Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFile 1 of 3 - Downtown Specific Plan - Code Amendment 92-5 - Council/Agency Meeting Held: Deferred/Continued to: ❑Approved ❑ Conditionally Approved ❑ Denied City Clerk's Signature Council Meeting Date: 04/17/95 Department ID Number: CD 95-017 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION SUBMITTED TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS SUBMITTED BY: MICHAEL T. UBERUAGA, City Admints PREPARED BY: MELANIE S. FALLON Community Development ment Director SUBJECT: CODE AMENDMENT NO. 92-5/DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN REWRITE "VILLAGE CONCEPT" AND PARKING MASTER PLAN Statement A Issue,Funding Source,Recommended Action,Alternative Action,Analysis,Environmental Status,Attachment( s� Statement of Issue: Transmitted for yfif%IMnslderation is Code Amendment No. 92-5 the Downtown Specific plan rewrite commonly referred to as the "Village Concept" and Parking Master Plan. The City Council approved Ordinance No. 3239 for the subject entitlement on October 3, 1994. On November 7, 1994, the City Council approved Resolution No. 6646, which forwarded Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA) No. 3-94 to the California Coastal Commission (CCC). LCPA No. 3-94 includes Code Amendment No. 92-5, the revisions to the Downtown Specific Plan "Village Concept" and Parking Master Plan. The CCC, at their public hearing on March 9, 1995, unanimously approved LCPA No. 3-94 with suggested modifications. The recommended modifications by the CCC require a new ordinance reflecting the CCC's actions. Funding Source: Not applicable Recommended Action: Motion to : "Approve Code Amendment No. 92-5, the Downtown Specific Plan rewrite and Downtown Parking Master Plan incorporating the suggested modifications recommended by the California Coastal Commission based upon the findings outlined in Attachment No. 1 by adopting Ordinance No. Alternative Action(s): The City Council may take the following alternative action: Deny Code Amendment No. 92-5 with findings. A consequence of this action will void the California Coastal Commission's approval of Local Coastal Program Amendment No. 3- 94. R.-.QUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTH MEETING DATE: 04/17/95 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: CD 95-017 Analysis: The CCC approved the Downtown Specific Plan and Downtown Parking Master Plan with suggested modifications. These modifications require the preparation of a new ordinance. Staff has prepared a matrix of the suggested modifications, a new legislative draft ordinance and a new ordinance for consideration by the City Council. Please see Attachment Nos. 3 - 5. Staff believes that the majority of the suggested modifications are technical in nature and are suggested to correct minor errors and/or omissions for clarity. The following modifications are noted by staff: Downtown Specific Plan: The suggested modifications to the specific plan include corrections which are not considered by staff to change the implementation of the Village Concept. The corrections include, rewording of definitions, correcting street names, rewording introductory paragraphs, clarifying the requirement for residential parking, correcting titles and correcting two (2) district maps to be consistent with the Coastal Element and Land Use Element (District 10 & 11). The substantive changes are noted as follows: Affordable Housing (Section 4.2.30): The CCC has recommended the deletion of a provision for guest parking to be provided on street or in a parking facility. Outdoor Dining (Section 4.2.33): The CCC has recommended that outdoor dining be prohibited in mini parks, public plazas and beach areas. The CCC also reorganized the factors to be considered and necessary findings for the approval of outdoor dining. Downtown Parking Master Plan (Section 4.2.14): Downtown Parking Validation: The CCC has recommended that any changes to the Downtown parking validation program be submitted to the Executive Director for review. The added provision is recommended by the CCC to ensure that parking which is owned and controlled by the city in the Downtown area is encouraged for use by the patrons and employees of the Downtown. The continued use of incentives such as validated parking for the city owned parking structure are encouraged to provide for it's continued use. The concern expressed by the CCC is that visitors to the commercial activity in the Downtown area do not impact beach goer parking. Annual Review and Monitoring Report: The CCC has recommended that six items be included in the city's annual report, and that the report be submitted to the Executive Director of the CCC for review. The items to be included are; 1) amount and type of development approved during the annual review period, 2) total square footage in the Downtown area, 3) inventory of existing parking, 4) a parking utilization study, and 5) a determination of whether adequate parking remains to serve development allowed up to the development cap. CD95-017.DOC -2- 03/29/95 9:49 AM R.-JUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTH MEETING DATE: 04/17/95 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: CD 95-017 Development Thresholds: The CCC has recommended standard code required parking be provided for all new development if the monitoring report indicates the development threshold has been exceeded. Standard code required parking would be implemented until new parking has been approved and constructed or it can be demonstrated that there is still an adequate supply of parking available to serve the Downtown visitors. The recommended change also permits the city to shift square footage between categories (restaurant, retail, office, and miscellaneous) as long as the total (500,000 sq. ft.) is not exceeded. The final recommendation is that the Downtown Parking Master Plan document approved by the Planning Commission (July 7, 1993) be used as the base document for the square footage analysis within the Downtown area. The document contains all the background information which provided the basis for the preparation of the Downtown Parking Master Plan. Staff recommends the City Council approve Code Amendment No. 92-5 as modified by the CCC because the modifications: 1) will provide internal consistency with the Implementation Plan (DTSP) changes and are consistent with the Chapter Three policies of the Coastal Act; 2) are necessary to carry out the standards and policies of the certified Land Use Plan; and 3) are consistent with the city's General Plan. Environmental Status: Code Amendment No. 92-5 is covered by Environmental Impact Report No. 82-2 adopted by City Council Resolution No. 5284 on July 18, 1983. MTU:MSF:hf Attachment(s): City Clerk's Page Number 1. Findings for Approval - Code Amendment No. 92-5 2. Area Map 3. Matrix of Suggested Modifications 4. Legislative Draft of the Downtown Specific Plan 5. Ordinance No. 6. California Coastal Commission suggested modifications dated 3/16/95 CD95-017.DOC -3- 03/29/95 9:46 AM ORDINANCE NO. _3 2$0 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY HUNTINGTON BEACH AMENDING THE DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN TO INCORPORATE CHANGES SUGGESTED BY BY THE CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION WHEREAS, pursuant to the California State Planning and Zoning Law, the Huntington Beach Planning Commission and Huntington Beach City Council have held separate, duly noticed public hearings relative to amending the Downtown Specific Plan, wherein both bodies have carefully considered all information presented at said hearings; and After due consideration of the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission and all other evidence presented, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 3239, which approved Code Amendment No. 92-5, and amended the Downtown Specific Plan; and The amended Downtown Specific Plan was forwarded to the California Coastal Commission for consideration; and The California Coastal Commission approved Code Amendment No. 92-5 with suggested modifications, and the City Council desires to accept and approve said modifications, NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach does hereby ordain as follows: SECTION 1. Section 4.0.04 of the Downtown Specific Plan, entitled Definitions, is hereby amended to read as follows: 4.0.04 Definitions The following definitions shall apply to the Downtown Specific Plan. Terms not described under this section shall be subject to the definitions contained in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. Beach Area: The ocean side of Pacific Coast Highway including the Bluff Top Park area and the Pier. Bluff Top Park Area: That area of improved beach access bounded on the south by 9th Street continuing north to the dividing line of Bolsa Chica State Beach. 1 ccaratti.aoc Bolsa Chica State Beach: The area seaward of Pacific Coast Highway extending from the Huntington Beach City Pier northwest to Warner Avenue. The portion of this beach from the pier to Goldenwest Street is within the boundary of the Downtown Specific Plan. Build-to-line: A dimension which specifies where the structure must begin. For example, "build-to-5"', means that the structure must extend to five feet from the lot line. Common open space: Any part of a lot or parcel unobstructed from the ground upward, excepting architectural features extending no more than thirty(30) inches from the structure and excluding any area of the site devoted to driveways and other parking areas. Conversion: A change in the original use of land or building/structure. Director: The Director of the Department of Community Development. Development: On land, in or under water, the placement or erection of any solid material or structure; discharge or disposal of any dredged material or of any gaseous, liquid, solid or thermal waste; grading, removing, dredging, mining, or extraction of any materials; change in the density or intensity of the use of land, including, but not limited to, subdivision pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act (commencing with Section 66410 of the Government Code), and any other division of land, including lot splits, except where the land division is brought about in connection with the purchase of such land by a public agency for public recreational use; change in the intensity of use of water, or of access thereto; construction, reconstruction, demolition, or alteration of the size of any structure, including any facility of any private, public, or municipal utility; and the removal or harvesting of major vegetation other than for agricultural purposes, kelp harvesting, and timber operations which are in accordance with a timber harvesting plan submitted pursuant to the provisions of the Z'berg-Nejedly Forest Practice Act of 1973 (commencing with Section 4511). Demolition: The deliberate removal or destruction of the frame or foundation of any portion of a building or structure. Facade: The main face or front of a building. Feasible: Capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, social and technological factors. Floor Area Ratio (FAR): A number which indicates how many square feet of structure can be built on a site, expressed as a multiple of the net site area; for example, if a site is 5,000 square feet in net site area and the FAR is 2.0, the square footage of a building cannot exceed 10,000 square feet of net site area(2 X 5,000). Fronting: Any lot or portion of a lot which abuts an arterial shall be considered to front on that arterial and shall comply with the required front yard setbacks, whether or not the development on that lot actually takes access from the arterial. Full block: A parcel of property bounded on all sides by public streets. Gross floor area: The total enclosed area of all floors of a building measured to the outside face of the structural members in exterior walls, and including halls, stairways, 2 cearati.aoc elevators shafts at each floor level, service and mechanical equipment rooms, and habitable basement or attic areas, but excluding area for vehicle parking and loading. Gross site area: The area within the lot lines of a parcel of land before public streets, alleys, easements or other areas to be dedicated or reserved for public use have been deducted. Half block: A parcel of property bounded on all sides by public streets and/or alleys containing at least one-half(1/2)the net area of the full block. Heght: The vertical distance above the highest adjacent street level measured to the highest point of the coping of a flat roof or to the deck line of a mansard roof or the average height of the highest gable of a pitched or hipped roof. See Section 4.2.04. Hotel: A building designed for or occupied as a temporary lodging place which contains guest room units. Mini-Parks: Areas under City ownership used for the purpose of open space, plazas, landscape buffers or public gathering. Net site area: The total horizontal area within the property lines of a parcel of land. All rights-of-way or easements which physically prohibit the surface use of that portion of the property for other than vehicular ingress and egress are excluded. Outdoor dininiz: An area where a cafe/restaurant provides food service on either public right-of-way, city owned open space, or privately owned open space. Physical obstruction: Things that affect the use of property including but not limited to light standards, trees, parking meters, trash receptacles, traffic signals, signs, benches, phone booths, newspaper stands, bus stops, driveways, pedestrian ramps, and other similar items. Pier: The structure owned by the City that extends from the termination of Main Street at Pacific Coast Highway into the Pacific Ocean 1,966 feet. Pier Plaza: The area adjacent and contiguous to the pier. Private open space: The area adjacent to a dwelling unit which has direct access in the form of a patio or balcony. Public open space: Outdoor or unenclosed area on the ground floor or above floor levels designed and accessible for use by the general public. Public open space may include one of the following: patios, plazas, balconies, gardens or view areas accessible to the general public, and open air commercial space, open to the street on the first floor, or on at least one side, above the first floor, or open to the sky. The open space requirement can be met anywhere in the development; however, open space provided above the second floor will receive only fifty(50) percent credit toward this requirement. This requirement cannot be met by open areas which are inaccessible to the general public or are contrary to specific requirements of a district. Public right-of-wad That property dedicated through acquisition or easement for the public right-of-way or utility purposes which includes the area spanning from the property line on one side of a street to the property line on the other side of a street. 3 ecarani.aoc Recreational Vehicle: A travel Trailer, pick-up camper or motorized home with or without a mode of power and designed for temporary human habitation for travel or recreational purposes. Rehabilitation: The physical repair, preservation, or improvement of a building or structure. Does not include an expansion of existing floor area greater than ten(10) percent; does not increase the building height; does not result in an increase in permitted density. Residual parcel: A legal lot which does not meet the requirements for a building site within the District in which it is located, and where the abutting sites are already developed. Right-of-Way(ROW): That portion of property which is dedicated or over which an easement is granted for public streets, utilities or alleys. Semi-subterranean parking: Parking structure which is partially recessed into the development site, and which may or may not support additional structures above (e.g. dwelling units, tennis courts, or parking structures). Setback: A stipulated area adjacent to the lot lines which must be kept free of structures over forty-two (42) inches high. Street level: The elevation measured at the centerline of the public street adjacent to the front setback at a point midway between the two side property lines. Suite Hotel: A building designed for or occupied as a temporary lodging place which contains guest rooms and may contain kitchenettes and a separate living room for each unit. Townlot: The area and parcels bounded by Pacific Coast Highway on the southwest, Goldenwest Street on the northwest, Palm Avenue on the north and northeast, and Sixth Street on the east and southeast. Wetland: Lands within the coastal zone which may be covered periodically or permanently with shallow water and include saltwater marshes, freewater marshes, open or closed brackish water marshes, swamps, mudflats and fens. Ultimate right-of-way: The most lateral edge of the area dedicated for street, utilities or alley purposes. SECTION 2. Section 4.1.03 of the Downtown Specfic Plan, entitled Coastal Permit, is hereby amended to read as follows: 4.1.03 Coastal Permit Developments within the Downtown Specific Plan area will be subject to the requirements pertaining to Coastal Development Permits (CDP) in the Local Coastal Program Implementing Ordinances, in addition to the other provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, except as modified by this Specific Plan. 4 ecdraffl.aoc SECTION 3. Section 4.2.02 of the Downtown Specific Plan, entitled Minimum Parcel Size, is hereby amended to read as follows: 4.2.02 Minimum Parcel Size. A minimum parcel size shall be established in each District. A waiver of this requirement may be granted by the Director for residual parcels. In addition, the following minimum floor areas shall apply to all residential dwelling units, except affordable units(see Section 4.2.30): Minimum Floor Unit Type Area(Sq. Ft.) Bachelor and single 450 One (1) bedroom 650 Two (2) bedrooms 900 Three (3)bedrooms 1100 Four (4) bedrooms 1300 SECTION 4. Section 4.2.13 of the Downtown Specific Plan, entitled Parking, is hereby amended to read as follows: 4.2.13 Parking. All developments (except as provided in Section 4.2.30)will be required to meet the minimum off-street parking standards of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code or as required by the Downtown Parking Master Plan. Exception: Affordable housing projects may reduce the required on-site guest parking. Residential: All parking, as required by the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, shall be provided on-site. Commercial: (a) Parking for all commercial projects within the area of the Downtown Parking Master Plan shall be consistent with the parking requirements of the Downtown Parking Master Plan. Districts 1, 2, 4, a portion of 5, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11 shall provide one-hundred (100) percent of the required parking on-site, pursuant to the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. Parking in District 3, a portion of District 5, and District 6 shall be provided on- site to the maximum extent feasible, as identified in the Parking Master Plan. The balance of any required parking shall be provided in facilities within walking distance. Any required off-site parking spaces shall be in place prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for any development. All parking for any portion of a District which is not within the area of the Downtown Parking Master Plan shall provide one-hundred (100) percent of the required parking on-site, pursuant to the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. 5 ccdraftl.doc (b) All off-street uncovered surface parking spaces shall be screened. Screening shall be a maximum of thirty-two (32) inches high as measured from the adjacent parking surface. Screening shall consist of landscaping or landscaping combined with opaque materials, and must be approved by the director. (c) Any commercial business (retail, office, restaurant)which requests to participate in the In-lieu parking fee program shall submit a conditional use permit application for review and approval. SECTION 5. Section 4.2.14 of the Downtown Specific Plan, entitled Downtown Parking Master Plan, is hereby amended to read as follows: 4.2.14 The Downtown Parking Master Plan The Downtown Parking Master Plan is based on a shared parking concept. Shared parking in effect allows one (1) parking space to serve two (2) or more individual land uses without conflict. Shared parking relies on the variations In the peak parking demand for different uses. In other words, parking demands will fluctuate in relationship to the mix of uses by hour, day of week and season. The proper mix will create an interrelationship among different uses and activities which results in a reduction of the demand for parking. The Downtown core area is centered along the Main Street commercial corridor. This commercial corridor divides into two (2) distinct areas, north and south of Orange. The area which encompasses the Downtown Parking Master Plan is as identified on the area map (Figure 4.1). Area 1 - The area south of Orange Avenue along Main Street provides the greatest amount of public parking opportunities both off-street and on-street. Area 1 will have the greatest number of visitor serving and seasonal commercial uses including year round entertainment. This area will also have the greatest concentration of expanded commercial, restaurant and office uses, and therefore, the majority of the public parking spaces should be provided in this area. Area 2 - The area north of Orange Avenue along Main Street provides limited amounts of public parking opportunities. This area is still part of the Downtown core. However, the commercial uses in Area 2 will cater more to the year round residents, therefore, additional on-street short term parking should be provided. This area will be a mixed use area with a significant amount of residential uses. The amount of commercial and office parking has been reduced. City owned and controlled public parking in the Downtown Parking Master Plan (DPMP) area shall be consistent with the City's certified land use plan. The DPMP is structured to protect beach user parking by providing adequate public parking within the Downtown area. The DPMP encourages the use of the City owned and controlled parking sites within the DPMP area. To encourage the use of the City owned public parking facilities, parking controls such as time limits, and parking rates may be adjusted to maintain the desired use of these spaces by patrons and employees of the downtown area. A validation program for the City owned public parking structure has been established as an incentive for the use of the structure by the patrons and employees of the downtown area. Any changes to the program shall be submitted to the Executive Director to determine if an amendment to the Specific Plan is necessary. 6 ccdraftl.doc The Downtown Parking Master Plan anticipates a total development scenario of approximately 450,000 to 500,000 square feet of commercial activity. The Master Plan has development thresholds of 100,000 square feet for restaurant, 250,000 square feet for retail, 100,000 square feet for office and 50,000 square feet for miscellaneous development. Area 1 will contain approximately 350,000 to 400,000 square feet with the remaining 50,000 to 100,000 square feet of activity occurring in Area 2. It shall be the responsibility of the Community Development Department to monitor the development square footage per use and parking spaces within the Downtown Parking Master Plan area. An annual review and monitoring report of the Downtown Parking Master Plan shall be prepared by the Department and presented for review by the Planning Commission. The Downtown Parking Master Plan annual review and monitoring report shall include, at a minimum: 1) amount and type of development square footage approved during the annual review period; 2) total amount of square footage in the Downtown Parking Master Plan area; 3) an inventory of existing parking spaces; 4) a parking utilization study; 5) an assessment of parking demand compared with parking supply; 6) a determination of whether adequate parking remains to serve development allowed up to the total development cap. The Downtown Parking Master Plan annual review and monitoring report shall be submitted to the Executive Director of the Coastal Commission for review. If the Downtown Parking Master Plan annual review and monitoring report indicates that the parking supply is inadequate to serve the approved level of development or if the development square footage exceeds the amount described above (up to 500,000 square feet total) all development within the Downtown Parking Master Plan area shall provide parking consistent with Off-Street Parking and Loading Provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, unless and until new parking to meet the identified demand is approved and constructed. Changes between one or more of the individual use categories may be allowed as long as the total square footage does not exceed 500,000 square feet and there are corresponding changes in the other use categories to assure adequate parking remains. The exisiting base square footage shall be as described in the document approved by the Huntington Beach Planning Commission on July 7, 1993 titled Downtown Huntington Beach Parking Master Plan. The location and type of parking resources available in the Downtown area recognizes that two different and distinct implementation approaches are necessary for each of the areas. The adjusted parking requirement was calculated for both Area 1 and Area 2 (Figure 4.2). Existing building square footage and uses are parked within the public parking supply within the Downtown Parking Master Plan. In the event a property owner demolishes his/her existing building, and rebuilds a new building of equal square footage and use, no additional parking shall be required. Any code required parking spaces provided on- site shall be credited for any expansion of square footage or intensification of use. All required parking shall be calculated based on the reduced requirements of the Downtown Parking Master Plan. Area 1 - In Area 1 the restaurant and retail parking requirement was reduced by thirty- three percent and twenty-five percent respectively. The office requirement by seventy- five percent. In addition, the theater parking requirement was reduced from the existing code requirement of one (1) parking space for every third seat to one (1) parking space for every fifth seat. This reduction is based on surveys conducted by the theater industry. These reductions recognize the time differential and captive market 7 concepts. Expanding commercial activity in this area remains the focus of the Downtown Master Plan, however, no additional parking for new or expanded commercial, restaurant and office uses should be required. The majority of public parking opportunities currently exist in this area and the current parking supply exceeds the parking demand. This parking supply will continue to be adequate provided the total square footage of uses do not exceed the Master Plan projections. The city shall retain the option to purchase property for a public parking facility. Area 2 - In Area 2 the retail and office requirement was reduced by fifty percent. This recognizes that the retail activity will be primarily convenience commercial catering to local residents on short term shopping trips. The office parking requirement reduction is based on the minimal number of office opportunities and the on-site parking. Restaurant uses were not given a reduction factor. Numerous conflicts are created between restaurant and residential uses, therefore, restaurants should be required to provide one hundred percent of their parking requirement on-site. The existing Downtown public parking facilities are not conveniently located for use in this area, thus, a combination of expanded on-street and on-site parking may be necessary for new or expanded commercial uses. However, providing the commercial activity remains primarily service related commercial, the existing supply of on-street and on- site parking should be sufficient for anticipated uses. All future development projects must be carefully reviewed for parking concerns. The mix of commercial and residential activities can justify a parking reduction and additional parking may not be necessary if development does not exceed the Master Plan projections. The city shall retain the option to purchase property for a public parking facility. The Planning Commission or City Council may impose one (1), all, or a combination of the following requirements to ensure that adequate parking is provided for each development: 1. Require on-site parking for all projects one-half(1/2)block or greater in size. 2. Require that any parking in-lieu fees be full cost recovery based on the parking requirement for specific uses. However, allow that these fees be paid over an amortization period, with appropriate security provided by the applicant to guarantee payment.. 3. Require valet parking once the maximum build out of restaurant activity has been obtained. 4. Commercial projects greater than 10,000 square feet in size shall be required to submit a parking management plan consistent with the Downtown Parking Master Plan. 5. Require valet and/or remote parking for special events and activities. 6. Require the applicant to provide additional on-site and/or off-site parking for any development. 7. Develop parking options which may generate additional parking for any development. SECTION 6. Section 4.2.24 of the Downtown Specific Plan, entitled Antennas, is hereby amended to read as follows: 8 ccdraft1.doc 4.2.24 Antennas. Antennas shall be consistent with the applicable zoning document. SECTION 7. Section 4.2.33 of the Downtown Specific Plan, entitled Outdoor Dining, is hereby amended to read as follows: 4.2.33 Outdoor dinin&. Outdoor dining on public or private property may be permitted subject to use permit approval by the Zoning Administrator and compliance with this section. (a) Location and design criteria. Outdoor dining shall conform to the following location and design criteria: (i) The outdoor dining shall be an extension of an existing or proposed eating or drinking establishment on contiguous property. (ii) Outdoor dining located on the sidewalk area of the public right-of-way shall be limited to commercial areas within the Downtown Specific Plan. (iii) Outdoor dining located on the sidewalk area of the public right-of-way of the first block of Main Street and Pacific Coast Highway within District 3 and on the Municipal Pier shall provide a minimum ten(10) foot clear passage area or pedestrian access. Outdoor dining located on the sidewalk area of the public right-of-way and all other areas shall provide a minimum eight (8) foot clear passage area for pedestrian access. A wider clear passage area may be required at the discretion of the Zoning Administrator. (iv) No outdoor dining shall be allowed in mini-parks, publicly owned plaza, or beach areas excluding concession carts with no seating. (v) Outdoor dining located on public property shall be separated from the clear passage area on the public sidewalk and/or pedestrian walkway by a temporary cordon and removed when not in use. (vi) All features including but not limited to tables, chairs, umbrellas, of outdoor dining located on public property shall be removed when not in use. (vii) Outdoor dining on private sidewalk areas shall provide a minimum eight (8) foot clear passage area for pedestrian access or a permanent cordon shall surround the outdoor dining area and a minimum five (5) foot clear passage area shall be provided. (viii) At street intersections, the triangular area formed by measuring 25 feet along the curb lines or the area formed by the extension of the property lines to the curb lines, whichever is more restrictive, shall be clear passage area. (b) Necessary Findings In order to approve outdoor dining the Zoning Administrator shall make the following findings: 9 (i) The sidewalk's public use, pedestrian, transit and business services including but not limited to loading zones, bus stops, public phones, and benches, are not restricted. (ii) Building entryways are not obstructed. (iii) Pedestrian traffic volumes are not inhibited. (iv) Handicapped accessibility is provided where required. (c) Operating requirements, provisions, and conditions. (i) A License agreement including use fees shall be obtained from the City for outdoor dining located on public property. The License Agreement shall be subject to termination at any time upon a 10 day prior written notice upon determination of the Zoning Administrator that one or more of the conditions or provisions of this section have been violated or that one or more factors listed in Subsection (b) above have changed and the permitted use is no longer compatible with the intended use of the public right-of-way or public property. Termination of a License Agreement shall nullify the use permit. (ii) The applicant shall enter into a Maintenance Agreement with the City for maintenance of all portions of the public property used and approved by the Zoning Administrator for the outdoor dining. Said agreement shall be submitted to and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of the use. (iii) All outdoor dining operators shall provide a public liability insurance policy as specified in all current insurance resolutions. Such liability insurance shall be provided in a form acceptable to the City Attorney. The policy shall name the City of Huntington Beach as an additional insured and shall be maintained at all times. (iv) An outdoor dining operator shall not sell to motorists or persons in vehicles. (v) The applicant (or operator) shall pay all fees and deposits required by the Huntington Beach Municipal Code and Ordinance Code, including the fee established for use of public property, prior to operation of the outdoor dining use. (vi) All provisions of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code shall apply. (vii) No alcohol beverages may be served on public property. (viii) The use permit may be transferred upon sale or transfer of the restaurant subject to a written request approved by the Zoning Administrator and the property owner. An amendment to the License Agreement will be required prior to transfer of the use permit for outdoor dining on public property. A use permit transfer or license renewal or amendment may be denied if one or more of the factors listed in Subsection (b) above have changed and the permitted use is no longer compatible with the intended use of the public right-of-way. (d) Parking. 10 ccdraftl.doc Parking shall comply with the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance or the Downtown Parking Master Plan; however, no parking spaces shall be required for the outdoor dining portion of the restaurant if the outdoor dining area does not exceed the following: Total Restaurant Area Outdoor Dining Area 1) 1,200 sq. ft. or less with: Maximum 5 tables and 20 seats 2) greater than 1,200 sq. ft. with: Maximum of 20% of the restaurant area, not to exceed 400 sq. ft. Any outdoor dining area which exceeds these standards shall provide 100% of the required parking for the entire area. (e) Enforcement. Enforcement of this Section shall be by the Community Development Director or his/her designee. Any outdoor dining use within the Downtown Specific Plan that has been established without prior use permit approval must obtain a use permit and if located on public property, a License Agreement within 90 days following the effective date of this ordinance. No use permit application filling fee shall be required for those uses existing prior to March 21, 1994. SECTION 8. Section 4.3.01 of the Downtown Specific Plan, entitled Permitted Uses, is hereby amended to read as follows: 4.3.01 Permitted Uses. (a) The following list of Visitor-Serving Commercial uses in District No. 1 may be allowed. Other visitor serving related uses as described in the Land Use Plan, and which have the same parking demand as the existing use not specified herein may be allowed subject to the approval of the Director. Change of use shall be subject to the approval of the Director. For Example: Art gallery • Bakery • Banks and savings and loans branch offices (no drive-up windows; not to exceed five thousand (5,000) square feet) • Beach, swimming and surfing equipment Bicycle sales, rental and repair • Boat and marine supplies • Bookstores Clothing stores Delicatessens Drug stores Florists Grocery (convenience) 11 ccdraftl.doc Ice cream parlors Laundromats, Laundries Meat or fish markets Newspaper and magazine stores Newsstands Office Outdoor dining pursuant to S.4.2.32 Photographic equipment sales Photographic processing Public Facilities Shoe stores Sporting goods Tourist related public and semipublic buildings, services and facilities Travel agency (b) The following list of Visitor Serving Commercial uses and any new construction, or change of such use in District No. 1 may be allowed subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit. For example: Dancing and/or live entertainment Dry Cleaning Health and sports clubs Liquor Stores Motels Permanent parking lots and parking structures Residential uses Restaurants Service station(minimum 14,000 square feet of net lot area, subject to the development standards outlined in Section 9220.14 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code) (c) Visitor-serving commercial uses must be a part of all development proposed in this District, with the following minimum requirements: for projects with less than a half-block of frontage, the entire street level must be devoted to visitor-serving uses; for projects with a half-block or more of frontage, either the entire street level, or at least one-third (1/3) of the total floor area must be devoted to visitor- serving commercial uses. (d) Residential uses are allowed only in conjunction with visitor-serving commercial uses. The required visitor-serving commercial portion of any initial construction shall be provided prior to or at the same time as any residential portion. No residential unit shall be occupied until the required commercial portion is completed. Projects which are proposed to be phased must proportionately develop the commercial and residential concurrently. 12 ccdraftl.doc SECTION 9. Section 4.5.01 of the Downtown Specific Plan, entitled Permitted Uses, is hereby amended to read as follows: 4.5.01 Permitted Uses. (a) The following list of uses which establishes a commercial core and which serves as the transition between visitor-serving and year round commercial uses in District No. 3 may be allowed. Other visitor serving related uses as described in the Land Use Plan, and which may have the same parking demand as the existing use not specified herein may be allowed subject to the approval of the Director. Change of use shall be subject to the approval of the Director. For example: Art gallery Bakeries Banks and savings and loans branch offices (no drive-up windows; not to exceed five thousand (5,000) square feet) Barber, beauty, manicure shops Beach, swimming and surfing equipment Bicycle sales, rental and repair Boat and marine supplies Bookstores Clothing stores Delicatessens Drug stores Florists Ice cream parlors Newspaper and magazine stores Newsstands Outdoor dining pursuant to S.4.2.32 Photographic equipment sales Photographic processing Shoe stores Sporting goods Tourist related public and semi-public buildings, services and facilities Travel Agency (b) The following list of uses and any new construction, or change of such use in District No. 3 may be allowed subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit. For example: Dancing and/or live entertainment Health and sports clubs Hotel and licensed bed and breakfast designed as a commercial establishment Liquor stores Permanent Parking lots and parking structures Restaurants Residential uses Retail sales, outdoor Theaters Note: The ground floor or street level of all buildings in this District shall be devoted to visitor-serving commercial activities. 13 (c) The ground floor or street level of all buildings in this District fronting Main Street and Pacific Coast Highway shall be devoted to visitor-serving commercial activities. (d) Visitor-serving commercial uses must be a part of all development proposed in this District with a minimum requirement that the entire street level, or at least one- third (1/3) of the total floor area be devoted to visitor-serving commercial uses. (e) Residential uses shall only be permitted if the development includes consolidation of a one block or greater area. Note: Residential uses are allowed only in conjunction with visitor-serving commercial uses. Up to one-half(1/2) of the floor area of projects may be devoted to residential uses. (f) The required visitor-serving commercial portion of any project shall be provided prior to or at the same time as any residential portion. No residential unit shall be occupied until the required commercial portion is complete. (g) In the event of a consolidation of a minimum one block area, non-priority (residential) uses may be located in separate structures or on separate portions of the parcel in the context of a planned development, provided no less than one-half of the total floor area permitted is devoted to visitor-serving uses, and provided that substantial public open space and pedestrian access amenities are provided to maintain a predominantly visitor-serving orientation. SECTION 10. Section 4.6 of the Downtown Specific Plan, entitled District 94: Mixed- Use; Office Residential, is hereby amended to read as follows: 4.6 DISTRICT #4: MIXED-USE, OFFICE RESIDENTIAL Purpose. This District flanks the Downtown core area, separating the area along Main Street from the outlying areas which are primarily residential. The purpose of this District is to provide a transition zone between the existing residential areas to the commercial Main Street corridor. Consequently, mixes of office and residential uses are permitted. Boundaries. District#4 includes the half-blocks on the northwest side of the Main Street core area from 6th Street to the alley between 6th and 5th Streets; and from the alley between 3rd and 2nd Streets to the alley between 2nd and First Streets, between Walnut and Orange Avenues. 