/ 23-17 TRACT P. M. B-J9 .a � r 0 - LOT / •� ��'! PROJE6f•w-OS o• 4.2/5 AC j n i }f Z65AL O ° R. 1 35-/3 }}} t3E � S ONLY. j -EE AS TO 'ABILITY NO.8623 OUCEDs•�sr CEO • :SSOA NNE Louvre •ram rs' G� i :H NOTE-ASSESSOR'S BLOCK d ASSESSOR'S 1 ` M.M. 4/8-3/,32,33 PARCEL NUMBERS i BOOK 24 PAS AlARCH 1948 1 HUNT/NGT1N E. SHOWN IN CIRCLES COUNTY Of - ; L/,yr pAC,F/ CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACHCA 89-7 [On COUNCIL - ADMINISTRATOR COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH To Honorable Mayor and From Paul E. Coo l City Council Members City Administrator Subject CONSIDERATION OF EXPANSION Date January 31, 1999 OR ADOPTION OF A REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA DOWNTOWN In response to a recent inquiry regarding the expansion of the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area from 6th Street to 8th Street, I would like to submit the following comments: The area in question, as outlined on the attached map, would encompass approximately 2 blocks. The land uses are residential, commercial and oil drilling and the zoning is the Downtown Specific Plan, District Two. In order for a redevelopment project area to be considered, three conditions must be met, the area must be at least 80% urbanized, it must be characterized by conditions of blight, and that problems within the area cannot be resolved by private enterprise acting alone. The subject area is predominantly urbanized and a recent windshield survey has found some blighting influences, but the survey has also revealed rehabilitation and new construction in and around the subject area, indicating that blighting conditions may be resolved by private enterprise acting alone. Of greater importance is the fact that an expansion of the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area would subject the entire project area to fiscal review. At this time, the Redevelopment Agency has no pass-through agreements or ether tax increment sharing agreements. An amendment to the project area would likely rest% L: new agreements with other taxing entities to share increment from the entire project area. Because of the risk of monetary loss and due to its extremely small size, staff is not recommending that the Agency consider this area as an addition to the Main-Pier Project Area. However, staff has arranged to meet with property owners (see attachment) from this two block area to discuss the City's Main-Pier Redevelopment Plans and how to integrate those plans with existing and future developments in the adjacent subject area. PEC/MC:sar Attachment 4374r REQUEST OR REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AC*N Date June 1, 1983 Le i3Y GI`lY GQj3�i�'.I� Submitted to: Honorable Chairperson and Redevelopment A Submitted by: Charles W. Thompson, Chief Executive Offi G` Prepared by: Office of Business .& Industrial Enterpris CITY.QLE Subject: APPROVAL OF MAIN-PIER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 1 AND CERTIFYING TO AGENCY REVIEW OF NEGAT VE- DECLARATION Statement of Issue, Recommendation,Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attachments: STATEMENT OF ISSUE: Attached is Agency Resolution No. 74 which makes certain. findings con- cerning the mitigation of any adverse environmental impacts, certifies that all steps required by law for the adoption of the amended Redevelop- ment Plan and processing of the Negative Declaration have been taken, and approves the amended Redevelopment Plan and determines that the use of tax increment funds outside the boundaries of the amended Project Area for the purpose of providing affordable housing will be of benefit to the project. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution No. 74. ANALYSIS : This action represents the final Agency step in the long and complex process which must be undertaken to establish an amended redevelopment project area. In addition to meeting all the legal requirements and pro- ceedings, staff has consulted each affected taxing agency and made an effort to discuss the proposed plan with many of the property owners. An attempt has also been made to inform the general public of these endeavors.. As a result of these efforts , .we feel the project which you are considering is feasible and that the redevelopment requirements .have been met. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS : Not adopt the resolution and thus terminate the amended plan development process . ATTACHMENTS : 1. Resolution No. 74 2 . Redevelopment Plan Amendment No. Land Negative Declaration (see Council Ordinance No. 2634 and Appendix H of ":Report to .City Council'-.' j , CWT:TT:lp ,i PIO 4/81 CIA RESOLUTION NO. 74 A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH APPROVING THE RE- DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE MAIN-PIER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 1 AND CERTIFYING AS TO ITS REVIEW OF THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION WITH RESPECT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach (the "Agency") has prepared an amended Redevelopment Plan for the Main- Pier Redevelopment Project Plan Amendment No. 1 (the "Redevelopment Plan Amendment") and has filed its Report on the Redevelopment Plan Amendment with the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Huntington Beach has approved and forwarded to the Agency its report and recommendation that the proposed Redevelopment Plan Amendment for the Project is in conformity with the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach and has recommended approval of said Redevelopment Plan Amendment; and WHEREAS, the Agency has prepared and approved a Negative Declaration with respect to the adoption of the Redevelopment Plan Amendment; and WHEREAS, pursuant to notice duly given, the Agency and the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach have held a full and fair public �- hearing on the proposed Redevelopment Plan Amendment and the Negative Declaration; and . WHEREAS, the City Council has approved and certified as to its re- view a final EIR with respect to the Downtown Specific Plan (No. 82-2) (the "prior EIR") . NOW, THEREFORE, the Community Redevelopment Agency of the. City of Huntington Beach does hereby resolve as follows; Section 1: A full and fair public hearing having been held on said Negative Declaration and the Agency having considered all comments re- ceived thereon , which comments and responses thereto have been attached to said Negative Declaration and incorporated therein, the Negative De- claration is hereby approved and adopted, as the Negative Declaration for the adoption of the Redevelopment Plan Amendment. Section 2 : The Agency hereby certifies that the Negative Declaration for the adoption of the Redevelopment Plan Amendment has been completed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 and the State and local environmental guidelines and regulations and that it has reviewed and considered the Negative Declaration and the information contained therein. Section 3 : The Agency hereby finds with respect to any adverse en- vironmental impacts : a. Any adverse environmental impacts associated with the adoption of the Redevelopment Plan Amendment have been considered and recog- nized by the Agency and the City Council. b. That comments and responses made during the public hearing of the Agency and City Council have been considered and recognized by the Agency. C. That, based on the information set forth in the Negative Decla- ration, the Agency finds and determines that measures to mitigate certain environmental impacts exist and will be implemented and wil..- reduce any significant environmental effects to an insignificant level. d. That, as to certain adverse impacts associated with long-term air quality impacts, the Agency finds and determines that said ad- verse impacts cannot be entirely mitigated due to the involvement of activities outside the jurisdiction of the Agency and the City of Huntington Beach. Section 4 : The Agency hereby finds and determines that all potenti, impacts on the environment cannot be entirely or feasibly eliminated. T; Agency hereby finds that the beneficial economic and social effects of the amended Project override such potential adverse impacts. Section 5 : All steps required by law for the adoption of the Re- development Plan Amendment having been taken and the full and fair publi( hearing having been held on the Redevelopment Plan Amendment, the Agency having considered all oral and written comments and testimony relating thereto, hereby overrules all objections and approves said Redevelopment Plan Amendment, attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and by this reference in- corporated herein. Section 6 : The Agency hereby finds and determines that measures have been incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan Amendment which will mitigate or avoid any significant environmental affects that can feasibl,. be mitigated or avoided thereof to an insignificant level. Section 7 : The Chief Executive Officer of the Agency, in cooperate( with the Agency Secretary, is hereby authorized and directed to file with the County Clerk of the County of Orange, a Notice of Determination . pursuant to 14 California Administrative Code Section 51085 (h) . Section 8 : The Agency hereby finds and determines that the use of tax increment funds outside of the boundaries of the amended Project Are, for the purpose of increasing and improving the community' s supply of low-and-moderate-income housing , as provided in Health and Safety Code Section 33334 . 2, will be of benefit to the amended Project. Section 9 : The Agency finds that the prior. EIR is sufficient and that no changes are proposed in the project which will require revision to the prior EIR, that no substantial changes in the circumstances under which the project is to be undertaken have occurred, and that no new in- formation of substantial importance has become available since the appro- val of the prior EIR. The Agency hereby finds that the environmental effects of the approval of the Downtown Specific Plan and the adoption of the amendment to the Main-Pier Redevelopment Plan are similar enough to warrant the same treatment in an EIR, and that the prior EIR will adequately cover the impacts of the adoption of the amendment to the Main-Pier Redevelopment Plan. Section 10 : This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of July , 198 - i ATTEST: Agency Clerk Chairperson APPROVED AS TO FORM: INITIATED AND APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: r gun cy Cou 1 Director, Business & Industrial Enterprise APPROVED AS TO FORM: S c' Ag y Counsel APPROVED: Chief Executive Officer • • 'Res. No. 74 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH) I , ALICIA M. WENTWORTH, Clerk of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach, California, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was duly adopted by the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach at a meeting of said Redevelopment Agency held on the 18th day of July 19 83 , and that it was so adopted by the following vote: AYES: Members: Kelly, MacAllister, Bailey NOES: Members: Finley ABSENT: Members: Pattinson, Thomas (out of room) , Mandic (out of room) 00, 4'er&kof the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach, Ca. /2` Alai" REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council M �19 Submitted by: Charles W. Thompson, City Administ CITY CL K Prepared by: Office of Business and Industrial Enterprise Subject: ADOPTION OF MAIN—PIER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 1 Statement of Issue, Recommendation,Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attachments: STATEMENT OF ISSUE: Pursuant to California Community Redevelopment Law, the Huntington Beach City Council and Redevelopment Agency may hold a joint public hearing to consider public input prior to taking action on the Redevelopment Plan Amendment No. 1. After the staff report is presented and the public hearing is held, the City Council and Redevelopment Agency will have several actions which must be taken. Acting as the City Council, you will be asked to consider adopting the attached resolution which approves and certifies the Negative Declaration and introduce the ordinance which adopts the Redevelopment Plan Amendment No. 1. Both of these matters will be considered after you have taken several actions in your capacity as the Redevelopment Agency. RECOMMENDATION: Approve and certify Negative Declaration and introduce ordinance. ANALYSIS : These actions represent the final steps in the long and complex process which must be undertaken to establish an amended redevelopment project area. If the ordinance. is introduced, it is anticipated that the second reading would take place at the next meeting, with the plan amendment becoming effective 30 days thereafter. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1 . Close the public hearing and introduce ordinance. 2. Continue the public hearing for additional input. 