14 ccdraftl.aoc SECTION 11. Section 4.7.01 of the Downtown Specific Plan, entitled Permitted Uses, is hereby amended to read as follows: 4.7.01 Permitted Uses. (a) The following list of uses which establishes a commercial core and which serves as the transition between visitor-serving and year round commercial uses in District No. 5 may be allowed. Other commercial/ office/residential related uses not specified herein may be allowed subject to the approval of the Director. Change of use shall be subject to the approval of the Director. For Example: Antique stores Art gallery Bakeries Banks and savings and loans branch offices • Barber, beauty, manicure shops • Beach, swimming and surfing equipment • Bicycle sales, rental and repair • Boat and marine supplies • Bookstores Boutiques Clothing stores Delicatessens Drug stores Dry cleaning Florists Groceries General retail Hardware stores Hobby supplies Ice cream parlors Jewelry stores Laundromats Newsstands Office Supplies Offices Outdoor dining pursuant to S.4.2.32 Photographic equipment sales Photographic processing Public facilities Shoe repair Shoe stores Sporting goods Stationery stores Tailor shops Travel agency (b) The following list of uses and any new construction, or change of such use in District No. 5 may be allowed subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit. For example: • Dancing and/ or live entertainment • Health and sports clubs • Liquor stores 15 ccdraftl.doc Permanent parking lots and parking structures Restaurants Residential uses (c) The street level of all buildings fronting Main Street and 5th Street in this District shall be devoted to commercial activities. (i) Commercial or residential may be permitted on the street level between Olive and Orange Avenue fronting 5th Street and 3rd Street. (d) The following uses may be permitted above the first floor: (i) Commercial Use - all commercial uses allowed on the first floor may be allowed on the second floor. (ii) Office Use - professional, general business and non-profit offices provided that: No sales either wholesale or retail which involve delivery of any goods or material to or from the premises occur. No inventory is kept on the premise other than samples. No processing, manufacturing, storage or repair of merchandise of any kind occurs. (iii) Residential Use - Residential uses are allowed only in conjunction with commercial uses in this District. Up to one-third (1/3) of the floor area of projects on parcels smaller than one-half(1/2) block may be devoted to residential uses; projects on one-half(1/2) block or larger parcels, except projects fronting on Main St., up to two-thirds (2/3) of the floor area may be devoted to residential uses; projects on full block or larger parcels, fronting on Main St., up to one-half(1/2) of the floor area may be devoted to residential uses provided that residential uses in addition to the following: Be segregated to a separate structure or restricted to the second story or above; Not occupy any portion of the same story with non-residential uses, unless they are provided with adequate physical and acoustical separation; Be on contiguous floors within a single structure; Be provided with separate pedestrian ingress and egress; Be provided with secured, designated parking. SECTION 12. Section 4.7.10 of the Downtown Specific Plan, entitled Open Space, is hereby amended to read as follows: 4.7.10 Open Space. Parcels within this district having one hundred (100) feet or more of street frontage, shall provide public open space. All non-residential developments shall provide a minimum of ten (10) percent of the net site area as public open space. 16 ccdraftl.doc Exception: Mixed use developments which include residential units, may reduce the public open space to five (5) percent of the net site area. Full block developments on Main Street require public plazas. These street level public plazas shall be incorporated into the design of the development and approved by the Director. Such plazas shall have the following characteristics: Location: street level corner; one side must face Main Street. Area: not less than one thousand (1,000) square feet excluding public right-of- way. Landscaping: not less than thirty (30) percent of the plaza area should be planted. Paving: all paved areas shall be textured. Visual Feature: plaza must include a sculpture, fountain, information kiosk, pond, display, or similar visual amenity. Public Seating shall be provided. Open Air Commercial: not more than fifty(50) percent of the privately owned publicly used plaza area may be used for open air commercial uses. SECTION 13. Section 4.9.01 of the Downtown Specific Plan, entitled Permitted Uses, is hereby amended to read as follows: 4.9.01 Permitted Uses. (a) The following list of Visitor-Serving Commercial uses in District No. 7 may be allowed. Other visitor serving related uses as described in the Land Use Plan, and which have the same parking demand as the existing use not specified herein may be allowed subject to the approval of the Director. Change of use shall be subject to the approval of the Director. For example: Art gallery Bakeries Banks and savings and loans branch offices (not to exceed five-thousand (5,000) square feet) Beach, swimming and surfing equipment Bicycle sales, rental and repair Boat and marine supplies Bookstores Clothing stores Delicatessens Florists Groceries (convenience) Ice cream parlors Laundromats, laundries Meat or fish markets Newspaper and magazine stores Newsstands 17 ccdra8l.aoc Outdoor dining pursuant to 5.4.2.32 Photographic equipment sales Photographic processing Professional Office (not to exceed fifty [50] percent of total floor area) Public Transportation Center Shoe stores Sporting goods Tourist related public and semi-public buildings, services and facilities Travel agency Note: Visitor-serving commercial uses must be a part of all development proposals in this District, with a minimum requirement that the entire street level be devoted to Visitor-Serving Commercial Uses. (b) The following list of uses and any new construction, or change of such use in District No. 7 may be allowed subject to the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. For example: • Automobile service stations • Dancing and/or live entertainment • Health and sports clubs • Hotels and motels • Liquor stores • Permanent parking lots and parking structures • Restaurants Taverns Theaters SECTION 14. Section 4.9.02 of the Downtown Specific Plan, entitled Minimum Parcel Size, is hereby amended to read as follows: 4.9.02 Minimum Parcel Size. No minimum parcel size shall be required for this District. However, prior to the approval of any development, including subdivision, a master site plan for the entire District shall be approved by the Planning Commission. Development which is in conformance with the site plan may then be permitted. SECTION 15. Section 4.9.11 of the Downtown Specific Plan, entitled Corridor Dedication, is hereby amended to read as follows: 4.9.11 Corridor Dedication. Development in District#7 shall require the dedication of a twenty (20) foot corridor between Atlanta Avenue and PCH for public access between the southern end of the Pacific Electric ROW and PCH. This requirement may be waived if an alternative public use is provided or if the corridor is deemed unnecessary by the City. Any proposal for an alternative public use must be approved by the Planning Commission. 18 ccdrafti.aoc SECTION 16. Section 4.10 of the Downtown Specific Plan, entitled District # 8: High Density Residential, is hereby amended to read as follows: 4.10 DISTRICT #8: -HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL Purpose. This District is intended to allow high density residential uses. New residential development will provide a population base to help support the commercial and office uses in the Downtown area. Boundaries. District#8 includes two consolidated parcels; one parcel is bounded on the north by Atlanta Avenue, on the east by Huntington Street, on the south by the proposed Walnut Extension and on the west by First Street. The second includes the area north of the proposed Walnut Avenue extension between Huntington Street and Beach Boulevard. SECTION 17. Section 4.11.01 of the Downtown Specific Plan, entitled Permitted Uses, is hereby amended to read as follows: 4.11.01 Permitted Uses. (a) The following list of commercial recreation uses in District No. 9 may be allowed. Other visitor serving/recreational related uses as described in the Land Use Plan, and which have the same parking demand as the existing use not specified herein may be allowed subject to the approval of the Director. A change of use shall be subject to the approval of the Director. For example: Retail sales Tourist related uses Outdoor dining pursuant to S.4.2.32 (b) The following list of uses and any new construction, or change of such use in District No. 9 may be allowed subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit. For example: Dancing and/or Live entertainment Hotels, motels Recreational facilities Restaurants SECTION 18. Section 4.12.01 of the Downtown Specific Plan, entitled Permitted Uses, is hereby amended to read as follows: 4.12.01 Permitted Uses. (a) The following list of pier related commercial uses in District No. 10 may be allowed. Other pier related uses as described in the Land Use Plan, and which have the same parking demand as the existing use not specified herein may be 19 cearafii.aa allowed subject to the approval of the Director. A change of use shall be subject to the approval of the Director. For example: Bait and tackle shops Beach rentals Retail sales (beach-related) Outdoor dining pursuant to S.4.2.33 (b) The following list of uses and any new construction, or change of such use in District No. 10 may be allowed subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit. For example: Aquariums Commercial uses or public recreation facilities (beach-related) Museums Parking lots that will not result in the loss of recreational sand area. Tiered parking is permitted within the Downtown Specific Plan area on existing lots seaward of Pacific Coast Highway provided the parking is designed so that the top of the structures including walls, etc., are located a minimum of one foot below the maximum height of the adjacent bluff. Restaurants (including fast food with take out windows) Note: Only parking uses are permitted in this District northwest of Sixth Street. SECTION 19. Section 4.16 of the Downtown Specific Plan, entitled Mobil Home District, is hereby amended to read as follows: 4.16 MOBILE HOME DISTRICT Purpose. The Downtown Specific Plan includes approximately 6.6 acres with a Mobilehome District (MH) designation. The purpose of the Mobilehome District is to permit present mobilehome park uses to continue. The mobilehome area falls within District Nine of the Downtown Specific Plan. Boundaries. The Mobilehome District encompasses a part District 9. The following describes the real property: THAT PORTION OF FRACTIONAL SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 11 WEST, CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 51, PAGE 14 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS; THE BASIS OF BEARING OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIPTION IS THE CENTERLINE OF LAKE STREET NORTH 40038'10" EAST AS SHOWN ON RECORD OF SURVEY 87-1049 FILED IN BOOK 117, PAGES 21 & 22 IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 14; THENCE SOUTH 88°42'52" WEST 20 cedraftl.aoc 111.91 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 2°29'35" WEST 593.12 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 24°32'06" WEST 386.94 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 12°44'44" EAST 117.71 FEET TO A POINT IN THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF FUTURE WALNUT AVENUE PER PRECISE PLAN OF STREET ALIGNMENT 88-1, ORDINANCE NO. 2961, SAID POINT BEING THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 12°44'44" EAST 653.77 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 78°59'52" WEST 82.75 FEET; THENCE NORTH 53000'08" WEST 835.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 36059'52" EAST 300.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 51°08'21" WEST 125.77 FEET TO A POINT IN SAID SOUTHERLY LINE OF FUTURE WALNUT AVENUE, SAID POINT BEING THE BEGINNING OF A NON-TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 1245.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE TO SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 30°31'l7" WEST; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE AND SAID SOUTHERLY LINE OF FUTURE WALNUT AVENUE 552.05 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 25024'20" TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. THE AREA OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED LAND IS 6.635 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. Regulations. The regulations of the Downtown Specific Plan will serve as overlays for the portion of District 9 which retains the (MH) zone, until such time that the Mobilehome District designation is removed. All areas retaining the (NM) zone shall be subject to the provisions of the Mobilehome District of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. In addition, these areas are subject to the provisions of the Mobilehome Overlay Zones/Removal/Rezoning/Change of Use Article of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. SECTION 20. The District 10 map is hereby revised to reflect the changes made herein, as depicted on the new District 10 map attached hereto as Exhibit"A" and incorporated by this reference as though fully set forth herein. SECTION 21. The District 11 map is hereby revised to reflect the changes made herein, as depicted on the new District 11 map attached hereto as Exhibit`B" and incorporated by this reference as though fully set forth herein. 21 cc&afti.aoc D � 0 O � Ycti O r O \ O 1 0 CD � D 0 awT c b ...... Vw1NVT aoao pq as a �._ Ptic�rrc co�sr rnNr. HUNTIN PLANNING DEPARTMENT DISTRICT 10 DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT ` � uu 11]uu[0[ ]lfl J7[fl- nu 11 IE If]un[11]I� O � IT nu Ifl- IE lu�o In- Gfl m fO[A7Ctl IfllTl ll]ill I D�n�O��`'�� � [11 lfl lfl DOOM[flu[][fl[fl nu nom U-1 11-1[11[]1-1f f V}f��,��1[flfD!]7�]QGTI[�1C�1G�Il1f1111[I II�II lllYl[Tll1 � ' � J � ��i�ITl �kfr[�1'I [r�1FJI�T� IJflIE-11.11-1 ! I � J ° �� '�m�ro �'��;�m�m�u� �11C_I �uJf mCALIFORNIA DISTRICT 11 DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN PLANNING oc:.x�.c+� CKkita�T 3 " 11 SECTION 22. This ordinance shall become effective 30 days after its adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach at a regular meeting thereof held on the 1st day of May , 1995. r� Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: — e City Clerk 4�Y_-Iqj-Ts rney H REVIEWED AND APPROVED: INITIATED AND APPROVED: City Administrator Director of Co nity Development 22 ccdraft1.doe Ord. No. 3280 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss: CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ) I, CONNIE BROCKWAY, 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 ordinance was read to said City Council at an re lar meeting thereof held on the 17th of April, 1995, and was again read to said City Council at a re ular meeting thereof held on the 1st of May, 1995, and was passed and adopted by the afFirmative vote of at least a majority of all the members of said City Council. AYES: Councilmembers: Harman, Bauer, Sullivan, Leipzig, Dettloff, Green, Garofalo NOES: Councilmembers: None ABSENT: Councilmembers: None City Clerk and ex-ofI'icio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California G/kw/indexes/ordbkpg 5/2/95 ,U wtw. Mr, CI'i x' COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING RE( SUBJECT: qT� DEPARTMENT: d 'MEETING: 4 A-7 Lq s 11-e 'q ....... .... .. ............ Si 1B �--NUMB..... .... -FF: �5T Gti -e ............ N, -!A YES NO Does Heading and Closing of Notice Reflect Citv Council Hearing (Not PC) Is a Map attached and/or is a quarter page legal ad reouired? If appeal, is appellant's name shovTi on legal notice? If housing 1s involved, s "legal challenge. paragraph" include? I If Coastal Development Permit, are the RESIDENT labels attached and is the Coastal Commission Office on the labels? If Coastal Development Perrr3t, has the Master Legal Notice Document been used? Is Title C0MDany-%7erjn'ca6on letter attached? Were the latest Assessor's Parcel Roils used? (Please attach verification of Title Co. or indicate that rolls used were derived from Assessor's Rolls in Planning Dept..Whicbever applicable) Is the appellant's name and address part of the labels? Is day of1public hearing correct - Mondav/'Tuesdav? Has the City Administrator's Office authorized the public hearing to be set? Is day of public hearing correct - Monday/Tuesday? Is there an Environmental Status to be approved by Council? Are the appellant/applicant's names and addresses on mailing labels? For Public Hearings at the City Council level, please insert the below paragraph of the public hearing notice "ALL-INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to attend said heaning.and.e&g P—ss 0"P)p' or submit to the _L — City Clerk Nvritten evidence for or against the application as outlined above. If there are any further questions, please call (insert name of Planner) at 536-5271 CONNIE BROCKWAY,CITY CLERK CITY OF HlJNTfN*GTO.1N1 BEACH 2000 MALN STREET- 2ND FLOOR HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFOR-NLA. 92648 (714) 536-52 2 7 ATTACHMENT 1 R` UEST FOR COUNCIL ACTIA MEETING DATE: 04/17/95 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: CD 95-017 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - CODE AMENDMENT NO. 92-5 (DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN): 1. Code Amendment No. 92-5 to amend the Downtown Specific Plan by proposing a "Village Concept" and scaling down development standards, creating three (3) planning nodes, establishing affordable housing standards, and a comprehensive parking management plan as modified by the California Coastal Commission is consistent with the city's General Plan by incorporating the goals and policies regarding land use, circulation, recreation, housing, and providing visitor serving opportunities. 2. Code Amendment No. 92-5 as modified by the California Coastal Commission is consistent with the goals and policies contained in the Housing Element and the city's affordable housing program by providing housing opportunities including affordable housing. 3. Code Amendment No. 92-5 as modified by the California Coastal Commission is consistent with the city's Coastal Element and the California Coastal Act by implementing coastal policies providing visitor serving opportunities, affordable housing and requiring coastal development permits in the coastal zone. CD95-017.DOC -4- 03/29/95 9:28 AM ATTACHMENT 2 17�) LoLJ \1 I-- a ID®r ON r_l r_D r C= i=r.=J U.li. I r_I �.,�.,•�'�- 1 J'_lM 1 extir• =_J Z W LIJ \.�/•� � \� !•\fir` � \ •� � to� LLJ LIJ \� � ; ✓; \- ii O .��� � � 7� ATTACHMENT 3 ::::-* :::* :::*:*- :::: :* .::*:.:: ::: :: .::::. '­ . ... .......... ---b-"** .... *...... ....... ...... ..... .. .. ... C AM .. .. .. T ----- .... . "T .. ....... .. ... ....... - ---- -N ADOW u. ........ ....% .. .. ... E -ME :M :.... .... .. ...... ... . I ..... . .... .. ...:. ... : .... ... .. . .... .... .... ....... ...... .... ....... ........ ------- ........ ........ ... . .. C ----ST-AL-C-.OIMMSSI-O*WS:SUG-GE--STE-D:MootgcAm---Ns OA .. ... ... -- ---- -- PAGE NO. CODE CITY COUNCIL COASTAL COMMISSION LEG. DRFT. SECTION ISSUE ACTION ACTION STAFF COMMENTS Pg. #1 4.0.04 Define Approved 10/3/94 Add new text: use definition as Agree with Coastal Commission Definitions development found in the Coastal Act. action Pg. #2 4.0.04 Define Approved 10/3/94 Delete text: for the purpose of Agree with Coastal Commission Definitions demolition preparing the site for new action construction. Pg. #2 4.0.04 Define floor Approved 10/3/94 Delete text: gross floor area. Add Agree with Coastal Commissior Definitions area ratio new text: net site. action Pg. #4 4.1.03 Coastal permit Approved 10/3/94 Add new text: in the Local Coastal Agree with Coastal Commission Administration. Program Implementing Ordinances. action Pg. #4 4.2.02 Min. Incorrect Approved 10/3/94 Correction: correct numbering. Agree with Coastal Commission Parcel Size numbering action (General Provisions) Pg. #4 4.2.13 Parking Affordable Approved 10/3/94 Correction: correct numbering. Agree with Coastal Commission (General housing -guest Delete text: guest parking on-street action Provisions) parking or in parking facility. Pg. #5 4.2.13 Parking Residential Approved 10/3/94 Add new text: Code required Agree with Coastal Commission (General parking parking shall be provided on-site. action Provisions) Pg. #6 4.2.14 Correct title Approved 10/3/94 Add new text: add the word Agree with Coastal Commission Downtown Parking to the title. action Parking Master Plan(General Provisions) Downtown SpecificPlan 1 4/5/95 Coastal Commission Modifications FAGE NO. CODE CITY COUNCIL COASTAL COMMISSION LEG.DST. SECTION :ISSUE ACTION ACTION STAFF COMMENTS Pg. #6 4.2.14 Parking Approved 10/3/94 Add new text: provide incentives Agree with Coastal Commission Downtown structure- and encourage the use of City owned action Parking Master validation and controlled parking with a Plan(General program validation program for Downtown/ Provisions) program changes to be submitted to Executive Director of Coastal Commission for review. Pg. #6 4.2.14 Annual review Approved 10/3/94 Add new text: require six items to Agree with Coastal Commission Downtown and monitoring be included in Annual Review and action Parking Master report Monitoring Report/Annual Report Plan(General submitted to the Executive Director Provisions) of Coastal Commission for review. Pg. #6-7 4.2.14 Development Approved 10/3/94 Add new text: if development Agree with Coastal Commission Downtown threshold exceeds threshold, require 100% action Parking Master code required parking/unless new Plan(General parking is approved and constructed Provisions) /allow shift in categories/use PC approved DTPMP as base document. Pg#6-7 4.2.14 Additional Approved 10/3/94 Delete text: exceeds development Agree with Coastal Commission Downtown requirements cap based upon entitlement. action Parking Master Plan(General Provision Pg. #8 4.2.24 Antennas Approved 10/3/94 Add new text: reference to Agree with Coastal Commission Antennas applicable zoning document. action (General Provisions Downtown Specific Plan 2 4/5/95 Coastal Commission Modifications PAGE NO. CODE CITY COUNCIL COASTAL COMMISSION LEG.DRFT SECTION ISSUE ACTION ACTION STAFT COMMENTS Pg. #9 4.2.33 Outdoor Location and Approved 10/3/94 Add new text: on the Municipal Agree with Coastal Commission Dining(a) (iii) design criteria Pier. action (General Provisions) Pg. #9 4.2.33 Outdoor Location and Approved 10/3/94 Delete text: 10 feet pedestrian Agree with Coastal Commission Dining(a) (iv) design criteria walkway located in mini park, public action (General plaza, beach area. Add new text: Provisions) Prohibit in mini parks, public plazas, and beach areas. Pg. #9 4.2.33 (b) Factors to Approved 10/3/94 Delete text: factors to consider(I) Agree with Coastal Commission Outdoor consider thru(vi). Add new text: Necessary action Dining Findings(I)thru (iv). (General Provisions Pg. #11 4.3.01 (a) Introductory Approved 10/3/94 Add new text: visitor serving/as Agree with Coastal Commission District One paragraph described in Land Use Plan/same action (Permitted parking demand. Uses Pg. #11-12 4.3.01 (a) List of Approved 10/3/94 Delete text: Hardware stores. Agree with Coastal Commission District One permitted uses Move text: dry cleaning to subpart action (Permitted (b) requiring a CUP. Uses Pg. #13 4.5.01 (a) Introductory Approved 10/3/94 Add new text: visitor serving/as Agree with Coastal Commission District Three paragraph described in Land Use Plan/same action (Permitted parking demand. Uses Pg. #14 4.6 District Boundary of Approved 10/3/94 Correction: change Lake St. to Agree with Coastal Commission Four district First St. action (Boundaries) Downtown Specific Plan 3 4/5/95 Coastal Commission Modifications PAGE NO. CODE CITY COUNCIL COASTAL COMMISSION LEG.DRVL SECTION ISSUE ACTION ACTION STAFF COMMENTS Pg. #15 4.7.01 (a) List of Approved 10/3/94 Add new text: Public Facilities to Agree with Coastal Commission District Five permitted uses list. action (Permitted Uses Pg. #17 4.7.10 District Reference Approved 10/3/94 Delete text: reference to Carts and Agree with Coastal Commission Five (Open carts& kiosk Kiosk Ordinance. action Space) ordinance Pg. #17 4.9.01 District Introductory Approved 10/3/04 Add new text: visitor serving/as Agree with Coastal Commission Seven paragraph described in Land Use Plan/ same action (Permitted parking demand. Uses Pg. #18 4.9.02 District Minimum Approved 10/3/94 Add new text: including Agree with Coastal Commission Seven(Min. parcel size subdivision. action Parcel Size Pg. #18 4.9.11 District Corridor Approved 10/3/94 Add new text: public use. Agree with Coastal Commission Seven dedication action (Corridor Dedication Pg. #19 4.10 District Boundary of Approved 10/3/94 Correction: change Lake St. to Agree with Coastal Commission Eight district First St. action (Boundaries) Pg. #19 4.11.01 Introductory Approved 10/3/94 Add new text: visitor Agree with Coastal Commission District Nine paragraph serving/recreational/as described in action (Permitted the Land Use Plan/same parking Uses) demand. Pg. #19 4.12 District District Approved 10/3/94 Correction: modify district map to Agree with Coastal Commission Ten boundary be consistent with Coastal Element. action Boundaries Downtown Specific Plan 4 4/5/95 Coastal Commission Modifications PAGE NO. CODE CITY COUNCIL COASTAL COMMISSION LEG. DRFT. SECTION ISSUE ACTION ACTION STAFF COMMENTS Pg. #19 4.12.01 Introductory Approved 10/3/94 Add new text: pier related/as Agree with Coastal Commission District Ten paragraph described in the Land Use Plan/ action (Permitted same parking demand. Uses Pg. #19 4.12.01 Incorrect Approved 10/3/94 Correction: correct numbering. Agree with Coastal Commission District Ten numbering action (Permitted Uses Pg. #20-22 4.16 Mobile Correct Approved 10/3/94 Correction: correct acreage and Agree with Coastal Commission Home District acreage and area descriptions. action area description Downtown Specific Plan 5 4/5/95 Coastal Commission Modifications ATTACHMENT 4 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT SHOWING COASTAL COMMISSION CHANGES SECTION 1. Section 4.0.04 of the Downtown Specific Plan, entitled definitions, is hereby amended to read as follows: 4.0,04 Definitions The following definitions shall apply to the Downtown Specific Plan. Terms not described under this section shall be subject to the definitions contained in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. Beach Area: The ocean side of Pacific Coast Highway including the Bluff Top Park area and the Pier. Bluff Top Park Area: That area of improved beach access bounded on the south by 9th Street continuing north to the dividing line of Bolsa Chica State Beach. Bolsa Chica State Beach: The area seaward of Pacific Coast Highway extending from the Huntington Beach City Pier northwest to Warner Avenue. The portion of this beach from the pier to Goldenwest Street is within the boundary of the Downtown Specific Plan. Build-to-line: A dimension which specifies where the structure must begin. For example, "build-to-5"', means that the structure must extend to five feet from the lot line. Common open space: Any part of a lot or parcel unobstructed from the ground upward, excepting architectural features extending no more than thirty (30) inches from the structure and excluding any area of the site devoted to driveways and other parking areas. Conversion: A change in the original use of land or building/structure. Director: The Director of the Department of Community Development. Development: The divisien ,.f lava r the onstFue fi slfuet e alteration, ele ate nl „t, efany s,n ~ �, etu On land, in or under water, the placement or erection of any solid material or structure; discharge or disposal of any dredged material or of any gaseous, liquid, solid or thermal waste; grading, removing, dredging, mining, or extraction of any materials- change in the density or intensity of the use of land, including, but not limited to, subdivision pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act (commencing with Section 66410 of the Government Code), and any other division of land, including lot splits, except where the land division is brought about in connection with the purchase of such land by a public agency for public recreational use; change in the intensity of use of water, or of access thereto; construction, reconstruction, demolition, or alteration of the size of any structure, including any facility of any private, public, or municipal utility; and the removalor harvesting of major vegetation other than for agricultural purposes, kelp harvesting, and timber operations which are in accordance with a timber harvesting plan 1 submitted pursuant to the provisions of the Tbergg-Nejedly Forest Practice Act of 1973 (commencing with Section 4511). Demolition: The deliberate removal or destruction of the frame or foundation of any portion of a building or structure Facade: The main face or front of a building. Feasible: Capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, social and technological factors. Floor Area Ratio (FAR): A number which indicates how many square feet of structure can be built on a site, expressed as a multiple of the gress net site area; for example, if a site is 5,000 square feet in net site area and the FAR is 2.0, the square footage of a building cannot exceed 10,000 square feet of gross flee net site area (2 X 5,000). Frontin,R: Any lot or portion of a lot which abuts an arterial shall be considered to front on that arterial and shall comply with the required front yard setbacks, whether or not the development on that lot actually takes access from the arterial. Full block: A parcel of property bounded on all sides by public streets. Gross floor area: The total enclosed area of all floors of a building measured to the outside face of the structural members in exterior walls, and including halls, stairways, elevators shafts at each floor level, service and mechanical equipment rooms, and habitable basement or attic areas, but excluding area for vehicle parking and loading. Gross site area: The area within the lot lines of a parcel of land before public streets, alleys, easements or other areas to be dedicated or reserved for public use have been deducted. Half block: A parcel of property bounded on all sides by public streets and/or alleys containing at least one-half(1/2) the net area of the full block. Height: The vertical distance above the highest adjacent street level measured to the highest point of the coping of a flat roof or to the deck line of a mansard roof or the average height of the highest gable of a pitched or hipped roof. See Section 4.2.04. Hotel: A building designed for or occupied as a temporary lodging place which contains guest room units. Mini-Parks: Areas under City ownership used for the purpose of open space, plazas, landscape buffers or public gathering. Net site area: The total horizontal area within the property lines of a parcel of land. All rights-of-way or easements which physically prohibit the surface use of that portion of the property for other than vehicular ingress and egress are excluded. Outdoor dining: An area where a cafe/restaurant provides food service on either public right-of-way, city owned open space, or privately owned open space. Physical obstruction: Things that affect the use of property including but not limited to light standards, trees, parking meters, trash receptacles, traffic signals, signs, benches, 2 ccdTat i.doc phone booths, newspaper stands, bus stops, driveways, pedestrian ramps, and other similar items. Pier: The structure owned by the City that extends from the termination of Main Street at Pacific Coast Highway into the Pacific Ocean 1,966 feet. Pier Plaza: The area adjacent and contiguous to the pier. Private open space: The area adjacent to a dwelling unit which has direct access in the form of a patio or balcony. Public open space: Outdoor or unenclosed area on the ground floor or above floor levels designed and accessible for use by the general public. Public open space may include one of the following: patios, plazas, balconies, gardens or view areas accessible to the general public, and open air commercial space, open to the street on the first floor, or on at least one side, above the first floor, or open to the sky. The open space requirement can be met anywhere in the development; however, open space provided above the second floor will receive only fifty (50) percent credit toward this requirement. This requirement cannot be met by open areas which are inaccessible to the general public or are contrary to specific requirements of a district. Public right-of-way: That property dedicated through acquisition or easement for the public right-of-way or utility purposes which includes the area spanning from the property line on one side of a street to the property line on the other side of a street. Recreational Vehicle: A travel Trailer, pick-up camper or motorized home with or without a mode of power and designed for temporary human habitation for travel or recreational purposes. Rehabilitation: The physical repair, preservation, or improvement of a building or structure. Does not include an expansion of existing floor area greater than ten (10) percent; does not increase the building height; does not result in an increase in permitted density. Residual parcel: A legal lot which does not meet the requirements for a building site within the District in which it is located, and where the abutting sites are already developed. Right-of-Way (ROW): That portion of property which is dedicated or over which an easement is granted for public streets, utilities or alleys. Semi-subterranean parking: Parking structure which is partially recessed into the development site, and which may or may not support additional structures above (e.g. dwelling units, tennis courts, or parking structures). Setback: A stipulated area adjacent to the lot lines which must be kept free of structures over forty-two (42) inches high. Street level: The elevation measured at the centerline of the public street adjacent to the front setback at a point midway between the two side property lines. Suite Hotel: A building designed for or occupied as a temporary lodging place which contains guest rooms and may contain kitchenettes and a separate living room for each unit. 3 Townlot: The area and parcels bounded by Pacific Coast Highway on the southwest, Goldenwest Street on the northwest, Palm Avenue on the north and northeast, and Sixth Street on the east and southeast. Wetland: Lands within the coastal zone which may be covered periodically or permanently with shallow water and include saltwater marshes, freewater marshes, open or closed brackish water marshes, swamps, mudflats and fens. Ultimate right-of-way: The most lateral edge of the area dedicated for street, utilities or alley purposes. SECTION 2. Section 4.1.03 of the Downtown Specfic Plan, entitled Coastal Permit, is hereby amended to read as follows: 4.1.03 Coastal Permit Developments within the Downtown Specific Plan area will be subject to the requirements pertaining to Coastal Development Permits (CDP) in the Local ogram I Coastal Prmplementing Ordinances, in addition to the other provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, except as modified by this Specific Plan. SECTION 3. Section 4.2.02 of the Downtown Specific Plan, entitled Minimum Parcel Size, is hereby amended to read as follows: 4.2.02 Minimum Parcel Size. A minimum parcel size shall be established in each District. A waiver of this requirement may be granted by the Director for residual parcels. In addition, the following minimum floor areas shall apply to all residential dwelling units, except affordable units (see Section 4.2.30 -24): Minimum Floor Unit Type Area (Sq. Ft.) Bachelor and single 450 One (1) bedroom 650 Two (2) bedrooms 900 Three (3)bedrooms 1100 Four (4) bedrooms 1300 SECTION 4. Section 4.2.13 of the Downtown Specific Plan, entitled Parking, is hereby amended to read as follows: 4.2.13 Parking. All developments (except as provided in Section 4.2.30 2-9) will be required to meet the minimum off-street parking standards of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code or as required by the Downtown Parking Master Plan. 4 ccdraftl.doc Exception: Affordable housing projects may reduce the required on-site guest parking. Residential: All parking, as required by the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, shaII be provided on-site. Commercial: (a) Parking for all commercial projects within the area of the Downtown Parking Master Plan shall be consistent with the parking requirements of the Downtown Parking Master Plan. Districts 1, 2, 4, a portion of 5, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11 shall provide one-hundred (100) percent of the required parking on-site, pursuant to the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. Parking in District 3, a portion of District 5, and District 6 shall be provided on- site to the maximum extent feasible, as identified in the Parking Master Plan. The balance of any required parking shall be provided in facilities within walking distance. Any required off-site parking spaces shall be in place prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for any development. All parking for any portion of a District which is not within the area of the Downtown Parking Master Plan shall provide one-hundred (100) percent of the required parking on-site, pursuant to the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. (b) All off-street uncovered surface parking spaces shall be screened. Screening shall be a maximum of thirty-two (32) inches high as measured from the adjacent parking surface. Screening shall consist of landscaping or landscaping combined with opaque materials, and must be approved by the director. (c) Any commercial business (retail, office, restaurant) which requests to participate in the in-lieu parking fee program shall submit a conditional use permit application for review and approval. SECTION 5. Section 4.2.14 of the Downtown Specific Plan, entitled Downtown Parking Master Plan, is hereby amended to read as follows: 4.2.14 The Downtown Parking Master Plan The Downtown Parking Master Plan is based on a shared parking concept. Shared parking in effect allows one (1) parking space to serve two (2) or more individual land uses without conflict. Shared parking relies on the variations in the peak parking demand for different uses. In other words, parking demands will fluctuate in relationship to the mix of uses by hour, day of week and season. The proper mix will create an interrelationship among different uses and activities which results in a reduction of the demand for parking. The Downtown core area is centered along the Main Street commercial corridor. This commercial corridor divides into two (2) distinct areas, north and south of Orange. The area which encompasses the Downtown Parking Master Plan is as identified on the area map (Figure 4.1). 5 ecdraftl.aoe Area 1 - The area south of Orange Avenue along Main Street provides the greatest amount of public parking opportunities both off-street and on-street. Area 1 will have the greatest number of visitor serving and seasonal commercial uses including year round entertainment. This area will also have the greatest concentration of expanded commercial, restaurant and office uses, and therefore, the majority of the public parking spaces should be provided in this area. Area 2 - The area north of Orange Avenue along Main Street provides limited amounts of public parking opportunities. This area is still part of the Downtown core. However, the commercial uses in Area 2 will cater more to the year round residents, therefore, additional on-street short term parking should be provided. This area will be a mixed use area with a significant amount of residential uses. The amount of commercial and office parking has been reduced. City owned and controlled public parking in the Downtown Parkin Master Plan (DPMP) area shall be consistent with the City's certified land use plan. The DPMP is structured to protect beach user parking by providing adequate public parking within the Downtown area. The DPMP encourages the use of the City owned and controlled parking sites within the DPMP area. To encourage the use of the City owned public parking facilities, parking controls such as time limits and parking rates may be adjusted to maintain the desired use of these spacesly atrons and employees of the downtown area. A validation program for the City owned public parking structure has been established as an incentive for the use of the structure by the patrons and employees of the downtown area. Any changes to the jprogram shall be submitted to the Executive Director to determine if an amendment to the Specific Plan is necessary. The Downtown Parking Master Plan anticipates a total development scenario of approximately 450,000 to 500,000 square feet of commercial activity. The Master Plan has development thresholds of 100,000 square feet for restaurant, 250,000 square feet for retail, 100,000 square feet for office and 50,000 square feet for miscellaneous development. Area 1 will contain approximately 350,000 to 400,000 square feet with the remaining 50,000 to 100,000 square feet of activity occurring in Area 2. It shall be the responsibility of the Community Development Department to monitor the development square footage per use and parking spaces within the Downtown Parking Master Plan area. An annual review and monitoring report of the Downtown Parking Master Plan shall be prepared by the Department and presented for review by the Planning Commission. The Downtown Parking Master Plan annual review and monitoring report shall include, at a minimum: 1) amount and type of development square footage approved Burin% the annual review period; 2) total amount of square footage in the Downtown Parking Master Plan area; 3) an inventory of existing parking spaces; 4) a parking utilization study; 5) an assessment of parking demand compared with parking supply; 6) a determination of whether adequate parking remains to serve development allowed up to the total development cap. The Downtown Parking Master Plan annual review and monitoring report shall be submitted to the Executive Director of the Coastal Commission for review. If the Downtown Parking Master Plan annual review and monitoring report indicates that the parking su pply is inadequate to serve the approved level of development or ifpthe development square footage 6 cearant.aoc exceeds the amount described above (up to 500 000 square feet total) all development within the Downtown Parking Master Plan area shall provide parking consistent with Off-Street Parking and Loading Provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, unless and until new parking to meet the identified demand is approved and constructed. Changes between one or more of the individual use categories maybe allowed as long as the total square footage does not exceed 500,000 square feet and there are corresponding changes in the other use categories to assure adequate parking remains. The exisiting base square footage shall be as described in the document apppproved b the Huntington Beach Planning Commission on July 7, 1y93 titled Downtown Huntington Beach Parking Master Plan. The location and type of parking resources available in the Downtown area recognizes that two different and distinct implementation approaches are necessary for each of the areas. The adjusted parking requirement was calculated for both Area 1 and Area 2 (Figure 4.2). Existing building square footage and uses are parked within the public parking supply within the Downtown Parking Master Plan. In the event a property owner demolishes his/her existing building, and rebuilds a new building of equal square footage and use, no additional parking shall be required. Any code required parking spaces provided on- site shall be credited for any expansion of square footage or intensification of use. All required parking shall be calculated based on the reduced requirements of the Downtown Parking Master Plan. Area 1 - In Area 1 the restaurant and retail parking requirement was reduced by thirty- three percent and twenty-five percent respectively. The office requirement by seventy- five percent. In addition, the theater parking requirement was reduced from the existing code requirement of one (1) parking space for every third seat to one (1) parking space for every fifth seat. This reduction is based on surveys conducted by the theater industry. These reductions recognize the time differential and captive market concepts. Expanding commercial activity in this area remains the focus of the Downtown Master Plan, however, no additional parking for new or expanded commercial, restaurant and office uses should be required. The majority of public parking opportunities currently exist in this area and the current parking supply exceeds the parking demand. This parking supply will continue to be adequate provided the total square footage of uses do not exceed the Master Plan projections. The city shall retain the option to purchase property for a public parking facility. Area 2 - In Area 2 the retail and office requirement was reduced by fifty percent. This recognizes that the retail activity will be primarily convenience commercial catering to local residents on short term shopping trips. The office parking requirement reduction is based on the minimal number of office opportunities and the on-site parking. Restaurant uses were not given a reduction factor. Numerous conflicts are created between restaurant and residential uses, therefore, restaurants should be required to provide one hundred percent of their parking requirement on-site. The existing Downtown public parking facilities are not conveniently located for use in this area, thus, a combination of expanded on-street and on-site parking may be necessary for new or expanded commercial uses. However, providing the commercial activity remains primarily service related commercial, the existing supply of on-street and on- site parking should be sufficient for anticipated uses. All future development projects must be carefully reviewed for parking concerns. The mix of commercial and residential activities can justify a parking reduction and additional parking may not be 7 ccaraftl.aoc necessary if development does not exceed the Master Plan projections. The city shall retain the option to purchase property for a public parking facility. The Planning Commission or City Council may impose one (1), all, or a combination of the following requirements to ensure that adequate parking is provided for each development: whieh exeeeds the develo,m^.,t_eap based yen enti lem 1. Require on-site parking for all projects one-half(1/2) block or greater in size. 2. Require that any parking in-lieu fees be full cost recovery based on the parking requirement for specific uses. However, allow that these fees be paid over an amortization period, with appropriate security provided by the applicant to guarantee payment.. 3. Require valet parking once the maximum build out of restaurant activity has been obtained. 4. Commercial projects greater than 10,000 square feet in size shall be required to submit a parking management plan consistent with the Downtown Parking Master Plan. 5. Require valet and/or remote parking for special events and activities. 6. Require the applicant to provide additional on-site and /or off-site parking for any development. 7. Develop parking options which may generate additional parking for any development. SECTION 6. Section 4.2.24 of the Downtown Specific Plan, entitled Antennas, is hereby amended to read as follows: 4.2.24 Antennas. Please refer to +� ing d c"'�a"''�'^�' Or-dina r^ Antennas shall be consistent with the applicable zoning document. SECTION 7. Section 4.2.33 of the Downtown Specific Plan, entitled Outdoor Dining, is hereby amended to read as follows: 4.2.33 Outdoor dining: Outdoor dining on public or private property may be permitted subject to use permit approval by the Zoning Administrator and compliance with this section. (a) Location and design criteria. Outdoor dining shall conform to the following location and design criteria: (i) The outdoor dining shall be an extension of an existing or proposed eating or drinking establishment on contiguous property. (ii) Outdoor dining located on the sidewalk area of the public right-of-way shall be limited to commercial areas within the Downtown Specific Plan. 8 ccdraft l.aoc (iii) Outdoor dining located on the sidewalk area of the public right-of-way of the first block of Main Street and Pacific Coast Highway within District 3 and on the Municipal Pier shall provide a minimum ten (10) foot clear passage area or pedestrian access. Outdoor dining located on the sidewalk area of the public right-of-way and all other areas shall provide a minimum eight (8) foot clear passage area for pedestrian access. A wider clear passage area may be required at the discretion of the Zoning Administrator. (iv) No outdoor dining shall be allowed in mini-parks, publicly owned plaza, or beach areas excluding concession carts with no seating. A rninimum ten (10) feet wide pedestrian walkway ay shall be pr-ev;.del when 1,,e to d ; a fnini aflE ublie plez or-1,oaeh (v) Outdoor dining located on public property shall be separated from the clear passage area on the public sidewalk and/or pedestrian walkway by a temporary cordon and removed when not in use. (vi) All features including but not limited to tables, chairs, umbrellas, of outdoor dining located on public property shall be removed when not in use. (vii) Outdoor dining on private sidewalk areas shall provide a minimum eight (8) foot clear passage area for pedestrian access or a permanent cordon shall surround the outdoor dining area and a minimum five (5) foot clear passage area shall be provided. (viii) At street intersections, the triangular area formed by measuring 25 feet along the curb lines or the area formed by the extension of the property lines to the curb lines, whichever is more restrictive, shall be clear passage area. (b) Necessary Findings In order to approve outdoor dining the Zoning Administrator shall make the following findings: (i) The sidewalk's public use, pedestrian, transit and business services including but not limited to loading zones, bus stops, public phones, and benches, are not restricted. (ii) Building entryways are not obstructed. (iii) Pedestrian traffic volumes are not inhibited. (iv) Handicapped accessibility is provided where required. li.,etef to eensider-. The 7.,.•ing A.d., inistsater shall � si der the fbile,. ing factors regarding tL , 111\+ LVI1111��1U 1111111 JL1-CTlpl JIIZill-GpIIJ�II{„� 'Tl'jC leeatie and the ales.. of the out doer- d:«:, .• [rii) TZTh�IG—VPidCt h-f he sidewalk. (iii) Existing physical ebstr-uetiens including, but net limited to signposts, light .sta—durd�, Ya kzizg --te r, be ehes rib... a beeths, newsstands d utilities. 9 ccdra8l.aoc (ic')—Metef:vehiele ae ivlty in the-adjaeent Ffjudway inelu'ding but not linated to VUJ steps, ll UVll 1V4U113g LVllV n' taxi stands, hetel on' r\ passenger (v) Pedestrian traff'ievelufnes (c) Operating requirements, provisions, and conditions. (i) A License agreement including use fees shall be obtained from the City for outdoor dining located on public property. The License Agreement shall be subject to termination at any time upon a 10 day prior written notice upon determination of the Zoning Administrator that one or more of the conditions or provisions of this section have been violated or that one or more factors listed in Subsection (b) above have changed and the permitted use is no longer compatible with the intended use of the public right-of-way or public property. Termination of a License Agreement shall nullify the use permit. (ii) The applicant shall enter into a Maintenance Agreement with the City for maintenance of all portions of the public property used and approved by the Zoning Administrator for the outdoor dining. Said agreement shall be submitted to and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of the use. (iii) All outdoor dining operators shall provide a public liability insurance policy as specified in all current insurance resolutions. Such liability insurance shall be provided in a form acceptable to the City Attorney. The policy shall name the City of Huntington Beach as an additional insured and shall be maintained at all times. (iv) An outdoor dining operator shall not sell to motorists or persons in vehicles. (v) The applicant (or operator) shall pay all fees and deposits required by the Huntington Beach Municipal Code and Ordinance Code, including the fee established for use of public property, prior to operation of the outdoor dining use. (vi) All provisions of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code shall apply. (vii) No alcohol beverages may be served on public property. (viii) The use permit may be transferred upon sale or transfer of the restaurant subject to a written request approved by the Zoning Administrator and the property owner. An amendment to the License Agreement will be required prior to transfer of the use permit for outdoor dining on public property. A use permit transfer or license renewal or amendment may be denied if one or more of the factors listed in Subsection (b) above have changed and the permitted use is no longer compatible with the intended use of the public right-of-way. (d) Parking. Parking shall comply with the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance or the Downtown Parking Master Plan; however, no parking spaces 10 cccirafti.doc shall be required for the outdoor dining portion of the restaurant if the outdoor dining area does not exceed the following: Total Restaurant Area Outdoor Dining Are 1) 1,200 sq. ft. or less with: Maximum 5 tables and 20 seats 2) greater than 1,200 sq. ft. with: Maximum of 20% of the restaurant area, not to exceed 400 sq. ft. Any outdoor dining area which exceeds these standards shall provide 100% of the required parking for the entire area. (e) Enforcement. Enforcement of this Section shall be by the Community Development Director or his/her designee. Any outdoor dining use within the Downtown Specific Plan that has been established without prior use permit approval must obtain a use permit and if located on public property, a License Agreement within 90 days following the effective date of this ordinance. No use permit application filling fee shall be required for those uses existing prior to March 21, 1994. SECTION 8. Section 4.3.01 of the Downtown Specific Plan, entitled Permitted Uses, is hereby amended to read as follows: 4.3.01 Permitted Uses. (a) The following list of Visitor-Serving Commercial uses in District No. 1 may be allowed. Other visitor serving related uses as described in the Land Use Plan, and which have the same parking demand as the existing use not specified herein may be allowed subject to the approval of the Director. Change of use shall be subject to the approval of the Director. For Example: Art gallery • Bakery • Banks and savings and loans branch offices (no drive-up windows; not to exceed five thousand (5,000) square feet) Beach, swimming and surfing equipment Bicycle sales, rental and repair Boat and marine supplies Bookstores Clothing stores Delicatessens Drug stores DFy 0- Florists Grocery (convenience) Hardware stores 11 ccdraftl.doc Ice cream parlors Laundromats, Laundries Meat or fish markets Newspaper and magazine stores Newsstands Office Outdoor dining pursuant to 5.4.2.32 Photographic equipment sales Photographic processing Public Facilities Shoe stores Sporting goods Tourist related public and semipublic buildings, services and facilities Travel agency (b) The following list of Visitor Serving Commercial uses and any new construction, or change of such use in District No. 1 may be allowed subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit. For example: • Dancing and/or live entertainment • Dry Cleaning • Health and sports clubs • Liquor Stores • Motels • Permanent parking lots and parking structures Residential uses Restaurants Service station (minimum 14,000 square feet of net lot area, subject to the development standards outlined in Section 9220.14 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code) (c) Visitor-serving commercial uses must be a part of all development proposed in this District, with the following minimum requirements: for projects with less than a half-block of frontage, the entire street level must be devoted to visitor-serving uses; for projects with a half-block or more of frontage, either the entire street level, or at least one-third (1/3) of the total floor area must be devoted to visitor- serving commercial uses. (d) Residential uses are allowed only in conjunction with visitor-serving commercial uses. The required visitor-serving commercial portion of any initial construction shall be provided prior to or at the same time as any residential portion. No residential unit shall be occupied until the required commercial portion is completed. Projects which are proposed to be phased must proportionately develop the commercial and residential concurrently. SECTION 9. Section 4.5.01 of the Downtown Specific Plan, entitled Permitted Uses, is hereby amended to read as follows: 4.5.01 Permitted Uses. 12 ccdrafll.aoc (a) The following list of uses which establishes a commercial core and which serves as the transition between visitor-serving and year round commercial uses in District No. 3 may be allowed. Other visitor serving related uses as described in the Land Use Plan, and which may have the same parking demand as the existing use not specified herein may be allowed subject to the approval of the Director. Change of use shall be subject to the approval of the Director. For example: Art gallery Bakeries Banks and savings and loans branch offices (no drive-up windows; not to exceed five thousand (5,000) square feet) • Barber, beauty, manicure shops • Beach, swimming and surfing equipment Bicycle sales, rental and repair Boat and marine supplies Bookstores Clothing stores • Delicatessens • Drug stores • Florists • Ice cream parlors • Newspaper and magazine stores • Newsstands Outdoor dining pursuant to S.4.2.32 Photographic equipment sales Photographic processing Shoe stores Sporting goods Tourist related public and semi-public buildings, services and facilities Travel Agency (b) The following list of uses and any new construction, or change of such use in District No. 3 may be allowed subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit. For example: Dancing and/or live entertainment • Health and sports clubs • Hotel and licensed bed and breakfast designed as a commercial establishment • Liquor stores Permanent Parking lots and parking structures Restaurants Residential uses Retail sales, outdoor Theaters Note: The ground floor or street level of all buildings in this District shall be devoted to visitor-serving commercial activities. (c) The ground floor or street level of all buildings in this District fronting Main Street and Pacific Coast Highway shall be devoted to visitor-serving commercial activities. 13 ccdraftl.doc (d) Visitor-serving commercial uses must be a part of all development proposed in this District with a minimum requirement that the entire street level, or at least one- third (1/3) of the total floor area be devoted to visitor-serving commercial uses. (e) Residential uses shall only be permitted if the development includes consolidation of a one block or greater area. Note: Residential uses are allowed only in conjunction with visitor-serving commercial uses. Up to one-half(1/2) of the floor area of projects may be devoted to residential uses. (f) The required visitor-serving commercial portion of any project shall be provided prior to or at the same time as any residential portion. No residential unit shall be occupied until the required commercial portion is complete. (g) In the event of a consolidation of a minimum one block area, non-priority (residential) uses may be located in separate structures or on separate portions of the parcel in the context of a planned development, provided no less than one-half of the total floor area permitted is devoted to visitor-serving uses, and provided that substantial public open space and pedestrian access amenities are provided to maintain a predominantly visitor-serving orientation. SECTION 10. Section 4.6 of the Downtown Specific Plan, entitled District #4: Mixed-Use; Office Residential, is hereby amended to read as follows: 4.6 DISTRICT 94: MIXED-USE, OFFICE RESIDENTIAL Purpose. This District flanks the Downtown core area, separating the area along Main Street from the outlying areas which are primarily residential. The purpose of this District is to provide a transition zone between the existing residential areas to the commercial Main Street corridor. Consequently, mixes of office and residential uses are permitted. Boundaries. District 94 includes the half-blocks on the northwest side of the Main Street core area from 6th Street to the alley between 6th and 5th Streets; and from the alley between 3rd and 2nd Streets to the alley between 2nd and First fake Streets, between Walnut and Orange Avenues. SECTION 11. Section 4.7.01 of the Downtown Specific Plan, entitled Permitted Uses, is hereby amended to read as follows: 4.7.01 Permitted Uses. (a) The following list of uses which establishes a commercial core and which serves as the transition between visitor-serving and year round commercial uses in District No. 5 may be allowed. Other commercial/ office/residential related uses not specified herein may be allowed subject to the approval of the Director. Change of use shall be subject to the approval of the Director. For Example: 14 ccaratu.aoc Antique stores Art gallery Bakeries Banks and savings and loans branch offices Barber, beauty, manicure shops Beach, swimming and surfing equipment Bicycle sales, rental and repair Boat and marine supplies Bookstores Boutiques Clothing stores Delicatessens Drug stores Dry cleaning Florists Groceries General retail Hardware stores Hobby supplies Ice cream parlors Jewelry stores Laundromats Newsstands Office Supplies Offices Outdoor dining pursuant to S.4.2.32 Photographic equipment sales Photographic processing Public facilities Shoe repair Shoe stores Sporting goods Stationery stores Tailor shops Travel agency (b) The following list of uses and any new construction, or change of such use in District No. 5 may be allowed subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit. For example: Dancing and/ or live entertainment Health and sports clubs Liquor stores Permanent parking lots and parking structures Restaurants Residential uses (c) The street level of all buildings fronting Main Street and 5th Street in this District shall be devoted to commercial activities. (i) Commercial or residential may be permitted on the street level between Olive and Orange Avenue fronting 5th Street and 3rd Street. (d) The following uses may be permitted above the first floor: 15 (i) Commercial Use - all commercial uses allowed on the first floor may be allowed on the second floor. (ii) Office Use - professional, general business and non-profit offices provided that: No sales either wholesale or retail which involve delivery of any goods or material to or from the premises occur. No inventory is kept on the premise other than samples. No processing, manufacturing, storage or repair of merchandise of any kind occurs. (iii) Residential Use - Residential uses are allowed only in conjunction with commercial uses in this District. Up to one-third (1/3) of the floor area of projects on parcels smaller than one-half(1/2) block may be devoted to residential uses; projects on one-half(1/2) block or larger parcels, except projects fronting on Main St., up to two-thirds (2/3) of the floor area may be devoted to residential uses; projects on full block or larger parcels, fronting on Main St., up to one-half(1/2) of the floor area may be devoted to residential uses provided that residential uses in addition to the following: Be segregated to a separate structure or restricted to the second story or above; Not occupy any portion of the same story with non-residential uses, unless they are provided with adequate physical and acoustical separation; Be on contiguous floors within a single structure; Be provided with separate pedestrian ingress and egress; Be provided with secured, designated parking. SECTION 12. Section 4.7.10 of the Downtown Specific Plan, entitled Open Space, is hereby amended to read as follows: 4.7.10 Open Space. Parcels within this district having one hundred (100) feet or more of street frontage, shall provide public open space. All non-residential developments shall provide a minimum of ten (10) percent of the net site area as public open space. Exception: Mixed use developments which include residential units, may reduce the public open space to five (5) percent of the net site area. Full block developments on Main Street require public plazas. These street level public plazas shall be incorporated into the design of the development and approved by the Director. Such plazas shall have the following characteristics: Location: street level corner; one side must face Main Street. 16 ccdraftl.doc Area: not less than one thousand (1,000) square feet excluding public right-of- way. Landscaping: not less than thirty (30) percent of the plaza area should be planted. Paving: all paved areas shall be textured. Visual Feature: plaza must include a sculpture, fountain, information kiosk, pond, display, or similar visual amenity. Public Seating shall be provided. Open Air Commercial: not more than fifty (50) percent of the privately owned publicly used plaza area may be used for open air commercial uses. This pr-evisi SECTION 13. Section 4.9.01 of the Downtown Specific Plan, entitled Permitted Uses, is hereby amended to read as follows: 4.9.01 Permitted Uses. (a) The following list of Visitor-Serving Commercial uses in District No. 7 may be allowed. Other visitor serving related uses as described in the Land Use Plan, and which have the same parking demand as the existing use not specified herein may be allowed subject to the approval of the Director. Change of use shall be subject to the approval of the Director. For example: Art gallery • Bakeries • Banks and savings and loans branch offices (not to exceed five-thousand (5,000) square feet) • Beach, swimming and surfing equipment • Bicycle sales, rental and repair • Boat and marine supplies Bookstores • Clothing stores • Delicatessens • Florists Groceries (convenience) • Ice cream parlors • Laundromats, laundries Meat or fish markets Newspaper and magazine stores Newsstands Outdoor dining pursuant to 5.4.2.32 • Photographic equipment sales • Photographic processing Professional Office (not to exceed fifty [50] percent of total floor area) Public Transportation Center Shoe stores Sporting goods Tourist related public and semi-public buildings, services and facilities Travel agency 17 ccdraftl.doc Note: Visitor-serving commercial uses must be a part of all development proposals in this District, with a minimum requirement that the entire street level be devoted to Visitor-Serving Commercial Uses. (b) The following list of uses and any new construction, or change of such use in District No. 7 may be allowed subject to the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. For example: Automobile service stations Dancing and/or live entertainment Health and sports clubs Hotels and motels Liquor stores Permanent parking lots and parking structures Restaurants Taverns Theaters SECTION 14. Section 4.9.02 of the Downtown Specific Plan, entitled Minimum Parcel Size, is hereby amended to read as follows: 4.9.02 Minimum Parcel Size. No minimum parcel size shall be required for this District. However, prior to the approval of any development, including subdivision, a master site plan for the entire District shall be approved by the Planning Commission. Development which is in conformance with the site plan may then be permitted. SECTION 15. Section 4.9.11 of the Downtown Specific Plan, entitled Corridor Dedication, is hereby amended to read as follows: 4.9.11 Corridor Dedication. Development in District#7 shall require the dedication of a twenty (20) foot corridor between Atlanta Avenue and PCH for public access between the southern end of the Pacific Electric ROW and PCH. This requirement may be waived if an alternative public use is provided or if the corridor is deemed unnecessary by the City. Any proposal for an alternative public use must be approved by the Planning Commission. SECTION 16. Section 4.10 of the Downtown Specific Plan, entitled District # 8: High Density Residential, is hereby amended to read as follows: 4.10 DISTRICT #8: - HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL Purpose. This District is intended to allow high density residential uses. New residential development will provide a population base to help support the commercial and office uses in the Downtown area. 18 ccdraftl.aoc Boundaries. District #8 includes two consolidated parcels; one parcel is bounded on the north by Atlanta Avenue, on the east by Huntington Street, on the south by the proposed Walnut Extension and on the west by First eke Street. The second includes the area north of the proposed Walnut Avenue extension between Huntington Street and Beach Boulevard. SECTION 17. Section 4.11.01 of the Downtown Specific Plan, entitled Permitted Uses, is hereby amended to read as follows: 4.11.01 Permitted Uses. (a) The following list of commercial recreation uses in District No. 9 may be allowed. Other visitor serving/recreational related uses as described in the Land Use Plan, aA which have the same parking demand as the existing use not specified herein may be allowed subject to the approval of the Director. A change of use shall be subject to the approval of the Director. For example: Retail sales Tourist related uses Outdoor dining pursuant to S.4.2.32 (b) The following list of uses and any new construction, or change of such use in District No. 9 may be allowed subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit. For example: Dancing and/or Live entertainment Hotels, motels Recreational facilities Restaurants SECTION 18. Section 4.12.01 of the Downtown Specific Plan, entitled Permitted Uses, is hereby amended to read as follows: 4.12.01 Permitted Uses. (a) The following list of pier related commercial uses in District No. 10 may be allowed. Other pier related uses as described in the Land Use Aan, and which have the same parking demand as the existing use not specified herein may be allowed subject to the approval of the Director. A change of use shall be subject to the approval of the Director. For example: • Bait and tackle shops • Beach rentals Retail sales (beach-related) Outdoor dining pursuant to S.4.2.33 32 19 ccdraftl.doc (b) The following list of uses and any new construction, or change of such use in District No. 10 may be allowed subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit. For example: Aquariums Commercial uses or public recreation facilities (beach-related) Museums Parking lots that will not result in the loss of recreational sand area. Tiered parking is permitted within the Downtown Specific Plan area on existing lots seaward of Pacific Coast Highway provided the parking is designed so that the top of the structures including walls, etc., are located a minimum of one foot below the maximum height of the adjacent-bluff. Restaurants (including fast food with take out windows) Note: Only parking uses are permitted in this District northwest of Sixth Street. SECTION 19. Section 4.16 of the Downtown Specific Plan, entitled Mobil Home District, is hereby amended to read as follows: 4.16 MOBILE HOME DISTRICT Purpose. The Downtown Specific Plan includes approximately 6.6 24 acres with a Mobilehome District (MH) designation. The purpose of the Mobilehome District is to permit present mobilehome park uses to continue. The These mobilehome area areas fall falls within Dist iets Seven Eight a District Nine of the Downtown Specific Plan. Boundaries. The Mobilehome District encompasses a part pa4s of Distr-lets 7, 4 and District 9. The following describes the real property: in twe seetie^ THAT PORTION OF FRACTIONAL SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 11 WEST, CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 51, PAGE 14 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS; THE BASIS OF BEARING OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIPTION IS THE CENTERLINE OF LAKE STREET NORTH 40038'10" EAST AS SHOWN ON RECORD OF SURVEY 87-1049 FILED IN BOOK 117, PAGES 21 & 22 IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 14; THENCE SOUTH 88042'52" WEST 111.91 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 2029'35" WEST 593.12 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 24032'06" WEST 386.94 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 12044'44" EAST 117.71 FEET TO A POINT IN THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF FUTURE WALNUT AVENUE PER PRECISE 20 ccdraftl.doc PLAN OF STREET ALIGNMENT 88-1, ORDINANCE NO. 2961, SAID POINT BEING THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 12044'44" EAST 653.77 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 78°59'52" WEST 82.75 FEET; THENCE NORTH 53°00'08" WEST 835.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 36059'52" EAST 300.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 51008'21" WEST 125.77 FEET TO A POINT IN SAID SOUTHERLY LINE OF FUTURE WALNUT AVENUE, SAID POINT BEING THE BEGINNING OF A NON- TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 1245.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE TO SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 30031'17" WEST; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE AND SAID SOUTHERLY LINE OF FUTURE WALNUT AVENUE 552.05 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 25024'20" TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. THE AREA OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED LAND IS 6.635 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. Rghway between Huntingten and Lake Streets. That pertien ef ffaetienal Seetien , €ellews= rightBeginning at the inter-seetien ef the eenter-line of Lake Street (f6r-mer-ly-First Street) ing parallel with and 3 7.5 0 feet seutheastefly measured 147 feet right angles ff em th-e Highway (formerly Ocean Avenue), also being the s „theastefl., ex4e ,sie ft1, 111�1=VY 4�� Beach, Reeet def e€said ee" thence seems 41 23 84 8 west 53.00 feet along the een«ne & Lake Street te the eonstfuefien eenter-line of Pacific Coast Highway; thence aleng said eenter-line ef Lake Street te the eenstpdetien eenterline of Paeifie Ceast Highway; thence o " east 99.26 fi�et to the f4heast havin a adi f t 200 feet; thence seutheasterly alen le ef o n b14 feet; thene seuth o '11 n east 108.26 feet te a eupv,e concave te the nef4heast haNing a radius of 3328.60 feet; thence seutheasteFly aleng said etiB,e thfough a central angle ef o n an are distance ef 77.72 feet; thence setith o n feet;east 400.00 said o n beginning; thence setith o n o n o ' n east 290.61 feet along said exte....e.. and s line; thence nef4 5 4°05'09'"west 520.0feet; thence west 1 20feet thence-sew 57'3 '3 west 55.85 f€ et thence neFth 57'05'09" west 70.00 feet;• thence rtt, o n west 120.00 feet; thence riefth o n east 130.00 feet; thence n0fth c onc'nn" '7n n feet; thence t 5'5 'c 1 n n nn mil•-��--�a�est-1-,-�T���er�ee-s e�z-1�-3��4�-�—��t 8��eet; thence neAh o 'nn� 70.00 f t• th ° '5 west feet; thence south 8�--A-S��r�est— -�-�T�enEe�e�-8�-54'c t�� beginning. Seetien Twe is +-I y ----s in size leeated on the west side e Highway. Beginning aA the southeast eofner- of 21 ccdraftl.doc 99043,00L, west 111.91 feet aleng the nefth line ef the south half ef the nef4heast quaftef: ef said o n west 593.12 feet; thenee- setith o i n west 386.94 feet; thence seuth o n east 771.48 feet; thenee se west 82.75 feet; theirce-s?vr c}i-5z2-00-00--west•835-vv feet; then Ec:�iercri 24o00'00" east 300.00 feet; the nee north 50o04'1 3" west 173.59 C et; t enee ,..ei4 45o00'00" east 84 4c feet to r nt A" (to be tised a a of r e f r the 32175 n west 714.4 9 feet; thenee due west 40.00 feet; thenee seuth ^-n°45'49"-west 170.29 feet; thenee nen174°25'33" wee o " o " east 59.76 feet te the nef:th line ef the seuth half ef the neftheast quat4er- ef said seetien-; thenee neFth o r ,i east 1,844.00 feet aleng said nei4h line te4he tfue peint ef beginning. "A", o ' ii east 190.00 feet te the tpde peint ef beginning; thenee nei4h 43'17'55" west . ; Then " east 648-0 feet-;-then£ seuth 3°29'43" west 254.03 feet; thenee south o " o i " west 170.00 feet te Regulations. The regulations of the Downtown Specific Plan will serve as overlays for the portion of District 9 which retains the (MH) zone, until such time that the Mobilehome District designation is removed. All areas retaining the (ME) zone shall be subject to the provisions of the Mobilehome District of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. In addition, these areas are subject to the provisions of the Mobilehome Overlay Zones/RemovaURezoning/Change of Use Article of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. SECTION 20. This section makes no textual changes, but merely adopts a new map for District 10. SECTION 21. This section makes no textual changes, but merely adopts a new map for District 11. 22 ccdraftl.aoc I zz\ O OL �QT� O O �L O�b � OAQ E 0 D� OLNK ------------ --- - ------------ WALNUT as a as o ° ____ _- - ---------- HUNTINGTON BEACH CALIFORNIA PLANNING DEPARTMENT DISTRICT 10 DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN RUDE M lfl no lfl IT r_l H_ J]11 nn nr [I Hn H[I ff 115 np 1E IE 1111 nn Ill M rn ril Tj ITI 1-1111-11 r-11- riI---,1"") [fl HII lIlI T-1 11TUTIf 1 J1�1,[1] IN Il I TI I- � r�rva10 no al�q on ii grlRiuiliF Ifj m DISTRICT 11 DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN ATTACHMENT 5 1 ATTACHMENT 6 STATE OF CALIFORNIA—THE RESOURCES AGENCY PETE WILSON, Governor CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION SOUTH COAST AREA 245 W. BROADWAY, STE. 380 P.O. BOX 1450 LONG BEACH, CA 90802-4416 (310) 590-5071 March 16, 1995 2 G Howard Zelefsky Planning Director Department of Community Development 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Re: Huntington Beach Local Coastal Program Amendment No. 3-94 Dear Mr. Zelefsky, You are hereby notified that Huntington Beach Local Coastal Program Amendment No. 3-94 was approved with suggested modifications by the California Coastal Commission at their March '9, 1995 public hearing in San Diego. The LCP amendment will not be fully effective until the Commission's suggested modifications are adopted by the City Council , and the Executive Director certifies to the Commission that the City has complied with the Commission's action. Certification of the Huntington Beach Local Coastal Program Amendment No. 3-94 is subject to the attached modifications. Pursuant to Section 13537 of the California Code of Regulations, the Commission's certification with suggested modifications will expire six months from the date of Commission action if not adopted by the local government. Thank you and your staff for your efforts and cooperation with this project. Please call Meg Vaughn at the above number if your have any questions regarding this matter. Sincerely, Teresa Henry Assistant District Director cc: Herb Fauland enc. 4007F STATE OF CALIFORNIA—THE RESOURCES AGENCY PETE WILSON, Governor CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION SOUTH COAST AREA w 245 W. BROADWAY, STE. 380 HUNTINGTON BEACH LCP AMENDMENT 3-94 P.O. BOX 1450 DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN LONG BEACH, CA 90802-4416 (310) 5M5071 SUGGESTED MODIFICATIONS Certification of the Land Use Plan Amendment is subject to the following modifications: (deletions indicated by strike-out, additions indicated by underscoring) 1 . Figure 9.6 Land Use acreage Summary Goldenwest Street to Beach Boulevard shall be corrected as necessary to reflect accurate acreages and shall correspond to the correct acreages depicted on Figure 9.8. 2. Figure 9.8, Coastal Land Use Plan, Goldenwest to Beach Boulevard shall be corrected to reflect the correct number of acres in each district and shall correspond to the correct acreages summarized on Figure 9.6. 3. Page 122, Goldenwest to Sixth Street, second to last paragraph: As ameans of discouraging undesirable strip commercial development along Pacific Coast Highway, the coastal land use plan designates the majority of the area as residential with three nodes for visitor-serving commercial development -- two half blocks between Goldenwest and Twenty-first Streets, two half blocks between Eighteenth and Sixteenth Streets, and drld/Ntlf/§ZdEk/BifiidA/NidfK/tAd/fliMfg/8ftddfi three half blocks between Ninth Street and Sixth Street. 4. Page 122, last paragraph, first two sentences: The remaining area along Pacific Coast Highway has been designated .dlddiddl bj,gh density residential with height limit of three stories. Within this area, a base density of 15 units per acre is assumed, with increases up to a maximum of 35 U units per acre on a fully consolidated block. S. Page 124, Sixth Street to Lake Street, title: Lake Street should be changed to First Street. 6. Page 124, fifth paragraph: A liM fdti maximum four story height limit has been applied to the entire Sixth to Wd First Street area as a means of encouraging the provision of amenities and recycling of existing uses, as well as allowing the possibility for vertical mixed uses within individual developments and providing opportunity for ocean views. 7. Page 126, second paragraph: Modify to reflect decrease in area covered by the Mobile Home overlay, consistent with proposed Figure 9.2, Land Use Plan Overlay, Existing Mobile Home Parks. Huntington Beach LCP Amendment 3-94 Suggested Modifications Page 2 8. Page 130a, last paragraph: The Municipal Pier and adjoining restaurant are designated as Mixed Development in the existing General Plan. The Pier functions primarily as a visitor—serving facility and provides a focal point for the Downtown/Main Street corridor; thus, the Pier and adjoining restaurant have been redesignated Visitor—Serving Commercial . This District is intended to provide for commercial uses on and alongside the pier which will enhance and expand the public's use and enjoyment of this area. Uses are encouraged which capitalize on the views available from the pier and the unique recreational or educational opportunities it affords. At the same time, care must be exercised to insure that the major portion of the pier will remain accessible to the public at no charge, for strolling, fishing or observation. New buildings on the pier shall not exceed 3S/fddf/1A/KdIdKf one story and 25 feet. excluding the end of pier fig. Public access shall be required around the entire perimeter of the pier. Certification of the Implementation Plan amendment is subject to the following modifications: I (deletions indicated by strike—out, additions indicated by underscoring) Changes to the Downtown Specific Plan 1 . 4.0.04 Definitions: Development: fiSE/dl�iifidd/df/lidd�/bt/fNE/td�ifffdtfldd�/tEtdritftdtfid�f( tdrS�iEt#ldd,(/fftdtfdfE/tlfEt�fidd(/tEldtE,fldri/d/`/Erf1�t�Ed�Erff/df/�rf� fftdtfdtdl on land. in or under water. the placement or erection of any solid material or structure: discharge or disposal of any dredged material or of any gaseous, liquid. solid. or thermal waste: grading, removing, dredging, mining. or extraction of any materials: change in the density or intensity of use of land, including. but not limited to, subdivision pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act (commencing with Section 66410 of the Government Code). and any other division of land, including lot splits. except where the land division is brought about in connection with the purchase of such land by a public agency for public recreational use* change in the intensity of use of water. or of access thereto: construction reconstruction demolition or alteration of the size of any structure, including any facility of any gate, public or municipal utility: and the removal or harvesting of major vegetation other than for agricultural purposes kelp harvesting and timber operations which are in accordance with a timber harvesting plan submitted pursuant to the provisions of the Z'berg-Nejedly Forest Practice Act of 1973 (commenciea with Section 4511 ) . Demolition: The deliberate removal or destruction of the frame or foundation of any portion of a building or structure fdt/fYfE/�6df�ddfE/df/l6fE�6�flrf�/fiiE tiff/fdt/�fEr6/tdr�sftdtfidr�/df/dfNEt/dfE. Huntington Beach LCP Amendment 3-94 Suggested Modifications Page 3 Floor Area Ratio (FAR): A number which indicates how many square feet of structure can be built on a site, expressed as a multiple of the it6tt f166t ni iJ-t@ area. 2. 