3. Not adopt ordinance. ATTACHMENTS : 1. Resolution 2 . Negative Declaration 3. Ordinance 4. Redevelopment Plan Amendment No. 1 CWT:TT:lp PIO 4/81 1� RESOLUTION NO. 5286 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH CERTIFYING AS TO ITS REVIEW OF THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION WITH RESPECT TO THE REDEVELOP- MENT PLAN AMENDMENT FOR THE MAIN-PIER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach (the "Agency") has prepared and approved a Negative Declaration with respect to the adoption of a Redevelopment Plan Amendment (the "Redevelopment Plan Amendment") for the Main- Pier Redevelopment Project Plan Amendment No. 1 (the "Project") ; and WHEREAS, pursuant to notice duly given, the Agency and the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach have held a full and fair public hearing on the proposed Redevelopment Plan Amendment and Negative Declaration; and WHEREAS, the City Council has approved and certified as to its review a final EIR with respect to the Downtown Specific Plan (No. 82-2) (the "prior EIR"), NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach does hereby resolve as follows: Section 1: A full and fair public hearing having been held on said Negative Declaration and the City Council having considered all comments received thereon, which comments and responses thereto have been attached to said Negative Declara- tion and incorporated therein, the Negative Declaration is hereby approved and - adopted as the Final Negative Declaration for the adoption of the Redevelopment Plan Amendment No. 1.. Section 2: The City Council hereby certifies that the Negative Declaration for the Redevelopment Plan Amendment No. 1 has been completed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 and the State and local environ- mental guidelines and regulations and that it has reviewed and considered the Negative Declaration and the information contained therein. Section 3: The City Council hereby finds with respect to the adverse environ- mental impacts: a) Any adverse environmental impacts associated with the adoption of the Redevelopment Plan Amendment have been considered and recognized by the City Council . b) The comments and responses made during the public hearing of the Agency and City Council have been considered and recognized by the City Council . c) That, based on the information set forth in the Negative Declaration, the City Council finds and determines that measures to mitigate certain environ- mental impacts exist and will be implemented and will reduce any significant environmental effects to an insignificant level . d) That as to certain adverse impacts associated with long-term environmental quality, the City Council finds and determines that said adverse impacts can- not be entirely mitigated due to the involvement of activities outside the jurisdiction of the Agency and the City of Huntington Beach. H j Section 4: The City Council hereby finds and determines that all potential impacts on the environment cannot be entirely or feasibly eliminated. The City - Council hereby finds that the beneficial economic and social effects of the amended Project override such potential adverse impacts. Section 5: The City Council hereby finds and determines that all measures have been incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan Amendment which will mitigate or. avoid any significant environemntal effects that can feasibly be mitigated or avoided to an insignificant level . Section 6: The City Clerk of the City of Huntington Beach is hereby authorized and directed to file with the County Clerk of the County of Orange, a Notice of Determination, pursuant to 14 California Administrative Code Section 51085(h) . Section 7: The Agency finds that the prior EIR is sufficient and that no changes are proposed in the Project which will require revision to the prior EIR, that no substantial changes in the circumstances under which the Project is to be undertaken have occurred, and that no new information of substantial importance has become available since the approval of the prior EIR. The Agency hereby finds that the environmental effects of the approval of the Downtown Specific Plan and the adoption of the amendment to the Main-Pier Redevelopment Plan are similar enough to warrant the same treatment in an EIR, and that the prior EIR will ade- quately cover the impacts of the adoption of the amendment to the Main-Pier Redevelopment Plan. Section 8: This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. ^ PASSED AND ADOPTED this 1.8th day of July 1983. ATTEST: My 71 er k Maybr APPROVED AS TO FORM: INITIATED AND APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: City Attorney / Director, Business and Industria Enterprise APPROVED AS FORM: APPROVED: ST LSON, RAUTH sty Administrator Spec' 1 g unsel a4 Res. No. 5286 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss: CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ) I, ALICIA M. WENTWORTH, the duly elected, qualified City Clerk of the City of Huntington Beach, and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of said City, do hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach is seven; that the, foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the affirmative vote of more than a majority of all the members of said City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on the 18th day of July 19 83 by the following vote: AYES: Councilmen: Kelly, MacAllister, Bailey NOES: Councilmen: Finley ABSENT: Councilmen: Pattinson, Thomas (out of room) , Mandic (out of room) --r44 City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California NEGATIVE DECLARATION MAIN-PIER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 1 f • 1 • FinCITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT P.O. Box 190 Huntington Beach, CA.92648 Tel: 1714)536.5271 ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM Fee - $115.00 FOR CITY USE ONLY _City of Huntington Beach Date nnnlicant/Authorized Agent Received: Project Number: ND 83-15 2000 Main Street Department of Origin : Mailing Address H.C.D. (714) 536-5271 Other Applications or Te ephone Permit Numbers : Vronerty Owner Mailinq Address/Telephone 1. 0 Project Information (please attach Plot Plan and submit photographs of subject property) 1 . 1. Nature of Project: Give complete description of the proposed . project. Expansion of redevelopment area--expansion area covered by Negative Declarations 82-41, 80-39, 76-117 1 . 2 Location of Project: (Address, nearest street intersections) See Attached Maps 1 . 3 Assessor ' s Parcel. Number: A-BD-EV-2A -1- • •. r , 1 . 4 What is the present zoning on the property? See Attached Zoning Maps 1 . `, what is the surrounding land use to the: North South East West 1 . 6 If the project is commercial or industrial give a complete description -of activities and other pertinent information including but not limited to estimated employment per shift and any potential hazardous materials which may be used, etc . N/A 1 . 7 If the project is residential, indicate number, types and size of units and associated facilities. N/A 1 . 8 If the project is institutional, indicate the major function, estimated employment per shift and maximum occupancy. N/A 1 .9 Project land area (.acres) Number of parking spaces N/A 1. 10 Square feet of building area N/A Number of floors N/A 1. 11 Height of tallest structure involved in the project 2 . 0 Environmental Setting . 1 Dra.inaa a and flood Control .0 Ploa!;o describe how on-site drainage will be accommodated . N/A -2- band Dorm • c) Is the site presently graded? N/A_ b) Indicate the qross cubic yards of grading -proposed the acres of land to be graded the amount of earth to be transported on the 'site , and the amount of earth to be transported. off the. site c) what will be the maximum height and grade of cut or fill after grading is completed? N/A 2 . 3 Soils a) Type of soils on the subject site? (Submit soils report if available) . N/A 2. 4 Vegetation a) Attach a map indicating the location, type and size of trees located on the site. Indicate below the number, type and size of trees to be removed as a result of the project: N/A 2 . 5 Water Quality a) Does any portion of the project abut or encroach on beaches , estuaries, bays, tidelands, or inland water areas? b) Describe how the project will effect any body of water. N/A 2. 6 Air nuality a) If the project is industrial , describe and list air pollution sources and quantity and types of pollutants emitted as a result of the project. N/A 2_ . 7 Noise a) Describe .any adjacent off-site noise sources ( .i .e . , air- ports , industry , freeways) . t1) W11.1t noi :,o wi I l be produced by the project? If available , tiivc, noise levels in decible measurement and typical time distribution when noise will be produced. N/A -3- C. How will noise produced by the project compare with existing noise levels? N/A ' . R Tra f f it" Approximatoly flow much traffic; will be generated by the project : (check one) 0-50 vehicular trips per day 50 - 250 vehicular trips per day 250 - 500 vehicular trips per day over 500 vehicular trips per day 3.0 Public Services and Facilities 3. 1 Water a) Will the project require installation or replacement of new water lines? b) Please estimate the daily volume in gallons required to serve the project. N/A 3. 2 Sewer a) Will the project require installation or replacement of new sewer lines? N/A b) Please indicate the approximate amount of sewage generated from the project. N/A 3. 3 Solid Waste a) If the project is industrial , describe the type and amount (pounds/day) of solid waste generated by the project. N/A 4 . 0 Social 4 . 1 Population Displacement a) Will any residential occuNpants be displaced by the project activities. //A e b) Describe briefly the type of buildings or improvements to be demolished by the project. N/A -4- 5 . 0 Mitigating Measures 5 . 1 Are there measures included in the. project which may conserve nonrenewable resources (e.g. electricity, gas, water) ? Please describe. N/A 5. 2 Are there measures included in the project which would protect or enhance flora and fauna? Please describe. N/A 5 . 3 Are there measures proposed in the design of the project to reduce noise pollution? Please describe. N/A 5. 4 Are there measures proposed in the design of the project (e.g. architectural treatment and landscaping) which have been coordinated with design of the existing community to minimize visual effect? Please describe. N/A 5. 5 Are there measures proposed in the design of the project to reduce water pollution? Please describe. N/A 5. 6 Are there measures proposed which would reduce air pollution? List any Air Pollution Control District equipment required. N/A 5. 7 Are there measures or facilities designed into the project to facilitate resource recovery and/or energy conservation (e.g. solar heating, special insulation, etc. ) ? Please describe. N/A 6 . 0 Alternatives 6. 1 Are there alternatives to the project which may result in a lesser adverse environmental effect? Please explain all project alternatives on an attached sheet. i herehy cortify that the information herein is true and accurate to the hest of my knowledge . C. ZY 3 Signature Date Filed -5- LEGAL DESCRIPTION MAIN -- PIER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA PROJECT AMENDMENT #1 A parcel of land situated partially in Sections 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , Township 6 south, Range 11 west, San Bernardino base and meridian, County of Orange, State of California. Said parcel being more particularly described as follows : Beginning at the intersection of section corners , Sections 11 , 12 , 13 , and 14 , thence south 00 40 ' 00" east 1320 . 00 feet tc a point; thence south 890 43 ' 00" west 1955 . 76 feet to a point; thence north 00 43 ' 15" west 1350 . 04 feet to a point; thence south 890 43 ' 00" west 670 . 00 feet to a point; thence north 00 00 ' 11" west 2640 . 00 feet to a point; thence north 890 58 ' 15" west 262 . 10 feet to a point; thence south 00 00 ' 00" east 294 . 10 feet to a point; thence north 890 57 ' 13" west 375 . 15 feet to a point; thence south 410 38 ' 18" west 419 . 76 feet to a point; thence south 480 21 ' 42" east' 190. 00 feet to a point; thence south 41° 38 ' 18 " west 1595 . 00 feet to a point; thence north 480 2.1 ' 42" west 5420 . 00 feet to a point; ' thence south 410 38 ' 50" west 714 . 00 feet to a point; thence south 460 30 ' 00" east 5628 . 00 feet to a point; thence north ..1° 38 ' 18" east 990 . 00 feet to a point; thence south 480 21 ' 42" east 1330. 00 feet to a point; thence south 100 09 ' 04 " east 414 . 00 feet to a point; thence south 410 38 ' 18" west 690 . 00 feet to a point; thence south 520 54 ' 19" east 4618 . 08 feet to a point; thence north 00 40 ' 00" west 1947 . 92 feet to a point; thence north 890 36 ' 56" east 439 . 56 feet to a point; thence north 00 40 ' 00" west 2029 . 66 feet to a point; thence south 890 37 ' 06" west 409 . 56 feet to a point; thence south 00 40 ' 00" east 50 . 00 .feet to the point of Beginning. FIGURE 2 S L 1 10 N A 1. S -,I k M A P 6711 ALI I)PT L V M A IICII 7, 1960 y* CITY COUNCIi fj;QIhItlCf NO. 754 -!-'3;ND lo- ll� -1 -1,7 3:7 IGo T I. 3 21 1 330 LiIi r FING"I"101 -N Bll-JACI-l' 5. 9oo 9. 9(18 G-5-6J 992 9 .0.F. 3 ;307 OHANG, f: (,'O [., NT)7, CALIFORNIA 1-20-24 0.'1 2 71 '13i AMENDL., BY ZONE CASE 3-2 64, uO�4,1 .5-4 6 111 05 5 23!-. 12.9. 13 1.'37'`53.340,!-;0.3�0,404.402,41,443.464.G6-33 6G-61,66-b6, 64-:7,Gki-26, 6 5.64 lo6z 4 7-Bri 242- PP7 1-3,72 8::9.6 4 -D79 SjFF 1 EG 8 1-66 1234 Mll.