4.1 .03 Coastal Permit Developments within the Downtown Specific Plan area will be subject to the requirements pertaining to Coastal Development Permits (CDP) in the Local Coastal Program Implementing Ordinances. in addition to the other provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, except as modified by this Specific Plan. 3. 4.2.02 Minimum Parcel Size. A minimum parcel size shall be established in each District. A waiver of this requirement may be granted by the Director for residual parcels. In addition, the following minimum floor areas shall apply to all residential dwelling units, except affordable units (sde Section 412129 4.2.30): 4. 4.2.13 Parking. All developments (except as provided in Section 412129 4.2.30) will be required to meet the minimum off-street parking standards of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code or as required by the Downtown Parking Master Plan. Exception: Affordable housing projects may reduce the required on-site guest parking. T6E/�dEtf/��tKld�/�4�/6E/�t6ti6Ed/6t�tttEff/6t/1t/t/�d6lit/��tKl�� ftEillt��/tdK�ftt/f6/4/t6tdltl66tl/dtE/�Et�itl Res idential • All parking. as required by the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, shall be provided on-site. 5. 4.2.14 Downtown Parking Master Plan Fifth paragraph, first sentence: The Downtown Parking Master Plan anticipates a total development scenario of approximately 450,000 to 500,000 square feet of commercial activity. Add after fourth paragraph: City owned and controlled public parking in the Downtown Parking Master Plan (DPMP) area shall be consistent with the City's certified land use plan The DPMP is structured to protect beach user parking by providing adequate public Barking within the Downtown area The DPMP encourages the use of the City owned and controlled parking sites within the DPMP area. To encourage the use of the City owned publ rking facilities parking controls such as time Huntington Beach LCP Amendment 3-94 Suggested Modifications Page 4 limits. and parking rates may be adjusted to maintain the desired use of these spaces by patrons and employees of the downtown area. A validation program for the City owned public parking structure has been established as an incentive for the use of the structure by the patrons and employees of the downtown area. Any changes to the program shall be submitted to the Executive Director to determine if an amendment to the Specific Plan is necessary. Add after fifth paragraph: .The Downtown Parking Master Plan annual review and monitoring report shall include. at a minimum: 1) amount and type of development sgware footage approved during the annual review period: 2) total amount of square footage in the Downtown Parking Master Plan area: 3) an inventory of existing parking spaces: 4) a parking utilization study: 5) an assessment of parking demand compared with parking supply: 6) a determination of whether adequate parking remains to serve development allowed up to the total development cap. The Downtown Parking Master Plan annual review and monitoring report shall be submitted to the Executive Director of the'Coastal Commission for review. If the Downtown Parking Master Plan annual review and monitoring report indicates that the parking supply is inadequate to serve the approved level of developmentr above (up to 500.000 square feet total) all development within the Downtown Parking Master Plan area shall provide parking consistent with Off—Street Parking and Landscaping Article of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. unless and until new parking to meet the identified demand is approved and constructed. Changes between one or more of the individual use categories may be allowed as long as the total square footage does not exceed 500,000 square feet and there are corresponding changes in the other use categories to assure adequate parking remains. The existing base square footage shall be as described in the document approved by the Huntington Beach Planning Commission on July 7. 1993 titled Downtown Huntington Beach Parking Master Plan. Tenth paragraph: The Planning Commission or City Council may impose one(1 ), all , or a combination of the following requirements to ensure that adequate parking is provided for each development r6Kttif/E�ttEEd�/tiff/dE�iEJdf6d�Erit/t�ifds/16�tEd dfdd�f/E�ftf t 1 Ed�trff: 6. 4.2.24 Antennas. PIE�t!/tEfEt/td/tifE/16rftrf�/tdd/8dl6di�ifttbrf/0tdf�f�rft!! Antennas shall be consistent with the applicable zoning document 7. 4.2.33 Outdoor Dining. (a)(iii) Outdoor dining located on the sidewalk area of the public right—of—way of the first block of Main Street and Pacific Coast Highway within District 3 and on the Municipal Pier shall provide a minimum ten (10) foot clear passage area or pedestrian access. ,luntington Beach LCP Amendment 3-94 Suggested Modifications Page 5 (a)(iv) Aldiidiifiddi/tlA/(101/fddt/Oldd/oiddlttitrf/AilKr6dj/l Nil I/lilfdtdiidid r6NEN/1dEdtEd/irf/d/d�irfi��6dtK�/f6�6161iE/�dlttd/dt/16EdtN/dt6dl No outdoor dining shall be allowed in mini—darks. publicly owned plaza, or beach areas excluding concession carts with no seating. (b) Fiitdt!/td/¢drfllddt 7NE/tdrfirf�/lidfiirfilttdtdt/lNtll/E6rflidEt/tNE/fdlJdr6irf�/fdttdt!/t6�itdirf� tiff/I6Edti6rf/drill/tNE/dEli�rf/df/tNE/6dtdddt/dirfirfgl [il/7NE/�iidtN/df/tN!/lidEr�tlKl [iil/7NE/i6td�tid�it�/trfd/Idtdtidrf/df/tldiJdirf�/Erftt�L�fEEll [iiil/F�tf lbrig/f6N�liEdl/6i6lttdtti6r(!/i�fElddirf��/16dt/rfdt/lid�itdd/td li�ri�dltl(lJigNt/ltdrfditdl�/iddtKirfg/fiEtEtl�/i6EdENdl�/�NdrfE/i6ddtNl� AE4!ltddd!/tdd/dtilI fI diI 41+i1/Mdtdt/�iENitIE/dEti+ift�/1rf/tNE/td�dEErit/t6td►6dj/irftlddirfg/16dt/ddt lid�itfd/td/Nd!/ltd�dl�/ttdEK/ldddirfg/tdri!!(/td�fi/ltdddl(/NdtEl/f6ri6!( dt/�d!!l�fgEt/16ddiri�l fil/Pdddit bill/t tiffl i/idl ddidll f iil/NfridiE ooiduadimilitIl Necessary Findings In order to approve outdoor dining the Zoning Administrator shall make the following findings: 0) The sidewalk's public use, pedestrian, transit and business services including but not limited to loading zones, bus stops. Dublic phones, and benches, are not restricted. (ii) Building entryways are not obstructed. (iii) Pedestrian traffic volumes are not inhibited. (iv) Handicapped accessibility is provided where required. B. 4.3 District #1 : Visitor—Serving Commercial 4.3.01 Permitted Uses (a) The following list of Visitor Serving Commercial uses in District No. 1 may be allowed. Other visitor serving related uses as described in the Land Use Plan and which have the same parking demand as the existing use not specified herein may be allowed subject to the approval of the Director. Change of use shall be subject to the approval of the Director. For example: Huntington Beach LCP Amendment a-94 Suggested Modifications Page 6 From the list of uses: delete Hardware stores. Move Dry Cleaning to section (b) which requires a conditional use permit. 9. 4.5 District #3: Visitor—Serving Commercial 4.5.01 Permitted Uses. (a) The following list of uses which establishes a commercial core and which serves as the transition between visitor—serving and year round commercial uses in District No. 3 may be allowed. Other visitor serving related uses as described in the Land Use Plan. and which have the same parking demand as the existing use not specified herein may be allowed subject to the approval of the Director. Change of use shall be subject to the approval of the Director. For example: 10. 4.6 District #4: Mixed—Use: Office Residential Boundaries. District #4 includes the half—blocks on the northwest side of the Main Street core area from 6th Street to the alley between 6th and 5th; and from the alley between 3rd and 2nd Streets to the alley between 2nd and EM First Streets, between Walnut and Orange Avenues. 11 . 4.7 District #5: Mixed—Use: Commercial/Office/Residential 4.7.01 Permitted Uses (a) Add Public Facilities to list 4.7. Open Space. Open Air Commercial : not more than fifty (50) percent of the privately owned publicly used plaza area may be used for open air commercial uses. TKJ�/�td�ilibE/�JJ1/bE/�E��EEtitb/tKE/�ttEdt�d�/dEfIJEEd/iE/tME/¢ttt� tEd/KliftiletdiEtEEEI 12. 4.9 District #7: Visitor-Serving Commercial 4.9.01 Permitted Uses. (a) The following list of Visitor-Serving Commercial uses in District No. 7 may be allowed. Other visitor serving related uses as described in the Land Use Plan and which have the same parking demand as the existing use not specified herein may be allowed subject to the approval of the Director. Change of use shall be subject to the approval of the Director. For example: duntington Beach LCP Amendment �3-94 Suggested Modifications Page 7 4.9.02 Minimum Parcel Size. No minimum parcel size shall be required for this District. However, prior to the approval of any development, including subdivision. a master site plan for the entire District shall be approved by the Planning Commission. Development which is in conformance with the site plan may then be permitted. 4.9.11 Corridor Dedication. Development in District #7 shall require the dedication of a twenty (20) foot corridor between Atlanta Avenue and PCH for public access between the southern end of the Pacific Electric ROW and PCH. This requirement may be waived if an alternative public use is provided or if the corridor is deemed unnecessary by the City. Any proposal for an alternative public use must be approved by the Planning Commission. 13. 4.10 District #8: High Density Residential Boundaries. Replace "Lake Street" with "First Street". 14. 4.11 District #9: Commercial/Recreation 4.11 .01 Permitted Uses (a) The following list of commercial recreation uses in District No. 9 may be allowed. Other visitor serving/recreational related uses Al described in the Land Use Plan, and which have the same parking demand as the existing use not specified herein may be allowed subject to the approval of the Director. A change of use shall be subject to the approval of the Director. For example: 15. 4.12 District #10: Pier-Related Commercial District #10 map must be modified to reflect the boundaries described in the District #10 text. 4.12.01 Permitted Uses. (a) The following list of pier related commercial uses in District No. 10 may be allowed. Other Bier related uses as described in the Land Use Plan, and which have the same parking demand as the existing use not specified herein may be allowed subject to the approval of the Director. A change of use shall be subject to the approval of the Director. For example: End of list: Outdoor dining pursuant to 91412 M S.4.2.33 ,untington Beach LCP Amendment _ j4 Suggested Modifications Page 8 16. 4.16 Mobile Home District Purpose. Provide the correct acreage figure for the area within the Specific Plan subject to the Mobile Home overlay. Also change the description of which Districts include the Mobile Home overlay. 4005F r_o Ltar4-eK e NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING �) place, ► ' BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH e-r 'YN%1 M bP-r (.20,r0.cj rG.ko h NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on Monday, April 17, 1995, at 7:00 PM in the City Council Chambers, 2000 Main Street,Huntington Beach,the City Council will hold a public hearing on the �`� following items: '1 al. CODE AMENDMENT NO.92-5/DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN"VILLAGE /� CONCEPT" eYID AND DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN: Applicant: City of Huntington Beach-To amend the Downtown Speck Plan and Downtown Parking Master Plan to include the suggested modifications as recommended by the California Coastal Commission at their public hearing on March 9, 1995. Location-An area bounded by Goldenwest Street,Pacific Coast Highway and Beach Boulevard(see map below). Planner Assigned: Herb Fauland Cam° ❑ 2. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 94-1: Applicant: City of Huntington Beach-To amend the Land Use Element and Coastal Element of the City's General Plan which includes redesignating approximately 2.5 gross acres of property from Residential-High Density to Commercial-Visitor Serving, and to amend pertinent text and exhibits in the Coastal Element. Location-An area generally bounded by Sixth Street,Pacific Coast Highway,Eighth Street and the first public alley paralleling Pacific Coast Highway. Planner Assigned: Wayne Carvalho NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the above Items 41 is covered by Environmental Impact Report No. 82-2. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that initial environmental assessments for the above Items #2 were processed and completed in accordance with the California Quality Act. It was determined that Items #2 would not have any significant environmental effect and,therefore,Negative Declaration No. 94-7 was approved by the City Council on October 3, 1994. ON FILE: A copy of the proposed requests are on file in the Department of Community Development, 2000 Main Street,Huntington Beach, California 92648,for inspection by the public. A copy of the staff report will be available to interested parties at the City Clerk's Office after April 13, 1995. ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to attend said hearing and express opinions or submit evidence for or against the application(s)as outlined above. If you challenge the City Council's action in court,you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice,or in written correspondence delivered to the City at,or prior to,the public hearing. If there are any further questions please call the Planning Division at 536-5271 and refer to the above items. Direct your written communications to the City Clerk. Connie Brockway, City Clerk City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street, 2nd Floor Huntington Beach, CA 92648(714) 536-5227 (CCLG0417-1) y c F7 iOCEAN l� �JLi❑01 UuTr- r� h er I J wl 1R� CODE AMENDMENT #92-5 DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 2000 MAIN STREET CALIFORNIA 92648 OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK CONNIE BROCKWAY CITY CLERK FAX COVER S H E E T DATE: / / ��� TIME: 3 i TO: PHONE: FAX: C/o 31_�S—q �z FROM: PHONE: 714-536-5227 Deputy City Clerk FAX: 714-374-1557 RE: e l70 741'c V CC: Number of pages including cover sheet: 3 Message r Charge for this material: (Telephone:714-536-5227) NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on Monday,April 17, 1995,at 7:00 PM in the City Council Chambers,2000 Main Street,Huntington Beach,the City Council will hold a public hearing on the following items: Is 1. CODE AMENDMENT NO.92-5/DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN"VILLAGE CONCEPT"AND DOWNTOWN PARKING.-MASTER PLAN4 Applicant: City of Huntington Beach-To amend the Downtown Specific Plan and Downtown Parking Master Plan to include the suggested modifications as recommended by the California Coastal Commission at their public hearing on March 9, 1995.Location-An area bounded by Goldenwest Street,Pacific Coast Highway and Beach Boulevard(see attached map). Planner Assigned:Herb Fauland ❑2. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO.94-1: Applicant: City of Huntington Beach-To amend the Land Use Element and Coastal Element of the City's General.Plan which includes redesignating approximately 2.5 gross acres of property from Residential-High Density to Commercial-Visitor Serving,and to amend pertinent text and exhibits in the Coastal Element. Location-An area generally bounded by Sixth Street,Pacific Coast Highway,Eighth Street and the first public alley paralleling Pacific Coast Highway. Planner Assigned:Wayne Carvalho NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the above Items 41 is covered by En-,ironmental Impact RMrt No. 82-2. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that initial environmental assessments for the above Item s 4V2 were processed and completed in accordance with the California Quality Act. It was determined that Items #2 would not have any significant environmental effect and,therefore,Negative Declaration No. 94-7 was approved by the City Council on October 3. 1994. ON FILE: A copy of the proposed requests are on file in the Department of Community Development, 2000 Main Street,Huntington Beach,California 92648,for inspection by the public. A copy of the staff report will be available to interested parties at the City Clerk's Office after April 13, 1995. ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to attend said hearing and express opinions or submit evidence for or against the application(s)as outlined above. If you challenge the City Council's action in court,you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice,or in written correspondence delivered to the City at,or prior to,the public hearing. If there are any further questions please call the Planning Division at 536-5271 and refer to the above items. Direct your written communications to the City Clerk. Connie Brockway, City Clerk City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street,2nd Floor Huntington Beach,CA 92648(714)536-5227 (CCLG041 7 1) YILJLJ oo El PACIFIC OCEAN lRyAlft CODE AMENDMENT #92-5 DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN 023-164-09 023-164 -10 023-164-14 Virbhandas Asrzni Arjun Ralph H . Bauer Lowell D . Zehnder 25442 Wagon Wheel Cir 16511 Cotuit Cir 206 15th St . Laguna Hills CA 92653 Huntington Eh CA 92649 Huntington Bh CA 92648 023-165-01 023-165-02 023-165-09 Shell Western E & P Inc Shell Western E & P Inc Shell Western E & P Inc P. O. Box 2099 P. O. Box 2099 P. O. Box 2099 Houston TX 77252 Houston TX 77252 Houston TX 77252 023-165-12 023-166-03 023-166-05 Shell =-s-ern E & P .Inc Thomas ,nadican Robert P. Mandic P. O. Box 2099 P. O. Box 127 1112 Main St .. custon TX 77252 '�untington CA 92648 Huntington Sh CA 92648 023-166-07 023-166-09 023-166-10 Leonard 0. Lindborg Huntington 'each Company State of California 30110 Crown Valley PKY P.O. Box 7611 Laguna Niguel CA 92677 San Francisco CA 94120 023-166-11 023-166-12 023-167-02 Leonard 0. Lindborg Leonard 0. T,indborg Southridge Investments 30110 Crown Valley PKY 30110 Crown Valley PKY 5362 Oceanus Dr. Laguna Niguel CA 92677 Laguna Niguel CA 92677 Huntington Bh CA 92649 023-167-03 023-167-11 023-168-09 Chris Bovy Alan A. Ankerstar Robert D. Bolen 526 18th St . 6792 Corral Ci r I818 Dine St . Huntir_cton Eh CA 92648 Huntington each CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 023-168-10 024-031-01 024-031-02 Southridge Homes Ptnshp Clyde Armijo Byron Morgan 5362 Oceanus Dr . 21632, Kanakca Lane 523 IOTh St . '.untington Bh CA 92649 Huntington Eh CA 92646 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024-031-04 024-031-07 024-031-09 E'dv:ard T. Conlon Richard Burton Wann Henry J. Winkler 227 9th St . P.O. Box 629! 240 E. Altura Dr. Huntington Bh CA 92648 Orange CA 92613 Fullerton CA 92635 024 -031-12 024-031-13 024-031-14 Lowell D. Zehnder Lowell D. Zehnder Joseph G. Nicosia 206 15th St . 206 15th St . 4330- Barranca PKY 14untington Eh CA 92648 Huntington Eh CA 92648 Irvine CA 92714 024-031-15 024-032-01 024-032-02 Chris Bovy Alvin M. Coen Joe E. Huskins 526 18th St . 5792 Meadowbrook Dr. 19811 Shorecliff Lane Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Eh CA 92649 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024 -032-06 024-032-07 024- 032-23 Alvin M. Coen Clive R. H. Ccu-oer Raymond Haws 5792 ?�,eadct-.brock Dr . 1206 E . Fern Dr. 177 Riverside Ave . No. F untington 3h CA 92649 Fullerton C! 92631 Newport Beach CA 92663 024 - 032-24 024-033-01 024 -033- 02 Calitzen Trust Harriet Goban Jack E. Dotson 9770 fames River Cir 126 Via Mesa Grande 19701 Quiet Bay Lane Fountain Valley CA 92708 Redondo Beac:n CA 90277 Huntington _Bh ._CA,_9.?r� 024 -033 -05 024 -033 -11 024-033-13 Lawrence A. Gibson James P . Eich J. Alan Campbell 11931 Emerald St . 1820 W. Grand Ave . 2425 Creekside Run Garden Grove CA 92645 Alhambra CA 91801 Chino CA 91709 024 -033-16 024 -033-21 024 -033 -23 John A. Galkin California Fed' L BK Carl Frederick Shrawder 101 Huntington St . 5700 Wilshire Blvd . 14934 Stonesboro Pl . ,:"..,ntington Bh CA 92648 Los Angeles CA 90036 Sherman Oaks CA 91403 024 -034 -01 024-034- 02 024-034-04 =c__ain= Lcwe Ralph H. Bauer Helene K. Goodman 16511 Cotui t Cir 17052 Palmdale St . Seal Beach CA 90740 Huntington Bh CA 92649 Huntington Beach CA 9264 024-034-05 024-034-13 024-034-14 V . A. Arjun Lorraine N. Lowe Gary K. Lessenger 25442 Wagon Wheel Cir 4508- Guava Ave . 8614 Darter Cir Laguna Hills CA 92653 Seal Beach CA 90740 Fountain Vly CA 92708 024 -034 -18 024-034-19 0'24-034-20 Collin Chan Victor H. York Brad Streel<< an 1520 E . Alto Lane 19890 Pleasant View Dr. 3190 N. Long Beach Blvd. Fullerton CA 92631 Groveland CA 95321 Long Beach CA 90807 024-034-22 024-034-24 024-035-01 Eleanor Blatt Cole Marie Fu'lwlder Virbhar_das A. Arjun 4C21 Figaro Cir 1732 Main St . 25442 Wagon Wheel Cir 1: ln_tington Bh CA 92649 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Laguna Hills CA 92553 024 -035-11 024-035-12 024-036-01 T-c-well D. Zehrder Lowell D. Zehnder John T. Sherman 2C,6 15th St . 206 15th St . 9149 Lindante Dr. Huntington -=h CA 92648 Huntington Eh CA 92648 Whittier CA 90603 024-036-04 024-036-05 024 -036-06 Fa; oh _o,:er Donald T. Yasuda Constance J. Brucker 16511 C a t u i t Cir 2800 S . Main St . No. D 5770 Via Del Potrero _�'ti^glen Bh CA 92649 Santa Ana CA 92707 Yorba Linda CA 92687 024-036-10 024-036-11 024-036-12 Achim r.esselink Michael A. Cosentino Terry L. Wesseln 3 ='utton Center No. 900 1050 Braemoor Dr. 22519 San Joaquin Dr. W Santa Ana CA 92707 Downers Grove IL 60515 Canyon_ Lake CA 92587 024 -038-04 024-038-08 024-038-09 Goodman Helen K Trust Michael W. Niccole Craig H. Lewis 17052 Palmdale St . 400 3rd St . 23341 Via Guadix Huntington Beach CA 92647 Huntington Beach CA 92648 Mission Viejo CA 92691 024 -038- 10 024 -038-11 024 -038-14 BaYbara T.)V;,ci lle Simmet William C. Goodman Arturo Filioove 1= :2 Gwen ','e . 17052 Palmdale St . 1300 N. Potrero Say- a Ana CA 2705 Huntington Beach CA 92647 S San Gabriel CA 91770 024 -121 - 07 024 -121-22 024-121-23 Rc er- F. Gardiner W. David Mello Paul Y . Chen 805 W. South ;✓,ountain_ Ave . 4825 Hillard Ave . 1808 W. Cedar St . No. A Phoenix AZ 85041 La Canada CA 91011 Alhambra CA 91801 024 -121 -23 024 -122- 01 024-122-02 Scott Friedland David E. Tsong Richard A. Harlow 5926 Manola Way 20381 Craimer Lane ill 1OTh St . Los Angeles CA 90068 Huntington =ii CA 92646 Huntington Ph CA 92648 024-1122-04 024-122-07 024-122-09 Edward J. SuiDernowicz William R. Paxson Antone John Roitz P. O. Box 4 Rancho Del Sol 115 9th St . P.O. Box 2087 Camino CA 95709 Huntington --=-h CA 92648 Montclair CA 91763 024-123-01 024-123-07 024 -123-08 Evelyn M. Ccc-ran Baron Inves-m. nt Co Sylvia W. =_ugustine 225 11-.- St . 15321 Trans__stor Lane 1851 W . Vista Say No. 26 runtingtcn Bh CA 92648 Huntington =- CA 92649 Vista CA 92083 - 024-123-13 024-123-14 024-123-15 Nancy Joan Vcore Merle Anderson Mehler John M. Thomason 107 Sonora St . 2254 Via Puerta No. A 147 Via Undine Newport Beach CA 92663 Laguna Hills CA 92653 Newport Beach CA 92663 024-124-01 024-124-04 OZ4-124-05 ,-ntheny R. Ursino Evelyn M. Cochran Evelyn M. Cochran 121 19th St . No. 6 225 11Th St . 225 11Th St . --untington Beach CA 92648 Huntington =- CA 92648 Huntington Ph CA 92648 024-124-06 024-124-08 024-124-09 . velyn i✓. Cochran Mao Ta Chen Horace C. Stovall 225 11Th St . 1856 E. Via Arroyo 948 llTh St . _ur_tirgton Bh .CA 92648 La Verne CA 1750 Huntington Beach CA 9264 024-124-10 024-124-13 024-124-16 Jitendra P. Barot Nazmi Ali Robert F. Gardiner 1102 Paci_i c Coast _itiY 706 Pacific Ccast H'WY 805 11. South Mountain Av in on Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Phoenix AZ 85041 024-124-18 024-141-01 024-141-02 lGrcarel Cockerley i�ilr.e '. Gre�ory Randoloh Caul 2.030 Mai- St . 4817 Hayter .1%,e . 11821 Morgan Lane inti? gton =h CA 92648 Lakewood CA 90712 Garden Grove CA 92640 024 -141-03 024-141-04 024-141-05 Surendra P . Barot 011ie S . Feemster Clint Woodington 118 11Th St . 1594 W. Sumac Lane 2755 S . 4th Ave . No. 965 untington Ph CA 92648 Anaheim CA 92802 Yuma AZ 85364 024-141-08 024-141-09 024-141-10 Donald Galitzen Robert J. Runk Robert A. Pedersen 9770 James River Cir 3 Macon 1313 E. Ave Q-12 =ountain Vly CA 92708 Irvine CA 92720 Palmdale CA 93550 024 -141-11 024-141-12 024-141-14 Peter O. Ycuncsma Dennis Niccc'e Majid Harb . O. pox 327 400 3rd St . 1900 Pacific Coast HWY N S,,"=side CA 90743 Huntingtn Bc-- CA 92648 Huntington Peach CA 9264 024 -141-17 024-141-19 024 -142-01 =in' L Svcs j . Southern C. Robert R. Ai'en Larry Bailey 17770 Cartwright Rd. P. O. Box 610 21282 Antigua Lane Irvine CA 92714 Huntington Ph CA 92648 Huntington Ph CA 92646 024-142- 05 024-142-06 024-142- 08 ;•Sardene M,iiler Ronald H. Wood Thomas J. Battaglia 215 Elmwood Dr. 19681 Quiet Bay Lane 18872 MacArthur Blvd. Co Fluffs IA 51503 Huntington 5h CA 92648 Irvine CA 92715 024 -142-09 024-142-10 024-142-12 Felix Veica Felix Veiga Michael G. Tater 2044 S . Hacienda Blvd. 2044 S . Hacienda Blvd. 16136 Twinkle Cir acienda ' gts CA 91745 Hacienda Hgts CA 91745 Huntington Sh CA 92649 024-142-13 024-142-14 024-142-16 Fel-x Ve ca Felix Veiga - Mike Ali 2044 S . ac__nda Blvd. 2044 S . Hacienda Blvd . 19105 Beachcrest Lane. No racienda :c-s CA 91745 Hacienda Ha7s CA 91745 Huntington 3h CA 92646 024 -142-17 024-142-18 024-142-21 F lix Veica Andrew Stupin Felix Veica 20-^-4 S . Hacienda Blvd. 220 5th St . 2044 S . Hacienda Blvd. acienda :gts CA 91745 Huntington h CA 92648 Hacienda Hgts CA 91745 024-142-22 024-143-01 0224-143-04 Felix Veiga Redevelopment Agency City Redevelopment Agency Cit 2044 S . "r_acienda Blvd. 2000 Main St . 2000 Main St . Hacienda acts CA 91745 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024-143-08 024-143-09 024-143-10 Redevelopment Agency City Redevelopment Agency City Beach Redevelopment Ag H 2000 Main St. 2000 Main St . 2000 Main St . :untingtcn �h CA 92648 Huntington _h CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024-143 -11 024-143-12 024-143-17 Redevelopment Acency City James E. Koller James E. Koller 2000 .Miazn Sz . 16001 Ballantine Lane 16001 Ballantine Jane :untiacton S Cy 92648 Huntington Eh CA 92647 Huntington Bh CA 92647 024-143 -13 024-143-20 024-143-23 Redevelop-:_-t Acency City James Edwarc Koller Redevelopment Acency Cit 2000 Main St_ 16001 Ballantine Lane 2000 Main St . �ntinctcn =h CA 92648 Huntington n- CA 92647 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024 -143-25 024-144-01 024-1d4 -02 Redevelcpmenz Agency City Ruth Larson Robert D. Bolen 2000 Main St. 271 E. -2nd St . 1818 Pine St . .'L.rltinctcn h CA 92648 Sn Bernrdno CA 92404 Huntington Sh CA 92648 02-__14 g - 03 024-1d4 -04 024-144 -10 Rcbert D. Bclen United States of America Ruth Larson 1018 Pine St. No Address 271 E. 42rd St . Huntington Sh CA 92648 No Address Sn Bernrdno CA 92404 024 -144 -1' 024-144-12 - 024-144 -14 Lecn E . Dubov Ben Trainer Y. H . Sun 222 Dee''. ale Lane 2364 3rd St . 16721 Carousel Lane 5h CA 92G46 San Francisco CA 94107 Huntington 3h CA 92649 024 - 145- 0_. 024-145-10 024 -145- 12 Ar_eelo Rinaldi Fern S . Larson Merle E . Cade P . O. Box F 4134 Country Club Dr. 17532 Metzler Lane Huntington -=h CA 92648 Lakewood CA 90712 Huntington Bh CA 92647 024 -145-13 024 -145-16 024 -145-18 :;erle E . Cade Steffen D. ragene James E . Osterman 17532 Metzler Lane 19200 Stevens Creek Blvd. 520 Meadowview Dr . -untington 3h CA 92647 Cupertino Cr 95014 La Canada Flt CA 91011 024 -145-21 024-145-22 024 -145-23 Francis W. Stocker Theresa A. I•;haley John Price Mc Roberts 10241 Camden Cir 19431 Ranch Lane No . 105 Hasi No . 64913 Villa Park CA 92667 Huntington -E.h CA 92648 Apo AE 09839 024-145-24 024 -145-26 024 -145-27 an_el joser,n Salerno Robert D. Gc'�rley Thomas C. Van T uyl P i ersice Cir 2201 Ci elo 7-1 . 1722 Park St . untington 3h CA 92648 Arcadia CA 91006 Huntington Bh CA 92648 02?-145-28 024-145-29 024-145-31 Dcualas V. Myhra Thomas C. Van Tuyi Stella Miller P .O. Box 505 1722 Park St . 2660 Point Del Mar _untington 3h CA 92648, Huntington CA 92648 Corona D1 Mar CA 92625 024 -145-32 024-145-33 0-24-145-35 Denis Gallon-Jo Julie Gallo Angelo Rinaldi Brian H. Relin P . O. Box 1312 P.O. Box F 1404 N. Tustin Ave . No. Arcadia CA 91077 Huntington h CA 92648 Santa Ana CA 92701 024-146-02 024-146-03 024-146-06 Ruby Scott Michael Gecrce Tater James M. Briggs 7821 Talbert Ave . 16136 Twinkle Cir 14312 Willow Lane =untington 3z CA 92648 Huntington =h CA 92649 Tustin CA 92680 024-146-07 024-146-10 024-146-12 Andrew Stupin Blanche A. I• ood Mohamad Shankal 3701 Birch St . No . 210 201 5th St . 10667 E1 Morro Cir .�e,,Nort Beach CA 92660 Huntington "-:zh CA 92648 Fountain Valley CA 92708 02=' -146-13 024-146-14 024-146-15 adas i Nakase Choong Hee '.hee Andrew Stunin 10171 NorthampLon Ave . P .O. Box 1041 3701 Birch St . No . 210 Iestminster CA 92683 Huntington 5h CA 92647 Newport Beach CA 92660 024-146-16 024-146-17 024-146-18 ernard L. Davis Tadashi Nakase Kathy Kyote Aw 507 11Th St . 10171 Northampton Ave . 15258 E. E1 Selinda Dr. _unting`Lon 3h CA 92648 Westmir_ster CA 92683 Hacienda Hgts CA 91745 024 -146-19 024-147-01 024-147-03 adashi D. Nakase Beach Redevelopment Ag Hu Andrew Stupin 10171 Northampton Ave . 2000 Main St . 3701 Birch St . Westminster CA 92683 Huntington =h CA 92648 Newport Beach CA 92660 C-124-147-08 024 -147-09 024 -147-14 =eaciI Redevelopment Ag Hun Clyde Joseph Mazzotti Douglas M. S . Lancevin 2 .. 00 rain St . 19051 Holly N �} 0 11 _ 8196 Pawtuc:•c�� Dr . �ntingtcn 3h CA 92548 Huntington =each CA 92648 Huntinaton B1 CA 92646 '-24 - 147-15 024 -147-23 024 -147-25 =homas R . urzl Pauline M. Cooper Richard A. Harlow 5199 Pacific Coast HWY P .O. Box 723 111 1OTh St . Long- Beach CA 90804 Huntington 2h CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024 -147-23 024 -147-30 024 -147-31 Xarjcrie T. Decker William G. Gallegos City of Huntington Beach 8877 Lauderdale Ct . 210 5th St . P.O. Box 190 :��tington Bh CA 92646 Huntington �h CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024 -147-33 024 -147-34 024-147-35 Redevelopment Agency of Th Redevelopment Agency of C Taylor Family Trust 2000 Main St . 2000 Main St . 220 Via San Remo Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington 5h CA 92648 Newport Beach CA 92663 024-147-36 024 -147-38 024-147-40 CCast Cr._Cialtiec -Project Yenti Lin - Thomas A. Caver" C-aiD,;,Gn P_ve . 209 ?Fain St . 553 Temple Hillis Dr . Crance C! 92666 Huntington _-each CA 92648 Laguna Beach CA 92651 024 -1�1- 01 024-151-02 024-151-03 Robert _. _ . Smith Don E. King Henry C. Volker 2015 F. Ocean Blvd. 3036 Marna Lve . 19382 Woodlands Lane Ne•A-oort Beach CA 92661 Long Beach CA 90808 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024-151-05 024 -151-07 0-24 -151-08 Ashcka Investments David N. Byrd Choong H. Rhee 129 6th St . 4800 Candleberry Ave . P .O. Box 1041 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Seal Beach CA 90740 Huntington Bh CA 92647 024__ -151-09 024-151-10 024-151-20 Michael L. Schowalter William A. eid Johnny Kitabj ian _50 _ Zeeman Ave . 5520 2nd St . No. 1-339 2435 Bella Vista Dr. Long =eac:n CA 90814 Long Beach CA 50803 Vista CA 92084 024-15-1-25 024-151-26 024-151-27 John Bogosian Ardem Horem_an Choong H. Rhee 2=_� 75 Queensberry Rd . 2475 Queenscerry Rd. P. O. Box 1041 asGQC^'a CA 91104 Pasadena CA 91104 Huntington Beach CA 9264 024-151-28 024-151-29 024-152 -01 S v-'✓cr O_l Co Sav-?,'or Gil Co Shirley D. Worthy 5150 i^;ilshire Blvd . No . 10 5150 Wilshire Blvd. No. 1 801 13Th St . Lcs -celes CA 90036 Los A,-ngeles CA 90036 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024-152-05 024 -152-10 024-152-11 Beach Redet,-eiczment Ag Hun Salvator W. Cracchiolo Blanche A. Wood 2000 Main St . 6691 Shire Cir 201 5th St . untinctcn 3h CA 92648 Huntington =h CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024 -152 -12 024 -152-13 024 -152-14 31anche A. Wood Redevelopment Agency City Beach Redevelopment Ag H 201 5th St . 2000 Main St . 2000 Main. St,. Huntington Sh CA 92648 Huntington =h CA 92648 Huntington--•3h CA 92648 024-153-01 024 -153-02 024 -153 -03 Re-'evelo—ment Agency of Ci Redevelopment Acency of C Redevelopment Agency of �'DC`D 2000 ?gain 2000 Main St . -h CA 92648 Huntington =h CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024 -153- 04 024 -153 -07 024 -153 -10 '�ictcria I-ean Lane Gary V. Mulligan Redevelopment Agency Cit 637 Fran', crt Ave . 504 ,gain St . No. A 2000 Main St . Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington ?h CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92r�4a 024 -153-11 024 -153-12 024-153-13 Eldon willard Bagstad Abdelmuti Development Co Abdelmuti Development Cc 901 Catalina Ave . 101 Main St . 113 Main St . Seal Beach CA 90740 Huntington Beach CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024 -153-14 024-153-15 024-153-16 Abdelmuti Development Cc Abdelmuti Development Co Redevelopment Agency of 113 Main St . 113 Main St . 2000 Main St . Huntington 3h CA 92648 Huntington Sh CA 92648 Huntington Bh .CA 92648 024-153 -18 024 -153-19 024 -153-20 F'-an,-- Al-0nc0 F�delmuti 'velooment C6 Abdelmuti Development Co 6:30 Vickiview Dr . 113 ;Fain St . 113 Main St . Canoga Park CA 91307 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024 -154- 01 024-154 -02 024-154-04 Ace- muss-a2a zei dan Blanche A. Wood William Enright 200 Pacific Coast HiqY No. 201 5th St . 3419 Via Lido No . 287 H:-intir_gton Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Newport Beach CA 92663 024-154-17 024-161-01 0'24-161-11 Cx Pierside Corp Alfred J. Palladino Dorothy E . Parnakian 350 S . Figueroa St . No. 60 106 Olive Ave . 78-7234 Puuloa Rd. - Los Angeles CA 90071 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Kailua Kona HI 96740 024-161-12 024-161-14 024-162-01 Satenig Deundian Alfred J. Palladino Beach Resorts Inc 317 2nd St . 106 Olive Ave . 222 5th St . �ntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington =each CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024 -162-03 024-162-16 024-162-17 Hazold E. Tomkins Carolin S . Resendez Carmel A. Ling 76-580 Cali-Orn_a Dr. P. O. Box 167 5401 Miesagrove Ave . Palm Desert CA 92260 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Whittier CA 90601 024 -162-22 024-162-24 024 -163-01 Carolin S . Resendez Genevieve Tr -1 Vanlan City Of Huntington Beach 222 2nd St . 2405 Kenilworth Ave . P.O. Box 190 .ntinaton =_� CA 92648 Los Angeles CA 90039 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024 -163-02 024-163 -08 024-163.-09 T^omas Holwerda Beach Resorts Inc Ralph Peck 5736 Hillpark Dr . No. 401 222 5th St . 8404 Lexington Rd. Les Angeles CA 90068 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Downey CA 90241 024 -163 -10 024-163-i1 02 _a- 163-12 each Resorts Inc Beach Resorts Inc Allen L. Nelson 222 5th St . 222 5th St . 8404 Lexington Rd . ' untinaton Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Downey CA 90241 024 -163 -13 024 -163-14 024 -164-01 Allen Nelson Iowa Sage Linited Partner Hayward C . Johnson Lexington Rd . 25258 Cabot Rd . No. 229 2236 Vista Grande Dr . ,c•.aney CA 90241 Laguna Hills CA 92653 Vista CA 92084 02= -1 4 - 07 024-164 - 08 024 -164 -10 Dennis Niccole Joseph A . 1,/jauri Carmel A. Ling 4CO 3rd St . 119 Via Toluca 5401 Mesagrove Ave . Huntingtn Bch CA 92648 San ClemPnta ra 4,)a7,) PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION CHECKL,ST Pg. 2 (1211D) Norm Smith, Environmental Planning Dir. Mr. Tom Zanic card Chairman City of Fountain Valley Seacliff Partners 4053 Aladdin Drive 10200 Slater Ave. 520 Broadway Ste. 100 Huntington Beach, CA 92649 Fountain Valley, CA 92708 Santa Monica, CA Pacific Coast Archaeological Planning Department OC County Harbors, Beach Society, Inc. Orange County EHA and Parks Dept. P.O. Box 10925 P. 0. Box 4048 P. 0. Box 4048 Costa Mesa, CA 92627 Santa Ana, CA 92702-4048 Santa Ana, CA 92702-4048 Attn: Jane Gothold - JERKY BUCHANAN , California Coastal Commission H3 CITY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT South District Office P. 0. Box 71 245 W. Broadway No. 380 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Long Beach, CA 92802-4458 954-8�88 GARY BUP.GNER HB UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISRICT �Q -SO T' 10251 Yorktown Avenue cm 1Z—IO Huntington Beach, CA 92646 �jv►�SET13����� � ' 964-3339 Q 074 Z- !,ARC ECKER �T1�t QO13�T Ms�'CEZ ��2P. FOUNTAIN VALLEY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT 17210 OAK STREET STD.(05O O.3On FOUNTAIN VALLEY CA 92708 tJEwpoCT LScrtcH,64• gZloS`8- � JAMES JONES OCEAN VIE4 ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT 17200 PINEHURS7 LANE HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92647 RON FRAZIER 'hESTMINSTER SCHOOL DISTRICT 14121 CEDARnOOD AVENUE '�ESTMINSTER CA 92683 CSA 730 E1 Camino Way #200 Tustin, CA 9680 SCHOOL DISTRICTS (1211D) Dr. Duane Dishno -5 CITY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT P. 0. Box 71 Huntirgton Beach, CA 92648 964—B&B8 DAVID HAGEN HB UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISRICT 10251 Yorktown Avenue Huntington Beach, CA 92646 964-3339 — CSA 730 El Camino Way r200 Tustin, CA 9680 Yolanda Zanchi _ 16601 halu Cr. Huntington Beach, CA 92649 Nark Sutter 17609 Ventura Blvd. Suite 212 Encino, CA 91316 roadrsoor Huntington Harbour X1SC �112 fourth200 Santa :na, CA 92705 Christiana Bay Homeowners C/O 16458 Harbour Huntington Beach, CA 92649 Seagate Westchester Bay P. 0. Box 1863 Huntington Beach, CA 92647 Seaharbor 15911 Blue Water Lane Huntington Eeach, CA 92649 024-164 -11 024 -164-13 024-164 -14 :.enry Dellano Coast Special Proj 2 Ora Resorts Beach 8412 Country Club Dr. 2123 Granada Ave . 222 5th St . Buena Park CA 90621 Newport Beach CA 92661 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024 -164 -15 024-164-16 024-165- 02 Beach Resorts Inc Beach Resorts Inc Charles E. Cather 222 5th St . 222 5th St . 2292 N. Long Beach Blvd. Huntington 3h CA 92648 Huntington 3h CA 92648 Long Beach CA 90806 024-165-06 024-165-07 024 -165-08 <�ssell Lee Aat.k Ins Vance J. Deri�o Robert R. Allen 1656 is "ree Cu . ?. O. Box 1325 P. O. Box 610 CA 92545 Sar_dnoint TD 83864 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024 -165-10 024 -165-i1 024 -165-12 Step-e: Jay elli Steven Jay Fe 11 H.SUEH Ronald 1877 Nueva Vista Dr. 1877 Nueva Vista Dr. 7111 Stonewood Dr. La Sabra CA 90631 La Habra CA 90631 Huntington Bh CA 92647 024-165-13 024-165-15 0-24-165-16 Bernard Mason Richard P. Spindler Bernard Mason 825 12Th St . P.O. Box 552- 825 12Th St . Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington 3h CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024-165-18 024-165-21 024-165-23 Dewey D. Davide Dewey Davide Robert B . Goodrich P. O. Box 342 P. O. Box F P. O. Box 368 untingtcn Bh CA 9264-8 Huntington 3h CA 92648 Huntington Beach CA 9264 024-271-04 H:unt_ngton Beach Co P . O. Box 7611 San Francisco CA 9G120 Connie Mandic Lorretta Wolfe Mike Roberts 1112 ?\4ain Street 411 Main Street P. O. Box 636 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Huntington Beach, CA 92 Michael Tater Bob Bolen James Lane 16136 Twinkle Circle 522 Main Street 637 Frankfort Ave. Huntington Beach, CA 92649 Huntington Beach, CA 9264S Huntington Beach, CA 92 Mark Porter Doug Ungevin Joe Hartge 19361 Topeka Lane S196 Pawtucket Drive 20061 Mural Circle Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Huntington Beach, CA 92646 Huntington Beach, CA 92 Dick Harlow Anthony Ursino 211 Main Street 6001 E. Edinger Ave. Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Huntington Beach, CA 92647 lab--Is 024-171- 01 024-171- 06 024-171-07 Pacific Coast Homes Pacific Coast Homes A. M. Pedersen P. O. Box 7611 P. O. Box 7611 610 Main St . San Francisco CA 94120 San Francisco CA 94120 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024 -171-10 024-171-13 024 -171-14 Pacific Coast Homes Pacific Coast Homes Pacific Coast Homes P .O. Box 7611 P.O. Box 7611 P. O. Box 7611 San Francisco CA 94120 San Francisco CA 94120 San Francisco CA 94120 024-171-15 024-172-01 024-172-02 " aci-1c Cc a 1, aiomes John R. Knox + LJames -av JIj DeGL P . O. Bcx 7611 13472 Tulane St . 19522 .estwinds Lane San Francisco CA 94120 Westminster CA 92683 Huntington Bh CA 92646 024-172- 03 024-172-05 024-172-06 ,ames T. McBeath Virgil E . Brewster Virgil E. Brewster 19522 We_stwinds Lane 7922 Speer Ave . 7922 Speer Ave ._ Hutington Bh CA 92646 Huntington Bh CA 92647 Huntington Bh CA 92647 024-172-07 024-172-10 024-172-11 Philip Zisakis Lewie Derigo Hertha Lovisa Backlund 16351 Tufts Lane 807 Main St . 302 13Th St . Huntington Sh CA 92647 Huntington Beach CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024-172-12 024-173-03 024-173 -04 City of Huntington Beach Lewie Derigo Robert j. Koury 2000 Main St . 807 Main St . P. O. Box 65176 untingtcn 3h CA 92648 Huntington Beach CA 92648 Los Angeles CA 90065 024-173-05 024-175-02 024-176- 08 .redrew Stu_pin City of Huntington Beach TNR Development Corporat 3701 Birch St . P.O. Box 190 5200Warnerave No. 207 Newport Beach CA 92660 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Beach CA 9264 Hunt. Harbour Prop. Owners Assoc. C/0 3565 Windspun Huntington Beach, CA 92649 Weatherly Bay Prop. Owners Assoc. MR Property Managenent 20062 Lawson — Huntington Beach, CA 92646 Seacape Prop. Owner Assoc. MR Property Management 20062 Lawson Huntington Beach, CA 92649 Ken Bourguignon 3692 Escapade Circle Huntington Beach, CA 92649 Trinidad Island Homeowners Assoc. 12607 Hiddencreek Way Ste. R Cerritos, CA 90701-2145 • PUBLIC HF-ARING NOTIFICATION CHECKLIST NJ+ILING LABELS (1211D) 3/2/93 President William D. Holman Planning Director H.B. Chamber of Commerce Pacific Coast Homes City of Westminster 2210 Main Street, Suite 200 23 Corporate Plaza, Suite 250 8200 Westminster Blvd. Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Newport Beach CA 92660-7912 Westminster, CA 92683 Judy Legan Pres., H.B. Hist. Society Planning Director H.B./F.V. Board of Realtors C/O Newland House Museum City of Seal Beach S101 Slater Ave. 19820 Beach Blvd. 211 Eight St. untington Beach, CA 92647 Huntington Beach, CA 92643 Seal Beach, CA 90740 President Chairperson CA Coastal Cow-ission Amigos De Bolsa Chica Historical Resources Bd. Theresa Henry P. 0. Box 3748 Comm. Services Dept. 245 W. Broadway, Ste" 380 Huntington Beach, CA 92605 2000 Main St. Long Bch, CA 90802 Huntington Beach, CA S2648 Charles Grant Robert Joseph Friends of the HB Wetlands Council on Acing Caltrans District 12 21902 Kiowa Lane 1706 Orance Ave. -2501 Pullman St. Huntington Beach, CA 92646 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Santa Ana, CA 92705 Edna Littlebury Director Golden St. Mob. H�. Owners Leag. Local Solid Waste Enf. Agy. 11021 Magnolia Blvd. O.C. Health Care Acencv Garden Grove, CA 92642 P.O. BOX 355 Santa Ana, CA 92702 President County of Orance/EMA Dominick Tomaino Huntington Beach Tomorrow Michael M. Ruane, Dir. Seaclifi Homeowners Assoc. 411 6th St. P.O. Box 4048 6812 Scenic Bay Lane 'r:untington "ceach, CA 92648 Santa Ana, CA 92702-4043 Huntington Beach, CA 92643 Julie Vandermost 3IA-OC County of Orance/EXA Huntington Harbor HOA 9 Executive Circle #100 Thomas Mathews, Dir, Planning P. 0. Box 791 Irvine Ca 92714-6734 P. 0. Box 4048 Sunset Beach, CA 90742 Santa Ana, CA 92702-4048 ichard Spicer cCAS County of Orance/EKA Bill Lilly SIB West 7th, 12th Floor Bob Fisher, Dir. HHHCA ARC Los Angeles, CA 90017 P.O. Box 4048 16835 Algonquin St. #119 Santa Ana, CA 92702-4048 Huntington Beach, CA 92649 E.T.I. Corral 100 Planning Dir. New Growth Coordinator ".ary Bell City of Costa Mesa Huntington Beach Post Office '0292 Eastwood Cir. P. 0. Box 1200 6771 Warner Ave. -_-•tinytcn Beach, CA 92645 Costa Mesa, CA 92=23-12{0 Huntington Beach, CA 92647 023 -131-04 023 -131-10 023-131-11 Richard Makimoto John R. I✓,c Cowan James Ji Hu Wang 645 S . Rockridge P1 . P.O. Box 217 5762 Bellfield Lane Anaheim CA 92807 Dana Point CA 92629 Huntington Bh CA 92648 023-131-12 023 -131-20 023-131-21 Stuart I . Venook James W. Burns Ocean Pointe Partners 34 Deerspring 4270 Madison Ave . 520Broadway No . 100 Irvine CA 92714 Culver City CA 90232 Santa Monica CA 90401 023 -131-24 023-132-12 023-132-16 Ocean Po m = e Partners Ursula A. Cc= i n Joan M Nci cta_r 520__�rcGc•„,,a No. 100 12180 Santa _aula Rd . 427 19th St . Santa Monica CA 90401 Ojai CA 93023 Huntington Bh CA - 92648 023-132 -22 023-132-23 023-132-28 James 7. Rea James T. Rea Eileen A. Murphy 222 22nd St . 222 22nd St . 201 21st St . Huntington 3h CA 92648 Huntington =h CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 023 -132 -35 023-133-0! 0L13 -133 -07 Richard Marvin Wilbur Billie Janet Slutsky Richard Makimoto 379 Saddlehorn Trl 266 21st St . 645 S . Rockridge Pl . Palm Desert CA 92260 Huntington Beach CA 92648 Anaheim CA 92807 023-133 -13 023-133 -15 023 -133-16 Chris D. Alicki Shell Western E & P Inc James Christopher Sampso 817 Frank_ert Ave . P. O. Box 2099 10093 La Quinta Cir Huntington 3h CA 92648 Houston TX 77252 Fountain Vly CA 92708 023-133-17 023 -133 -25 023 -133 -26 Robert E. Freeman Michael F. Grant William B . Lewis l 5d ^r�ncrr E . m T Ave . C� a Lane 202 I?G ;,pion Jr. r7 Sur_si de Huntington �h CA 92646 Pineville LA 71360 Surfside CA 90743 023 -133 -32 023 -133 -33 023-134 -02 Security '!'_ _mot Company John P. T'no-.oson Chaur-Yang Tar, P. O. Box 1589 6252 Priscilla Dr. 10382 La Tortola Cir San Diego C= 92112 Huntington =:,n CA 92647 Fountain Vly CA 92708 023 -134-14 023 -134-15 023 -134-20 Eight Ocean Eight Ocean Neria Yomtoubian P . O. Box 579 P.O. Box 579 P. O. Box 3595 Dana Point CA 92629 Dana Point CA 92629 Newport Beach CA 92659 023 -134 -21 023 -134 -28 023-134-29 'Feria Yomtoubian Raymond G. D-drda Raymond G. Durda P . O. Box 3595 6661 Morning Tide Dr. 6661 Morning Tide Dr. Newport Beach CA 92659 Huntington Eh CA 92648 Huntington -Eh-CA 92648 023 -135- 02 023'-136 -05 023 -137-04 Flo Roc"-me Flo Huntington �=ach Co Huntington Beach Company =204 S . Greenville St . P.O. Box 76=_ P. O. Box 7611 Sa=a L—a CA 92704 San FranciscD CA 94120 San Francisco CA 94120 023- 137- 09 023 -138-01 023 -138-09 games M . Co'e Merle Anderson Mehler William J. Janowski P . O. Bcx 5577 2254 Via Puerta No. A P.O. Box 2284 Huntington aeach CA 92615 Laguna Hills CA 92653 Seal Beach rA 9n-7dn 023 -138 -10 023-139-02 023-161-06 Gary Garfield Huntington Beach Co Herbert V. Swanigan 16027 Ventura Blvd . No. 50 P.O. Box 7611 17132 Harbor Bluffs Cir Encino CA 91436 San Francisco CA 94120 Huntington Ph CA 92649 023 -161-08 023-161-12 023 -161-17 Gary W . Lawson Lowell D. Zehnder Bonnie M. Doolan 18180 Devonwood Cir 206 15th St . 415 Signal Rd . Fountain Vly CA 92708 Huntington Ph CA 92648 Newport Beach CA 92663 023-161-19 023-161-20 023-161-22 c�nie M . DOO'_an Bonnie I✓ . Doolan Daniel J . Salerno L1J Signal Rd. 415 Signal Rd. 504 Pierside Cir K'ewoort Beach CA 92663 Newport Beach CA 92653 Huntir_aton Ph CA 92648 023-161-23 023-161-25 023-161-27 Stevan Karl Brad James J. Hoffman Noeline Khaw 315 12Th St . 1221 Sea Terrace 14062 Bexley St . Huntington Ph CA 92648 Irving .TX 75060 Westminster CA 92693 023-161-31 023-162-13 623-162-14 Killiam J. Sullivan J. Carlos Maggi Peter A. Mazzagatte 7612 Woodwind Dr. 11232 Kensington Rd. 8282 Monique Way Huntington Ph CA 92647 Rossmoor CA 90720 Cypress CA 90630 023 -162-15 023-162-16 023-162-21 Azmy N. Dimyan James E. Holton Dewey Dav=de 19381 Coralwood Lane 7201 Wellesley Ave . P.O. Box F Huntington Bh CA 92646 Westminster CA 92683 Huntington Ph CA 92648 023-162-25 023-162-26 023-162-27 Peter J. Fehervari Kevin C. Kelter Kevin C . Kelter 1837 Al-oha St . 5362 Oceanus Dr. No. A 5362 Oceanus Dr. No. A S Pasadena CA 91030 Huntington Ph CA 92649 Huntington Ph CA 92649 023-162-29 023-163-03 023-163-08 LO:#:ell D. Ze'=der Wesley Grant Crawford IiPrS Mary N 206 15th St . 1150 E . Cypress Ave . 24175 Minnetonka Lane Huntington Ph CA 92648 Glendora CA 91740 El Toro CA 92630 023-163-09 023-163-10 023-163-12 Lowell D. Zehnder Lowell D. Zehnder John M. Thompson 206 15th St . 206 15th St . 147 Via Undine Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Ph CA 92648 Newport Beach CA 92663 023 -163 -13 023 -163 -15 023-163-18 ' James P. Eich John C. Alfonso California Fed' L BK 1820 W. Grand Ave . 6662 Kiowa Rd. 5700 Wilshire Blvd. No. Alhambra CA 91801 Westminster CA 92683 Los Angeles CA 90036 023- 163 -20 023-163-24 023-163-25 Lowell D . Zehnder Beulah C. Lerner Beulah C . Lerner 206 i5th St . 323 Lido So-nd 323 Lido Sound .=_:tington Ph CA 92648 Newport Beach CA 92663 Newport Beach CA 92663 023-164 - 01 023-164 - 02 023-164 -06 Dcnn R . Parsch Vera Michaels Alexander Marilyn O. 1Iouchen 78- 939 Montego Bay Cir 53361 Rd 432 10366 Powderhorn River C Bermuda Dunes CA 92201 Bass Lake CA 93604 Fountain V1y, CA_ .527.08 _ CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH TO: Scott Hess, Senior Planner FROM: Connie Brockway, City Clerk SUBJECT: ASSESSOR'S LABELS PROVIDED FOR CODE AMENDMENT 92-5- DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN DATE: April 12, 1995 The Assessor's Office today verified that the AP No. 024-147-15 - Thomas R. Wurzl - was from the 1993 Rolls. As you can see, Robert J. Koury is on your hard copy in the Planning Department and, per the County Assessor, is the Assessor's Parcel number on the 1994 Rolls. Regarding AP No. 024-147-25 -Richard A. Harlow - your hard copy Assessor's Parcel book shows correct address of 1742 Main Street (1994 Rolls). The label provided is from 1993 Rolls. The City Clerk's Office realizes this is unintentional and your department believes it is providing better rolls. Many times this is correct; however, in this instance, up-to-date rolls were not provided. State Law requires 1994 Rolls. Please recheck these labels. If you do not wish to do so, please obtain permission from the City Attorney's Office (written on this memo) that, given the above information, the public hearing can proceed. Please respond immediately. Sincerely, Connie Brockway, City Clerk P.S. Per Art Folger, former Deputy City Attorney, it is not the number of returns that come back, it is the fact the latest available rolls must be used. g:jgh\dtspecpl RCA ROUTING SHEET INITIATING DEPARTMENT: Community Development SUBJECT: CA #92-5, Downtown Specific Plan COUNCIL MEETING DATE: April 17, 1995 RCA ATTACHMENTS STATUS Ordinance (w/exhibits & legislative draft if applicable) Attached Resolution (w/exhibits & legislative draft if applicable) Tract Map, Location Map and/or other Exhibits Contract/Agreement (w/exhibits if applicable) (Signed in full by the City Attorne Subleases, Third Party Agreements, etc. (Appoved as to form by City Attome Certificates of Insurance (Approved by the City Attorney) Financial Impact Statement (Unbudget, over $5,000) Bonds (If applicable) Staff Report (If applicable) Commission, Board or Committee Report (If applicable) Findings/Conditions for Approval and/or Denial Attached EXPLANATION FOR MISSING ATTACHMENTS REVIEWED RETURNED FO DED Administrative Staff Vu Assistant City Administrator Initial City Administrator Initial City Clerk EXPLANATION FOR RETURN OF ITEM: (Below Space For City Clerk's Use • CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH TO: Connie Brockway, City Clerk FROM: Gail Hutton, City Attorney DATE: April 14, 1995 SUBJECT: Notice Labels for Downtown Specific Plan In your memo to Scott Hess dated April 12, 1995, you have asked whether or not the hearing on the suggested modifications to the Downtown Specific Plan can be held on April 17, 1995. Apparently you have noticed a few discrepancies between the 1994 Assessor's Roll and the notice list provided by the Planning Department, and you are concerned that proper notice of the hearing has not been given. Normal procedure for providing notice for a code amendment is to use the standard city code amendment list, which contains several groups, agencies and other interested parties, who are normally interested in code amendments. The law only requires publication, since the number of persons to whom notice would be delivered exceeds 1000. (Government Code Section 65091(a)(3).) For the Downtown Specific Plan, the City Council asked staff to specially mail notice to owners of downtown property who do not actually live downtown. This is not normally required by state law. Since the Assessor's Parcel roll is out of date by the time it is printed, the law allows the city to use records of the county assessor or tax collector which contain more recent information than the assessment roll. (Government Code Section 65091(a)(3).) The staff generally uses a CD ROM which contains information more recent than the last County assessment roll. This is permitted by the Government Code, as cited above. A few mistaken labels are to be expected no matter which source is used. The return of a few notice letters does not mean that the city has not substantially complied with the law. In the present situation, the city mailed the notices as a courtesy, not because the law requires mailed notice. Therefore, assuming that the proper newspaper notices were published, the hearing may proceed as scheduled on April 17. If you have any further questions, please contact me as soon as possible. Gail Hutton City Attorney 4\G:Labe1s\4/14/95 Lij0TN CITY OF HUNTI GTON BEACH ire" INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH TO: Connie Brockway, City Clerk FROM: Melanie S. Fallon, Community Development DirectorC�4'. DATE: April 14, 1995 SUBJECT: Mailing labels/Code Amendment No. 92-5 (Downtown Specific Plan) This is to inform you that the mailing labels provided to you by this office for the April 17, 1995, public hearing on the Downtown Specific Plan are courtesy labels. The City Council directed staff to notify all off-site property owners of the Downtown Specific Plan public hearings. The required notification for the code amendment was adhered to. Planning staff generated the courtesy labels from the CD-ROM available on the third floor. The courtesy notification is above and beyond the requirement pursuant to Government Code Section 65090. 1 will inform my staff to indicate to you by way of a cover memo, that any public hearing that is provided with labels that exceed the Government Code requirements are clearly identified. This will clear up any confusion in the future. xc: Howard Zelefsky, Planning Director Scott Hess, Senior Planner Herb Fauland, Associate Planner (495hf3) NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on Monday,April 17, 1995,at 7:00 PM in the City Council Chambers,2000 Main Street,Huntington Beach,the City Council will hold a public hearing on the following items: al. CODE AMENDMENT NO. 92-5/DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN"VILLAGE CONCEPT"AND DOWNTOWN PARKING-MASTER PLANt Applicant: City of Huntington Beach-To amend the Downtown Specific Plan and Downtown Parking Master Plan to include the suggested modifications as recommended by the California Coastal Commission at their public hearing on March 9, 1995.Location-An area bounded by Goldenwest Street,Pacific Coast Highway and Beach Boulevard(see attached map). Planner Assigned:Herb Fauland ❑ 2. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO.94-1: Applicant: City of Huntington Beach-To amend the Land Use Element and Coastal Element of the City's General.Plan which includes redesignating approximately 2.5 gross acres of property from Residential-High Density to Commercial-Visitor Serving,and to amend pertinent text and exhibits in the Coastal Element. Location-An area generally bounded by Sixth Street,Pacific Coast Highway,Eighth Street and the first public alley paralleling Pacific Coast Highway. Planner Assigned: Wayne Carvalho NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the above Items #1 is covered by Environmental Impact Report No. 82-2. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that initial environmental assessments for the above Items #2 were processed and completed in accordance with the California Quality Act. It was determined that Items 42 would not have any significant environmental effect and,therefore,Negative Declaration No. 94-7 was approved by the City Council on October 3. 1994. ON FILE: A copy of the proposed requests are on file in the Department of Community Development, 2000 Main Street,Huntington Beach, California 92648,for inspection by the public. A copy of the staff report will be available to interested parties at the City Clerk's Office after April 13, 1995. ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to attend said hearing and express opinions or submit evidence for or against the application(s)as outlined above. If you challenge the City Council's action in court,you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice,or in written correspondence delivered to the City at,or prior to, the public hearing. If there are any further questions please call the Planning Division at 536-5271 and refer to the above items. Direct your written communications to the City Clerk. Connie Brockway,City Clerk City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street,2nd Floor Huntington Beach,CA 92648(714)536-5227 (CCLG0417-1) � ��Pim�D�a��SLJG000 � Fm L u 17/ R 00 El OCEAN d 131 PACIFIC - CODE AMENDMENT #92-5 DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN Connie Brockway,City Clerk ...... City of Huntington Beach Office of the City Clerk :f P.O.Box 190 OR AM IN 1$ 7 9)5 'r - 4,K Huntington Beach,CA 92648 41-if 023-131-04 m .0 �NT 0 f` ING - Y3 6.4 ' CA 92807 RP044 Anaheim C.2 6 A EGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING %e,_ 1111111111 111 lifil[fill 11 fill I )III it RED�0R�?ED, C XP!h Connie Brockway,City Clerk City of Huntington Beach Office of the City Clerk p R 0 R", U.S PUS;AR T C rF 1� AM 7 97) P.O.Box 190 a V Huntington Beach,CA 92M R V E T E 7 3:-13 3�-�133 07 51ZZ MakimotO Im r�1� Richa I 07 GAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING 1111 It lilt 11111 111 11111111 i i • Connie Brockway,City Clerk City of Huntington Beach Office of the City Clerk ,� "� ;;r+ : `,�,, -�, 'P .C9 �C1G i 0'V __ - t. P.O. BOX 190 .K � w 3' ' ::.y $`ai � y It l ` �: Huntington Beach CAtr r- ra R 92648 ,.. I'i 6 '�` a �o N,1'� a N K <AP W f �� _a- -____-- aye.• Usss 024-147-03 Andrew S n U 1y� 3701 h St . IN6Tpy,Q �'e t Beach CA 92660 `Q ,*Lon PORK lF cFc��NTY9 Ca���o LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING '� Connie Brockway,City Clerk City of Huntington Beach q I C. 4�� Office of the City Clerk P.O.Box 190 APR 7 95 Huntington Beach,CA 92648 CL -j C 331 1'I:M': F R W'00524 W 0 T, N .,pv'�24-124-16 Robert- F. Gardiner 0 1004, Ott, 0 FO ING 4pr. 144, J0 n i A * ft'D14C sc 1. LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING 2S 301ION IV931 ONI&31-longnd' UN 30N C11 099Z6 vo tiova tour ah9NI OTZ aTE TOLE nns maapuv Ll LO-9K-�ZO -�zA i MW VO'peee uoj6uijunH e v 06 L x013 'O'd N 910 A110 9t4j jo eoi J pBae uoj6ui3unH jo Aj!0 Nd WO d.d mialo Ap0'A8Mm3oJ8 eiuuoo PUaIC t 7CES _ PUBLIC NOTICES PUBLIC NOTICES, PUBLIC NOTICES NOTICE OF.PlIBLE ,ARINSa BEFORE THE CITY COUNIM OF THE C11Y OF HUNTINGTON BEACH NOTICE ISHEREBY GIVEN that on Monday,April 17,1995,at 7.00 PM in the City Council Chambers,2000 Main Street,Huntington Beach,the City Council will hold a public hearing on the following items: ❑ 1. fix*AMENDMENT NO 92-SMOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PL&N"VILLAGE !CONCEPT"AND DOWNT03NN PARKING MASTER PLAN:AApplicen-City of Huntington Beach-To amend the Downtown Specific Plan and Downtown Parking Master Plan to include the suggested modifications as recommended by the California Coastal Commission at their public heating on March 9, 1995.Location-An area bounded by Goldenwest Street,Pacific Coast Highway and Beach Boulevard(sec map below). Plgnner AsAi eQ:Herb Fauland 00000— PACIFIC- OCEAN \♦ (D ._ ._ —.. — i ♦\ �I CODE AMENDMENT #92-5 R DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN ❑2. GENERAL,PLAN AMENDMENT NO.94-1: &Wic=:City of Huntington Beach•To amend the Land Use Element and Coastal Element of the City's General Plan which includes redesignating approximately 2.5 gross acres of property from Residential-High Density to Commercial-Visitor Serving,and to amend pertinent text and exhibits in the Coastal Element. Location)-An area generally bounded by Sixth Street,Pacific Coast Highway,Eighth Street and the first public alley paralleling Pacific Coast Highway. PNiaaer Assianed:Wayne Carvalho NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the above Item(s)01 is covered by Environmental Impact Report No. a"- . NOTICE IS HEREBY GiVP_N that initial environmental assessments for the above Itcm(012 were processed and completed in accordance with the California Quality Act. 11 was determined that Items 42 would not have any significant environmental effect and,therefore,LV_egative Declaration No.94-7 was approved by the City Council on October 3.1994_ ON PILE• A copy of the proposed requests are on file in the Department of Community Development, 2000 Main Street,Huntington Beach,California 92641i,for inspection by the public. A copy of the staff report will be available to interested parties at the City Clerk's Office after April 13,1995. 4 ALL INTERESTED PERSONS am invited to attend said hearing and express opinions or submit evidence for or against the application(s)as outlined above. If you challenge the City Council's action in court,you may be limited to raising only those lstua you or-someone else raised at the.public heating described in this notice,or in written correspondence delivered to the City at,or prior to,the public hearing. if there are any further questions please call the Planning Division at 536-5271 and refer to the above items. Direct your written coaumunications to the City Clerk Connie Brockway,City Clerk City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street,2nd Floor Huntington Beach,CA 97649(714)536-5227 PROOF OF PUBLICATION STATE OF CALIFORNIA) ) SS. County of Orange ) I am a Citizen of the United States and a resident of the County aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to or interested in the below entitled matter. I am a principal clerk of the HUNTINGTON BEACH INDEPENDENT, a newspaper of general circulation, printed and published in the City of Huntington Beach, County of Orange, State of California, and that attached Notice is a true and complete copy as was printed and published in the Huntington Beach and Fountain Valley issues of said newspaper to wit the issue(s) of: April 6 , 1995 1 declare, under penalty of perjury, that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on April 7 199 5 at Costa Mesa, California. �"Lk- LJ=2� Signature NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on Monday,April 17, 1995,at 7:00 PM in the City Council Chambers, 2000 Main Street,Huntington Beach,the City Council will hold a public hearing on the following items: Is 1. CODE AMENDMENT NO.92-5/DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN"VILLAGE CONCEPT"AND DOWNTOWN PARKING-MASTER PLANS Applicant: City of Huntington Beach-To amend the Downtown Specific Plan and Downtown Parking Master Plan to include the suggested modifications as recommended by the California Coastal Commission.at their public hearing on March 9, 1995. Location-An area bounded by Goldenwest Street,Pacific Coast Highway and Beach Boulevard(see attached map). Planner Assigned:Herb Fauland ❑ 2. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 94-1: Applicant: City of Huntington Beach-To amend the Land Use Element and Coastal Element of the City's General.Plan which includes redesignating approximately 2.5 gross acres of property from Residential-High Density to Commercial-Visitor Serving,and to amend pertinent text and exhibits in the Coastal Element. Location-An area generally bounded by Sixth Street,Pacific Coast Highway,Eighth Street and the first public alley paralleling Pacific Coast Highway. Planner Assigned: Wayne Carvalho NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the above Items 41 is covered by Environmental Impact Report No. 82-2. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that initial environmental assessments for the above Items 42 were processed and completed in accordance with the California Quality Act. It was determined that Item(s)42 would not have any significant environmental effect and,therefore,Negative Declaration No. 94-7 was approved by the City Council on October 3, 1994. ON FILE: A copy of the proposed requests are on file in the Department of Community Development, 2000 Main Street,Huntington Beach, California 92648,for inspection by the public. A copy of the staff report will be available to interested parties at the City Clerk's Office after April 13, 1995. ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to attend said hearing and express opinions or submit evidence for or against the application(s)as outlined above. If you challenge the City Council's action in court,you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice,or in written correspondence delivered to the City at,or prior to,the public hearing. If there are any further questions please call the Planning Division at 536-5271 and refer to the above items. Direct your written communications to the City Clerk. Connie Brockway, City Clerk City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street, 2nd Floor Huntington Beach, CA 92648(714)536-5227 (CCLG0417-1) ✓9 ���h(� fib c� u�/i�> \. t� �� il�f�OCR]GN7Ci0Ll � 3ff1 � C(i �a OGC7� �a OCEANPACIFIC � ^\\ i CODE AMENDMENT #92-5 DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN It Connie Brockway,City Clerk - = - — - _ City of Huntington Beach 1 Office of the City Clerk -. _ `� :f - s - "s�.a�- '.`ti.•� P.O. Box 190 ,x. n g,g e� r�7. t4, + lr3 Huntington Beach,CA 92648 -40 ��r a 2 •4it"`�.1 :�>, xRe_a.�.r'`` \C'"L.fj ,+....• "'i S 7 i 0�`,q i t. n � 024-173-05 r Andrew pan l INGTp 13701 _rch S� + �O \NCOPPOR4JFO `C9� Ive Orl. DeQCn CA 92660 C 9 Z NOUN TY CP LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING Connie Brockway,City Clerk :�..,.,.. .n.� ..�•_� + �, ;iON �� City of Huntington Beach t� Office of the City Clerk '�1 a5 ." P.O. Box 190 _ tir" c--� Huntington Beach,CA 92648 _ _._ _ _ ���i �4 -; w "'a` )4 � s 024--151-09 N,icrael L. Scnowalzer 350 Freeman Avep,J.�n INGTp ;L- raW O` N(,OR POR4 9- FFB 17. j9p9. l+ \ FppUNTY CPS LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING i t• . r i . i i Connie Brockway,City Clerk City of Huntington Beach , P ` Office of the City Clerk P.O. Box 190 ; .. APR 7 95 Huntington Beach,CA 92648 ° "K�� " `" b `L � ( perV.r 7 e R i?Cc 2"1 I ' 1 024-153-07 Gary V. Mul_iaan J 15a0 4—Ma n—&t Huntington ?h CA 926 1NGTpJyd ot-�-: Q 90B P 1�•k,,f,..=NGO 4 c � -�4���"—`� ._� C X Air•, 2 FFB!1, 1909 o-O O CFc©LINTY LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING ll►1+�+�lEl�fl„�l�sil�ll��l�l,1,�Ilsll„�l��lli;itsi;�ltcslli Cortnie Brockway,City Clerk City of Huntington Beach '�� .s t �' d� r^_;° ,11 s P Office of the City Clerk oil i P.O. Box 190 APR 7 95 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 l l 5 ms Ey L Kd b+4� r • -0--6-6-e�3 t� 3 -� l (6 ' Thomas ;✓ads ran a � � oa a V��t� � ,ANT I N G r - - •-�-2�-- F9� -'ur_ti c254 8 O� =NCORPOHA lF� ngton CA •_ . v 2 MADI127 926484017 IA93 04/10/95 FORWARDING TIME EXRIRED _�— MADIGAN 46391 MANITOU DR INDIAN WELLS CA 92210-9041 FFB 1j Igag,a� OQ RETURN TO SENDER , �pONTY CP LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING III���IIIEI„II�III„II���Il��IIIII�IIIIII„IIIi�l�ll�l�llll!I - r Connie Brockway,City Clerk City of Huntington Beach ,�.,._.,w...�,..•..-�.�...x.,�..�.•.�q:._L.�,......�> //�/ ry G ,.. u s r o„n�.-.,;�;;� j Office of the City Clerk '. ;q ` Y:• j,n wa�� C E � r ; AFii 7 .``i.J C""M,-` J 4 � . P.O.Box 190 y' r' 1 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 `"``� U L �•r,� `'i _ :u 4§6^ui a e,!L•i.i;l�:? -s•.: ,,,.v �•�n r �4�� ;�.:: _ � !`�I G ii�2� i [] C"jty'a_.=L''ll d j d iJ I _ 024 -121-23 Paul Y. Chen I N G Tpy 1-&"—W�C e'd a-r-- &t—�.o� (✓i.� �j Alhambra CA 91801 O� \,CORP Rq JJ,o Cl/, 70 �ENDER ', � TU ��ENi-'� FOFWARDIh!,. R; X I �/ [;E 1L% TY P LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLI _ .�..._ t!ti ill lllllil llllllll11l 11lllllllll ii llllli lli!IIIIIIIlilll ilttlllll 1 i l 1 . 3 I + i Connie Brockway,City Clerk .�.....,.. ..,_•«. .v ... r o v City of Huntington Beach jtv ,� �F �;��! _ J PJJf.11;l-�d ,i Office of the City Clerk f J y S . P.O. Box 190 `�*0Tf?/Pjp/1! `• -4; �ro cR �^ r r APR 7 y5 untington Beach,CA 92ti48 ��(i��CyNprRpFR `� i'" _ i --i i Np/FR �✓ � - ._ . . i . vOc1�?4-16 3�-0 2 ma s H 1w d �l� <L�o s�.n�g•e de s®CA�9•a0=6�8� `'��'� INGTp�, I 9 Q .. �UUNTY LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING 111i„11111111111111 Ili 11 fill,1111111,11,111111111111IN111III r • ! Connie Brockway,City Clerk - 1 —> ,� ` y q"'�"�• City of Huntington Beach h Y .. , rr a `t gnu <- f Office of the City Clerk 4 �4<< .`,�.;'u, .. - - ____.. ;•• .- ,, •' I P.O.Box 190 �L APR 7 95— :: pv E" ia;• t�h 1) AF.t" ' Huntington Beach, CA 92648 :. e v �� ref 4s a"a 4a 024-146-15 I F.ndre:a St,- J.• r 3701 Bir St . No. 210 ' INGTpy Netipor` each CA 92660 vVL `FBJ11 - \C�cp` NT I LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING ' Connie Brockway,City Clerk City of Huntington Beach �^1.. Office of the City Clerk - '•�Y ''a ': U P.O. Box 190 � Huntington Beach,CA 92648 k .� t.. r �,,�� »a � AP12 024-173-05 in . W �NTINGTp 3701 �rchpS RPOg4/�y�F9 Ne ort Beach CA 92660 17 ISO o Q �pUN TY CP LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING Connie Brockway,City Clerk - '� City of Huntington Beach 9� r4: terra:3 J = C. Office of the City Clerk NOR 7 y5 `.•� ' - P.O.Box 190 P^o>•R.w z• ;<,z �. �1� n? ., a I <_ --�.'�� y`•_ • � \'1' �..t+ L 3„Fia4at �:'3c:kk t w a! [a,ET: R Huntington Beach,CA 92648 �Gsi_�F ;" 1 024-151-09 O Michael L. Schowalzer 3 5 0 :reeman Ave . Long Beach CA T I N G Tpy ��.�. .•h 17.ISO FppUNTY CPS LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING ll,i,,,.i,l,!!I„I„!►, l,n,,,,,,I!!,!„Ii„�!,!„!l,I,,,I,(I - i i , • I • t ' t Connie Brockway,City Clerk �.....>..,.,.�„x-.-.-.,.�,.....-..�.�.�,.....,..,. .,. �;�G�'(N City of Huntington Beach Office of the City Clerk �. APR 7 95 cW L; P.O.Box 190 �"_� '\'; , _ f Huntington Beach, CA 92648 ° 4"'''� &:`"'' �" f` 3r ( -�v,c"1 e R. y "' r 024-153-07 a Gary V. Miniigan -.5.0.4_Ma n ` Huntington 2h CA 926 ,8--__� o ORP A4, t�[koir. Q LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING Connie Brockway,City Clerk City of Huntington Beach Office of the City Clerk AP11 7 95 P.O. Box 190 n. , Silo Huntington Beach,CA 92648 6 L f Z Thomas d i can 14UPt'ngtOn =h CA 92648 MADI127 926484017 1A93 04/10/95 FORWARDING TIME EXPIRED MADIGAN 46391 MANITOU DR INDIAN WELLS CA 9a210-9041 RETURN TO SENDER cFppUNTY LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING Connie Brockway,City Clerk City of Huntington Beach I U r p Y,L Office of the City Clerk "'-' .0 A Pi P.O. Box 190 1 A ll 7 A L i'6 6 F Huntington Beach,CA 92648 ci:ocrz Y 4 IOJ 024 -121-23 Paul Y. Chen ING Alhambra CA 91801 0 ENDER T EN L. hl- IJ H f1l LF- O R W A R 0 1 R'.0' T LEGAL NOTICE PUBLI 1 0 E.;i III If IIJIIIIIJII 111111 111 fill 11 ~ p NI • IL 1 - , f Connie Brockway,City Clerk �. K ..... ..a _.,.. f o� %V 1 City of Huntington Beach Office of the City Clerk = APR 7 95 ' P.O. Box 190 \�T'EIJP�pr'yr �'"�No�q 1 s N'� '�I' �eL ran r� a 1 i-it F i 1 \s psp` �FpN pRpF ."t z n �is'—A o� b1,e�1 L Huntington Beach,CA 92648 \ UrT h or H , ', t_�,1 E V 4- I xo �pFpC�sl�jroF ,)Fp � c,si ��:, JC��r1F0 � O �4C4 4,RY 41q�� BQr • �IT�UO�F24-163-02 L mas H lw -Los A_nge. ,es—CA90068_ INGTpyA Q 9ycF �FB N TY CPS LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING Iiflttlifttlltf��li��ittl�t�l,I.,tli,t(Itftfiitflitfllt,tfflll i i Connie Brockway,City Clerk ^! \`i�'i oi�er' __--� `^ •-�,�� City of Huntington Beach ��rs K��� rP Office of the City Clerk o d:< <��- �• j _- � P.O. Box 190 .:, r" it „ a:. �!10 AP;; !• Huntington Beach,CA 92648 ..+ 1 p2a-146-15 1 7 Fndre�•a Stuo 3701 Bir St . ro. 210 � . ' INGTpN �'� Nev�*po=` eGch CA 92660 • �. to O� pGONPOH�I ' Q �';-1go%'� \�OQ �CpU LEGAL NOTICE -- - -- PUBLIC HEARING Connie Brockway,City Clerk •;i4 0 ; City of Huntington Beach 4.;,-{y •;,..t�• /,'v` NvF --` _ :( aU:,f;IbE-•�:; : Office o e City Clerk APR 7 JS =� ` i , 1 "'- P.O. Box 190 �w :' Huntington Beach, CA 92648 ` ' ,�,s � ' # , [ n1 E r t R L!F� .-��1 j"r•.,fj f?j 4 < v n i A ' 024 - 21-22 V 4 W. Da id Mello 4825 illard Ave . „ p =,CORPOR41 6F La Ca ada CA 91011 r I — - Z Q / �F9 77, I909'� p LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING till :. 1111,Ii„ rrrm,I I I II,I, Connie Brockway,City Clerk City of Huntington Beach �.."�.��-n��"_ \�i�TON`•� ;. ti �' ��_=-, : v, ' Office of the City Clerk u ���� us �as.nc�i�; n _�_—__ " P.O. Box 190 "CA p} API 7 JS ;_�_ , (� Huntington Beach,CA 92648 ,*a J T C L�:S S &"e ?y "'� 16 A, - 0 2 4-121 0 7 rws.'7, Robert Gardiner ��NTINGTpy 805 W. South Mountain_ Aver...` / 4 5 0 1 O� =NCOPPONq/F (T/. Phoenix AZ 8 k,.,h,, _ .--, f•`: UUNTY �' LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING STATEMENT OF ACTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL Council Chamber, Civic Center Huntington Beach, California Monday, April 17, 1995 A videotape recording of this meeting is on file in the City Clerk's Office. Mayor Leipzig called the regular meetings of the City Council and the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach to order at 5:00 p.m. in Room B-8. CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ROLL CALL PRESENT: Harman, Bauer, Sullivan, Leipzig, Dettloff, Green, Garofalo ABSENT: None (City Council) PUBLIC HEARING - RESOLUTION NO. 6684 - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 94-1 -AREA BOUNDED BY SIXTH STREET - PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY, EIGHTH STREET AND FIRST PUBLIC ALLEY PARALLELING PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY- CODE AMENDMENT NO. 92-5 - DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN "VILLAGE CONCEPT" AND DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN - INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCE NO. 3280 - INCORPORATES CHANGES SUGGESTED BY THE CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION - RESOLUTION NO. 6685 -AGREEMENT AND ACCEPTANCE OF COASTAL COMMISSION'S MODIFICATIONS TO LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM NO. 3-94 -(DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN (440.50) (640.10) (420.85) The Mayor announced that this was the day and hour set for a public hearings to consider the following: APPLICATION NUMBER: General Plan Amendment No. 94-1 APPLICANT: City of Huntington Beach LOCATION: An area generally bounded by Sixth Street, Pacific Coast Highway, Eighth Street and the first public alley paralleling Pacific Coast Highway REQUEST: To amend the Land Use Element and Coastal Element of the City's General Plan which includes redesignating approximately 2.5 gross acres of property from Residential-High Density to Commercial-Visitor Serving and to amend pertinent text and exhibits in the Coastal Element Page 2 - Statement of Action ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Environmental assessments were processed and completed in accordance with the California Quality Act. It was determined that General Plan Amendment No. 94-1 would not have any significant environmental effect and, therefore, Negative Declaration No. 94-7 was approved by the City Council on October 3, 1994. AND APPLICANT NUMBER: Code Amendment No. 92-5 APPLICANT: City of Huntington Beach LOCATION: An area bounded by Goldenwest Street, Pacific Coast Highway and Beach Boulevard REQUEST: To amend the Downtown Specific Plan and Downtown Parking Master Plan to include the suggested modifications as recommended by the California Coastal Commission at their public hearing on March 9, 1995 ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: It was determined that Code Amendment No. 92-5 is covered by Environmental Impact Report No. 82-2 The City Clerk presented for Council adoption Resolution No. 6684 - "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH APPROVING MODIFICATIONS TO THE COASTAL ELEMENT OF THE HUNTINGTON BEACH GENERAL PLAN AS SUGGESTED BY THE CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION (LCP AMENDMENT 3-94)." and Ordinance No. 3280 for Council introduction - "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH AMENDING THE DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN TO INCORPORATE CHANGES SUGGESTED BY THE CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION." A communication from the Director of Community Development was received and distributed to Council transmitting Resolution No. 6685 which indicates agreement and acceptance by the City Council of the suggested modifications recommended by the California Coastal Commission as part of their approval of Local Coastal Program Amendment No. 3-94. A motion as made by Dettloff, seconded by Green, to approve General Plan Amendment No. 94- 1, incorporating the suggested modifications recommended by the California Coastal Commission by adopting Resolution No. 6684. The motion carried by the following roll call vote. AYES: Harman, Bauer, Sullivan, Leipzig, Dettloff, Green, Garofalo NOES: None ABSENT: None Page 3 - Statement of Action A motion was made by Green, seconded by Dettloff, to approve Code Amendment No. 92-5, the Downtown Specific Plan rewrite and Downtown Parking Master Plan incorporating the suggested modifications recommended by the California Coastal Commission based upon the findings outlined in Attachment No. 1 to the Request for Council Action dated April 16, 1995 by adopting Ordinance No. 3280 after reading by title and adopt Resolution No. 6685. The motion carried by the following roll call vote. AYES: Harman, Bauer, Sullivan, Leipzig, Dettloff, Green, Garofalo NOES: None ABSENT: None Mayor Leipzig adjourned the regular meetings of the City Council and the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach. /s/ Connie Brockway City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California ATTEST: /s/ Connie Brockway /s/Victor Leipzig City Clerk/Clerk Mayor STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) County of Orange ) ss: City of Huntington Beach ) I, Connie Brockway, the duly elected City Clerk of the City of Huntington Beach, California, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true and correct Statement of Action of the City Council of said City at their adjourned regular meeting held on the 17th day of April, 1995. Witness my hand and seal of the said City of Huntington Beach this the 20 day of April, 1995. /s/Connie Brockway City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California Byn Deput ity Clerk Connie Brockway,City Clerk City of Huntington Beach ,.,r F�'� y� =, } Office of the City Clerk - \` P.O. Box 190 4�r `7. 4. APR 7 55 Huntington Beach,CA 92648 ;" � L:L A v Zo rx l l r Ni is T E R—� 024-163-10 Beach Resort Inc { St TING 9 a g Tp 222 5th 14untington Bh CA = 2.6 ` Q NCORPOPO flA IFO LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING 1 i IIEIt!!tIII111!tEltlll III tlIEI!lttllli!IIItEIUtIfIiEI!IifIEII ' Connie Brockway,City Clerk Cit Y Huntington of Huntin Beach ` ory \ 5 vl'y cw �.��l.fi. a� F Office of the City Clerk APR 7 P.O. Box190 wr,,rns: Huntington Beach, CA 92648 024-164-14 , INC rpy Resorts Beach 4 d 222 5th St . N f� O =NUIR PORA IF F Huntington Eh CA 92648r {) C/� FFB 17,1909 Q• O !' ppUN TY CPS LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING IItI,EttI,I!IIE!E{ttlit,IE!It{tElt{Ilttlilt!itt,Itl:!IE{!t{tI{ Connie Brockway,City Clerk - "j i City of Huntington Beach ;�r;,r v aiS_ _`•'.' _ _ __ .'tier: ., _ I r_m-'4+� 'C?'ir.i::... . Office of the City Clerk +' a5 Y< �~ ? =__ - _ _ "?' `•o- P.O. Box 190 r A,'R:.7 95 tl"N 4"'�F"i rY°' 8 'F iiL k� `•`� Huntington Beach,CA 92648 024-16\-I Beach crts'"IncINGTp 222 5ttHuntinn 3h CA�-92648 V �: I i Y - - -- "•:a ; < SEAC222: Oti/12/95 �',, RETURN~ TO "aEMDER �,NO FORWARD ,QRDER ON FILE ' 9 - UNABLE :,FORWARD is i 2C �EeV— ao O RETURN � •,SENDER T i F Il 1909. ' I UNTY LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING J Connie Brockway,City Clerk fb y I City of Huntington Beach ;�. ; ros;}.Ist` I Office of the City Clerk d�t^�' ' �' i _- I APR 7 P.O. Box 190 5 :.j F..+ a C� � Huntington Beach,CA 92648 t R'S,j lP L`'Y 0 Z. IVA' 024-162-01 Beach Resorts Inc j 222 5th S�'. ` \� HurtinQton Bn'.CA 92648 + ��pNTINGTpy 1 \NLORPOR4IF 0 Q C' ppUN TY P� LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING IijiljjIl,I.(I III lit Iijj(tJ,I11 Connie Brockway,City Clerk P City of Huntington Beach ` r"`1 i• -- 3 Office of the City Clerk ' w., ' !l - 1 P.O. Box 190 �'. 130 �'R 14 Huntington Beach, CA92648 r.;E 024-146-15 ANDREW S 40 1 Cep I3 INVESTMENT `f INGjpy RCH ST. 1#210 t�� f O� Ng�NPRRAIFO PORT BEACH CA 92660 V _ _ __ ' �. •t. �UUNTY CP LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING ! ss! >s -t3i } Connie Brockway,City Clerk71-y City of Huntington Beach ��I�c — M N, s� Office of the City Clerk 9''ia 5; q t z + hrR 7 s j P.O.Box 190 11 :a Pa —, Huntington Beach,CA 92648 bt_� �s c. >i, �.� .�•�-a "�-f. ._. , _._...- --�._..-vzi Chi �_i �_ 'ti�•:,2,• . ., .. 2 6 15 Beach a sorts Inc 4� ~� t MNTINGjp 222 St St O_ CORPRRq Huntin ton Bh CA E9 .�a,g i i•'• ~='' 1 - - -._--- BEAC222 : ..4244s2b_gs: iN 04/i2/95 i - - - RETUR\J'70'%.GENDER I 9 era = NO FORWARD..QRDER ON ,FILE UNABLE.` O FORWARD `Ee+ 19oyo-� �Q RETURN-'TO'-SENDER LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING I Connie Brockway,City Clerk ,-> ..- . ...... ... ...... -.,..._...,.,, _ _ _ City of Huntington Beach I Office of the City Clerk P.O. Box 190 I Huntington Beach, CA 92648 I� TeAlt a w Sy3� UJa rn�✓ .4ve, � f3�u 9zz,Y t ; f@ 17. 1909.�'� O cFppuNTY - HEARING LEGAL NOTICE PUBLIC t [i 1 1 t f1 ! t t 1 11 1i f ' - I II9t1}itllltli!!i11lllilt113111lIIi1tllllllll!lIIIIII!ltiEllll ,I { Connie Brockway,City Clerk 1 City of Huntington Beach Office of the City Clerk - P.O. BOX 190 Huntington Beach,CA 92648 US n �i Tenant 5908 Warner Ave X' Huntington Beach CA 92649 I 4 �F NCORPOBq rfO 71 \ ` he E ,°'F� AUNTY C LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING I ' II1lttll�}I;#It411li1IMI 1III1111111!11' tIiIIIII III}III}:I Connie Brockway, City Clerk —" City of Huntington Beach Office of the City Clerk ` D C r P.O. Box 190 -�,- 1•j Huntington Beach, CA 92648 ~.� " � ?snfrc�' �=;t: 5y2� UJairvr� •(s 5zl, ING 1 FppUNTY cps 0 LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING i dii�ItEt�l�l��i11�11S�1111f�tt�{��III��1l��i11119I�7itti�l{!I� • ..•,..�..,..-- �..�..T..---r _.._....,..._....__.•—f_^•____.—_ .._..__,.:.��-.,._.....,-_...,._ .^,,, ,.,�:. o .m,.,..: -. ,-. .bra;-;c- ., -..... .. .. ...—.�w:r.... ., ,�Ittriwar• .. 77. nl �'Js'vsA?x rt.'ku � Connie Brockway,City Clerk . City of Huntington Beach . ......-•_......• .,.. ... :, _. ,•.. . —;,, ,: _ Office of the City Clerk - P.O. Box 190 y� ' Huntington y,� �•-> Jrr, {_ T Beach, CA 92648 a J: 4 t ', Nti .. r Dar~ Cz D INGTpy !-tu��t►�9+ah 3ca��C 9tGY9 OR POflgr z_19 Q Y <• ppUNTY ��� LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING f41e211ltlttE71!!•11i�i7l74i{?7lIS9i4i�s!I�tt7it!tfL4�5iii4if�i Connie Brockway,City Clerk J City of Huntington Beach „a �;z:r � , Office of the City Clerk P.O. Box 190 r �`" Huntington Beach,CA 92648 ONT I N G Tp �I U 91-.1 4;n -fv Y% c,& & q V NOORPOR4J 77.1909• `� CF ppUN TY CPS\ LEGAL NOTICE _ PUBLIC HEARING 1 1 ! t1 9 liS�ilil:!lS3�SEi1SS�ttISIS�SS:I�tSSSt�lEiSSSSl36i33iiiitllSi! 94 54J N.-Stribution White: Requesting Department Yellow: Office Control File Pink : Assigned Staff Member REQUEST FOR LEGAL SERVICES FOLLOW-UP MEMORANDUM To: Connie From: Office of the City Attorney Subject: Your Request for Legal Services Date: 8/ 11/94 This will acknowledge receipt of your Request for Legal Services, below listed. Dated: 8/09/94 Type of Legal Service Requested: [ ] Ordinance [ ] Insurance [ ] Resolution [ ] Bonds [ ] Contract/Agreement [ ] Opinion [xx J Other : memo Description: Downtown Specific Plan This Request for Legal Services has been assigned to ART FOLGER for handling. He/she can be reached through extension 5555. The Control Number assigned to this request is: 94-541 Please reference this .number when making any inquiries in regard to this matter. _'hank you. 0673L _ � HCITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH ,el�� .15 Ail -;rcU ORNE" TO: Gail Hutton, City Attorney FROM: Connie Brockway, City Clerk :%��'' SUBJECT: DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN DATE: August 9, 1994 The public hearing was closed on the Downtown Specific Plan on August 1, 1994. The City i Attorney's Office has in the past advised that a decision on a closed hearing shall be continued to a date certain. i The Council referred the Downtown Specific Plan back to staff but did not set a time certain for decision. ✓Please advise the Planning Department as to whether to provide the City Clerk's Office with a new public hearing notice in order for the affected property owners to be notified of the date a certain cision is to be made or legal notice for a new public hearing if required. I would appreciate a Vl�l copy of the Government Code sent in regarding "Need for a certain date to be set for decision on a public hearing land use matter". The Planning Department staff has also called me regarding their concern on this item. I I - - cc: Melanie Fallon, Community Development Director gAcc\cbmem\dsplan HUG-11-1994 11:56 FRnm 1JCI CONSULTANTS INC TO 741557 P.01 TO: MAYOR ',.