—Ii AVE Rl R3 I .'RI RI-Sl II 1 3 R 3- IE R3 R3 R3 R3 R IRI I : R: A -A R'3 134 R 2 RI RI R2 !'IR2j r---Axi" I m )i R3 I R I RI RI R2-.:0 7 �F R I CF-E R3 I - I,I R I .. . . ..... j is RI 11311 RI RI 3 R3 I RI -:'0 z P2 R R I R 3 1 RI R.3 R 1 1 R F12 H3 RI F j C -R F?I RI PA RI Em 1 Mult RA-0 j MI-A-0 ....... RI D;i :I MI-A-0 MI -A-0 10 o C F u M I-A-0 RA-0 E I MH II Lill 1 I-Q M2-0 X M2-0 % PAC IF IC OCEAN `\�.J \ \ If cal i ; II I li i'./� ���.-.\ •ems•-�0����:�� �• I` �. �� �: �c� • �� n ,. � : Imo,_ CJCJ __J�JJ �C�CJ[-_JCJC C�� J� >/',v F 11 11C�J��_ JC ffi, LIJL][fl[1LlGJ[�JC� . UCDLJCJCJCJCJCJC ]CIC�C�JLJC�C��_� G.J '�lJ C� ;�� i:&., �.��. �a 'cpa e�11'eeea�m h�e�a sie■er�'e - r��EU 1 10,11D r -; n rr 411 L_i-J (i E I L71 � l 1l-1 t X. �L `�f {J -- � El UCi - - --- - -- eel D i eeei"1 ee{en eaea r� -� Mai Existing Main-Pier Project Area • c m MAIN-PIER PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 1 �, CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH . INITIAL STUDY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 1 . BACKGROUND Redevelopment Agency 1. Applicant Huntington Beach 2. Address 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, CA 92648 3. Telephone (714)536-5541 4. Project Location See Attached Maps 5. Project Title/Description expansion redevelopment area 6. Date May 12, 1983 II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: (Explanations of all "Yes" and "Maybe" answers are required on attached sheet). 1. Physical Environment: Will the project have a significant impact on the physical environment with respect to: a) hydrology, b) air quality, c) geology, d) flora and fauna, e) noise, f) archaeological/historical . Yes Maybe No Other 2. Impact of Environment on Project: Will the project be subject to impacts from the surrounding environment? i .e. , natural environment; manmade environment. Yes Maybe . No x 3. Impacts on Public Services: Will the project have a significant impact upon, or re- sult in a need for a new or altered government service in any of the following areas: fire, police, schools, parks or other governmental agencies. Yes x Maybe No 4. Impacts on Traffic/Circulation: Will project result in substantial vehicular move- ment, or impact surrounding circulation system, or increase traffic hazard? Yes Maybe No x 5. Will the project result in a substantial alteration or have a negative affect on the existing: land use, population/housing, energy/utilities, natural resources, human health? Yes Maybe No x 6. Other potential environmental impacts not discussed above (see attached sheet). III. OTHER RESPONSIBLE AGENCIES AND/OR PERSONS CONTACTED ( ) See Attached Not Applicable IV. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE: 1. Will project degrade quality of environment? Yes Maybe No 2. Will project achieve short-term goals to the disadvantage of long-term environmental .goals? Yes Maybe No x 3. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited but cumulatively considerable? Yes Maybe No x 4. Will the project adversely affect human beings either directly or indirectly? Yes Maybe No x V. DETERMINATION ( X ) Negative Declaration ( ) Negative Declaration With Mitigation ( ) Environmental Impact Report DATE SIGNATURE �` The proposed project is the expansion of the Main-Pier redevelopment area to include approximately 350 acres between Goldenwest Street and Beach Boule- vard (Downtown Specific Plan Area) and 2-7.5 acres at Beach Boulevard and Atlanta. The proposed expansion will not in itself constitute any environ- mental impacts. All future development in the expanded area will comply with existing zoning; therefore, no increases to density or intensity will occur as .a result of the proposed expansion. There are some environmental issues within the Specific Plan area; however, these have been addressed in the Downtown Specific Plan EIR (No. 82-2), The half block area depicted on Attachment B was not included in the Specific Plan Area or accompanying EIR. Because these blocks border the downtown area, they are ideally situated to act as additional buffer between the office/com- mercial uses of the downtown and the existing residential communities. The Specific Plan recommended some changes in this area; however, because these are not proposed to be implemented at this time, no environmental impacts are expected to occur. The area at Beach and Atlanta is currently developed as an apartment complex and a neighborhood shopping center. The apartment complex received a negative declaration (No. 82-41) last year. The commercial area was developed prior to the adoption of CEQA; therefore, there is no existing environmental docu- mentation on this site. In the shopping area, future development is expected to consist of commercial rehabilitation only. Because no new construction will occur, this project is exempt under CEQA Section 15101, Class 1. In summary, the majority of the area within the proposed redevelopment expan- sion has been covered in previous environmental documentation. Under CEQA Section 15067, "where an EIR or Negative Declaration has been prepared, no additional EIR need be prepared. " In the remaining area, no significant changes will occur; therefore, no additional environmental review will be required. AREA NOT INCLUDED IN SPECIFIC PLAN _ ]IJCJ' 3'X JLJCJCJC�CJCJL� C_i _� L ! C IIF L // . \ LF C: C �J �J CJ i_JCJCCJ[111 CCJCJCJC:JCJCCJ C J ',i _ �j, r i r'I C�p t•' , r;� I ,r"j ! �� 1 III �JCJC,�.CJCJCJLJ �� C�3�J ; CJMCJ E---1 _JC7, LCJ ' �C !,JL !� I - r r -- L ATTACHMENT "B" This area was not addressed in the Downtown Specific Plan EIR. /—ltcr> . '" REQUEO FOR CITY COUNCOACTI N 83-20 GZS' Date May 12, 198 GZ� 19 Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council g0� Submitted by: Charles W. Thompson, City Administrator ��4 ✓ t��c Prepared by: 0-I Tom Tincher, Director of Business and Industria erpris Subject: FORMATION OF A PROJECT AREA COMMITTEE FOR THE- MAT - R EVELOPMENT PROJECT PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 1 AREA Statement of Issue, Recommendation,Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attachments: STATEMENT OF ISSUE: Because::there is likely to be some resident wand mobilehome displacement as a re- sult of redevelopment activities within the proposed Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Plan Amendment No. l Area, Califfornia Community Redevelopment Law requires that the City form a Project Area Committee (PAC) comprised of property owners, residents and business representatives. RECOMMENDATION: Approve the expansion- of the existing Main-Pier PAC as outlined below and appoint persons who qualify to represent the designated interests: Main-Pier Plan Amendment No. 1 Project Area Committee EXISTING EXISTING (1) Residential Tenant Oleta Kiewatt (1) Residential Property Owner Gary Mulligan (1) Business Property Owner Oscar Taylor (1) Business Tenant Carl Hayward (1) Representative of the Downtown Richard Jensen Merchants' Guild PROPOSED RECOMMENDATIONS TO BE PROVIDED (1) Blufftop Subarea Property Owner da COW D974 (1) Downtown Core Subarea Property �VUU:r ovpq/ Owner (1) Mobi l ehome Park Resident b4Ls._31dIpA M (1) Downtown Business Tenant N'A t-RL► O�o$"3 CH ANALYSIS: . State Law provides that the City Council shall call upon the residents and exist- ing community organizations in a redevelopment project area, or amended:.area, with- in which a substantial number of low- and moderate-income families are to be dis- placed by the redevelopment project, to form a Project Area Committee. This com- mittee shall include, when applicable, residential owner:•occupants, residential tenants, businessmen and members of existing organizations within the project area. The members of the committee shall serve without compensation. P10 4/81 RCA 83-20 • May 12, 1983 Page Two The State Law specifically provides that the Redevelopment Agency, through its staff, consultants and Agency members, shall , upon the direction of and approval of the City Council , consult with, and obtain the advice of, the Project Area Committee concerning those policy matters which deal with the planning and pro- vision of residential facilities or replacement housing for those to be displaced by project activities. The Agency shall also consult with the PAC on other policy matters which affect the existing residents and, in addition, it is pm- posed that the PAC be consulted on matters affecting existing businesses as well . The PAC will review the proposed redevelopment plan amendment, owner participation rules, replacement housing plan and relocation plan and, if the PAC chooses, may prepare a report and recommendati:ons. for submission to the City Council for consideration prior to action by the City Council on. the rede- velopment plan amendment and associated documents. If the'-PAC opposes the adoption of the redevelopment plan amendment, then the City Council may only approve said plan by a two-thirds vote of its entire mem- bership eligible and qualified to vote on said plan. The PAC shall serve in its designated capacity throughout the period of preparation of the redevelopment plan amendment and for a three-year period after the adoption of the redevelop- plan amendment, subject to one-year extensions by the City Council . In our effort to expedite the planning process and to meet the legal requirement and the public hearing date requirement, staff is recommending that the City Council appoint the members at this time. FUNDING SOURCE: Redevelopment Administrative Funds. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: None; the PAC required pursuant to Community Redevelopment Law. ATTACHMENTS: None. CWT:TT:jb Colry OF HUNTINGTON BEACH COUNCIL ADMINISTRATOR COMMUNICATION Hl/NTINGTON BEACH To Mayor Don MacAllister and City From Charles W. Thompson, Council Members City Administrator Subject EXPANSION OF PROJECT AREA COMMITTEE Date May 16, 1983 After informing you of proposed appointments to the Main-Pier Project Area Com- mittee and soliciting comments from you concerning this matter, the following appointments are suggested: (1) Blufftop Subarea Property Owner. Vi Cowden (1) . Downtown Core Subarea Property Robert Koury Owner (1) Mobilehome Park Resident Dale Ingram (1) Downtown Business Tenant Natalie Kotsch CWT:jb a *�- TY OF HWITINGTOAEACtl �.' COUNCIL ADMINISI RATOR 'COMMUNICATION To .' City Council Members From Charles W. Thompson City Administrator Subiect FORMATION OF .EXPANDED PROJECT AREA Date May 12, 1983 COMMITTEE FOR MAIN-PIER REDEVELOPMENT AREA Included in your agenda packet is an RCA recommending the formation of an expanded Project Area Committee in the Main-Pier Redevelopment Area. Staff is proposing various categories for representation on the expanded committee. In addition, staff has made an effort to identify potential candidates who would. qualify to fi l'l* the. respective positions. Following is a list of recommended positions and 'possible candidates to serve on the committee: v, (1) Blufftop Subarea Property Owner (1) Downtown Core Subarea Property Robert Koury Owner (1) Mobilehome Park Resident Dale Ingram (1) Downtown Business Tenant Natalie Kotsch Staff is in, the process of contacting these candidates to see if they would have an interest in serving on the committee if they should be appointed by the City- Council . Because this contact has not been made and I have not had an opportunity to discuss these or other potential appointees with you, we have not included the specific names in the agenda packet, but would hope to formalize these recommenda- tions between now and the time they are considered on Monday evening. If you have any additional suggestions or concerns over these potential appoi.ntees, please let me know right away. CWT:jb CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH D INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION ; 1983 HUNTINGTON BEACH CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS GAIL HUTTON CITY COUNCIL OFFICE To OF THE CITY COUNCIL. FromCity Attorney Subject COUNCILMAN JOHN THOMAS Date July 15, 1983 BACKGROUND: At the City Council meeting of July 11, 1983, Mayor MacAllister asked for a written opinion on the issue of whether Councilman John Thomas will be qualified to vote on the Main-Pier Redevelop- ment Project Plan Amendment No. 1. The issue arose because it appears that the Huntington Beach Company, which owns some 41 acres of land within the borders of " the proposed project, .is a "source of income" to Mr. .Thomas. ISSUE: Do Government Code Sections 87100 and 87103 (c ) preclude Council- man John Thomas from voting on the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Plan Amendment because of his relationship with the Huntington Beach Company? CONCLUSION: If Councilman John Thomas has received, or been promised, income aggregating $250 or more in value within 12 months prior to July 18, 1983, from the Huntington Beach Company, he shall not "make, participate in making, or in any way attempt to use his official position to influence the decision" concerning the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Plan Amendment:. ANALYSIS: Similar questions have been presented regarding Councilman John Thomas in the past, but not particularly dealing with this Redevelopment Project. On December 8, 1982, this issue was in the context of a question concerning Councilman Thomas and Councilman Pattinson (see attached Exhibit "A" ) . On December 14, 1982, the City"Attorney 's of"fice requested an opinion from the Fair Political Practices Commission concerning the same subject (see attached Exhibit "B" ) . L/ Honorable Mayor and City Council Re: Councilman John Thomas July 15, 1983 Page Two On June 25, 1983, the State of California Fair Political Practices Commission responded to our request (see attached Exhibit "C" ) . We will, therefore , only address the general principles contained in the above three documents as they specifically related to the issue at hand. The key inquiry turns on whether the Redevelopment Project Amend- ment will have a "material financial effect" upon the Huntington Beach Company which is a source of income , under §87103 (c ) of the California Government Code, to Mr. Thomas. Such issue was discussed in a similar case by the California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, in Witt v. Morrow, 70 Cal .App. 3d 817, 139 Cal.Rptr. 161. That case involved similar facts in that a City Councilman, Mr. Morrow, participated in the San Diego City Council, acting as the Redevelopment Agency, by adopting a proposed redevelopment plan for a shopping center. Councilman Morrow was also employed by a corporation (BEE) which owned three properties across the street from the shopping center and one-half interest in a parcel "very close to the center. " The court discussed the applicability of §87103(c ) of the Govern- ment Code as follows : "Morrow says he has made the disclosures required by the statute and should not have been disquali- fied from participating in these decisions because there is no evidence to support a finding of fact that decisions regarding the Center have had or will have a 'material financial effect ' on his own pocketbook. Because the money would accrue to BEE . . . rather than directly to him, Morrow argues his interest is remote, because he is paid a set monthly fee, rather than a percentage. Morrow says BEE 's fortunes and failure are of no con- sequence to him. Honorable Mayor and City Council Re: Councilman John Thomas July 15, 1983 Page Three This same argument may conceivably be made by Councilman Thomas. He may feel that simply because he receives business from the Huntington Beach Company his participation in redevelopment decisions is not affected and, therefore, his own interest in those decisions is remote . The court in Witt v. Morrow said: "Here , Morrow is employed directly by BEE; he is paid a salary directly by BEE; . . . as a member of the Redevelopment Agency, he would participate directly in decisions on the redevelopment of the Center across the street; these decisions on land use may affect the value of BEE 's investment. . . The fact that any increase in value of the prop- erty would accrue to BEE . . . does not make Morrow's interest remote. Such an interpretation would mean that as long as he was paid a set salary by a third party, a public official would never have a conflict of interest between his public duties and his private employment because his interest would always be remote. " In the case of Councilman Thomas, he is employed by the Huntington Beach Company, presumably on an independent contractor basis, but the important connection is that the Huntington Beach Company is a "source of income" as in the Morrow case . Moreover, the Redevelopment Project contains some 41 acres owned by the Huntington Beach Company as did BEE in the Morrow decision. Indeed, Huntington Beach Company pays Councilman Thomas more than just a fixed salary which seemed to be the distinguishing fact in Morrow. It pays Thomas for work performed and may, therefore, increase or decrease his income at will. This fact makes Mr. Thomas ' connection to the. Huntington Beach Company less remote since there could be a conflict of interest between his public duties as councilman and his private employment with the Huntington Beach Company. In Morrow the court discussed the issue of potential profits accruing to the "source of income" and not to the councilman as follows: Honorable Mayor and City Council Re : Councilman John Thomas July 15, 1983 Page Four "Morrow claims decisions concerning the redevelop- ment in Linda Vista have no 'material financial effect' on him because he receives a set amount each month. The unstated implication is that even if BEE were to reap large profits Morrow's salary would remain the same. However, the statute is concerned with whether there will be a 'material financial effect . . . on any source of income (over $250 ) . . . '" (Emphasis added ) Accordingly, so long as there is a material financial effect on the Huntington Beach Company, it matters not that a fixed amount of income is paid. As mentioned above , the fact that there is no fixed income for Councilman Thomas from the Huntington Beach Company may be a sufficient basis upon which to conclude that there is a closer connection to "financial interest" here than in the Morrow case . Additionally, it may be argued that there is no evidence to support a finding that a "material financial effect" would flow to the Huntington Beach Company. This contention is without merit in that it is necessary to show only that it be reasonably foreseeable that the decision would have an effect on the Huntington Beach Company or "source of income . " In Morrow the court found sufficient evidence where an appraiser testified that properties closer to the renewal area would improve faster than those farther away. "There was no need to give specific dollar amounts or percentage increases of the appreciation BEE might expect. " Finally, it is instructive to review the court 's discussion of the underlying purpose for the Political Reform Act and the ratonale therefor: "The whole purpose of the Political Reform Act of 1974 is to preclude a government official from participating in decisions where it appears he may not be totally objective because the outcome will likely benefit a corporation or individual by whom is is also employed. (See County of Nevada v. Macmillen, 11 Cal. 3d 662, 674, 114 Cal .Rptr. 345, 522 P. 2d 1345 ) . That is the situation here . Honorable Mayor and City Council Re : Councilman John Thomas July 15, 1983 Page Five "It is not just actual improprieties which the law seeks to forestall but also the appearance of possible improprieties. Any employee , in the private or public sector, wishes to keep his job and maintain good relations with his employer. A person who must make decisions which may affect his employer ' s purse is in a situation where he may not give full consideration to the merits of the decision. "One cannot serve two masters (Matthew 6: 24 ) . " Bear in mind . that the City Attorney 's office is only an advisor to the responsible and affected official in the matter of conflict of interest. This office is not empowered to "disqualify" any councilperson from exercising his or her vote. Councilpersons have an absolute right while they sit to act or abstain in any matter they choose . Further, neither the council as a whole, any majority of the council, or any other member is the arbiter of a fellow council- person 's right to vote or abstain or participate. Such decisions are entirely within the right, power and duty of the office holder and the decision is solely his. Coupled with this power, however, is the burden of error. Participating when disqualified is a crime . Additionally, participation can be enjoined by the court. Section 91003 of the California Government Code provides that the court may also "set the official action aside as void. " Accordingly, Councilman Thomas should strongly consider the con- sequences of his decision to participate in the light of its potential effect" to himself and the city. A - 4�_ GAI L HUT, ON City Attorney J .t U"r iN r R-D`(}A�;TfV'L I CQ,�1`;iLil1: �,111 Q 1 b To COUNCILMAN. PATTINSON Frpm Gr, .. J'. City Attorney Subject CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AS AN Date Decejilber 8 , EMPLOYEE OF A BUSINESS ENTITY MENOR '':DigA OPINION We have been risked to render an c pinion an situntiu Cowncilman may be in a conflict of interest by vir't'.](' -'is status as an elilployee of a buSil'ass entity owned by an::'`...ar councilman . Rather than address specific Eact ::=ituatiu ns ,r: -- } will speak generally of the applicable principles . The touchstone W the conflict oL interest law is Gov;:r .. - •` .. f'dO public official aL any l(.'ve at sLatc or local govor!nmeint ME Cis_ make , ._ni.ci. atc K . making .(fir in any vay „_ e;1 pL to use hiz (.Ie(; Ision in which hQ 1:'iCi''... Oi n•.s uen .:n to, r:now he IlaFi ail H:lit;tcis :. LnCnitQn:__ . An oH .].c . ? ; haF a Vlna' ciaf. K ._. u seahle 1. We aqcinion t disL. nqul.'.iilaf).i-c - Eron AS ris ucu G:. Chu n ! bc vijy , . r.)i. t.h e feilowing intorests : ( a ) A"v business CI-: 0 ty A ,.u7.Gh th°_- WhHO official has a direct nr worth more than one thousand do cars ! , 000 • " ( b ) Any real properLy in uhicK the public KHAN has a direct or inoicact intn.r st Wol:t l more than One thousand dollars 01 , 000 ) ( c ) Any source K income , (-i.k 1- than loans by a commercial le_ndin ; insf inu .on i.i' the � ' rayular ourne (; ) ht:..,i., _SS nh 1 .`tr!'.?S avo ,..}:. . ble to the puhlic withouL tnIn!rd , .; Mficikl .,t-:ILuq , 0'Iq f .1,-11 ! nq i".F.i imil(;rod 1 i , t y 4- t f)'•,' or f:1-om i scd W tit'. , L is : 5:01 wKwin .12 iilO;l l:hs prior Lq the time ,."Gn the ;uw i s ion is made . . 8YHIBIT "A" councilman Pcat".tinson Mccmdou V .! ' ;;c�. Re.. Conflict of Interest ;,aye Two " (d ) Any business entity in which the public official is a director , officer- , partner , trustee , employee , or holds any; position of management . '' Government .Code §07103 It is obvious from Treading these categories that not all Of .them. hem. apply to an employee of another councilmember . interests t'h t might disqualify the employer under paragraphs ( a) and ( '. ) will not necessarily disqualify the employee , unless he is also an ' investor . Likewise , paragraph ( c) wi_il not generally apply Lo the employee except as paragraph (d ) appiies . T hus , r Au more fact that .the employer is disqualified by ;a conflict o ii ner._.c. under these pacadraphs does not disqualify the emplo1 eu- The pertinent elimitation is (.d ) , a foreseeable material financial. effect upon a business entity of which the counn.il:;em;.:_.•y is employee . Such a material Mect would disquaVVy the council member . ( See Witt v . Porrow ( 1977 ) 70 Cal- .hpp , 3d 817 , 139 Cal . Rptr . 161 ) . `.Lill' conflict of interest law ,i')C_'_s not definn Trial effect . ' However , the r eg1;l 0any of thy l''PPC `i"t .:Or 'O . ;; _ w ..-. tests . Under the reyula'tions , a _Iec_.:-ion has is Matu . -. .. _ ,. .-'.?n: 1 .. . it will have a " significant NOW t" on the business ea .. _ ty . FPPC summarizes toe situations defining whether 1:t: is . whether a decision will be significant in its pamphlet _.. the act : "As a general rule , an effect of $100 , 000 or more on real property or a business entity is considereC: material. . When the effect Cat a goveyn- mental decision is between $1 , 000 and $100 , 000 the ehect may be material , " Tho applical_,le regulation lists this Cal.l.owi-ng f.:rckors " cop- Mering whether the effect upon the t)US1.1 oss oi;Ll.ty C::u>-l..ayinq the coundilmember may foi. esecably be a matCr1,:: 1. financial Ci L cct : " Ln dei:i?r:min .ng l•JhpLhur it is ,renson lhl1 foreseeahlc that '.:hc EJI-.L uts of a governmental decision will bo significant , consideration sh A be given to the following factors : f & Councilman Pattinson December S , 1982. Re . Conflict of Interest Pagc Thre-a ":'ih(_'ther ,'. in the case of a business entity . . . ( Or source of income ) in -whicK the public official is a director , officer , partner , employee , trustee or holds an%l position of management, the effect of the decision will be to increase or decrease : (A) The annualized Gross revenues by the lesser_ of : 1 . One hundred thousand dollar: ( $100 , 000 ) ; or 2 . One percent if it is one thousand: dollars 01 , 000 ) or more ; or ( L ) An.nual. net income by the lesser of : 1 . Fifty thousand dollars ( ti 50 , 000 ) 1 . 2 . One half K One percent _ f it is one thousand dollars ( $1 , 000 ) or more ; or (C ) Current assets or liabilities b , the lesser of : 1 . One hundred thousand ( $100 ,.000 ) ; or 2 . One 'half of One percent if A is one thousand dollars or more .. ''CurcenL assetsf Memed t he i - -r`d by the amount at any expcnncs inuarued an resul L Q a yovernmennal. Ueci:: ion . '' ( L California t- dministuative Coda 118 02 ) It, can he readily seen that it is a qu:astion M Lact ';! -iwhcy particular decision :•:ill. have a matc ial financial effect on business entity and requires knowledge and ai;ci...ysis of the .n one and assets. of the business that may not be pl_':?lic information and is beyond the scope of the disclosure requirements . is r_,. '.Cie feces of the inquiry in analyzing rleci_sion> that �. ->_�__ct a business entity employing a council I'ilC_'fiiber is I:.he financial �# efCact on that business entity . if the employe council fR�Ji�'bor � 1 1. is disquali ded under §871.03 (d ) , the employed ronncil membcr Ghoul d also he d l squal i F ied . t1C)`:ll'ver ; UK f;llt>'.1 IY.l nnv h- . l.l.lSM With I:h " KOHI l:(., "F I II(;OI! V 01- L!'CL Ili - "l .II: ;glpl.-i !. n � knI • . .. . t I I e (.o 1.11)('! I . S"Ot: iOn 1 7 l 03 ( C ) itl.0 It US WL dK ,. .. h L :?.-..1. ii•. t_1llanCla1. ].nt.C'L"(]-`it if tilu i;i?('J.slOn hrl.l..L IiaVi' a I:OI:Cs;_'Cat).L ( material financial effect upon any source oi: income _LGCj;Ru ating $250 or. 11iore to the official. . In the case of the employee council mgmber , the " source of income" will normally be thc_ r CounciIinan hattinson > , 1932 Re : Conflict of Interest ?.;cue Four employing business entity . However , with theemployer council member, the " source of income" will normally be the applicant before the Council . Thus , the mete fact that the employer is disqualified under the '" source of income" rule Goes not per "� require .disqualiLication of the employee . FOP e}:ample , assume a developer has a sl.!i)CI,- .-,_,:.moil map before the Council . Developer has paid $250 to the employer councilman , but .has not paid anything to the employee councilman . The " source income" inquiry is whether the decislop will have a material financial effect upon the developer ; if so , employer is Cis- qualified , but notemployee . Only ifthe decisioiladditionally has a material financial effect- upon the emp1..;_'_..ing business entity is the eriployee council member disqualified . These are the general guidelines . If we are provided _ :..-, specific fact situations dnd figures , we will attempt to apply the above principles a„d render advisory opir. .c;ns . City Attorney OF! WE OF CITY A F. Q. SOX 1.90 200011,-Mi STR[ET HUB KNE fON BEACH CALIFCRNIA 926,18 GAIL HUTTON TELEP"UM. City Attorney - _ 04) 5355355 . December 14 ; . 1082 Fair Political Practices Commission Legal Division 1100 "K" Street Post Office Box 807 Sacramento , California 95804 Gentlemen : The City of Iluntington ? each. 1"el nests an opinion on thie conflict of inLeL",est arising from one counci.L member woukin fc- a corporation owned by another . As we understand the Eacts , Councilman :on PaLtinsor: .mpiojvwj works for a company .;holly owned by Councilman ,7ohn 'l' .._..:..:s ( employer ) . Thr company is John A . Thomas Cry.,:. .: wK Twock : r7 , Inc , , a California corporation . Employee has no interns : company . `here is no s g'_estio of any 2 _ . The company does some ..ol. k f-c,_ the Huntington M_Ici: Company , _ corporation of Which Standard Oil of California is the majc shareholder . Ue do not 'C?low the dollar a??loon`_ of this wok _ _ the relationship it bears to the Tho?'.lad, company ' s annual in,cmv . The Huntington Beach Company is .a major landowner in the ci frequently has development projects before the Council . t o _isc 'generally do not have specific knowledge whether any p 'sir_! ' project has a material financial effect on the Huntington MEN-, Company Or itz parent corporation . Thomas r '^Cres inca�i. $10 , O0n t0 the TllOmd5 COIIpa;1y f=r:0ia the (tilill:7.ilQ l_:i;1.A�;;1 .� — o?i 5-`�Fe led u. e 2 .f'f ; 'a C1= ?.n scan does rc)1.^_L.nz-ar �,iluntinan cacTl Ccnl )and on h.i.s COIlCa1.Ct Of i.I ?_:r::rt'St "_ �x statement . 4.1e have written an e)pin,-can annay;;i.nci L-Ili.; proi. .em and at..:-;.... _. copy . In general , we Vic".•1 §03103 (d ) as ll,':, :?' iny hn i1 C: ? _ _1:.',., _ .-• emplovec if _l decision haz a m wr;,; t .Ermine!-iI Thomas company . 1.'hl.s cot-,Q.d oC. _,?r L �)TE l•:a:.. ,1.,")'.1 ab_i.e that: , (.1ec.ls1a-:_l wn lit 'L A ustC S OiI )_ny til il t ldVe_ ._S1 I11� 1Cant accyC1L-'?_1�0'.l bars the employer It the „-,a'tcriai �AM t _. the Huntington Bench Company as a source of income to Thomas his company . The employec, is not disqualified in every aizua- tion merely because the employe;: is d isqual i f d . EXHIBIT "B" 1 Fair Political Practices Commission December. 14 , 1982 Page Two I We would appreciate your thoughts on the accuracy of our opiKs . Please contact us if you need any further information . i Very truly yours, 5 GAIL HUTTON .City Attorney GH : RCS : ps Enclosure cc : Mayor and Members of City Council City Administrator ta,to of Z •�i.iTS+,.s �t3�+njJS�a jl'A-\ i s r �!A t ✓ r A r1T c:till Sl nip ..i•ir l� 1a . _ 321 _ 7 P.O. BOA S07 SACRAMENTO, 45SO4 . . . 1100 K ST ._._i bUIiD NG, ��> '�:y;T.-•' '.ethnical Assi%tcnce Ad,nwistcahon EReo ;•.el:cgal z-io:ccr.-,_nt (916) 322-5662 322-5660 322-5901 2.4aL1 322 =- January 25, 198 P--Is. Gail Button My Attorney P.P. Box 190 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach , Cif 92648 ... R a . Your R e q e s f o i Advice , W Advice No -02- 10 Dear Ms . Hutton : Thank you for your le'C � � rng - - _t L.I r L-C a r C{ the c.. 5`_��.-�. -- -i �.C:r •-;� interesrs provisions of the Political. Reform ..or jotter that Councilman Ran rattinson is emplc• company :!holly owned by Councilwan john '!'.;c:;n,_, .; , This conpok;. Jon, A. '1no111as Crane and `ir ucK .S ng , Goes war . Low Thomas wcat disqualify themselves from =:o :ern =.itai nc_. _ . _.o ..._ affecting Thomas Crane u Trucking or Huntin gnon Leach Compsny . Government Code Section t %1 00=0/ prohibits in official _.:on making. and participating in the making of a governmental decision in which he knows or has _reason to Kno, he has a financial interest . An MUM has a financ -,_,__ interest in a decision within the meaning of Section 37100 E it is ronsonably foresl'-Calale that a decision will Have a ❑jat-eri.Al financial e f f e c t i/ on : A. '1'1 Hun t.i.nyLon ocach Company Palo Joli:, A. `i'i:r.m.. ,, C:: ..n and Trucking over $1.0, 000 in 1981 . f/ Herwinakuer all 5_ _�Li_tsences aLe 1"_i ...:1-: unless otherwise indicated . The phrise "material Anancial. Afectll is c:Y'Jl:. _I:l:::_ in 2 Cal.. Adm . Code Section 16702 . EXHIBIT "C" Ms . Ga i 1 Hutton January 25, i983 Page T w o (a) . Any business entity in wniCh the public official has an investment worth more than $1 , 000 . (b) Any real copC'rt1; in wnicn the uolic official hos an interest worth more than $1 , 000 . (c) Any source of income aggfegati: q 230 mor` r"eceived . within 12 months prior to the time when cle decision is made . (d) Any business entity in wnich the public official is an employee or holds any position of manaeeme„ t . C;ouncilma.n Thomas has an investment interest of over $1 , 5W in Thomas Crane and Trucking ; it is a source of: Gcome to ..i over 1250 ; and he holds a position of management in tha SuAnwwa entity . The company is also a source of income to izs employes , Mr . Pa tti nson. Thus, neither Mr . Thomas :or Mr . Fatcins3n _... make or participate in tree making of a ;overl."..:_;`l:_al enis___.. . . it is reasonably foreseeable that t thy' decision wdli n . . material financial effect o- `� n 1T�i1 'Mane ani in 11 1�.Jll•U J l..L J Huntington Beach Company is : L S C c. source at incomu ._ :. $.50 to Councilman Thanas. Since Mr . Thomas is Woln 3VAf q .-- Thomas Crane ` tucking , income from Hanti.njLin . wcA C'o _ the truc:.iny company is deemea tc De personal income Mr lho as i'r The'ref re Mr . Thomas musz abstain from decision if it is reasonauly iore.sedable that _ .: ,, .mil_. e =_ material financial effect on the Huntington Boesch Company . :L hope I have clarified your questions ,?bout the Poll is w. Reform Act. If you , or tt e .Councilmembers, have any =._ ci :.__onDl questions, please .feel free to contact me at 16/3 22-5901 . Very truly yours, i /� Jis1ii s Shank '1�:Lea t. Counsel 1 �' Legal .Division, JSM: k:il Enclosures Q Section 82030 (a) provides that income 01 an injiv i .+aol includes a }fro rata sham'_ of any income of any wusincss enzi , in which the individual owns a 10% interest or greater . ReguIations o the ra:ir Po'Lit i .. 1. Practices (Title 2 , Division 6 of the Cai:i_i-or is r.dminiscrat_�:e %ode? 18702. Material • inancial E.ffec- (a) The i,..iancia1 •effect C;f u qc . _-:r; tc decision on a Linancia-. int=rest of a nub s offic- c' material if the decision will have Z the business .entity , real property oL soy rco� oL _ co::,a _.. question. (b) in aetermwn ng wheti.- 1 : i icc �On Jit' foreseeable that the o-ILE ect—s of a gava :r:��en: :i C 'c_'_ �ii) '. will be sig%iiicant `:Ji h i n the ;;1ean?. :Q 0 :? standarc set forth in aragraph (a' , Con S iC`er .CiOi. S: c.i.'. . be given to t e f0110,,Jing Fors . ( t e case C,*.'_ _._. _._ . entity in ;: ,ich t:.e :LI 4 (7 ci. _c__..:_ .o__,:. Or i1:(d_fe nvest:aC-. 01 0n J'_..c.�,.� (al, GOG) or more cc in the case o .__ ss . entity in vi ich the oublic off_cI i i S _ractc - officer, partner, e:�,plovee , trust,- - or :Oy..., a- position of Management, the. effeb cf the cis_. will "o increase or decrease : 'A) 'she a;::zuali.;ed c cc tl:e 1�cse� of . I. Cne hunuri_ s :c Co. (:5100, 00CI) o: . one thous--nd doll- s I , vuj or _ or (3) Ar.nu l net_ income 511, c:ze l"asse 1. F, ft housa o'i a s (a550 , 000) ; or . 2. One half Of one ,Dercent i� effect _s one thousand dollars OC or more ; or {C) Curr'enu asseLS or 1_ab4Lliti the lesser of : 1. One hundred thou_~:d do- -rs ($100, 000) ; or 2. Gre calf or one oe�rcerit _ t_'irect is One tho-sand QC!laf5 { , COJ, or 11or . GGCrc 5 ?Cl EL, amount Uv ex-:�o: .: incurred as an resu-i- c, decision. ( 2) Whether, in zhe cus` of a indirect in-terest in real pro:,ert Q.. O`1c _.:C;-, c011ars ( $1, 000) or more held Cv _ i� Orr lclal, tC a e t act- of: the Oec i sicn I i :DE- %C• increase or decrease Lhe prod, r L'+' o.:' :hc Der month; or 2. Five per t �r .or, h i per m0:,ti1� Or (B The fair iTlar;:e `! 1.ue. ok property 15V Lhe lesser Of I. Ten thousa::d viol a s or 2. Olz, nalf of o.-;e -ercent .-- is One z.,CusanC 0,3 M. ur more . ( 3) [ het III e_ , 1;1 tfle Cc "r income as defined in Government 8'l03, (c , o t,ao hundred f 1L ty do _ :ram l"io e receIvt=_,,d ri1 Gr 0r"Dm,1, 0 !'J..._C With In 12 monL""hs i i.vr madC . A) Tl-e effect c� to directly increase or deer L.e e - c<w .., Of income (Ot:lear tl:an ref:ts,) to ty the official_ , or to co;;f__ benefit or cecrijruer.t Upon o fic _ :_ o _ i, member o t1ie. officiai ' F, ilr.:; c.iaV-e ;i - ' , -. •= more ; o: (3) Thlei:e is U 7o✓ermment:al decision and t; I r:�c�� nor which the offic-'' r� ..r;e ; 3 • (C) I:. the case o a ourCe which is a business entity , :,e buw..__ ... entity will be afz"ected in ld.^..:er e S C _, c ' in su-seci.ion (b) (1) above ; or (D) if the source of ncome nog _ business .entity', the decisicr, w significant exect on the source . (c) Subsections (a) and (:;) o` is ?C i0i: notaithstanding , the making or participation in E. M or a Governmental decision by a contract c::,: su1tant f b : person retained to provide 1.nLc rim a_Ion, - e , redo imer.dation or counsel has no material ncis _ er._ _ on a ousiness ent:.tY or source or income i7: w iC:: S `:. consultant Or person fetai,ned . s an o;f:f ice,f, eT. ,, - Oro :rletor or part„ter , Ir decision are tI:e Modi`icatio~, per�e- uat_._:. o� the contractual or retainer as ee:nen anC;'L)L., t le opportunity to bid co:^.petitively on the ��rc- c or,traci: Gov. Code Section 871 03 history ( _ Ne;a section filed 2 2� / J e�tectiv.e Z) /i:nendir,ent filed 12,/2 / % c _ . L/19/i C,' SU D5C:C _Ji-,S ( 4) Um�'.:C]:il'._,i t L l l l c 3) 5 ` 8%32 4 INTER-DE'ARTOEN'�" COMMUNICATION ✓(/ Pryv � 1�o,� 1 9y 83 To h':JNORAE�LE ROBERT MAND1-C From GAIL HUTTON C/ryC o, �NGTO HUNTINGtUN BEACH CITY COUNCIL Attorney cli 'Iv�t oulject Conflict of Interest . - Date July 12, 1983' :,tam Pier Redevelopment Project. Background At , the City Council meeting on July 11 , 1983, Cott,. you rand Mayor MacAllister requested an opinion concerning your possible disqualification to participate in a decisions r_eiatinr; to ,Main- Pier Redevelopment Project, Plan Amer:c rzrent No . 1 . The contention was that them had been conflicting opi:iions or; the same subject given by this office . This is not the :case. The first opinion �`ri the suu . ct, :fated Sept:.ember 23, 198 2; CL copy •)4 o7hicr, is W.- -.ached _jc. Exhihit "A ..elated to . C C e a 1 property interest owned by you: Irself i.tt the Gothard area. Thv s,_ opinion opinon on tine sut!-)]ect , dated _ _:jr:uar`.1 G2, l .7, ( Exhlbi-t "B" hereto ) relates r.:.:i a tour-pl&x owneu � i1' _✓Ql)�r ?� .� situated in Suu-a ire a Two o the Main-P].er Rt r.;.4Ce!� • Tlein h'iinall_y , the opi;-,ian expressed at the City Council. '(;eetl.n._,, of July l 1 , 1983, rela_tc=!d to the Mandi_c Motors_ business. e,:iti _•J is Sub-ar,.=a rive . Sub-at:-__a rive was not a part ur the original i.n existence at the time E'x} ib'i t "B" was written . xriihits "A'° and "B" and this opinion are, limited in scc• ,e to t.ic Sri_ `:!c areas in - question . Sub-are Five thus r_;:s._-nt.s iz.cc L ct pact,--rn to be considered. Analysis Goverment Code Sect_on 87101 which in re1'_ •ant p�.rt provides, that . "No public official at any level of state or local government make, pa.rt-ici;Date in ;r;aking or: in any way attempt: to Use h .:, official _vositi-Dn to in 'l.uence a gover..nmental decision in which he knows or has reason to know i1e has a finance interest. (Lmphas added ) ----- Councilman Robert Mandic Re : Conflict of Interest July 12, 1983 Page Two Government Code Section 87103 provides in pertinent part : "An ofticial has a financial interest in a deci- sion within the meaning of Section 87100 if it is reasonably foreseeable that the derision will have a material financial effect on: " (c ) Any source of income ag; regatincj two hundred fifty dollars ( 5250 ) or more in value received -by or promised to the public official within twelve months .prior to the time when the decision is made , or . " (d ) Any business entity in which the2ublic official is a director, officer, partner,-trustee, employee , or holds any position of _management. " (Emphasis added ) You are an. employee of Mandic Motors and "':old a position c :,= mrnageme:rt" therein . Additionally, you received froi-i Mond _- Motors. as a source of income in excess of DSO in va.'