\40t.)'LT(-)N-PAYrF-RSON, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: DOWNTOWN R14S11JEN1S ASSOCIATION DATE: AUGUST 11, 1-994 RE: OUTDOOR DINING ORDINANCE (INCLUDED IN DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PI-AN) We continue to have concerns over specific items contained in the Outdoor Dining Ordinance language included in the August 1, 1994 Downtown Specific Plan Rewrite, namely: 1. Page 25 (or .31) of 7/20/94 draft, lines 36, 37, 38: Regarding mini-parks, public plazas, or beach areas - these areas are dedicated solely as public open space arid any cornmercial use on them should be prohibited. 2. Page 25 (or .31) of 7/920/94 draft, lines 46 thru 50: Relative to the storage of diiiiiig paraphencalla - this must be clarifed to make certain that this equipment is stored after use (or during use) at the owner's or operator's premises. An example of non-conformance is the storage of tables, chairs, etc. in the adjacent mini park by The Lotigboard. To use public open space for this activity is, unacceptable. Page 28 (oc .34) of 7/20/94 draft, lines 34 thna 41: Rz�Terence is made to prior existing uses and we strongly suggest that an uses on property MUSt obtain a Use, Permit, a License Agreement and a 0 '-—N,A i N- '­-`%`k11',T'_`E AGREENti�NT. This may be intimated, but must be spelled out. We do coot agree with the finial sentence, "No use permit application filing fee shall be required for those uses existing prior to March 21." In that case, what of the License Agreement and Maintenance Agreement. Are there fees applicable to them, or is there only one fee involved? Please clarify this point. in ease consider: a, a rev- r of this Ordinance in one year after adoption, and ow dining on public property. b. eq -11;ng a use fee for outd F:Z S? Thank t\ V, Dian rsterling ,_:o-Chair, DowntovT, Rt sidents Assu-, - - [Orl CL_ Connie Broc --way < ' ity Clerk axed to City for Council distribution) 5-V LO--f TOTAL P.01 VA&Ie '�4 t . 'I !' 1 e� Pagg 21 -Council/Agency Minutes - 10/17/94 (City Council) ORDINANCE NO. 3256 - BOARD AND COMMISSION SERVICE LIMITATION - ADOPTED (640.10) - "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH AMENDING CHAPTER 2.100, SECTION 2.100.060 PERTAINING TO SERVICE LIMITATIONS OF COMMISSIONERS AND BOARD MEMBERS." Introduction approved October 3, 1994. (City Council) ORDINANCE NO. 3257 - TIME LIMITS FOR VARIOUS TYPES OF PAINTED CURBS -ADOPTED (640.10) - "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH AMENDING CHAPTER 10.48 OF THE HUNTINGTON BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO EFFECTIVE TIME PERIODS FOR CURB PARKING RESTRICTIONS." The ordinance allows parking enforcement on a 24-hour per day basis. Introduction approved October 3, 1994. (City Council ORDINANCE NO. 3239 - DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN - "DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS" A PTED (450.30) The City Clerk presented Ordinance No. 3239 for Council adoption - "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH AMENDING THE DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN BY AMENDING SECTION 4.0 THEREOF ENTITLED 'DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS'." The public hearing was held and introduction approved on October 3, 1994. Councilmember Bauer commended the staff member who worked so diligently on this ordinance. A motion was made by Bauer, seconded by Winchell, to adopt Ordinance No. 3239. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Silva, Bauer, Moulton-Patterson, Winchell, Leipzig, Sullivan NOES: None ABSENT: Robitaille ORDINANCES FOR INTRODUCTION On motion by Winchell, second Leipzig, after reading by titles, the following ordinances were introduced by the following roll call vote: AYES: Silva, Bauer, Moulton-Patterson, Winchell, Leipzig, Sullivan NOES: None ABSENT: Robitaille Ordinances Introduced - Public Hearings To Be Scheduled For November 7, 1994 (City Council) ORDINANCE NO. 3259 -GRADING AND EXCAVATION CODE (640.10) - "AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE 17 OF THE HUNTINGTON BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING CHAPTER 17.05 RELATING TO GRADING AND EXCAVATION." 127 Page 8 - Council/Agency Minutes - 10/03/94 (City Council PUBLIC HEARING - CODE AMENDMENT NO. 92-5 - DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN REWRITE "VILLAGE CONCEPT" AND PARKING MASTER PLAN INTRODUCTION ORDINANCE NO. 3239 APPROVED (450.30) The Mayor announced that this was the day and hour set for a public hearing to consider the following: APPLICATION NO.: Code Amendment No. 92-5 - Downtown Specific Plan Code Amendment- "Village Concept" and Downtown Parking Master Plan APPLICANT: City of Huntington Beach LOCATION: An area bounded by Goldenwest Street, Pacific Coast Highway and Beach Boulevard ZONE: Downtown Specific Plan REQUEST: To amend the Downtown Specific Plan for the purpose of scaling down development standards, creating three (3) planning nodes, establishing affordable housing standards and a comprehensive parking management plan. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Covered by the Downtown Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report COASTAL STATUS: Local Coastal Plan Amendment The Planning Director presented a staff report on the history of the Village Concept. Herb Fauland, Community Development Associate Planner, presented a staff report regarding proposed clarification of the wording in Ordinance No. 3239. He stated that staff recommended on Page Four of the ordinance the deletion of the word "rehab" in the definition and use the word "rehabilitation". He stated that staff recommended on Page Eleven of the ordinance a change to the last sentence in the second paragraph from the bottom to read "Any code required parking spaces provided on site shall be credited for any expansion of square footage or intensification of use. All required parking shall be calculated based on the reduced requirements of the Downtown Parking Master Plan." He stated that staff recommended on Page Twenty of the ordinance Section 4.3.01 Permitted Uses (b) be amended to delete "rehabilitation" from the list of uses that require a Conditional Use Permit unless the rehabilitation results in an expansion of existing floor area greater than ten percent (10%). Councilmember Winchell questioned if staff intends to strike the word "rehabilitation" from the list of uses that require a Conditional Use Permit in other districts. Herb Fauland, Associate Planner, responded that the word "rehabilitation"would be stricken from all the districts. He stated that staff recommended on Page Thirty-Four, Section (iii) of the ordinance the wording be amended to read as follows: 82 Page 9 - Council/Agency Minutes - 10/03/94 (iii) Residential Use - Residential uses are allowed only in conjunction with commercial uses in this District. Up to one-third (1/3) of the floor area of projects on parcels smaller than one-half (1/2) block may be devoted to residential uses; projects on one-half(1/2) block or larger parcels, except for projects fronting on Main Street up to two-thirds (2/3) of the floor area may be devoted to residential uses; projects on full block or larger parcels up to one-half (1/2) of the floor area may be devoted to residential uses; provided that residential uses in addition to the following: (Remainder of section not amended) Councilmember Winchell requested that the wording "fronting on Main Street' be changed to "Main Street Frontage". Herb Fauland, Associate Planner, stated that Council directed staff to revert back to the original wording for Districts Seven and Eight regarding building heights, reduction in density from gross acre to net acre, open space and adding transportation center to the list of permitted uses and that those changes have not been incorporated into the ordinance but would be added prior to the second reading of the ordinance. Legal notice as provided to the City Clerk's Office by staff had been published, posted and mailed. No communication or written protests were received on the matter. Mayor Moulton-Patterson declared the public hearing open. A communication was received and distributed to Council from Q. L. Sfreddo received September 29, 1994 in opposition to amending the Downtown Specific Plan. Connie Mandic spoke in support of the approval of'the Downtown Specific Plan with the additions added by Mr. Fauland. She thanked Council for their pro-business attitude and especially Councilmembers Bauer, Winchell and Sullivan who served on the Council Committee. She thanked Melanie Fallon, Community Development Director; Howard Zelefsky, Planning Director; Herb Fauland, Associate Planner, the Community Development Department,_Legal and Administration Departments for creating a level playing field for all businesses. Virginia Bow spoke in opposition to changes to the Downtown Specific Plan relating to Pacific Coast Highway. She stated that she owns an apartment building at Sixteenth Street and Walnut Street and the vacant property next door is zoned commercial. She requested clarification of what type of commercial would be allowed in this area. The Planning Director responded to Ms. Bovy's questions. He stated that he would meet with her to discuss her concerns. In response to Councilmember Silva's question, the City Administrator reported that the Development Agreement for Districts Eight and Nine would need to be amended or re-negotiated. The Planning Director reported that Council changed the open space requirements for that district from twenty-five percent (25%) to thirty percent(30%) and that may or may not have an effect on the commercial portion of the project. He stated that the floor area ratio was changed from three point five (3.5) to three (3). He stated that the effect to the project cannot be determined at this . point because there are no plans that can be reviewed. s Page 10 - Council/Agency Minutes - 10/03/94 The Economic Development Director reported. The City Attorney reported regarding vested rights. There being no one further present to speak on the matter and there being no further protests filed, either oral or written, the hearing was closed by the Mayor. A motion was made by Bauer, seconded by Leipzig, to approve Code Amendment No. 92-5, the Downtown Specific Plan rewrite and Downtown Parking Master Plan based upon the findings outlined as follows and, after reading by title, approve introduction of Ordinance No. 3239 as amended - "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH AMENDING THE DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN BY AMENDING SECTION 4.0 THEREOF ENTITLED "DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS." The motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Bauer, Moulton-Patterson, Winchell, Leipzig, Sullivan NOES; Silva, Robitaille ABSENT: None (City Council) PUBLIC HEARING - RECONSIDERATION OF CITY COUNCIL'S DENIAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 94-10 WITH SPECIAL PERMIT FOR COMPACT PARKING SPACES - INDOOR SWAP MEET - FRAZER-TREMBLAY ENTERPRISES -APPROVED AS AMENDED - (RECONSIDERATION OF AUGUST 1, 1994 COUNCIL DENIAL OF APPEAL TO PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION FILED BY COUNCILMEMBER BAUER) (420.40) The Mayor announced that this was the day and hour set for a public hearing to consider the following: APPLICATION NUMBER: Conditional Use Permit No. 94-10 with Special Permit for Compact Parking _ LOCATION: 5555 McFadden Avenue ZONE: M1-A (Restricted Manufacturing) REQUEST: To reconsider the City Council's denial on August 15, 1994 of a 325 vendor indoor swap meet with indoor entertainment activities including food service with sales of beer and wine, and to reduce the amount of required parking from 2,125 spaces to 1,320 spaces, and a special permit to allow forty-seven (47) three and one half percent (3.5%) of the parking spaces to be compact sized spaces. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Categorically exempt pursuant to Section 15301, Class 1 of the California Environmental Quality Act. COASTAL STATUS: Not Applicable. The Planning Director presented a staff report. 84 1-3t Page 2 - Council/Agency Minutes - 09/12/94 (City Council) PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED OPEN FROM SEPTEMBER 6, 1994 = BUSINESS LICENSE ORDINANCE - SWAP MEETS/SPECIAL EVENTS/SPECIFIC EVENTS/CHARITABLE EVENTS - INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCE NO. 3241 (640.10) The Mayor announced that this was the day and hour set to consider a public hearing continued open from August 2, 1994 to consider proposed business license ordinance related to swap meets. The proposed ordinance set business license fees for the uses as follows: Outdoor swap meets, indoor swap meets under 100,000 feet of total area, and special events $1 per day per booth collectable daily or monthly at the payer's option. Indoor swap meets in excess of 100,000 feet in area $12,000 a month_payable monthly in advance. The estimated increase in revenue is $200,000 a year The City Treasurer presented a staff report. Mayor Moulton-Patterson declared the public hearing open. There being no one present to speak on the matter and there being no protests filed, either oral or written, the hearing was closed by the Mayor. A motion was made by Leipzig, seconded by Robitaille, to after reading by title, approve introduction of Ordinance No. 3241 - "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH AMENDING CHAPTER 5.16 OF THE HUNTINGTON BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO RATES CHARGED TO BUSINESS BY ADDING SWAP MEETS, INDOOR SWAP MEETS, SPECIAL EVENTS, SPECIFIC EVENTS AND CHARITABLE EVENTS." The motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Silva, Bauer, Robitaille, Moulton-Patterson, Winchell, Leipzig, Sullivan NOES: None ABSENT None (City Council) CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING -CONTINUED CLOSED FROM AUGUST 1, 1994 - CODE AMENDMENT NO. 92-5 - DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN CODE AMENDMENT - "VILLAGE CONCEPT" - DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN - INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCE NO. 3239 -APPROVED AS AMENDED (640.10) The Mayor announced that this was the day and hour set for a public hearing that was closed on August 1, 1994 regarding the following: APPLICATION NUMBER: Code Amendment No. 92-5- Downtown Specific Plan Code Amendment- "Village Concept" and Downtown Parking Master Plan APPLICANT: City of Huntington Beach 5 LOCATION: An area bounded by Goldenwest Street, Pacific Coast Highway, Beach Boulevard Page 3 - Council/Agency Minutes - 09/12/94 ZONE: Downtown Specific Plan REQUEST: To amend the Downtown Specific Plan for the purpose of scaling down development standards, creating three (3) planning nodes, establishing affordable housing standards and a comprehensive parking management plan. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Covered by the Downtown Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report COASTAL STATUS: Local Coastal Plan Amendment A communication was received and distributed to Council from Brian Shally, Huntington Beach Company Vice President, dated September 1, 1994 regarding the proposed Code Amendment No. 92-5, Downtown Specific Plan Amendment. The Community Development Director presented a staff report regarding a meeting of the Downtown Subcommittee, staff and the public to review the legislative draft and ordinance on August 5, 1994. She sated that as a result of the meeting, a new matrix of issues was generated for consideration and straw vote action by the City Council. Herb Fauland, Community Development Associate Planner, presented a staff report using slides regarding the process for proceeding with the adoption of the Downtown Specific Plan Code Amendment and reviewed outstanding issues addressed on the matrix. The City Clerk announced a communication received and distributed to Council from Connie Mandic of a matrix on specific plan comments. Straw Vote - Definition of Gross Floor Area -Approved A motion was made by Winchell, seconded by Robitaille, to accept staff's recommendation on regarding the definition of gross floor area on Page Three of Ordinance No. 3239 as follows: "Gross floor area: The total enclosed area of all floors of a building measured to the outside face of the structural members in exterior walls, and including halls, stairways, elevators shafts at each floor level, service and mechanical equipment rooms, and habitable basement or attic areas, but excluding area for vehicle parking and loading." The motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Bauer, Robitaille, Moulton-Patterson, Winchell, Leipzig, Sullivan NOES: Silva ABSENT: None s Page 4 - Council/Agency Minutes - 09/12/94 Straw Vote - Definitions of Street Level and Public Open Space -Approved as Amended A motion was made by Winchell, seconded by Silva, to approve the staff recommendation which affects open space by approving staff's definition of street level on Page Four of Ordinance No. 3239 as follows: "Street level: The elevation measured at the centerline of the public street adjacent to the front setback at a point midway between the two side property lines." An amendment to the motion was made by Winchell, accepted by Sullivan, to amend the motion to add: "as long as direct public access is maintained from street level" as follows: "Public open space: Outdoor or unenclosed area on the ground floor or above floor levels designed and accessible for use by the general public from the street level. Public open space may include one of the following: patios, plazas, balconies, gardens or view areas accessible to the general public, and open air commercial space (open to the street on the first floor, or on at least one side, above the first floor, or open to the sky), the open space requirement can be met anywhere in the development; however, open space provided above the second floor will receive only fifty (50) percent credit toward this requirement. This requirement cannot be met by open areas which are inaccessible to the general public or are contrary to specific requirements of a district." The motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Silva, Bauer, Robitaille, Moulton-Patterson, Winchell, Leipzig, Sullivan NOES: None ABSENT: None Councilmember Silva requested Connie Mandic to speak. Connie Mandic spoke regarding the proposed ten percent(10%) increase limiting the rehabilitation of a building without the need for a Conditional Use Permit. Straw Vote=Definition of Rehabilitation -Approved as Amended A motion was made by Winchell, seconded by Bauer, approved the addition of the definition of rehabilitation on Page Four of Ordinance No. 3239 as amended as follows: "Rehabilitation: The physical repair, preservation, and/or improvement of a building or structure greater than ten percent (10%) expansion of the existing gross floor area and does not increase the building height; or results in the increase of the permitted density." 7 t Page 5 - Council/Agency Minutes - 09/12/94 The motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Silva, Bauer, Robitaille, Moulton-Patterson, Winchell, Leipzig, Sullivan NOES: None ABSENT: None Straw Vote -Amendment to Ordinance No. 3239 - Section 4.2.14 of- Deletion of Demo - Approved as Amended A motion was made by Winchell, seconded by Bauer, to amend Section 4.2.14 on Page Sixteen Ordinance No. 3239 by deleting the word "demo" as follows: "Existing square footage and uses are parked in public parking supply; Demo and rebuild same square footage and uses - no additional parking required. Demo, Expansion or intensification - credit for existing parking: spaces must conform to code and remain on site." The motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Silva, Bauer, Robitaille, Moulton-Patterson, Winchell, Leipzig, Sullivan NOES: None ABSENT: None Straw Vote -Affordable Housing Minimum Unit Size -Approved as Amended A motion was made by Leipzig, seconded by Sullivan, to amend Ordinance No. 3239 Section 4.2.30 Affordable Housing, Minimum Unit Size, on Page Nineteen as follows: "Minimum Unit Size- Studio 400 square feet 1 bedroom 600 square feet 2 bedroom 800 square feet' The motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: --Silva, Bauer, Moulton-Patterson, Winchell, Leipzig, Sullivan NOES: None ABSENT: Robitaille (out of room) Straw Vote -Amendment to Section 4.2.13 Parking -Approved A motion was made by Winchell, seconded by Leipzig, to approve all remaining items on the matrix, approve revisions to Ordinance No. 3239 for first reading at the City Council meeting of October 3, 1994 with clarification on Page Thirteen and Fourteen of the legislative draft (Page Twelve and Thirteen of Ordinance No. 3239) Section 4.2.13 Parking - Commercial first and second paragraph as follows: Q Page 6 - Council/Agency Minutes - 09/12/94 Commercial: (a) Parking for all commercial projects with the area of the Downtown Parking Master Plan shall be consistent with the parking requirements of the Downtown.Parking Master Plan. Districts 1, 2, 4, a portion of 5, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11 shall provide one-hundred (100) percent of the required parking on-site, pursuant to the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. "Parking in Districts 3, a portion of District 5 and 6 shall be provided on-site to the maximum extent feasible, as identified in the Parking Master Plan. The balance of any required parking shall be provided in facilities within walking distance. Any required off-site parking spaces shall be in place prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for any development. All parking for any District or part of a district which is not within the area of the Downtown Parking Master Plan shall provide one-hundred (100) percent of the required parking on-site, pursuant to the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code." The motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Silva, Bauer, Moulton-Patterson, Winchell, Leipzig, Sullivan NOES: None ABSENT: Robitaille (out of room) Clarification of Motion Councilmember Winchell clarified that the mobilehome overlay was removed from District Seven but not removed from any other districts. She clarified that it was not the intent to Council to remove the conservation overlay in any district. In response to Councilmember Bauer's questions, Connie Mandic responded regarding building height. The.Planning Director reported. (City Council) PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED OPEN FROM SEPTEMBER 6, 1994 - SIX MONTH REVIEW- TO REVIEW COMPLIANCE WITH CONDITIONS OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 90-50 - NICCOLE'S RESTAURANT- LIVE ENTERTAINMENT - MAIN AND SIXTH STREETS -APPROVED (420.40) The Mayor announced that this was the day and hour set for a public hearing to consider the following: APPLICATION NUMBER: Conditional Use Permit No. 90-50 (Six Month Review) APPLICANT: Michael Niccole LOCATION: 520 Main Street (Northeasterly Corner of Main Street and Sixth Street) 9 ORDINANCE NO. 3239 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY HUNTINGTON BEACH AMENDING THE DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN BY AMENDING SECTION 4.0 THEREOF ENTITLED "DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS" WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach has previously adopted the Downtown Specific Plan; and Pursuant to the California State Planning and Zoning Law, the Huntington Beach Planning Commission and Huntington Beach City Council have held separate, duly noticed public hearings relative to amending the Downtown Specific Plan, wherein both bodies have carefully considered all information presented at said hearings; and After due consideration of the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission and all other evidence presented, the City Council finds that the aforesaid amendment is proper and consistent with the General Plan, NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach does hereby ordain as follows: SECTION 1. That Section 4.0 of the Downtown Specific Plan, entitled "Development Standards," is hereby amended to read as set forth in the document attached hereto. as Exhibit "A," which document is incorporated by this reference as though fully set forth herein. 1 4\orrd/downtown/09/28/94 SECTION 2. This ordinance shall become effective 30 days after its adoption, or upon certification of the California Coastal Commission, whichever occurs later. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach at a regular meeting thereof held on the 17th day of October , 1994. Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: a AIPMUC <�e City Clerk City ttorney �.sL S-2 3-9� REVIEWED AND APPROVED: INITIATED AND APPROVED: City Admires rator Director of Community Development 2 4\orrd/downtown/09/28/94 3239 Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A Exhibit "A" 4.0 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS 4.0.01 Intent and Purpose The purpose of this document is to provide for orderly development-and improvement within the Downtown Specific Plan. The plan is established to guide the development of the area which is characterized by its unique location, geographic features, land uses and ownership patterns, and should not be regulated by zoning district standards applicable throughout the city. This specific plan will replace the existing zoning with policies, development standards and descriptive maps specifically designed for the downtown area. The specific plan provides for creativity at the individual project level, and at the same time ensures that developments will ultimately combine to create a cohesive community. The provisions of this ordinance shall not apply to Conditional Use Permits processed with Tentative Tract Maps that have been approved prior to the effective date of this ordinance. Building permits shall be issued for such previously approved entitlements if the applications for such building permits are consistent therewith. Only paragraph 4.0 et seq., "Development Standards", shall be certified as part of the Local Coastal Program. 4.0.02 Downtown Specific Plan Boundary The property described herein is included in the Downtown Specific Plan and shall be subject to policies and development standards set forth in this article. Precisely, the Downtown Specific Plan includes the real property described as follows: Beginning at the most northerly corner of Lot 22, Block 122 of the Huntington Beach Seventeenth Street Section Tract, as recorded in Book 4, page 10 of Miscellaneous Maps, records of Orange County, State of California; thence northerly 50 feet approximately to a point, said point being the intersection of the centerlines of Goldenwest Street and Walnut Avenue; said point also being the true point of beginning; thence southwesterly along the centerline of Goldenwest Street and its prolongation to a point on the high tide line of the Pacific Ocean; thence southeasterly along said high tide line to a line parallel with and 72.50 feet northwesterly, measured at right angles, from the southwesterly along said high tide line to a line parallel with and 72.50 feet northwesterly, measured at right angles, from the southwesterly prolongation of the centerline of Main Street; thence southwesterly along said line 1,470 feet approximately to a line parallel with heretofore said high tide line; thence southeasterly along said line 145 feet approximately to a line parallel with and 72.50 feet southeasterly, measured at right angles, from said southwesterly prolongation of the centerline of Main Street; thence northeasterly along said line to the heretofore said high tide line to the prolonged survey centerline of Beach Boulevard; thence northerly along said survey centerline of Beach Boulevard 2800 feet approximately to the south line of Tract 9580, as shown on a map recorded in Book 444, page 31, records of Orange County, State of California; thence westerly along said line 1995 feet approximately to the centerline of Huntington Street; thence northerly along said centerline 1320 feet approximately to the centerline of Atlanta Avenue; thence westerly along said centerline 857 feet approximately to the centerline of Lake Street; thence northerly along said centerline 2352 feet approximately to the centerline of Palm Avenue; thence westerly along said centerline 332 feet approximately to the centerline of Sixth Street; thence southwesterly to the centerline of DTSPNW.DOC 1 DoNvntoivri Spccsc Plan Reviscd 9/20/94 Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A Walnut Avenue; thence northwesterly along said centerline 5547 feet approximately to the true point of beginning. 4.0.03 Organization This section details the development standards for projects in the Specific Plan area. The section includes 1) regulations affecting administration and permitting, 2) general requirements for all projects of a certain size or type, 3) particular requirements for projects within the different Districts and 4) overlays which permit special uses in select areas. 4.0.04 Definitions The following definitions shall apply to the Downtown Specific Plan. Terms not described under this section shall be subject to the definitions contained in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. Beach Area: The ocean side of Pacific Coast Highway including the Bluff Top Park area and the Pier. Bluff Top Park Area: That area of improved beach access bounded on the south by 9th Street continuing north to the dividing line of Bolsa Chica State Beach. Bolsa Chica State Beach: The area seaward of Pacific Coast Highway extending from the Huntington Beach City Pier northwest to Warner Avenue. The portion of this beach from the pier to Goldenwest Street is within the boundary of the Downtown Specific Plan. Build-to-line: A dimension which specifies where the structure must begin. For example, "bull d-to-5'", means that the structure must extend to five feet from the lot line. Common open space: Any part of a lot or parcel unobstructed from the ground upward, excepting architectural features extending no more than thirty (30) inches from the structure and excluding any area of the site devoted to driveways and other parking areas. Conversion: A change in the original use of land or building/structure. Director: The Director of the Department of Community Development. Development: The division of land, or the construction, reconstruction, conversion, structure alteration, relocation or enlargement of any structure. Demolition: The deliberate removal or destruction of the frame or foundation of any portion of a building or structure for the purpose of preparing the site for new construction or other use. Facade: The main face or front of a building. Feasible: Capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, social and technological factors. Floor Area Ratio (FAR): A number which indicates how many square feet of structure can be built on a site, expressed as a multiple of the gross floor area. For example, if a DTSPNW.DOC 2 Downtown Specific Plan Revised 9/20/94 Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A site is 5,000 square feet in net site area and the FAR is 2.0, the square footage of a building cannot exceed 10,000 square feet of gross floor area (2 X 5,000). Fronting: Any lot or portion of a lot which abuts an arterial shall be considered to front on that arterial and shall comply with the required front yard setbacks, whether or not the development on that lot actually takes access from the arterial. Full block: A parcel of property bounded on all sides by public streets. Gross floor area: The total enclosed area of all floors of a building measured to the outside face of the structural members in exterior walls, and including halls, stairways, elevators shafts at each floor level, service and mechanical equipment rooms, and habitable basement or attic areas, but excluding area for vehicle parking and loading. Gross site area: The area within the lot lines of a parcel of land before public streets, alleys, easements or other areas to be dedicated or reserved for public use have been deducted. Half block: A parcel of property bounded on all sides by public streets and/or alleys containing at least one-half(1/2) the net area of the full block. Height: The vertical distance above the highest adjacent street level measured to the highest point of the coping of a flat roof or to the deck line of a mansard roof or the average height of the highest gable of a pitched or hipped roof. See Section 4.2.04. Hotel: A building designed for or occupied as a temporary lodging place which contains guest room units. Mini-Parks: Areas under City ownership used for the purpose of open space, plazas, landscape buffers or public gathering. Net site area: The total horizontal area within the property lines of a parcel of land. All rights-of-way or easements which physically prohibit the surface use of that portion of the property for other than vehicular ingress and egress are excluded. Outdoor dining: An area where a cafe/restaurant provides food service on either public right-of-way, city owned open space, or privately owned open space. Physical obstruction: Things that affect the use of property including but not limited to light standards, trees, parking meters, trash receptacles, traffic signals, signs, benches, phone booths, newspaper stands, bus stops, driveways, pedestrian ramps, and other similar items. Pier: The structure owned by the City that extends from the termination of Main Street at Pacific Coast Highway into the Pacific Ocean 1,966 feet. Pier Plaza: The area adjacent and contiguous to the pier. Private open space: The area adjacent to a dwelling unit which has direct access in the form of a patio or balcony. Public open space: Outdoor or unenclosed area on the ground floor or above floor levels designed and accessible for use by the general public. Public open space may include one of the following: patios, plazas, balconies, gardens or view areas accessible to the general public, and open air commercial space, open to the street on the first floor, or on at least one side, above the first floor, or open to the sky. The open space DTSPNW.DOC 3 Downtown Specific Plan Revised 9/20/94 Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A requirement can be met anywhere in the development; however, open space provided above the second floor will receive only fifty(50) percent credit toward this requirement. This requirement cannot be met by open areas which are inaccessible to the general public or are contrary to specific requirements of a district. Public right-of-way: That property dedicated through acquisition or easement for the public right-of-way or utility purposes which includes the area spanning from the property line on one side of a street to the property line on the other side of a street. Recreational Vehicle: A travel Trailer, pick-up camper or motorized home with or without a mode of power and designed for temporary human habitation for travel or recreational purposes. Rehabilitation: The physical repair, preservation, or improvement of a building or structure. Does not include an expansion of existing floor area greater than ten (10) percent; does not increase the building height; does not result in an increase in permitted density. Residual parcel: A legal lot which does not meet the requirements for a building site within the District in which it is located, and where the abutting sites are already developed. Right-of-Way (ROW): That portion of property which is dedicated or over which an easement is granted for public streets, utilities or alleys. Semi-subterranean parkin: Parking structure which is partially recessed into the development site, and which may or may not support additional structures above (e.g. dwelling units, tennis courts, or parking structures). Setback: A stipulated area adjacent to the lot lines which must be kept free of structures over forty-two (42) inches high. Street level: The elevation measured at the centerline of the public street adjacent to the front setback at a point midway between the two side property lines. Suite Hotel: A building designed for or occupied as a temporary lodging place which contains guest rooms and may contain kitchenettes and a separate living room for each unit. Townlot: The area and parcels bounded by Pacific Coast Highway on the southwest, Goldenwest Street on the northwest, Palm Avenue on the north and northeast, and Sixth Street on the east and southeast. Wetland: Lands within the coastal zone which may be covered periodically or permanently with shallow water and include saltwater marshes, freewater marshes, open or closed brackish water marshes, swamps, mudflats and fens. Ultimate right-of--way: The most lateral edge of the area dedicated for street, utilities or alley purposes. DTSPNW.DOC 4 Downtown Specific Plan Revised 9/20/94 Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A 4.1 ADMINISTRATION 4.1.01 Approvals Required All development within the Downtown Specific Plan shall be subject to one or more of the following, as identified in each district: a Conditional Use Permit , and/or the Design Review Board provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. All physical development shall be required to be reviewed by the Design Review Board prior to processing additional entitlements if required. The Historical Resources Board shall provide recommendations for structures considered to be historically significant. In addition, a Conditional Use Permit shall be required for any residential cooperative subdivision, mixed-use development, or any project which requires a special permit (Section 4.1.02). The Design Review Board, Planning Commission or the City Council shall also consider the following before approving a project: (a) Projects shall be in conformance with the adopted Design Guidelines for the area. (b) Architectural features and general appearance of the proposed development shall enhance the orderly and harmonious development of the area or the community as a whole. (c) Architectural features and complimentary colors shall be incorporated into the design of all exterior surfaces of the buildings in order to create an aesthetically pleasing project. (d) Particular attention shall be given to incorporating signs, including their colors, into the overall design of the entire development in order to achieve uniformity. (e) Vehicular accessways shall be designed with landscaping and building variation to " eliminate an alley-like appearance. 4.1.02 Special Permit The Downtown Specific Plan development standards are designed to encourage developments creating an aesthetically pleasing appearance, enhancing the living environment, and facilitating innovative architectural design and adaptation of the development to the unique surrounding environment. A special permit may not be granted for deviations from maximum density or parking or from requirements of the Conservation Overlay in any district. Nor shall any special permits be granted for deviations from maximum building height in District 1, 2, 4, 10, 11. Special Permits allow for minor deviations from the development regulations of this Specific Plan. Special Permits may be granted at the time of project approval for unique architectural siting or features, including but not limited to site coverage, setbacks, open space and landscaping. Special Permits shall only be allowed when, in the opinion of the Planning Commission, significantly greater benefits from the project can be provided than would occur if all the minimum requirements were met. Some additional benefits which may make a project eligible for approval of Special Permits include: greater open space, greater setbacks, unique or innovative designs, public parking, public open space, and the use of energy conservation or solar technology. The developer may request a Special Permit at the DTSPNWDOC 5 Downtown Specific Plan Revised 9/20/94 Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A same time as the filing of an application for a Conditional Use Permit and both requests shall be heard concurrently. The Planning Commission may approve the Special Permit in whole or in part only upon the finding that the proposed development, in addition to providing greater benefits as required above, will also: (a) Promote better living environments; and (b) Provide better land planning techniques with maximum use of aesthetically pleasing types of architecture, landscaping, site layout and design; and (c) Not be detrimental to the general health, welfare, safety and convenience of the neighborhood or City in general, nor detrimental or injurious to the value of property or improvements of the neighborhood or of the City in general; and (d) Be consistent with objectives of the Downtown Specific Plan in achieving a development adapted to the terrain and compatible with the surrounding environment; and (e) Be consistent with the policies of the Coastal Element of the City's General Plan and the California Coastal Act; and (f) Comply with State and Federal law. 4.1.03 Coastal Permit Developments within the Downtown Specific Plan area will be subject to the requirements pertaining to Coastal Development Permits (CDP), in addition to the other provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, except as modified by this Specific Plan. 4.1.04 Severability If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this title, or any future amendments or additions hereto, is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this title, or any future amendments or additions hereto. The Council hereby declares that it would have adopted these titles and each sentence, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion or any future amendments or additions thereto, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, clauses, phrases, portions or any future amendments or additions thereto may be declared invalid or unconstitutional. 4.1.05 Appeals Decisions by the Director on non-zoning matters may be appealed to the City Administrator; decisions on zoning matters may be appealed to the Planning Commission and City Council. 4.1.06 Huntington Beach Ordinance code. If not specifically addressed in this Specific Plan, the applicable provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code and Huntington Beach Municipal code shall apply. DTSPNW.DOC 6 Downtown Specific Plan Revised 9/20194 Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A 4.2 GENERAL PROVISIONS The general provisions of this article shall apply to all developments within the Downtown Specific Plan area wherever the size or type of development proposed would make such provisions applicable. All development shall comply with all existing standard plans and specifications and all applicable provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance and Municipal Codes. 