-ue within twelve, months prior to the meeting of July 11, l983. Under .t; ose facts, our conclusion is that -,you fall.. within purview of Government Code Section 87106 bec _use of your involvement with Mandic [Motors, a business entity within the project area. As such, one has only to cietermine whether "material financial effect" is reasonably toreseeable tc; the business entity, Mandic Motors , as a result of the- decision. In a recent decision by the Fair Political Practices Commission ( 3 FPPC Op. 38 ) the above test was discussed with regard to u council member who owned property several hundred feet from tn. Manned developinent and not within the planned development.i The Commission said: "With respect to foreseeability, it sec.-ins abun dantly clear that. this criterion is satisfied as to all of the above interests. The proposed senior citizens ' housing complex is located within the City ' s redevelopment zone , and is part of the last portion of the zone to be redeveloped. Councilman Robert Mandic Re : Conflict of Interest July 12, 1983 Page Three Redevelopment zones are created for the precise purpose of upgrading portions of a community and creating a positive financial impact on invest- ments and property values in the zone . Ideally, new businesses are attracted", new sales and services result, the value of the redeveloped property, and property in close proximity to it, increases .because of more productive use , and the community', in general, benefits through a . broadened tax base . Thus, it is intended and anticipated that redevelopment will have a financial . impact on real property and businesses located in and near the redevelopment zone . (Emphasis added ) In the present. case , we think it- Ls ' r_e.ason.ably f(.-)re.seeable that these. types C, ;p 0sitive financial consequences wi_11 occur if the property in question is rezoned and the senior citizens-' housing complex constructed.. Moreover, .e tl-ink it is. clear that Flavor GiIIr�Qr 's interests will be affected ._ The decision to rezone and to construct the new housing complex foreseeably will briny additional renters, visitors, shoppers and, foot traffic , in general , into the area . Accordingly, more potential customers will be avail:-able for Mayor Gillmor ' s sources of income . Finally, if these various businesses do enjoy an increase in business, their locations will become more desirable and real 2roperty values, including those of Mayor Gillmor ' s property, foreseeably will be enhanced. "We also conclude that these foreseeable financial effects will be 'material ' within the meaning of Section 871.03. 2 Cal .Adm.Code Secti.or; 18702 clarifies the concept of materiality and ,provides, in pertinent part : " (a ) The financial effect of a governmental decision on a financial interest of a public official is material if , at the time the Councilman Robert Mandic Re : Conflict of Interest July 12, 1983 Page Four official makes, participates in making or attempts to use his or her official position to influence the making of the decision , in light of all the circumstances and facts known at the time of the decision , the official knows or has reason to know that the existence of the financial interest might interfere with the official ' s performance of his or her duties in an impartial manner free from bias . "In applying. this test to the facts presented herein we think the following observations are pertinent. mayor Gillmor has multiple financial interests which could be affected by the_ proposed, roject, including interests in real property, investments and sources of income . Lore over,, these financial interests are located in close proximity to the proposed project (wi ! hin 1-00 yards ) . Finally, as we have indicated in ou _ . _._discussion. of the question of foreseeability, it is likely that. .pr_oceedina with the prc sed pro, ect_ will _-rodu-cc; benefic-ial.. financial . ef-iects for at least some of Mayor Gil.lmor ' s t_.nancial interests. "Under these circumstances, we think it is clear that the existence of Mayor Gillmor 's ;nultin financial interests might interfere with his abilit.y to perform his duties relative - to the rezoning issue ' in an impartial manner . free fr,TrI bias . ' Accordingly, we conclude that the Mayor is prohibited from making , participating in making or in any way attempting to use his official Losition to influence the rezoning decision . " It should be borne in mind that the factual in:t:ormation upon which we rely in preparing these opinions as to possible conflict of interest is provided us by city staff , the coancil member or as gleaned .from the public record. In regard to Exl.ibit "A" and "b, " the consensus of opinion was that. as to the property discussion ; Exhibit "A, " the location of the land and t,io condition of its Councilman Robert Mandic Re : Conflict of Interest July 12, 1983 Page 'Five development_ was such that project enhancement would have ensued. However, in the opinion in Exhibit "B, " our planning and redevelopment staff , in particular , did not feel that the value of a four-plex would be materially increased or decreased by redevelopment. Finally, with regard to the present facts , a commercial use such as an automobile repair garage is felt to be typically affected by a redevelopment project . If redevelopment were- to eliminate "blight" and upgrade the commercial arc_:a as planned, the repair garage business would very probable "priced out" of the area and forced to relocate at foreseeable loss of business, whereas, the underlying real property would by such action be enhanced in value . An employee such as Mr . [Mandic could be affected in a number of ways. The business might prosper in another location , or given the difficulty in locating sui.tabl;; zoned locations for garage repair business within the city",. the relocated business conceivably might fail or decline. The owner of the business conceivably could decide a( air_,s.. relocating and convert. the property- to anotnot use . ;:�rante-d al." of these possibilities are mere speculation , however, ti1.o possibilities (and many others.) are fei.t- to fall squarely j:i1-hin the ambit of.. what are reasonably t:orseeabie busine.ss manage:n&nt decisions. that need. be. made when .a IRa3or e •�:::r . such as area-wide redevelopment is visited upon a givoin locality. 'Bear in mind that the City Attorney ' s office it only an advisor to the responsible and affected official in the matter ok conflict c.. interest. This office is not empo:-rered to "disqualify" anv councilperson from exercising his or her vote . Council r)erso s have an ab$olute right while . they sit to arc or abstain in any matter they choose . Further, the council as a whole , nor any majority, nor any other member is not the arbiter of a fellow councilpersons ri: hL to voLk= or abstain or participate . Such decisions are entirely wit;;in the right, power and duty of the office holder and the decisio:� is solely his or hers. In sum, the choice is yours. Coupled with this power , however, is the burden of error . Participating when disqualified is a crir(ie . lidditi.ona11y , participation can be enjoined icy the court. Section 91003 of the California Government Code provides that the court may also "set the official action aside as void. " Councilman Robert Mandic Re : Conflict of Interest July 12, 1983 Page Six Hopefully, ,ae have presented in this opinion, and in our other opinions to you, sufficiently understandable and detailed reasons for the conclusions expressed herein . There can be no "general rule" adduced on this subject. The very nature of a conflict of interest requires an ad hoc or case-by-case analysis of each factual situation as it occurs and inter- relates with all factors present, and a 5olomo —like ability to decipher the problems presented is required. The purpose of rendering conflict of interest opinions is . guide the requestor in attending to his or her duty as a city official , and to. protect first the city, city council, and city staff from the consequences of an incorrect decision, and second, to protect the individual. councilperson in his official capacity and his personal capacity. Our philosophy is to � _r on the side of caution rather_ than the amide of liberality, but-', hopefully, not to err_ at all . Conclusion Our opinion is that.. you should strongly consider. disqualifying yourself as in regard to any decision materially, reasonably and forseeably affecting Mandic Motors, and that the action proposed as relates the Main Pier Redevelopment- Plan is such a decision . However, perhaps, this is a -si It-uati_on W e re reasonable minds may differ . The consequences on your deciding this question erroneously are potentially grave to ":oth yourself and the city. 6GAI�HUT TN City Attorney kdl cc : Honorable Mayor MacAllister and the Members of the City Council City Administrator- Charles W. Thompson YYY4, pFa y'''` Li I 1-- "r� n 1 __ e / '� �'•;-' n�'I INTE,t i_l=r�'`,t?TIML-N � CO? lJ, l,- VWNrIN'GION RACIi . To CHI\Rhh�'S V; If P.'PSOI�.r From G .?I_ .'u7":G[� City I.dministrator -il�y t i Subject COivl L�.C`;' OF 1NTERES'T LAP -d Dat Se'" P.II.c i j Z received your note calling at%e ltlon ,e .anCUaq _. j Goyermoent .:ode section .i103 to tha e sec t ... n ozz.-c ! a financial lnLere-st .oniv l tie .-':i7C� ..nl � _..,_...,....a.� '�_�.:C4 disc' ingulshed f' oiTl :ts er1- :'t on L}le. public cenGi"ali agree with you that the interesin �_ of ._.:0 Co,_ : _..,:rnl- =.? Gothard area are excepted' by that 4 Obviously, a coulicllmember L:'GulC I:Ot b( o i.i G :. `.'.: .:1. - on an OrCi l.nailCC f0C 1 cis,l-'ance , i eC' 1Y;',o' al.. _ CJ property within the city rilerel; becaus:: h-a o: s:::c 7. that is entir2iy difLere;it .rom ;e Suk: 1 Ownership of two acres in a potential -project rya facts appears 0 remove -.r-ne 0fT1Cla1 f..G;:i i generally . " T';le Pub. 1C C�P_;;3r a } subject survey area it is t1',e: cOns it11enCr - .. Of Class of CGillJcfr.:b1e }jrc.t�e C'/ �r b sin-..i O r l _ c_ _. . :. e City t}l:� t c0ilSt'ltutes i T1)e relevant r12C�LI•__aai< .`. O:. C o i tl Ili s s L Ci:1 r-'ad,. Cl.::, i 0. t Section 1; lia3 . ".A nat-.�rial fina,:c al c.. �: c goveCnL"'ent.,11 6ecisirD.. on Fir, Offlcadl t S _ 1'!i', St is distinguished frorn its efl e c t C l 1:.. :_ � . i• generally unless ;he decisio;: _l. : fj-,c. . :e official ' s inLe, e :L in s stantia7.iy tIn _.,:.... ' as 1L ai1.1 effect a,11 i;lembers of h, ;; D.LiC 0i: signifi,canL segment Of the public . " i' A reCeilt pcir!',1J11c t of the J'hPC r'3:fila_iiS i .`IC ' . language as follo::,s : "INn o l;1clal does not- ,lav@ a conf i 'i. oi: JnLe ' the effect of a CjoverrlplentaI vi=': 1 ;1 '% 0 Officic:'.. is financ121 intezests is no di_L .. C.n i 1.tS ?.CLi�ct On 1110::1 ot-her persons Or _:'i' •^_i::,� .:s i jurlsdicL`.loni . Fol exa„pie' i 3 C1'ty sales 'max , :.,hich Gill a%;_eCt a111 S the city, c]oes- n o L affect an.y 1nCsi counclli",iember (no iihaCter how mllch hz! Cr ' �. sales taxes) . in a different manner than i aFeccs the public clenerall'y, and , as- a i suii: dogs create a conflict 0f i1)teres for .. :_ ... l councilmember . By '.day of contrast, a C,G,C i:s V;i concerning a zoning; variance for G: c::fici::i. business or home , which has a di fe::rnt effect- on the official ' s financial interests nian cn or e members of the general public , doe:-. Consti',:l:te a 1 conflict . of interest for the off ici,-I'L " our opinion of Septe nber 2i9 cited the ! : '_...v` Ci:.0 bears or; this .issue of the public general ly=. You may also be intere_.ted in the fo11owi!-,e -'C oU ,_ __ .. 3 FPPC 38 individual counci' r einber o%. r. ` n-, real c)roce<i% "having in in the Sant,i Clara _ .. evC, o pm,e it -area affec' ed by a rez oil in,: d_c isi on ;leas ' constitute the public genera.::.V or a _ _,i:,r,iLi.c_ ::-- segment thereof -4 FPPC 19 Counci.lmembers o n i n 9 do'.ti'nto-wn com'--mercial a Jc do. not. constitute a s 9 n i f c nt se9r; r.c- o public generally i.n 'a situatio : -hE,re tine Ala\, category of downtown con:n;ercia1 top-,r' own-rs small o:ie vela ive to e� tner wss C. C L mente co:�merci� :1 proNarty ;_ . ._ r.s o: `.i1' e: =._ San_ Cle -e.nte business co:,'I;rui:i. V. 2 FPPC 77 Planning Co;,missioner gas uG partici_oati;;q in adoption of .s; :: ific I Q us for tLe dog:ntown "core area , " sin--e he partner in a partnership ahich o'::ne v cunt within the area and was ' tl:e ,:;rccc :S o constructing a commercial e ic : . ..:e commission interpreted thti °pLibI as Rollo in L-he i.11stant case , we terpret = l� phrase ' public generally ' :s com.p �ii:r. those persons within the ir!SdiCt.On the respective Off ic.ia L S . .i . e. , residents and persons doi.r , bus i..ss the Ci t`.' of Davis hit of the ' core area plan }-;eve so ae financial inpact 0Vi e:k);-10 1 c interests of all. resideni_:- of Duv _ car, hardly be contended L',_ut an L_Lci - to either revitalize , 1 4 _e c_ otherwise seriously G_ _.er tr;e a.ea bounded by the ' core a. ... ,l a . r I affect all residents in subs tars. . the sane manner. ' Sp:..<> _ arson: groups of persons affected more direct-1- t:: .. o-_hc s , ` 2. The Commission then fount: that the segment of the public owning buildings leased for commercial purposes was not a significant segment of the gene.al public and that. -he "?