4.2.01 Permitted Uses. Permitted uses shall be established in each District and shall be required to meet all applicable provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. In addition, the following shall apply: (a) All structures incidental and accessory to a permitted principal use or structure may be erected on any parcel containing a main building provided that such structure(s) shall not exceed fifteen(15) feet in height nor to be closer than ten (10) feet to any other structure on the same parcel and shall conform with all setback requirements of the District. Exception: Parking structures are excluded from this provision. (b) Parcels which, prior to the effective date of this ordinance, had an oil suffix (0,01) and are identified in Figure 4.14, shall retain such suffix in combination with the new zoning designation "Downtown Specific Plan" (see Section 4.14). (c) Parcels which, prior to the effective date of this ordinance, had a Mobile home District (MH), shall retain such designation in combination with the new zoning designations in the 'Downtown Specific Plan" serving as an overlay, for the effected Districts (see Section 4.16). (d) All non conforming uses or structures,or uses which have been abandoned for more than six (6) months, shall be required to meet all applicable provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code in each of the following: Any expansion of floor area greater than ten (10) percent; increase in height; or an increase in the permitted density shall require a conditional use permit and shall be required to comply with all applicable provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. Deviations to parking and density development standards are not allowed. Minor deviations to other development standards shall be subject to special permits. Any change of use, expansion of use, or change in occupant to a use which would require additional off street parking shall provide the required off street parking according to the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code or as required by the Downtown Parking Master Plan. If fifty percent (50%) or more of an existing structure is demolished and reconstructed, the new structure must provide the required off-street parking. The parking may be provided through the payment of in-lieu fees as allowed by the Downtown Specific Plan in-lieu fee parking program. Exception: Any building alteration, rehabilitation or facade improvement which does not exceed ten (10) percent expansion of the existing floor area; does not increase the height; or result in an increase in permitted density. The Design Review Board shall review and approve any proposed exterior modifications. DTSPNW.DOC 7 Downtown Specific Plan Revised 9/20/94 Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A 4.2.02 Minimum Parcel Size. A minimum parcel size shall be established in each District. A waiver of this requirement may be granted by the Director for residual parcels. In addition, the following minimum floor areas shall apply to all residential dwelling units, except affordable units (see Section 4.2.29): Minimum Floor Unit Type Area (Sq. Ft.) Bachelor and single 450 One (1) bedroom 650 Two (2)bedrooms 900 Three (3) bedrooms 1100 Four(4) bedrooms 1300 4.2.03 Maximum Density/Intensi1y. The maximum allowable density and/or intensity (Floor Area Ratio) shall be established in each District. 4.2.04 Maximum Building Height. The maximum allowable building height shall be established in each District. In addition, the following shall apply: (a) An additional ten (10) feet in height will be allowed for roof line treatment, architectural features such as chimneys, solar energy equipment and mechanical devices. In no case may the air space granted for these purposes above the maximum height limit be used as a habitable room. (b) An additional fourteen (14) feet in height may be allowed for elevator equipment. All mechanical devices, except for solar panels, shall be set back and screened so that they cannot be seen from public right-of-ways. 4.2.05 Maximum Site Coverage. The maximum allowable site coverage shall be established in each District. Any part of the site covered by a roof, including covered walkways, patios and carports, shall be included in coverage. Exception: Subterranean or semi-subterranean parking less than forty-two (42) inches in height above the adjacent grade shall be subject to the provisions of Section 4.2.13(b). 4.2.06 Setback (Front ) ardl. The minimum front yard setback shall be established in each District. In addition, the following shall apply: (a) No structure or portion of any structure shall project into or over the public ROW. (b) The minimum front yard setback for parking lots and all parking structures above grade shall be ten (10) feet. Structures below.42 inches in height are not subject to this provision. (c) The minimum front yard setback for subterranean and semi-subterranean parking structures shall be subject to the approval of the Director and the Department of Public Works. The depth of the front yard setback shall be a minimum of five (5) feet. 4.2.07 Setback (Side Yard). The minimum side yard setback shall be established in each District. In addition, the following shall apply: DTSPNW.DOC 8 Downtown Specific Plan Revised 9/20/94 Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A The minimum exterior side yard setback for parking lots and above grade parking structures shall be ten (10) feet. 4.2.08 Setback Rear Yard). The minimum rear yard setback shall be established in each District. 4.2.09 Setback per Story). An.upper story setback shalt be established in each District. 4.2.10 Building Separation. No building shall be closer than ten (10) feet to any other detached building on the same site. 4.2.11 Open Space. A minimum public open space provision will be established in each District. In addition, the following open space requirements shall apply to all residential developments: (a) Common Open Space: All multi-family residential developments shall provide a minimum common open space equal to twenty-five (25) percent of the floor area of each unit with a minimum dimension of twenty (20) feet. Common open space shall be designed so that it enhances the appearance of the project to passers-by. In multiple unit subdivision developments, common areas shall be guaranteed by a restrictive covenant describing the common space and its maintenance and improvement, running with the land for the benefit of residents of the development. The developer shall file with the Department of Community Development for recordation with the final subdivision map, legal documents which will provide for restricting the use of common spaces for the designated purpose, as approved on the final development plan. All lands to be conveyed to the homeowner's association shall be subject to the right of the grantee or grantees to enforce maintenance and improvements of the common space. (b) Private Open Space: All multi-family residential developments shall provide the following private open space. All ground floor units shall be provided with a patio area as set forth below. Minimum Area Min. Dim. Unit Type (Sq. Ft. Bachelor, single or one (1) bedroom 200 10 Two (2)bedrooms 250 10 Three (3) bedrooms 300 10 Four (4) bedrooms 400 10 Units constructed above ground level shall be provided with balconies or sun decks as follows: Minimum Area Min. Dim. Unit Type (Sq. Ft. Ft. Bachelor, single or one 60 6 (1) bedroom Two (2), three (3), or 120 6 four (4) bedrooms Note: Private open space shall be contiguous to the unit and for the exclusive use of the occupants. Private open space shall not be accessible to any dwelling unit except the unit it serves. Private open space shall be physically separated from common areas by a DTSPNW.DOC 9 Downtown Specific Plan Revised 9/20/94 Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A wall or hedge at least forty-two (42) inches in height. The private open space requirement may be satisfied in whole or in part by areas used for outdoor activities which need not be open to the sky but must be open on at least one(1) side. 4.2.12 Multi-block Consolidations. Where consolidations span two (2) or more Districts, the requirements of each District shall apply to that portion of the development. Divisions between Districts shall be the center line of the vacated street. In addition, the following shall apply: (a) Visitor-serving commercial uses must be provided within that portion of the development designated as a visitor-serving District. (b) Commercial uses must be provided on the ground floor along Main Street. 4.2.13 Parkiniz. All developments (except as provided in Section 4.2.29)will be required to meet the minimum off-street parking standards of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code or as required by the Downtown Parking Master Plan. Exception: Affordable housing projects may reduce the required on-site guest parking. The guest parking may be provided on-street or in a public parking facility, subject to a conditional use permit. Commercial: (a) Parking for all commercial projects within the area of the Downtown Parking Master Plan shall be consistent with the parking requirements of the Downtown Parking Master Plan. Districts 1, 2, 4, a portion of 5,7, 8, 9, 10 and 11 shall provide one-hundred (100) percent of the required parking on-site, pursuant to the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. Parking in District 3, a portion of District 5, and District 6 shall be provided on- site to the maximum extent feasible, as identified in the Parking Master Plan. The balance of any required parking shall be provided in facilities within walking distance. Any required off-site parking spaces shall be in place prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for any development. All parking for any portion of a District which is not within the area of the Downtown Parking Master Plan shall provide one-hundred (100) percent of the required parking on-site, pursuant to the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. (b) All off-street uncovered surface parking spaces shall be screened. Screening shall be a maximum of thirty-two (32) inches high as measured from the adjacent parking surface. Screening shall consist of landscaping or landscaping combined with opaque materials, and must be approved by the director. (c) Any commercial business (retail, office, restaurant) which requests to participate in . the in-lieu parking fee program shall submit a conditional use permit application for review and approval. 4.2.14 The Downtown Parking Master Plan The Downtown Parking Master Plan is based on a shared parking concept. Shared parking in effect allows one (1) parking space to serve two (2) or more individual land uses without conflict. Shared parking relies on the variations in the peak parking demand for different uses. In other words, parking demands will fluctuate in relationship to the mix of uses by hour, day of week and season. The proper mix will DTSPNw.DOC 10 Downtown Specific Plan Revised 9/20/94 Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A create an interrelationship among different uses and activities which results in a reduction of the demand for parking. The Downtown core area is centered along the Main Street commercial corridor. This commercial corridor divides into two (2) distinct areas, north and south of Orange. The area which encompasses the Downtown Parking Master Plan is as identified on the area map (Figure 4.1). Area 1 - The area south of Orange Avenue along Main Street provides the greatest amount of public parking opportunities both off-street and on-street. Area 1 will have the greatest number of visitor serving and seasonal commercial uses including year round entertainment. This area will also have the greatest concentration of expanded commercial, restaurant and office uses, and therefore, the majority of the public parking spaces should be provided in this area. Area 2 - The area north of Orange Avenue along Main Street provides limited amounts of public parking opportunities. This area is still part of the Downtown core. However, the commercial uses in Area 2 will cater more to the year round residents, therefore, additional on-street short term parking should be provided. This area will be a mixed use area with a significant amount of residential uses. The amount of commercial and office parking has been reduced. The Downtown Master Plan anticipates a total development scenario of approximately 450,000 to 500,000 square feet of commercial activity. The Master Plan has development thresholds of 100,000 square feet for restaurant, 250,000 square feet for retail, 100,000 square feet for office and 50,000 square feet for miscellaneous development. Area 1 will contain approximately 350,000 to 400,000 square feet with the remaining 50,000 to 100,000 square feet of activity occurring in Area 2. It shall be the responsibility of the Community Development Department to monitor the development square footage per use and parking spaces within the Downtown Parking Master Plan area. An annual review and monitoring report of the Downtown Parking Master Plan shall be prepared by the Department and presented for review by the Planning Commission. The location and type of parking resources available in the Downtown area recognizes that two different and distinct implementation approaches are necessary for each of the areas. The adjusted parking requirement was calculated for both Area 1 and Area 2 (Figure 4.2). Existing building square footage and uses are parked within the public parking supply within the Downtown Parking Master Plan. In the event a property owner demolishes his/her existing building, and rebuilds a new building of equal square footage and use, no additional parking shall be required. Any code required parking spaces provided on- site shall be credited for any expansion of square footage or intensification of use. All required parking shall be calculated based on the reduced requirements of the Downtown Parking Master Plan. Area 1 - In Area 1 the restaurant and retail parking requirement was reduced by thirty- three percent and twenty-five percent respectively. The office requirement by seventy- five percent. In addition, the theater parking requirement was reduced from the existing code requirement of one (1) parking space for every third seat to one (1) parking space for every fifth seat. This reduction is based on surveys conducted by the theater industry. These reductions recognize the time differential and captive market concepts. Expanding commercial activity in this area remains the focus of the Downtown Master Plan, however, no additional parking for new or expanded commercial, restaurant and office uses should be required. The majority of public DTSPNW.DOC I I Downtown Specific Plan Revised 9/20/94 Ord. No.3239 Exhibit A 05/18/94 Downtown Parking Master Plan Codified Parking Requirements New Parking Standard (Reduction Factor) Land Use H.B. Code Area 1 South Area 2 North (Percentage Reduced) (Percentage Reduced) Retail 1:200 1:250 1:400 (25 %) (50 %) Restaurant 1:100 1:150 1:100 (3 3 %) (0 %) Office 1:250 1:1,000 1:500 (75 %) (50 %) Note: At any time it deems necessary, the Planning Commission may require additional on-site parking to meet the parking demands generated by a use or development. Figure 4.2 Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A parking opportunities currently exist in this area and the current parking supply exceeds the parking demand. This parking supply will continue to be adequate provided the total square footage of uses do not exceed the Master Plan projections. The city shall retain the option to purchase property for a public parking facility. Area 2 - In Area 2 the retail and office requirement was reduced by fifty percent. This recognizes that the retail activity will be primarily convenience commercial catering to local residents on short term shopping trips. The office parking requirement reduction is based on the minimal number of office opportunities and the on-site parking. Restaurant uses were not given a reduction factor. Numerous conflicts are created between restaurant and residential uses, therefore, restaurants should be required to provide one hundred percent of their parking requirement on-site. The existing Downtown public parking facilities are not conveniently located for use in this area, thus, a combination of expanded on-street and on-site parking may be necessary for new or expanded commercial uses. However, providing the commercial activity remains primarily service related commercial, the existing supply of on-street and on- site parking should be sufficient for anticipated uses. All future development projects must be carefully reviewed for parking concerns. The mix of commercial and residential activities can justify a parking reduction and additional parking may not be necessary if development does not exceed the Master Plan projections. The city shall retain the option to purchase property for a public parking facility. The Planning Commission or City Council may impose one (1), all, or a combination of the following requirements to ensure that adequate parking is provided for each development which exceeds the development caps based upon entitlement: 1. Require on-site parking for all projects one-half(1/2)'block or greater in size. 2. Require that any parking in-lieu fees be full cost recovery based on the parking requirement for specific uses. However, allow that these fees be paid over an amortization period, with appropriate security provided by the applicant to guarantee payment.. 3. Require valet parking once the maximum build out of restaurant activity has been obtained. 4. Commercial projects greater than 10,000 square feet in size shall be required to submit a parking management plan consistent with the Downtown Parking Master Plan. 5. Require valet and/or remote parking for special events and activities. 6. Require the applicant to provide additional on-site and/or off-site parking for any development. 7. Develop parking options which may generate additional parking for any development. 4.2.15 Landscaping. In addition to City standard landscape plans and specifications, the following shall apply: (a) All setback areas fronting on or visible from an adjacent public street, and all recreation, leisure and open space areas shall be landscaped and permanently maintained in an attractive manner and shall be consistent with the adopted Design Guidelines. DTSPNVJ.DOC 12 Do„ntown Specific Plan Revised 9/20/94 Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A (b) Permanent automatic electric irrigation facilities shall be provided in all landscaped areas. (c) On-site trees shall be provided in all developments as follows: One (1) thirty-six (36) inch box tree for each residential unit or for each 2,500 square feet of gross site area for commercial or office space. Alternatively, the equivalent of thirty-six (36) inch box trees may be provided where feasible (except when palm trees are required). Seventy-five(75) percent of the total requirement shall be thirty-six (36) inch box trees and the remaining twenty-five (25) percent of such requirement may be provided at a ratio of one (1) inch for one (1) inch through the use of twenty-four (24) inch box trees. Additional trees and shrubs shall also be planted to provide a well-balanced landscape environment. Exception: Structures fronting on Main Street, Fifth Street and Third Street, with a required five (5)foot setback shall be exempt from this requirement. (d) A landscape and irrigation plan in conformance with the adopted Design Guidelines shall be subject to approval by the Director and the Department of Public Works prior to the issuance of building permits. (e) All parking lots shall provide a decorative masonry wall or landscaped berm installed in the setback area. All.landscaping shall be installed within the parking lot area, in accordance with the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. Parking structures must screen all street-level parking areas from the public ROW. Such screening must be approved by the Director. The setback area shall be landscaped in accordance with the following guidelines and a landscape plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Director: Where feasible, planting material shall include a minimum three (3) five (5) gallon size shrubs for each seventy-five (75) square feet of landscaped area and at least one (1) thirty-six (36) inch box tree or palm for each one hundred and fifty(150) square feet of landscaped area (except when palm trees are required). The setback area shall be planted with suitable ground cover. The landscaped area shall be provided with an irrigation system which conforms to the standards specified for landscaped medians by the Department of Public Works. All landscaping shall be maintained in a neat and attractive manner. 4.2.16 Street Vacations. The following conditions will apply to City vacation of streets and alleys for consolidation of parcels greater than one block in size: (a) Streets shall be vacated only after the City has analyzed the impacts on circulation patterns and determined that the vacation will not be detrimental. (b) Where streets are to be vacated, the cost of relocating all utilities shall be borne by the developer; the City Council may waive this requirement. DTSPNW.DOC 13 DoNNmtown Specific Plan Revised 9/20/94 Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A (c) Any public parking lost by street vacations must be replaced either on or off site or through in lieu fees. Such parking shall be in addition to required parking for the proposed use. (d) Consolidations that require vacation of a portion of Main Street north of Orange Avenue shall provide a public plaza space that will enhance the Main Street corridor to the pier. The type of facility and its design shall be approved by the City. (e) At the discretion of the City Council, all or portions of Main Street may be used for a pedestrian mall, subject to a public hearing. (f) Any development proposing the vacation of streets intersecting PCH in District 2 and District 3 shall provide a view corridor not less than the width of the former street between Walnut Avenue and PCH. No structures greater than forty-two (42)inches in height shall be allowed within such view corridor. A pedestrian easement ten(10) feet wide shall be provided through the development generally parallel to the vacated street. 4.2.17 Access Ways. The following standards shall apply to all vehicular access ways: All Development: (a) Developments abutting Pacific Coast Highway(PCH)or Main Street shall dedicate sufficient additional land along the alleys parallel to these rights-of-way so that the alleys have an ultimate width of twenty-four (24) feet in the case of commercial or mixed use developments, or twenty(20) feet in the case of residential only developments. No more than one-half(1/2) of the total alley dedication shall be from one(1) side. Access to development shall be permitted from these alleys. Access to development shall not be taken directly from PCH; new automobile curb cuts on this right-of-way are prohibited. Access to developments on Main Street shall be limited to one (1)point of ingress only for developments which have greater than one hundred (100) feet of frontage subject to Public Works design standards. Exception: Developments that are larger than full block consolidations in District 1 are exempt from this provision. (b) All access ways shall be free and clear of any and all structures including but not limited to trash enclosures, utility devices or storage areas. Residential Development: (c) Private access ways shall have a minimum paved width of not less than twenty- eight (28) feet. An additional twelve (12) foot wide travel lane may be required in each direction of traffic flow into the development for a distance of one hundred (100) feet, where an access way intersects a local or arterial public street. (d) Private access ways exceeding one hundred fifty(150) feet in length but less than three hundred (300) feet in length, shall be provided with a turn-around having a minimum radius of thirty-one (31) feet. For those access ways exceeding three hundred (300) feet but less than six hundred (600) feet, there shall be provided a turn-around having a minimum radius of forty (40) feet or an inter-tying loop circulation system. For those access ways exceeding six hundred (600) feet, there shall be provided an inter tying loop circulation system. DTSPNW.DOC 14 Downtown Specific Plan Revised 9/20/94 Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A 4.2.18 Lighting. For developments of more than two (2)units, the developer shall install an on-site lighting system on all vehicular access ways and along major walkways. . Such lighting shall be directed onto driveways and walkways within the development and away from adjacent properties. Lighting shall also be installed within all covered and enclosed parking areas. A lighting plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Director. 4.2.19 Outside Storage Space. Where a proposed residential development does not include a separate attached garage for each dwelling unit, a minimum of one hundred (100) cubic feet of outside storage space shall be provided for each such unit. 4.2.20 Sewer and Water Systems. Sewer and water systems shall be designed to City standards and shall be located underneath streets, alleys or drives. In no case shall individual sewer lines or sewer mains for a dwelling unit be permitted to extend underneath any other dwelling unit. 4.2.21 Signs. All signs shall conform to the provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. Commercial signs in mixed developments shall not be intrusive to residential development or other uses and shall be consistent with the adopted Design Guidelines. (a) The placement of address numbers shall be at a uniform location throughout a development and shall be approved by the Director. (b) When appropriate, the developer shall install on-site street name signs at the intersections of access ways, as approved by the City Engineer. Street name signs shall also be approved by the Director for design and type and shall be consistent with the adopted Design Guidelines. All signs required by this section shall be installed at the approved locations prior to the time the first dwelling unit is occupied. 4.2.22 Refuse Collection Areas. In residential developments, refuse collection areas shall be provided within two hundred (200) feet of the units they are to serve. In all developments, trash areas shall be enclosed or screened with a masonry wall, and shall be situated in order to minimize noise and visual intrusion on adjacent property as well as to eliminate fire hazard to adjacent structures. Residents shall be provided with collection areas that are separate and distinct from the collection area of offices and other commercial activities. 4.2.23 Vehicular Storage. Storage of boats, trailers, recreational vehicles (as defined herein) and other similar vehicles shall be prohibited unless specifically designated areas for the storage of such vehicles are set aside on the final development plan and, in the case of condominium developments, provided for in the association's covenants, conditions, and restrictions. Where such areas are provided, they shall be enclosed and screened from view on a horizontal plane from adjacent areas by a combination of a six (6) foot high masonry wall and permanently maintained landscaping. 4.2.24 Antennas. Please refer to the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance. 4.2.25 Utility Lines-ines. All utility lines shall be undergrounded where possible. 4.2.26 Bus Turnouts. In commercial developments of one half block or more, dedication shall be made for bus turnouts as recommended by O.C.T.A. Any bus turnout so recommended shall be incorporated as part of the development plan. DTSPNW.DOC 15 Downto„n Specific Plan Revised 9/20/94 Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A 4.2.27 Orange County Transit Authority Center. A transit center shall be located within proximity of the downtown area which will provide pedestrians access to the beach and retail services. 4.2.28 Homeowners' or Community Association. All multiple unit subdivision developments shall be approved subject to submission of a legal instrument or instruments setting forth a plan or manner of permanent care and maintenance of open spaces, recreational areas, and communal facilities. No such instrument shall be acceptable until approved by the City Attorney as to legal form and effect, and by the Department of Community Development as to suitability for the proposed use of the open areas. If the common open spaces are to be conveyed to the homeowners' association, the developer shall file a declaration of covenants, to be submitted with the application for approval, that will govern the association. The provisions shall include, but not be limited to, the following: (a) The homeowners' association shall be established prior to the initial sale of the last dwelling units. (b) Membership shall be mandatory for each buyer and any successive buyer. (c) The open space restrictions shall be permanent. 4.2.29 Compliance with certain requirements of the Coastal Zone (CZ) Suffix: All projects shall comply with the following sections of the Coastal Zone Suffix: "Community Facilities"; "Diking, Dredging and Filling"; "Hazards"; "Buffer Requirements"; "Energy"; and "Signs" as identified in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. 4.2.30 Affordable Housinr; Residential projects that offer 50% of the units to persons and households earning between 80-100% of the Orange County Median Income as defined by HUD for a period of 30 years may be eligible for a reduction in the following development standards. Guest Parking - If determined by the Planning Commission that adequate excess public parking is available, the Planning Commission may grant a maximum 100% waiver depending on size and location of project. Common Open Space - Maximum 70% reduction if replaced by private open space. (Roof decks may be used to satisfy a portion of this requirement.) Site Coverage - Maximum 75%. Height - Maximum four (4) stories in any district. Density - The Floor Area Ratio formula may be substituted for units per acre in each district. A maximum 1.0 Floor Area Ratio will apply to affordable projects. Minimum Unit Size - Studio 400 square feet 1 bedroom 600 square feet DTSPNW.DOC 16 Downtown Specific Plan Revised 9/20/94 Ord. No.3239 Exhibit A 2 bedroom 800 square feet It is the intent of these provisions to provide maximum design flexibility while still maintaining high quality design standards in exchange for affordable housing. 4.2.31 School Facilities: A school facilities impact mitigation and reimbursement agreement shall be a condition of approval for any subdivision, tentative tract, or parcel map within the Specific Plan. The agreement shall provide for the adequate mitigation of impacts on the elementary and/or high school district.. It shall provide for adequate funding of school facilities as may be necessary to serve the student population generated by the proposed development. This condition may be waived by the Huntington Beach Planning Commission and will not apply to affordable housing projects as defined in the Specific Plan. 4.2.32 Historic Properties: The Historic Resources Board shall provide to the Design Review Board and Planning Commission recommendations for structures considered to be historically significant as identified in the City's 1989 Historic Survey. 4.2.33 Outdoor dining: Outdoor dining on public or private property may be permitted subject to use permit approval by the Zoning Administrator and compliance with this section. (a) Location and design criteria. Outdoor dining shall conform to the following location and design criteria: (i) The outdoor dining shall be an extension of an existing or proposed eating or drinking establishment on contiguous property. (ii) Outdoor dining located on the sidewalk area of the public right-of-way shall be limited to commercial areas within the Downtown Specific Plan. (iii) Outdoor dining located on the sidewalk area of the public right-of-way of the first block of Main Street and Pacific Coast Highway within District 3 shall provide a minimum ten (10) foot clear passage area or pedestrian access. Outdoor dining located on the sidewalk area of the public right-of-way and all other areas shall provide a minimum eight (8) foot clear passage area for pedestrian access. A wider clear passage area may be required at the discretion of the Zoning Administrator. (iv) A minimum ten (10) foot wide pedestrian walkway shall be provided when located in a mini-park, public plaza or beach area. (v) Outdoor dining located on public property shall be separated from the clear passage area on the public sidewalk and/or pedestrian walkway by a temporary cordon and removed when not in use. (vi) All features including but not limited to tables, chairs, umbrellas, of outdoor dining located on public property shall be removed when not in use. (vii) Outdoor dining on private sidewalk areas shall provide a minimum eight (8) foot clear passage area for pedestrian access or a permanent cordon shall surround the outdoor dining area and a minimum five (5) foot clear passage area shall be provided. DTSPNW.DOC 17 Downtown Specific Plan Revised 9/20/94 Ord. No.3239 Exhibit A (viii) At street intersections, the triangular area formed by measuring 25 feet along the curb lines or the area formed by the extension of the property lines to the curb lines, whichever is more restrictive, shall be clear passage area. (b) Factors to consider. The Zoning Administrator shall consider the following factors regarding the location and the design of the outdoor dining: (i) The width of the sidewalk. (ii) The proximity and location of building entrances. (iii) Existing physical obstructions including, but not limited to signposts, light standards, parking meters, benches, phone booths, newsstands and utilities. (iv) Motor vehicle activity in the adjacent roadway including but not limited to bus stops, truck loading zones, taxi stands, hotel zones, or passenger loading. (v) Pedestrian traffic volumes (vi) Handicapped accessibility. (c) Operating requirements, provisions, and conditions. (i) A License agreement including use fees shall be obtained from the City for outdoor dining located on public property. The License Agreement shall be subject to termination at any time upon a 10 day prior written notice upon determination of the Zoning Administrator that one or more of the conditions or provisions of this section have been violated or that one or more factors listed in Subsection (b) above have changed and the permitted use is no longer compatible with the intended use of the public right-of-way or public property. Termination of a License Agreement shall nullify the use permit. (ii) The applicant shall enter into a Maintenance Agreement with the City for maintenance of all portions of the public property used and approved by the Zoning Administrator for the outdoor dining. Said agreement shall be submitted to and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to. commencement of the use. (iii) All outdoor dining operators shall provide a public liability insurance policy as specified in all current insurance resolutions. Such liability insurance shall be provided in a form acceptable to the City Attorney. The policy shall name the City of Huntington Beach as an additional insured and shall be maintained at all times. (iv) An outdoor dining operator shall not sell to motorists or persons in vehicles. (v) The applicant (or operator) shall pay all fees and deposits required by the Huntington Beach Municipal Code and Ordinance Code, including the fee established for use of public property, prior to operation of the outdoor dining use. (vi) All provisions of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code shall apply. (vii) No alcohol beverages may be served on public property. DTSPNW.DOC 18 Downtown Specific Plan Revised 9/20/94 Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A (viii) The use permit may be transferred upon sale or transfer of the restaurant subject to a written request approved by the Zoning Administrator and the property owner. An amendment to the License Agreement will be required prior to transfer of the use permit for outdoor dining on public property. A use permit transfer or license renewal or amendment may be denied if one or more of the factors listed in Subsection (b) above have changed and the permitted use is no longer compatible with the intended use of the public right-of-way. (d) Parking. Parking shall comply with the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance or the Downtown Parking Master Plan; however, no parking spaces shall be required for the outdoor dining portion of the restaurant if the outdoor dining area does not exceed the following: Total Restaurant Area Outdoor Dining Area 1) 1,200 sq. ft. or less with: Maximum 5 tables and 20 seats 2) greater than 1,200 sq. ft. with: Maximum of 20% of the restaurant area, not to exceed 400 sq. ft. Any outdoor dining area which exceeds these standards shall provide 100% of the required parking for the entire area. (e) Enforcement. Enforcement of this Section shall be by the Community Development Director or his/her designee. Any outdoor dining use within the Downtown Specific Plan that has been established without prior use permit approval must obtain a use permit_and if located on public property, a License Agreement within 90 days following the effective date of this ordinance. No use permit application filling fee shall be required for those uses existing prior to March 21, 1994. DTSPNW.DOC 19 Downtown Specific Plan Rcvised 9/20/94 �s Iw� _ I �l , MIAf�J �1 �� �0 [�' ��lL�] L�J [JIII IIII I�JIII� � �1f � IL�JI� II ;-� � FICAN ] fl[l [� ll�ll� i [�III� IVIflf1�_ ' >> . �L�IIJLIJ� ILIu ]I.",] �I I_I�� n11J��l� II L [III �I1-11.'] �J L� I LIIIII [ II ] �_ � I [�CJ[�-1t �R �LR �1 �_�I I«1J[�ll�i I[�IKP� �� � PACIFIC OCEAN a e DISTRICT 1 DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLA61-11-1 IT 110 00 11 F.10 1-1100 [11 IT 111.] [10 [1] [_11] Pid V_ mz Ash HUNTINGTON BEACH CALIFORNIA IA WAPAR u Ord. No.3239 Exhibit A 4.3 DISTRICT 41: VISITOR-SERVING COMMERCIAL Purpose. This District is limited to three nodes fronting on Pacific Coast Highway (PCH)which are adjacent to medium and high density residential Districts. These nodes provide sites for commercial facilities to serve visitors to the City and State Beaches. The area between Goldenwest and 6th Streets will be primarily medium to high density residential. Residential uses will also be permitted in this District, as long as the necessary visitor-serving uses are included in the development. Boundaries. District#1 includes three nodes: The two blocks from Goldenwest to 21st Streets, between PCH and the midline of the alley; the two blocks from 18th to 16th Streets, between PCH and the midline of the alley; and the block from 9th to 6th between PCH and the midline of the alley. 4.3.01 Permitted Uses. (a) The following list of Visitor-Serving Commercial uses in District No. 1 may be allowed. Other related uses not specified herein may be allowed subject to the approval of the Director. Change of use shall be subject to the approval of the Director. For Example: Art gallery • Bakery • Banks and savings and loans branch offices (no drive-up windows; not to exceed five thousand (5,000) square feet) • Beach, swimming and surfing equipment • Bicycle sales, rental and repair • Boat and marine supplies • Bookstores Clothing stores Delicatessens Drug stores Dry Cleaning Florists Grocery (convenience) Hardware stores Ice cream parlors Laundromats, Laundries Meat or fish markets Newspaper and magazine stores Newsstands Office Outdoor dining pursuant to S.4.2.32 Photographic equipment sales Photographic processing Public Facilities Shoe stores Sporting goods Tourist related public and semipublic buildings, services and facilities Travel agency (b) The following list of Visitor Serving Commercial uses and any new construction, or change of such use in District No. 1 may be allowed subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit. For example: DTSPNW.DOC 20 Downtown Specific Plan Revised 9/20/94 Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A Dancing and/or live entertainment Health and sports clubs Liquor Stores Motels Permanent parking lots and parking structures Residential uses Restaurants Service station (minimum 14,000 square feet of net lot area, subject to the development standards outlined in Section 9220.14 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code) (c) Visitor-serving commercial uses must be a part of all development proposed in this District, with the following minimum requirements: for projects with less than a half-block of frontage, the entire street level must be devoted to visitor-serving uses; for projects with a half-block or more of frontage, either the entire street level, or at least one-third (1/3) of the total floor area must be devoted to visitor- serving commercial uses. (d) Residential uses are allowed only in conjunction with visitor-serving commercial uses. The required visitor-serving commercial portion of any initial construction shall be provided prior to or at the same time as any residential portion. No residential unit shall be occupied until the required commercial portion is completed. Projects which are proposed to be phased must proportionately develop the commercial and residential concurrently. 4:3.02 Minimum Parcel Size. The minimum parcel size for development shall be 10,000 sq. ft. of net site area and one hundred (100) feet of frontage on PCH. 4.3.03 Maximum Density/Intensity. The maximum allowable number of residential dwelling units (du) shall be 1 du/1,742 square feet of net lot area or twenty-five (25) units per net acre. The Floor Area Ratio shall be 1.0 calculated on net acreage. 4.3.04 Maximum Building Height. The maximum building height shall be thirty-five (35) feet and no more than three (3) stories. 