` effect of the plan would be much more direct and particular in benefiting such persons and `.hei.r interests . There is little doubt that the L PPC would ,_ 'nd that parsons owning acreage in the Gothard commercial corridor are not synonymous with the public generally or a significant segment of the public . , ,,,.;.; GAI L HUTTOTI City Attorney GH: RCS : kdl cc : Mayor Robert P . Mandic , Jr . Councilmember John Thomas JS so sin 3 . mr:•••�rrcra a.tc�, , ITYv,; F: I; HONORABLE ROBERT P . MQDI � tI E;C To MAYOR FrOr CITY ATTORNEY `:',abject. CONFLICT OF WTEREST! ?ebru . .. 2 -- _ REDEVELOPMENT �` . '" ,i 1',LILL r`, ISSUE : Mayor Mandic requests an .opinion on whether he is a__sq Liifies from voting upon adoption o.. a Redevelopment Plan for he town Redevelopment Area by vir ue. of ow2ing residential . _... wl units located-within . tye area . Mayor Mandic is not disqualif_::d , sinc: ,.t dog.. .: no:, appear . _ tne facts that it is . oasona bly fo rese ._.. l _ tt._. : Qc .. ._ will have a material financial affeK , distingnisnabin - . _ ._ - e: . ect Q .t le _ bllc s;enerally • on his s . in an J in - a, yDr Vnndin oNns a font, - p-_ex see i Clent:i_.._ strwctuns , .. • .,.: _ _ . , nt,al ,,:i t , on a of 501 by 1151 gat, 119 Sev -rcf7 . i:,e unit., are relatively t'eCeiitl:' built anC A.- : i:.o..: . . ... .. .. .. . .. . He formerly resided in one of iie units , r.•t_t _ all units a .ice.re hold _ or rental purposes . d3w3 :i v c .,.. ..__ other residential rental property in the city , ;he ict in in ;-proposed Downtown Redevelopment Area , an area of over 20 6 . Approximately 20% of the area is ,_s_:.ent .al , .:h._..ie .,- of the property is zoned commercial . A ALlS.t_,S: The general principles applicable to analysis of whe t. _ - _ - cou ncilmember has a material financial interes3 were :1_.: LE our opinion dated September 20, 1952 and folinw-upopiAon of September 23, 1982 . These oplll.,_ons .dealt wit ., a ._:...,.1._. _. but are factually distinguished as involving . _ant lots in a commercial industrial corridor . { ?Memorandum O;piniion Page T;• o The basic inquiry ir. these prob!e:r1s is _tiL'I i :i that the decision Gill have a m ter_a1 fi:lai:c'i Ci : e 1 distinguishable frOiu i ;•S effect. On tile, pUb_i g`'^era:_ ^:- specif ied interest-S. No` erl.iilt:•_nt Cocci While the 'foi-mer Op.iiion concluded l:hat t ie[ s a ..':i ' conflict , under the facts Of tiii.. case , :.e .,:_._. a disqualifying conflict . TI-1- is conclusion is ;;cs_ed - following factors : l . The prop,rty ;.s irlpro';t+d u .0Pe s . o Yr ;.o demolisi: the units in the area o., :change ;:F G . r'. „1 ment area des 'nation has less i'm0a'ct cl 1_1C1 'L ;pr"='• _ than it :;ould have on vac,a:nt land . C. T11e p r o p e r:,y 1S r ti _ lcl:,l'ltla_. area . Iis -a rasti redeve1, 00iuent d e s i` ;a .,_or.' har. vac-anl. 20i'1:11:...r:_.__ :i' _.. .. primarily cc—)mmie.rcia.:_ area . j T[;a r di Ire,1..)pM (, agc:;c.- does O': S1gn1f iCan 3-1)1JrcC:._ i11)(1 il. Clrv?:f.i'%;, ( im,hed Late i'utur .'ue t:o tie ,ormat,io 1 . While c,`:e of tile- o.. purpo of i�C!e ;C properL�� v1:11ua , , er a?i r:o _ acI- s Since t inanCi li c.i : GCt._. ,Ti'•_]::•L L`C: redSOl;n'D_! , short tGrli, and not ..ere _ ,r sE,eci^J_ativ � ;. _._. . .. is, not :r1 e t . '. E Mayo :CLnd lc _s a local_ )us_LII C�.:J and repair bus: ,;ess i l the p.-oposed arc T;. _. . U e.i.H.eC.it 1.1,E; 1 11,:s.L n"s,s 1:1v". ._. :.] ail 1p l.11.: rho_ _.(1`,.. -, analysis of th:: 4nt icy l opin _o^ i 1 F PPG 0p .i-_. ._s uy ) : :.;_ nc require disqualification , since there i:. IloI �:r.: ar�.:;_. of cumulative cfi'ecLs . l:,cre �s no. eciden^• .,=interests as as a bus ine:3 m ti w4 11 b(- a i c ] _ . l'-I'C l: Other merchant-s . (St e Davis o•`J1nion 2 'i l ;L:.ltl:_ J.. f, Me.l.orahndum Opinicrl Pale Three We base this .opinion on the conclusion, that ,. er is iot- ca reasonably foreseeable r,„al erial f nanci._._l ef.'_ . ,, U O:: r: w _ interest . We do not base :Lt On '.;he 11dwstl effect on the public generally" test . EOv,eV passing that , despite 1;he arti_f 1Clal _77 P S "Ferraro" opinion (4 F P P C Opinions 62) , it1 S Ua0 et _: c Mayor is not with` n the rental p:^Opt':i j 1 duS:, 'y al Of four and fewer units are a s_r nif lca l;, sc .,e,t c ':e %;'J__ We have revlevied thn icuts Of 1 11S CaS b:itit L'. : F1 ani� attorney fG1' slat aenCy generally Cv Cli i"' 3 1:: CUr O ?;...1Qi: . its stated ins our Septe:aber, opirl..on , i.r. the a a - decision l•:hether a decl-sion ,,ill :ave a mate: _a_ . UpOr"i propert,y owned by. an oftf-Licia.1 is 1 yUeS ,_GC: G . _ al:. a;JprOaCi:eG O.i a ^clsi? v`: Cu`3e -S.Sls . i'iF71ie vii: `ijC'_'. C.� : .: .. Confll� Of interests J_a;;' is to 2voJ.G COafli N tint eres and 0fPicia1 J ,ies , dis7!.:all 1Cc_l talken lightly , s noted _n ant. concur: _ng op on _"... -------------. F CO'iS �JISGU= 1 ^ : 0 ] < L disnua1.iCied O! l i..__aI L! i Up ('i:.S 1.nierc. is inti'ii .a._C , i uOT1C._U P %. C1 C�.. _ COir,peliJ.ng- discu,,'ililca 1Cn . GAIL 1-1UTT0 City Attorney CC : C1-ty �Ciilliilly' t L"cam LGI' c MCMbeYs o F - c City COunc_1_;_ L� CITV OF H`JINTINGTO14 BEACH CA 87-128 COUNCIL - ADMINISTRATOR COMMUNICATION ` • HUNTtNC.70N BEACH To From Honorable Mayor and Paul E. Cook, ,�_,� City Council Members Interim City Administrator Subject Date MAIN-PIER REDEVELOPMENT September 24, 1987 PROJECT AREA STATUS REPORT- CURRENT PROJECTS For your Agency meeting of Monday, September 28, 1987, staff has prepared this background memorandum and project update on various pending projects within the Main-Pier Project Area for your review and consideration. At your September 28, meeting,.staff will present a current update on the following projects: 1) Main-Pier Phase I - Approximate 14 acre site that includes Pierside Village and the hotel/commercial project on the inland side of Pacific Coast Highway. 2) Main-Pier Phase II - Approximate 6 acre site bounded by Main Street, Pacific Coast Highway, Walnut Avenue, and 6th Street. 3) Retail/Parking Structure Project - Approximate 2 acre site in second block of Main Street between Walnut Avenue, Olive Avenue, and Second Street. 4) Town Square Phase I (Mola) - Approximate 4 acre site north of. Orange Avenue, between Sixth and Main Streets. The Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area as amended was adopted in 1983 and comprises 336 acres (Exhibit 1). Within the project area, as identified on Exhibit 2, the Agency is in various stages of implementing a number of projects. The following report is intended to provide a summary overview of each of the above projects, and will be the basis of staff's presentation on September 28, 1987. In addition to a specific review of each of these projects a summary overview of the entire project area will be presented. • - `�J/ �/ I I 1 ' � I I I:�� I i �� I �� I ;' I ' 'I i 'l� I `� � � I! a �:� �� \.`\� � �`c`"' ��✓ �� - . ... _.::� -, f': > `,✓� L' Liu U_ L,.A UI`..� LJ_J Lu L:.J LU L_JL) ��J �U LLj J �'�J ,-J __•J -I L.� . �� \�/ IF f-irl -1� f:r-, r-�� r i-in f"_ ;! �ri Iln r-il-'_ ♦ \�\ Lei !U ` i_' U ��J i-U UJ �'J L i_I i__;l_J l_J L�U U U LU UL1 UU L� • \\ I. r O ♦� " ��r �r n I ' r_1 l n nn it l FR.l ;;�;; �FI VI 1,1711��'��U!�:(-'I i r.li !f�..,_�,f li^, . ��`- : i^�� I��,fr, ..P111 F. FF] ,. I.f-'FT I Ipl i iil ( i fl 11 iL 4 I i e I !i_-iil F Ii II 1' I lj J' II ` U uJIU�I�I� � U L�LI=� i+� �._ J-L'_1•L�._I I-JJ l�L� L..:1J L_ LIU•L'_ L_`J �U �_iJ `� L,J U it LOW MAIN-PIER PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 1 I IAfffkk CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH Exnib_: MAIN-PIER PHASE I PROJECT SCOPE AND BACKGROUND: Main-Pier Phase I is the site generally bounded by Walnut Avenue, Second Street, Main Street exclusive of the southeast corner of Main and Walnut, and the ocean side of P.C.H., from the Pier to Lake Street, on the P.C.H side to the frontage road. The total project includes approximately 14 acres. The business terms of the project have been incorporated into an amended Disposition and Development Agreement and a Lease for the ocean side of P.C.H approved by the Agency in October of 1986. The developer is Huntington Pacifica I for the hotel/commercial portion of the project and Pierside Development which includes Pierside, Inc., (Bryant Morris), and Huntington Pacifica I for the Pierside Village portion. Pierside Village received its entitlement subject to Conditions of Approval in December of 1986, and the developer has been working since that date to comply with those Conditions of Approval. The developer on the inland portion for the hotel/commercial project has been seeking to obtain a hotel operator and complete an entitlement application. The developer filed a submittal package for staff review on September 21, 1987. AGREEMENT STATUS - Amended Disposition and Development Agreement and Pierside Lease approved by Agency on October 27, 1986: PROJECT BENEFITS: The projected value as part of the economic analysis completed with the approval of the amended Disposition and Development Agreement and Pierside Lease, exclusive of land, will be at least $S3,S00,000. Project payback occurs between the fifth and sixth years, with a project net cash flow of approximately $10 million by year ten. Additional project benefits include the alleviation of deteriorating conditions, including the removal of a number of deteriorating structures, the clearance of other blighting conditions within the project site, and an enhanced visitor-serving environment for the benefit of those that utilize the beach area. PROJECT IMPACTS/COSTS: As part of the amended Disposition and Development Agreement and Pierside Lease, the Agency's contribution to the project is a total of $12.3 million, spread over a number of years. The economic analysis completed at the time of the project's approval indicated this to be a reasonable and warranted level of assistance based upon developer costs and risks. Some increased traffic and the need for parking will be generated by this project, however, the approved plan for downtown circulation and the parking that will be required to be provided by the developer as a part of the project and as a part of the City/Agency downtown parking plan, will address these concerns. WILL NUT---L� AV E. A - t— MADIOFF,HEL ZFIDAN.ADEL RMDALLFwvl . cf UBALHI RAWL Fod"I GWENKLYN UNALL fooe 1 • 1 I . LU z N 0 1 T Y OF 14.13. z Q M N `J g PAC , CST. HWY. CITY OF N.B . t I IITY OF 14. 8 . CITY OF W . $ . MAIN - PIER PHASE I PIER - PIER SIDE VILLAGE I - HOTEL / COMMERCIAL t(T OF H . S. ' Exhibit 2 MAIN-PIER PHASE H PROJECT SCOPE AND BACKGROUND: This project is the area bounded by Walnut Avenue, Main Street, P.C.H., and 6th Street. The total project includes approximately 6 acres In the Spring of 1986, following an RFP process, the Main-Pacific Property Owners were selected to enter into a period of exclusive negotiations with the Agency. The Main-Pacific Property Owners included A-M Equities as a principal partner, and a number of the Main Street property owners as signators to the initial Exclusive Negotiation Agreement with the Agency. The interest of A-M Equities was acquired in March of 1987, by Griffin Realty Corporation who has been working since that date to assemble the property and develop a workable development plan for the site with the Main Street property owners. The present scope of the project as envisioned by Griffin Realty, includes 32S residential units and related retail commercial, in addition to that developed by the Main Street property owners. AGREEMENT STATUS - A Disposition and Development Agreement to be negotiated following approval of the project concept and analysis of the project's economic pro forma. PROJECT BENEFITS: This project, if implemented, is projected to have a value of $SO million exclusive of land. Direct benefits to the City/Agency relate to the added sales tax that would be realized from the enhanced and new retail commercial and the tax increment. Indirect benefits that would accrue equate to the new families that would reside in the area and the support base they would provide to retail uses in the downtown area. Finally, the project would help realize a major redevelopment objective - that of clearing significant blighted conditions in a portion of the downtown area. PROJECT IMPACTS/COSTS: Developer and property owner assistance is anticipated to address extraordinary project development costs related to site consolidation, tenant and owner business relocation expense, site clearance, and infrastructure improvement costs. A project pro forma is being prepared for the developer and must be analyzed to quantify the level of Agency assistance, if any, that would be needed to bring this project to a reality. Experience tells us, however, that some assistance will be required if the city and Agency should desire this project to move forward. � a wA L N U r---- - - - -AVE . J • -1 WORTHY,SKIRUY D SHUP . E. TERRY.ROBERT C TERRY,DOROT9r 1 1 1 1 ME Ko . Op0110faD.STVART 7USYMBERT C. DMMERKOR J. TUARR VANFORD TERRY,ROBERT C. rNu1 EVEW DEV. MR FITHM,STIMEN CONLEYA014H IRRY.ROBERI C. D 1 3 LIKU 1, I y THOMAS ui S 00 -cm -cc ly Lp PAC . C5T. HW Y= - - - - STATE OF CAL . PIER 0 W Q MAIN PIER PHASE II RETAIL OFFICE/PARKING STRUCTURE PROJECT PROJECT SCOPE AND BACKGROUND: The staff has been working to assemble properties in the second block of Main Street, between the alley and Third Street, Walnut and Orange Avenue, for a parking structure pursuant to your earlier action. Appraisals have been completed, and to date, offers have been made to purchase all properties within that one-half block area. Additionally, staff has been working for some time with the major property owner in the second block along Main Street and that individual is Robert .l. Koury. Mr. Koury presently owns all but three parcels in that block, and one of the three that he does not own is presently owned by.the city (Main-Pier Realty), a second is owned by Security Pacific Bank (Pacific Southwest Realty), and the Shandrick property (Clark Hotel) which has recently been acquired by a third party. The project, as envisioned, would provide for approximately 50,000 sq.ft. of retail/office uses. On the east half of the project, a four-level parking structure of approximately 520 spaces is proposed. AGREEMENT STATUS: No agreement to date. Staff and property owner discussions underway. PROJECT BENEFITS: The immediate direct benefit of added parking to-support the retail and related uses in the downtown area will be realized through the completion of this structure. In addition, it is estimated that the new retail/office project would have a project value in the $3 million range, thus, generating additional tax increment revenue and enhanced sales tax within that area. PROJECT IMPACTS/COSTS: Developer assistance is anticipated to address site consolidation costs, tenant and owner business relocation expense, site clearance, and infrastructure improvement costs. Some increased traffic and the need for parking will be generated by this project, however, the approved plan for downtown circulation and the parking that will be required to be provided by the developer as a part of the project and as a part of the City/Agency downtown parking plan, will address these concerns. b - J, ' •, • , � � � fir. ' CJ X � OLIVE- - SHAUDRICK.SYIYIA NICCOLE►DENNIS A. it KOURY MBERT J, SNANDRICk►501A e NINE,FRANCES D. CITY OF N. B. KOURY.ROBERT . i i TAN NIISIAN ,PAUL A. TR KOURY,ROBUT J. � p Q � PKIRL So WEV Crl i REALTY i e WALNUT- - COMMERCIAL RETAIL PARKING TOWN SQUARE_.- PHASE I MOLA • PROJECT SCOPE AND BACKGROUND: This project is divided into Phase I and Phase Ia. Phase I comprises approximately 4 acres and Phase Ia comprises approximately 2 acres. The initial phase I includes 125 for sale condominium units. Phase Ia provides for combination commercial/residential project yet to be determined. AGREEMENT STATUS - The developer currently has an exclusive agreement through October 20, for the site in question. PROJECT BENEFITS: The initial phase of development is projected to have a value in the range of $12 million, which will in turn generate increment to the Agency as well as provide housing opportunities and a support base for the retail uses envisioned in the downtown area. The consolidation of properties and the intended new development will help achieve the objective of eliminating deteriorating and blighted conditions and provide for an enhanced economic environment. PROJECT IMPACT/COSTS: Based upon a previous analysis of a project pro forma based upon anticipated land assembly costs and relocation costs it is projected that some Agency assistance will be. needed to facilitate the implementation of this redevelopment project. The extension of Sixth Street could be considered an extraordinary offsite improvement burden for a project of this scope and magnitude. Additional impacts center around some projected increase in traffic which was planned for in the overall circulation plan for the downtown area. i V x CITY OF H.B. / /100, �♦ / ^ PECAN 4000, CITY OF H.B. MOLA r - 1 MOLA 1 0 °o TOVATTIBERTA F-= �e KHOURY i H,13. = REDMOMENTz Ln A iENCY ORANGE--� - - - - -- TOWN SQUARE - MOLA TOWN SQUARE PHASE I PHASE IA . CA 87-125 J4"Jff CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH (� COUNCIL ADMINISTRATOR COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH j To From Honorable Mayor and Charles W. Thompson, City Council Members City Administrator Subject Date MAIN-PIER PHASE I September 21, 1987 FINANCIAL SUMMARY As a follow-up to your discussion of the financial aspects of the Main-Pier Phase I project, this memo is intended to provide you with a financial summary of the project. On October 27, 1986, the Agency approved a First Amended Disposition and Development Agreement and a Pierside Lease that, when implemented, will provide for the completion of the project that is referred to as Main-Pier Phase I. Main-Pier Phase I includes a first-rate hotel of not less than 280 rooms and related retail uses, and the Pierside Village project. The two documents provide for the construction, exclusive of land value, of a total development of at least $53,500,000. The agreements set forth the obligations of both the developer and Redevelopment Agency which are summarized as follows: The Developer(s) are responsible for constructing a 280-room, "first-rate,.high • quality hotel" with a minimum 15,000 sq.ft. commercial building, and approximately 20,000 sq.ft. of public plaza area and a pedestrian overcrossing at P.C.H. The Pierside Village portion provides for a minimum of 75,000 sq.ft. of specialty/retail commercial, (excludes Maxwells), with a minimum of 600 parking spaces. The construction cost of the above improvements must be at least $53.5 million. The developer(s) is obligated to pay the relocation costs for the Beach division headquarters up to $500,000, and up to $250,000 of the cost for the pedestrian overcrossing of P.C.H. The Ag_ency's responsibilities include waterline improvements to a maximum of $1,000,000, underground utilities to a maximum of $350,000, and site relocation costs to a maximum of $1,000,000. Additionally, the Agency is obligated to provide for the construction of 200 parking spaces adjacent to the project, the value of which is estimated at $1.5 million, and has pledged back the transient occupancy tax for up to 10 years and 77% of the tax increment for a period of two (2) years and 38.5% for two (2) years and agrees to the sale of a city-owned parcel valued at slightly over $1.5 million for the sum of One dollar ($1). The attached Huntington Beach mixed use project City/Agency cash flow analysis.as revised dated October 17, 1986, and prepared by Keyser Marston Associates, Inc., provides a summary cost benefit analysis of the project as approved in October. As can be seen, the initial front end Agency costs are paid back between the fifth and sixth year with a net project balance of $6.9 million as of the end of the tenth year: • The above reflects the economics of the project as approved in October of 1986. As previously indicated, upon completion of the final Scope of Development for both Pierside • Village and the hotel project, amendments to the Pierside Lease and a second amendment to the Disposition and Development Agreement will be necessary prior to commencement of construction. At that time, we will again analyze the cost and benefits of the project to be constructed to determine that assistance is, in fact, still needed and the project is of continuing economic benefit to the community. The above summary information has been taken from a number of documents previously transmitted to the Agency as a part of your public hearing process on both the original Disposition and Development Agreement and amendments thereto. Staff would be happy to provide additional background information to you should you desire. Should you have any questions regarding this memorandum and the attached Cash Flow Analysis, please feel free to contact me, Doug La Belle, or Bob Franz at your convenience. rss ubmitted; ; City Administrator CWT:lp Attachments xc: Paul E. Cook, Interim City Administrator • Douglas N. La Belle, Deputy City Administrator Bob Franz, Deputy City Administrator 3332h • MAIN-PIER MIXED USE PROJECT CITY/AGENCY CASH FLOW ANALYSIS REVISED ANALYSIS (OCTOBER 17, 1986) BEGINNING NET ENDING BALANCE REVENUES COSTS BALANCE (000) (000) (000) (000) YEAR 1 ($3,863) $1,707 $1,464 ($3,619) 2 (3,619) 1,937 1,523 (3,205) 3 (3,205) 2,086 1,328 .(2,447) 4 (2,447) 2,213 1,371 (1,604) 5 (1,604) 2,371 1,132 (365) f 6 (365) 2,499 1,158 976 7 976 2,601 1,187 2,390 8 2,390 2,711 1,216 3,885 9 3,885 2,754 1,247 5,392 10 5,392 21841 1,280 6,953 NOTES: 1. Beginning balance consists of City land purchase, relocation costs, 'water, and utility undergrounding. 2. Revenues consist of 100% property tax increment revenues, 100% transient occupancy tax, sales tax, ground lease payments, and parking revenues from 200 spaces. 3. Costs consist of rebate of 77% of property tax increment for 2 years, and 38.5N for two years, rebate of 100% of transient occupancy tax for ten years, and debt service on 200 parking spaces. Source: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. October, 1986 1996r MACRO ECONOMIC ANALYSIS MAIN=PIER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA MACRO ECONOMIC ANALYSIS MAIN PIER PROJECT AREA MASTER SUMMARY Capital .Costs $33,645,000 Net Annual Revenue Increase ~" General Fund $4,943,000 Redevelopment Agency 3 961 000 Net Annual Increase Service Costs 860,000 *Net Net Annual Increase $8.044,000 ` * Revenues calculated at stabilized ultimate development and no adjustment made for interest or principal payments on debt incurred to meet capital costs. Also no adjustment for revenue derived from land sale proceeds or participation in project profits. 0873h MACRO ECONOMIC ANALYSIS MAIN-PIER PROJECT AREA CKPITKI MAY 1985 Street Improvements <3 Widen and realign 6th Street between, PCH and Lake $ 500,000 Reconstruct Lake between Orange'and 6th 125,000 Reconstruct.Lake between Orange and PCH 360,000 Reconstruct and realign Orange between Atlanta and 6th 600,000 Reconstruct Walnut between Lake and 6th Street 320,000 Walnut extension between Lake and Beach 1,000,000 Y. Main Street underpass at PCH 5,000,000 _ $7;90.5,000 Note: The above street improvements do not include any cost of right-of-way;;R/W is estimated-at $20 million. " Traffic Signals . PCH Q 20th Street` $ 70,000 vji: PCH a 14th Street 70,000 Orange @ 6th Street 60,000 _ Orange @ Lake:Street 80,000 Orange/Lake/Atlanta 80,000 Lake C Walnut. SO 000 Atlanta @ Delaware _ 60;000 Beach @ Walnut - 100,000 s _ rk $580,000 F: Storm Drains 6th Street/Olive Avenue $ 550,0.00 Main Street 30,000 Lake/Olive Avenue 250,000 Goldenwest 15,000 Twentieth I5,000 Eighteenth Sixteenth 15,000 z-s $890,:000 3 ;. z = Water 18" transmission line from Overmyer Reservoir $ 1,000,000 r4 Sewer >; U¢grade existing downtown collection system/relocate $ 1,200,000 ;. from alleys - its Pierk: place existing concrete portion of pier. $ 7,500,000 ------ a rking Structures 1200 parking spaces (exclusive of land acquisition $ 10,000,000 iY Electric/Gas/Telephone/Cable TV New backbone system in streets $ 2,000,000 Miscellaneous Cul-de-sac 7th, 8th, loth, llth, 12th, 13th, 15th, . 16th, 18th, 19th, 21st, 22nd Streets $ 220,000 Replace street lighting system 1,000,000 PCH median island landscape 250,000 (2) pedestrian overpass (PCH) 1,500,000 Street furniture/new signs 100,000 $2,570,000 GRAND TOTAL: $33,645,000 I ?855h i MACRO ECONOMIC ANALYSIS MAIN-PIER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA , SERVICE COSTS DEPARTMENT CURRENT ULTIMATE-_ DIFFERENCE Community Services.:* $20010,000 $2,150,000 +$l40,000 Fire ** . 100,000 200-300,000 . +100-200,000 Police *** 300,000 800,000 +500,000 Public Works;.**** 11560,000 1,560,000 _ -0- TOTAL:. $3,970,000 $4,8.10,000 -. $840,000 * Additional parking structures will need to be maintained. ** If city requires automatic sprinklers in 100% of redevelopment area, ultimate costs could be reduced by $100,000. *** These figures are based on the existing average of 1.1 officers per 1,000 population. **** Although incr.+.ased capital outlay requirements will need to be met, normal personnel and operating costs should not change. '4 MACRO. ECONOMIC ANALYSIS rtt ?_ i ; MAIN-PIER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA ` 'SERVICE COSTS ; DEPARTMENT CURRENT ULTIMATE DIFFERENCE ! Property Tax j ;s General Fund $1.11,000 $111,000 $ 70- Increment 65,000 4,026,000 3;961,000 Sales Tax $2 sq.ft. 200,000 826,000 626,000 Occupancy Tax 200,000 2,933,000 2,73-3,000 Rentals Concessions 450,000 Same * -0 Parking Meters 245,000 50000 195,000 Lots , 1,100,000 1,950,000 850,000 I Utility Tax Net i} Increase 565,000 Total Net Revenue Increase $8,930,000 Net Revenue Increase by Fund General Fund , 4,969,000 Redevelopment 3,961,000 $8,30,000 *NOTE: Concession revenue should increase substantially, but is unquantifiable at this time. 1 MACRO ECONOMIC ANALYSIS MAIN-PIER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA � Assumptions.in Ultimate Development Scenario ''' 7n, CURRENT ULTIMATE OFFICE: 75,000 sq.ft. 170,000 sq.ft. f Y $3.5/sq.ft. @ $75/sq.ft. cz1 RESIDENTIAL- Medium.`Density -535 Units 350 Units'.. ' @ 1400 sq.ft. avg• a Medium-High 366 Units 1142 Units 1:200 sq.ft. avg. 4' High 50 Units 2184 Units @ 1000 sq.ft. avg. (All above @ $100/sq.ft.) HOTEL: 194 Units 1650 Units @ $25,000/unit @ $75,000 Unit COMMERCIAL: General 237,000 sq.ft. 195,000 sq.ft @$30/sq.ft. @$60/sq.ft: Restaurant 10,000 sq.ft. 48,000 sq.ft. @ $120/sq.ft. @ $120/sq.ft. a' Specialty 88,000 sq.ft." 125,000 sq.ft. @ $30/sq.ft. @ $60/sq.ft. Beach/Pier 20,000.sq.ft. 125,000 sq.ft. @ $25/sq.ft. @ $75/sq.ft. 1101h