4.3.05 Maximum Site Coverage. The maximum site coverage shall be fifty (50) percent of the net site area. 4.3.06 Setback (Front Yard). The minimum front yard setback for all structures exceeding forty-two (42) inches in height shall be twenty-five (25) feet from Pacific Coast Highway right-of-way. This setback may be reduced to twenty (20) feet on up to fifty (50) percent of the frontage, provided that the average setback for total site frontage is not less than twenty-five (25) feet. The setback area shall be limited to landscaping only and shall be designed to be compatible with the Bluff Top Landscaping area located across Pacific Coast Highway. 4.3.07 Setback Side Yard). The minimum aggregate side yard requirements shall be as follows: (a) Interior side yard setback shall be twenty(20) percent of lot frontage total with not less than seven(7) feet on a side. (b) Exterior side yard setback shall be twenty (20) percent of lot frontage total with not less than fifteen (15) feet, from any public ROW. DTSPNW.DOC 21 Do„ntmvn Specific Plan Revised 9/20/94 Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A 4.108 Setback (Rear Yard). The minimum rear yard setback shall be three (3) feet from the rear property line. Structures may also be cantilevered to within three (3) feet of the rear property line. Note: An additional right-of-way dedication will be required to widen the alley to twenty-four (24) feet for mixed use and commercial projects. No more than one-half (1/2) of the total alley dedication shall be from one (1) side. 4.3.09 Setback Upper Story). The covered portion of all stories above the second shall be set back an average of an additional ten(10) feet from the second story facade 4.3.10 Open Space. Public open space and pedestrian access, subject to approval of the Director, may be required for development projects one full block or greater in size; in order to assure a predominantly visitor-serving orientation. DTSPM'V.DOC 22 Downtown Specific Plan Revised 9/20/94 LU 1 Q-2 PICAN iOWA�i.li �II �J[IIYJ �II ' [!fJl_911P � IV1161111I '�IIl�lirllll9lil� lllll � _ � � � __ 1777 1 'lil 'Ii`tllllli � � liifl ! i� � llllli' ! II[) Illi III � II � PACIFIC OCEAN HUNTINGTON BEACH CALIFORNIA � �f PUHwNc oErnnimEryi DISTRICT DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN ' Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A 4.4 DISTRICT 92: RESIDENTIAL Purpose. This District allows residential development exclusively. While allowing higher densities, the District employs graduated height limits and proportional setback requirements to keep the scale of new developments compatible with the existing residential neighborhood. Boundaries. District#2 includes the first block along PCH to Walnut Avenue between Goldenwest Street and 6th Streets except for the area included in District#1. 4.4.01 Permitted Uses. The following residential uses may be allowed in District No. 2: For example: (a) Single Family Detached Dwellings which comply with the development standards of District 2 may be allowed subject to approval of the Design Review Board. All standards within the Downtown Specific Plan, District 2 shall apply to the construction of single-unit dwellings, except as specifically identified below (Resolution No. 5760): (1) Parking requirements shall be as required for single-unit dwellings for the Oldtown/Townlot areas in Article 960. (2) Open space requirements shall be as required for the Oldtown/Townlot areas in Article 913. (3) Maximum building height shall be thirty (30)feet for main dwellings and fifteen (15) feet for detached accessory buildings. In addition, the maximum building height shall be twenty-two (22) feet within twenty-five (25) feet of the front property line. (4) Minimum parcel size shall be as stated in Article 913. (5) The requirements of Section 9130.13 shall apply, including single-unit dwelling design standards. (b) Multi-family housing, apartments, condominiums, single family detached dwellings that do not comply with Subsection (a) above, and stock-cooperatives subject to the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. 4.4.02 Minimum Parcel Size. The minimum parcel size for development shall be twenty-five (25) feet of frontage and 2,500 square foot net size area. 4.4.03 Maximum Density/Intensity. The maximum allowable number of residential dwelling units (du) shall increase as the parcel size increases according to the following: Lot Size (Frontage) Maximum Allowable Density less than 50' 1 du 50' 4 du 5 Pup to full block I du/1,452 sq. ft. of net lot area or 30 units per net acre A maximum floor area ratio of 1.0 shall be permitted for single family residential dwellings. No floor area ratio will apply to multi family dwellings in this district. DTSPNW.DOC 23 Downtown Specific Plan RcN ised 9/20/94 Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A 4.4.04 Maximum Building Height: The maximum building height shall be thirty-five (35)feet and no more than three (3) stories. 4.4.05 Maximum Site Coverage. The maximum site coverage shall be fifty (50) percent of the net site area. 4.4.06 Setback (Front Yard). The minimum front yard setback for all structures exceeding forty-two (42) inches in height shall be as follows: (a) Parcels fronting on PCH, require a minimum setback of twenty-five (25)feet. This setback shall be limited to landscaping only and shall be designed to be compatible with the Bluff Top landscaping located across Pacific Coast Highway. Note: This setback may be reduced by five (5) feet on up to fifty(50) percent of the frontage, provided that the average setback for the total site frontage is not less than twenty-five (25) feet. (b) Parcels fronting all other streets except PCH, require fifteen(15)feet. This setback may be reduced to eight (8) feet on up to fifty(50) percent of the frontage provided that the average setback for the total site frontage is not less than fifteen (15) feet. 4.4.07 Setback (Side Yard. The minimum aggregate side yard requirements shall be as follows: (a) Parcels with one hundred (100) feet or less of frontage require twenty(20) percent of the lot frontage, with not less than three (3) feet on a side. Exterior yards require not less than five(5) feet from a public ROW. Exception: Garages located on a single twenty-five (25) foot wide lot*, will be allowed an exterior yard reduction to not less than three (3) feet from a public ROW. * Note: Twenty-five (25) foot wide lots may have a zero interior side yard setback on one side if. 1) adjacent property is under same ownership and developed at the same time; 2) at least five (5) feet is provided on the opposite side yard of both properties; 3) no portion of a building at a zero lot line is closer than six (6) feet to an adjacent building, if the buildings are not abutting. (b) Parcels with greater than one hundred (100) feet but less than a half block of frontage require twenty(20) percent of the frontage, with not less than seven (7) feet on any interior yard, and not less than fifteen (15) feet for an exterior yard, from a public ROW. (c) Parcels with greater than a half block of frontage require not less than seven (7) feet on any interior yard and not less than fifteen (15) feet for an exterior yard, from a public ROW. 4.4.08 Setback Rear Yard). The minimum rear yard setback shall be as follows: (a) Parcels fronting on PCH require not less than three (3) feet. Note: An additional right-of-way dedication will be required to widen the alley to twenty (20) feet. No more than one-half(1/2) of the total alley dedication shall be from one (1) side. DTSPNW.DOC 24 Do«vntoNvn Specific Plan Revised 9/20/94 Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A (b) Parcels fronting all other streets, except PCH, require not less than seven and one- half(7.5) feet. Structures may be cantilevered into this setback, however, not closer than two and one-half(2.5)feet from the rear property line. 4.4.09 Setback (Upper Stork). The covered portion of all structures above the second shall be setback an average of an additional ten(10) feet from the second story facade. 4.4.10 Open Space: (a) Projects which maintain the twenty-five (25) foot front setback along Pacific Coast Highway shall be allowed to use the front setback area towards common open space. Any encroachments into the twenty-five(25) foot front setback area shall require common open space to be located behind the front setback. (b) No public open space shall be required in this District. 4.4.11 Resource Production Overlay. A portion of District 42 is designated with an Oil Suffix (O, 01). Within this area, all the requirements of the resource production overlay shall apply (see Section 4.14). DTSPNW.DOC 25 Downtowri Specific Plan Revised 9/20/94 Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A PECAN L LL ORANGE OLFVE F-1 d � ` of I l II i i I ;I } � d �� , i � l N j H WALNUT z uj ... ..... • uj mLjH > LLJ z 0 M, (n . u- -------------- PACIFIC COAST HWY. RAC:-,C OC:AN Allkk DISTRICT 3 DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A 4.5 DISTRICT#3: VISITOR-SERVING COMIviERCIAL Purpose. This District is limited to the five blocks fronting on Pacific Coast Highway across from the City pier. The visitor-serving category is broad enough to include many commercial activities which will also serve the needs of the surrounding community, providing an off-season clientele for the District. The plan also allows residential and office uses in this District so long as the required visitor-serving commercial is provided. Large amounts of ground level open space are encouraged in this District to further promote the feeling of openness and to provide additional view opportunities. Boundaries. District#3 includes the area between PCH and Walnut, from 6th to 1 st Street. 4.5.01 Permitted Uses. (a) The following list of uses which establishes a commercial core and which serves as the transition between visitor-serving and year round commercial uses in District No. 3 may be allowed. Other related uses not specified herein may be allowed subject to the approval of the Director. Change of use shall be subject to the approval of the Director. For example: Art gallery Bakeries Banks and savings and loans branch offices (no drive-up windows; not to exceed five thousand (5,000) square feet) Barber, beauty, manicure shops Beach, swimming and surfing equipment Bicycle sales, rental and repair Boat and marine supplies Bookstores Clothing stores Delicatessens . Drug stores Florists Ice cream parlors Newspaper and magazine stores Newsstands Outdoor dining pursuant to S.4.2.32 Photographic equipment sales Photographic processing Shoe stores Sporting goods Tourist related public and semi-public buildings, services and facilities Travel Agency (b) The following list of uses and any new construction, or change of such use in District No. 3 may be allowed subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit. For example: • Dancing and/or live entertainment • Health and sports clubs DTSPNW.DOC 26 Downtown Specific Plan Revised 9/20/94 Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A Hotel and licensed bed and breakfast designed as a commercial establishment Liquor stores Permanent Parking lots and parking structures Restaurants Residential uses Retail sales, outdoor Theaters Note: The ground floor or street level of all buildings in this District shall be devoted to visitor-serving commercial activities. (c) The ground floor or street level of all buildings in this District fronting Main Street and Pacific Coast Highway shall be devoted to visitor-serving commercial activities. (d) Visitor-serving commercial uses must be a part of all development proposed in this District with a minimum requirement that the entire street level, or at least one- third (1/3) of the total floor area be devoted to visitor-serving commercial uses. (e) Residential uses shall only be permitted if the development includes consolidation of a one block or greater area. Note: Residential uses are allowed only in conjunction with visitor-serving commercial uses. Up to one-half(1/2) of the floor area of projects may be devoted to residential uses. (f) The required visitor-serving commercial portion of any project shall be provided prior to or at the same time as any residential portion. No residential unit shall be occupied until the required commercial portion is complete. (g) In the event of a consolidation of a minimum one block area, non-priority (residential) uses may be located in separate structures or on separate portions of the parcel in the context of a planned development, provided no less than one-half of the total floor area permitted is devoted to visitor-serving uses, and provided that substantial public open space and pedestrian access amenities are provided to maintain a predominantly visitor-serving orientation. 4.5.02 Minimum Parcel Size. The minimum parcel size for development shall be 2,500 square feet of net site area and twenty-five (25)feet of frontage. 4.5.03 Maximum Density/Intensity. The maximum intensity of development shall be calculated by floor area ratios (FAR) for this District. The floor area ratio shall apply to the entire project area. Floor area ratios shall be calculated on net acreage. (a) The maximum floor area for developments in this District shall be calculated with the following multiples: Lot Size Maximum FAR less than half block 2.0 one-half block-full block 2.5 full block or greater 3.0 DTSPNW.DOC 27 Downtown Specific Plan Revised 9/20/94 Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A (b) The maximum allowable number of residential dwelling units (du) shall be 1 du/ 1,452 square feet of net lot area or thirty(30) units per net acre. 4.5.04 Maximum Building Height. The maximum building height shall be as follows: Lot Size Height less than full block 3 stories/35 feet full block or greater 4 stories/45 feet 4.5.05 Maximum Site Coverage. No maximum site coverage required. 4.5.06 Setback (Front Yard). The minimum front yard setback for all structures exceeding forty-two (42) inches in height shall be fifteen (15) feet. Exception: Parcels fronting on Fifth and Third Streets may be reduced to five (5)feet. Parcels fronting on Main Street must develop to a build-to-line* five(5) feet from the property line. *Note: The build-to requirement can be satisfied by extending any of the following to five (5) feet of the property line: 1)the facade of the ground floor level; 2) a plaza or patio used for open-air commercial activity; 3) a low-wall or fence (not exceeding forty- two (42) inches in height), planters or other architectural features, which extend along at least fifty(50) percent of the frontage along the lot line; 4)two (2) side walls and second story facade. Note: The following may be permitted in the front yard setback on 5th Street, 3rd Street, Main Street, First Street and PCH: benches, bicycle racks, transparent wind screens and open-air commercial facilities. Note: An additional ROW dedication will be required for parcels fronting on PCH of five (5) feet, for additional parkway and sidewalk; and two and one-half(2-1/2) feet for parcels fronting on Sixth Street. 4.5.07 Setback Side Yard). The minimum aggregate side yard requirements shall be as follows: (a) Parcels fronting on Sixth, Second and Lake Streets require twenty (20) percent of lot frontage, with not less than seven (7) feet for an interior yard and not less than fifteen (15) feet for an exterior yard, from a public ROW. (b) Parcels fronting on Fifth, Main and Third Streets and Pacific Coast Highway require zero for an interior yard. Exterior side yard requirements shall equal the front yard setback for the respective street. 4.5.08 Setback (Rear Yard). The minimum rear yard setback shall be three (3) feet from the rear property line. Structures may also be cantilevered to within three (3) feet of the rear property line. Note: An additional ROW dedication will be required to widen the alley to twenty-four (24) feet. No more than one-half(1/2) of the total alley dedication shall be from one (1) side. 4.5.09 Setback Upper Stogy). Upper story setbacks for this District shall be as follows: DTSPNW.DOC 28 Downtown Specific Plan Revised 9/20/94 Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A (a) Parcels fronting PCH, 6th, 2nd and First Streets: all stories above the second shall be set back an average of twenty-five (25)feet from the ultimate street ROW. Up to fifty(50) percent of the building frontage may be set back fifteen (15) feet from the ROW, providing that the average setback on upper stories is no less than twenty-five (25)feet. (b) Parcels fronting on 5th and 3rd Street: any part of the building facade above the second story shall be set back ten (10) feet from the first story facade. (c) Parcels fronting on Main Street: no building or portion of a building above the second story shall be within ten (10) feet of the build-to line. (d) Structures exceeding thirty-five(35) feet in height: the portion of the structure above 35 feet in height shall be set back a minimum of ten(10)feet from the interior side yard property line. 4.510 Open Space. All development projects within this District shall provide public open space. A minimum of ten (10)percent of the net site area must be public open space. (a) Full block developments on Main Street require public plazas at the corner of PCH and Main Street. These street level public plazas shall be incorporated into the design of the development and approved by the Director. Such plazas shall have the following characteristics: Location: street level corner; one side must face Main Street. Area: not less than one thousand (1,000) square feet excluding public right- of-way. Landscaping: not less than thirty(30) percent of the plaza area should be planted. Paving: all paved areas shall be textured. Visual Feature: plazas must include a sculpture, fountain, information kiosk, pond, display, or similar visual amenity. Public Seating shall be provided. Open Air Commercial: not more than fifty (50) percent of the plaza area may be used for open air commercial uses. DTSPNW.DOC 29 Downtown Specific Plan Revised 9/20/94 Ord. No.3239 Exhibit A I � 1 I` 1 ( II i I � I � � I � PECAN ORANGE 11 1 i� ` I �j I ( it � 1 1( ! � � i > ! OLIVE I fi ( s i I zoo Li Ll WALNT J7— zI 7 i L 117 — IF 1 Lj Z 1 1H 1 ¢ ( 1 Y ! ( �� � � �� �U � � ice: ! iL �. PACIFIC COAST HWY. 1 PACInC OCEAN DISTRICT 4 DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN HVIVIINGTONBEACH PLk'sNINNG T)TVIS1014' Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A 4.6 DISTRICT #4: MIXED-USE,• OFFICE RESIDENTIAL Pu ose. This District flanks the Downtown core area, separating the area along Main Street from the outlying areas which are primarily residential. The purpose of this District is to provide a transition zone between the existing residential areas to the commercial Main Street corridor. Consequently, mixes of office and residential uses are permitted. Boundaries. District#4 includes the half-blocks on the northwest side of the Main Street core area from 6th Street to the alley between 6th and 5th Streets; and from the alley between 3rd and 2nd Streets to the alley between 2nd and Lake Streets, between Walnut and Orange Avenues. 4.6.01 Permitted Uses. (a) The following list of principal uses in District No. 4 may be allowed. Other office- residential related uses not specified herein may be allowed subject to the approval of the Director. Change of use shall be subject to the approval of the Director. For example: • Office Use- professional, general business and non-profit offices. • Outdoor dining pursuant to S.4.2.32 • Commercial Use- Commercial uses which are integrated within and clearly incidental to an office use, shall be permitted provided that it cumulatively does not exceed ten (10) percent of total gross floor areas of the development. Note: Single Family Detached dwellings which comply with the development standards in District 44 shall be subject to the approval of the Design Review Board in lieu of a conditional use permit. (b) The following list of uses and any new construction, or change of such use in District No. 4 may be allowed subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit. For example: • Residential Use - multi-family housing, apartments, condominiums and stock cooperatives. • Mixed-Use -Mixed Residential/Office Use developments shall be permitted provided that residential uses: Be segregated to separate structure or restricted to the second story or above; Not occupy any portion of the same story with non-residential uses, unless they are provided with adequate physical and acoustical separation; Be on contiguous floors within a single structure; Be provided with separate pedestrian ingress and egress; Be provided with secured, designated parking. DTSPNW.DOC 30 Downtown Specific Plan Revised 9/20/94 Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A 4.6.02 Minimum Parcel Size. The minimum parcel size for development shall be twenty-five hundred (2500) square feet and twenty(25) feet of frontage. However, existing lots twenty-five (25) feet in width or greater shall not be subdivided to create smaller parcels. 4.6.03 Maximum Density/Intensity. The maximum intensity of development shall be calculated by Floor Area Ratio (FAR.)for the District. The Floor Area Ratio shall apply to the whole District. The Floor Area Ratio shall be 1.5 calculated on net acreage. Lot Size (Frontage) Maximum Allowable Density Less than 50' 1 du 51' up to full block 1 du/1,452 sq. ft. of net lot area or 30 units per net acre 4.6.04 Maximum Building Height. The maximum building height shall be thirty-five (35)feet - and no more than three (3) stories. 4.6.05 Maximum Site Coverage. The maximum site coverage shall be fifty(50) percent of the net site area. 4.6.06 Setback (Front ) ard). The minimum front yard setback for all structures exceeding forty-two (42) inches in height, shall be fifteen (15) feet. Note: An additional ROW dedication will be required for parcels fronting on Sixth Street, of two and one-half(2-1/2) feet. 4.6.07 Setback (Side Yard). The minimum aggregate side yard requirements shall be as follows: (a) Parcels with one hundred (100) feet or less of frontage require twenty (20) percent of the lot frontage, with not less than three (3) feet on a side. Exterior yards require not less than five (5) feet from a public ROW. Exception: Garages located on a single twenty-five(25) foot wide lot., will be allowed an exterior yard reduction to not less than three (3) feet from a public ROW. * Note: Twenty-five (25) foot wide lots may have a zero interior side yard setback on one side if: 1) adjacent property is under same ownership and developed at the same time; 2) at least five (5) feet is provided on the opposite side yard of both properties; 3) no portion of a building at a zero lot line is closer than six (6) feet to an adjacent building, if the buildings are not abutting. (b) Parcels with greater than one hundred (100) feet but less than a half block of frontage require twenty (20) percent of the frontage, with not less than seven (7) feet on any interior yard, and not less than fifteen (15) feet for an exterior yard, from a public ROW. (c) Parcels with greater than a half block of frontage require not less than seven (7) feet on any interior yard and not less than fifteen (15) feet for an exterior yard, from a public ROW. 4.6.08 Setback (Rear Yard). The minimum rear yard setback shall be three (3) feet from the rear property line. Structures may also be cantilevered to within three (3) feet of the rear property line. DTSPNW.DOC 31 Do-writown Specific Plan Revised 9/20/94 Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A Note: An additional ROW dedication may be required to widen the alley to twenty-four (24) feet). No more than one-half(1/2)of the total alley dedication shall be from one (1) side. 4.6.09 Setback (Upper Story). The covered portions of all stories above the second shall be set back an average of an additional ten (10) feet from the second story facade. 4.6.10 OpenSpace. No public open space shall be required in this District. DTSPNW.DOC 32 Downtown Specific Plan Revised 9/20/94 Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A Q PECAN UH LH ORANGE L=j 'H Lj OLfVE it ........... L WALNUT T z L z2: z Lu L.0 (D z z > 0 lzi Lu LZI u- L I to PACIFIC COAST HWY. DISTRICT 5 DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A 4.7 DISTRICT#5: MIXED-USE.• COMMERCIAL/OFFICE/RESIDENTIAL Pu1pose. This District includes the blocks on either side of and including Main Street, and constitutes the oldest commercial area in the City. The purpose of this District is to re-establish the area as the Downtown for the City by creating a more urban atmosphere, encouraging relatively higher intensity development with viable commercial office and residential uses. View corridors along with height and orientation restrictions in the development requirements of this District are intended to focus development on the Main Street corridor. The Main Street-pier axis is intended to be an active, vital and interesting pedestrian way, intersecting with and complementing the visitor-serving commercial area on PCH and the pier area. The District promotes mixed uses of commercial, office and residential developments. Boundaries. District #5 includes the area from the alley between 6th and 5th Streets to the alley between 3rd and 2nd Streets and the 1st Street frontage (on the northwest side) from Walnut to Orange Avenues. 4.7.01 Permitted Uses. (a) The following list of uses which establishes a commercial core and which serves as the transition between visitor-serving and year round commercial uses in District No. 5 may be allowed. Other commercial/office/residential related uses not specified herein may be allowed subject to the approval of the Director. Change of use shall be subject to the approval of the Director. For Example: Antique stores Art gallery Bakeries Banks and savings and loans branch offices Barber, beauty, manicure shops Beach, swimming and surfing equipment Bicycle sales, rental and repair Boat and marine supplies Bookstores Boutiques Clothing stores Delicatessens Drug stores Dry cleaning Florists Groceries General retail Hardware stores Hobby supplies Ice cream parlors Jewelry stores Laundromats Newsstands Office Supplies Offices Outdoor dining pursuant to S.4.2.32 Photographic equipment sales Photographic processing Shoe repair DTSPN-NV.DOC 33 Downtovm Specific Plan Revised 9/20/94 Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A Shoe stores Sporting goods Stationery stores Tailor shops Travel agency (b) The following list of uses and any new construction, or change of such use in District No. 5 may be allowed subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit. For example: Dancing and/or live entertainment Health and sports clubs Liquor stores Permanent parking lots and parking structures Restaurants Residential uses (c) The street level of all buildings fronting Main Street and 5th Street in this District shall be devoted to commercial activities. (i) Commercial or residential may be permitted on the street level between Olive and Orange Avenue fronting 5th Street and 3rd Street. (d) The following uses may be permitted above the first floor: (i) Commercial Use - all commercial uses allowed on the first floor may be allowed on the second floor. (ii) Office Use - professional, general business and non-profit offices provided that: No sales either wholesale or retail which involve delivery of any goods or material to or from the premises occur. No inventory is kept on the premise other than samples. No processing, manufacturing, storage or repair of merchandise of any kind occurs. (iii) Residential Use- Residential uses are allowed only in conjunction with commercial uses in this District. Up to one-third (1/3) of the floor area of projects on parcels smaller than one-half(1/2)block may be devoted to residential uses; projects on one-half(1/2)block or larger parcels, except projects fronting on Main St., up to two-thirds (2/3) of the floor area may be devoted to residential uses; projects on full block or larger parcels, fronting on Main St., up to one-half(1/2) of the floor area may be devoted to residential uses provided that residential uses in addition to the following: Be segregated to a separate structure or restricted to the second story or above; Not occupy any portion of the same story with non-residential uses, unless they are provided with adequate physical and acoustical separation; Be on contiguous floors within a single structure; DTSPNW.DOC 34 Downtown Specific Plan Revised 9/20/94 Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A Be provided with separate pedestrian ingress and egress; Be provided with secured, designated parking. 4.7.02 Minimum Parcel Size. The minimum parcel size for development shall be twenty-five hundred (2500) square feet and twenty-five(25) feet of frontage. 4.7.03 Maximum Density/Intensity. The maximum intensity of development shall be calculated by floor area ratio (FAR) for this District. The floor area ratio shall apply to the entire project area. Floor area ratios shall be 2.0 calculated on net acreage. (a) The maximum allowable number of residential dwelling units (du) shall be 1 du/1,742 square feet of net lot area or twenty-five (25)units per net acre. 4.7.04 Maximum Building�Height. The maximum building height shall be as follows: Lot Size Frontal Height less than a full block 3 stories/35 feet full block 4 stories/45 feet 4.7.05 Maximum Site Coverage. No maximum site coverage shall be required in this District. 4.7.06 Setback (Front Yard). The minimum front yard setback for all structures exceeding forty-two (42) inches in height shall be fifteen (15) feet. Exception: Parcels fronting on Fifth and Third Streets may be reduced to five (5) feet and parcels fronting on Main Street must develop within five (5) feet of the property line. *Note: The build-to requirement can be satisfied by extending any of the following to five (5) feet of the property line: 1) the facade of the ground floor level; 2) a plaza or patio used for open-air commercial activity; 3) a low-wall or fence (not exceeding forty- two (42) inches in height), planters or other architectural features, which extend along at least fifty (50) percent of the frontage along the lot line; 4) two (2) side walls and second story facade. Note: The following may be permitted in the front yard setback on Fifth Street, Third Street, and Main Street: benches, bicycle racks, transparent wind screens and open-air commercial facilities. 4.7.07 Setback (Side Yard). The minimum side yard requirements shall be as follows: (a) Interior yard requirements shall be zero. (b) Exterior yards require five (5) feet from a public ROW. 4.7.08 Setback (Rear Yard). The minimum rear yard setback shall be three (3) feet from the rear property line. Structures may also be cantilevered to within three (3) feet of the rear property line. Note: An additional ROW dedication will be required to widen the alley to twenty-four (24) feet. No more than one-half(1/2) of the total alley dedication shall be from one (1) side. DTSPNW.DOC 35 Downtown Specific Plan Revised 9/20/94 Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A 4.7.09 Setback a1pper Story). The covered portion of all stories above the second shall be set back an average of an additional ten (10)feet from the second story facade. 4.7.10 Open Space. Parcels within this district having one hundred (100) feet or more of street frontage, shall provide public open space. All non-residential developments shall provide a minimum of ten(10) percent of the net site area as public open space. Exception: Mixed use developments which include residential units, may reduce the public open space to five (5) percent of the net site area. Full block developments on Main Street require public plazas. These street level public plazas shall be incorporated into the design of the development and approved by the Director. Such plazas shall have the following characteristics: Location: street level corner; one side must face Main Street. Area: not less than one thousand (1,000) square feet excluding public right-of- way. Landscaping: not less than thirty(30) percent of the plaza area should be planted. Paving: all paved areas shall be textured. Visual Feature: plaza must include a sculpture, fountain, information kiosk, pond, display, or similar visual amenity. Public Seating shall be provided. Open Air Commercial: not more than fifty(50) percent of the privately owned publicly used plaza area may be used for open air commercial uses. This provision will be subject to the standards outlined in the Carts and Kiosks Ordinance. DTSPNW.DOC 36 Downtown Speck Plan Revised 9/20/94 -1 F AM TENTH ST. NINTH ST {`= D�_ ` Imo_`_.l 0 :--- n rn D K =Fi EIGHTH ST. m 0> SEVENTH ST. L ___ J Li SIXTH ST. . ..... ...... *N- cl) FIFTH Si. ..... In .--� l.- '--- -- - ------ :.. -n MAIN ST. THIRD ST. SECOND ST. 0 M Z 9 rr w FIRST ST. Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A 4.8 DISTRICT #6: MIXED USE, COMMERCIAL/OFFICE/RESIDENTIAL Purpose. This District encompasses the area north of the Downtown core and includes the public library. It is intended to provide a location for neighborhood commercial enterprises to serve surrounding residents, as well as office space, public facilities and residential uses. This mixed use node will anchor the inland end of the Main/Pier corridor. Boundaries. District#6 consists of the blocks located between Sixth Street and Lake Street from Orange Avenue to Palm Avenue. 4.8.01 Permitted Uses. (a) The following list of uses which establishes new neighborhood commercial uses and which cater to year round residents in District No. 6 may be allowed. Other commercial/office/residential related uses not specified herein may be allowed subject to the approval of the Director. Change of use shall be subject to the approval of the Director. For Example: Antique stores Art Gallery Bakeries Banks Barber, beauty, manicure shops Bicycle sales, rental and repair Bookstores Clothing stores Delicatessens Drug stores Dry cleaning Florists Glass shops Groceries • Hardware stores Ice House • Laundromats,laundries Newspaper and magazine stores Newsstands Offices Outdoor dining pursuant to S.4.2.32 Photographic studios Photographic equipment sales Photographic processing Public facilities Shoe repair Shoe stores Sporting goods Tailor shops Travel agency Undertakers (b) The following list of uses and any new construction, or change of such use in District No. 6 may be allowed subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit. For example: DTSPNW.DOC 37 Downto-wn Specific Plan Revised 9/20/94 Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A Dancing and/or live entertainment Health and sports clubs Liquor stores Permanent parking lots and parking structures Residential Uses Restaurants (c) Residential uses are allowed in conjunction with commercial uses and/or separate from commercial uses in this district subject to conditional use permit. Single family dwellings are subject to the Design Review Board process. (d) The frontage on 3rd and Lake Streets between Orange and Palm Avenues may be residential. 4.8.02 Minimum Parcel Size. The minimum parcel size for development shall be two thousand five hundred (2,500) square feet and twenty-five (25) feet of frontage. Existing parcels greater than twenty-five (25)feet in width shall not be subdivided to create 2,500 square foot lots. 4.8.03 Maximum Density/Intensity. The maximum intensity of development shall be calculated by floor area ratio (FAR) for this District. The floor area ratio shall apply to the entire project area. Floor area ratios shall be calculated on net acreage. (a) The maximum allowable number of residential dwelling units shall be 1 du/1,742 square feet net lot area or twenty-five (25)units per net acre. (b) Lot Size Maximum FAR Less than half-block 1.5 Half-block or greater 2.0 4.8.04 Maximum Building Height. The maximum building height shall be as follows: Lot Size (Frontage) Height less than 100' 2 stories/30 feet 100'up to but less than 3 stories/35 feet a full block full block 4 stories/45 feet 4.8.05 Maximum Site Coverage. No maximum site coverage shall be required in this District. 4.8.06 Setback Front Yard). The minimum front yard setback for all structures exceeding forty-two (42) inches in height shall be fifteen (15) feet; Exception: Parcels fronting on Fifth and Third Streets may be reduced to five (5) feet and parcels fronting on Main Street must build to within (5)feet of the property line. *Note: The build-to requirement can be satisfied by extending any of the following to within five (5) feet of the Property line: 1) the facade of the ground floor level; 2) a plaza or patio used for open-air commercial activity; 3) a low-wall or fence (not exceeding forty-two [42] inches in height), planters or other architectural features, which extend along at least fifty(50) percent of the frontage along the lot line; 4) two (2) side walls and second story facade. DTSPNW.DOC 38 Downtown Specific Plan Revised 9/20/94 Ord. No.3239 Exhibit A Note: The following may be permitted in the front yard setback on Fifth Street, Third Street and Main Street: benches, bicycle racks, transparent wind screens and open-air commercial facilities. 4.8.07 Setback Side Yard). The minimum side yard requirements shall be as follows: (a) Interior yard requirements, for residential development, shall be ten (10) feet; non residential may be reduced to zero. (b) Exterior yards require not less than fifteen(15)feet, from a public ROW. 4.8.08 Setback (Rear Yard). The minimum rear yard setback shall be three(3) feet from the rear property line. Structures may also be cantilevered to within three (3)feet of the rear property line. Note: An additional ROW dedication will be required to widen the alley to twenty-four (24)feet. No more than one-half(1/2) of the total alley dedication shall be from one (1) side. 4.8.09 Setback(Unner Stoa). The covered portion of all stories above the second shall be setback an average of an additional ten (10)feet from the second story facade. 4.8.10 Open Space. Parcels within this District having one hundred (100) feet or more of street frontage, shall provide public open space. All non-residential developments shall provide a minimum of five percent (5%) of the net site area as public open space on the street level, or above a semi-subterranean parking structure. Access to the public space shall be provided from the street level. Mixed use developments which include residential units, shall also provide public open space to five (5) percent of the net site area. Full block developments on Main Street require public plazas. These street level public plazas shall be incorporated into the design of the development and approved by the Director. DTSPNW.DOC 39 DoNvntown Specific Plan Revised 9/20/94 OUVF_ 3 p W \ t_JL 0 C __[1 I _ u _ I - - C C_ (� l O. mz HUNTINGTON BEACH CALIFORNIA s° � � PLANNING DEPARTMENT DISTRICT 7 DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PL.AI�o Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A 4.9 DISTRICT #7: VISITOR-SERVING COMMERCIAL Purpose. This District extends southeast of the Downtown core adjacent to Pacific Coast Highway. The principal purpose of this District is to provide commercial facilities to serve seasonal visitors to the beaches as well as to serve local residents on a year round basis. This District also provides a continuous commercial link between the Downtown and the visitor-commercial/recreation District near Beach Boulevard. Boundaries. District #7 extends from First Street to Huntington Avenue between PCH and the proposed Walnut Avenue extension. 4.9.01 Permitted Uses. (a) The following list of Visitor-Serving Commercial uses in District No. 7 may be allowed. Other related uses not specified herein may be allowed subject to the approval of the Director. Change of use shall be subject to the approval of the Director. For example: Art gallery Bakeries Banks and savings and loans branch offices (not to exceed five-thousand (5,000) square feet) Beach, swimming and surfing equipment Bicycle sales, rental and repair Boat and marine supplies Bookstores Clothing stores Delicatessens Florists Groceries (convenience) Ice cream parlors Laundromats, laundries Meat or fish markets Newspaper and magazine stores Newsstands Outdoor dining pursuant to S.4.2.32 Photographic equipment sales Photographic processing Professional Office (not to exceed fifty [50] percent of total floor area) Public Transportation Center Shoe stores Sporting goods Tourist related public and semi-public buildings, services and facilities Travel agency Note: Visitor-serving commercial uses must be a part of all development proposals in this District, with a minimum requirement that the entire street level be devoted to Visitor-Serving Commercial Uses. (b) The following list of uses and any new construction, or change of such use in District No. 7 may be allowed subject to the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. For example: Automobile service stations Dancing and/or live entertainment Health and sports clubs DTSPNW.DOC 40 Downtown Specific Plan Revised 9/20/94 Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A Hotels and motels Liquor stores Permanent parking lots and parking structures Restaurants Taverns Theaters 4.9.02 Minimum Parcel Size. No minimum parcel size shall be required for this District. However, prior to the approval of any development, a master site plan for the entire District shall be approved by the Planning Commission. Development which is in conformance with the site plan may then be permitted. 4.9.03 Maximum Density/Intensity. (a) The maximum intensity of development shall be calculated by Floor Area Ratio (FAR) for the District. The floor area ratio shall apply to the whole District. The floor area ratio shall be 3.0 calculated on net acreage. 4.9.04 Maximum Building Heiszht. The maximum building height shall be eight (8) stories. 4.9.05 Maximum Site Coverage. The maximum site coverage shall be fifty(50) percent of the net site area. 4.9.06 Setback Front Yard). The minimum front yard setback for all structures exceeding forty-two (42) inches in height shall be fifty (50)feet from PCH. 4.9.07 Setback (Side Yard). The minimum exterior side yard requirement shall be twenty (20) feet. 4.9.08 Setback (Rear) ardl. The minimum rear yard setback shall be twenty(20) feet from the proposed Walnut Avenue extension. Note: An additional ROW dedication will be required to provide for the Walnut Avenue extension. 4.9.09 Setback (Upper Storv). No upper story setback shall be required in this District. 4.9.10 Open Space. Public open space and/or pedestrian access shall be required for development projects in order to assure a predominantly visitor-serving orientation. 4.9.11 Corridor Dedication. Development in District #7 shall require the dedication of a twenty (20)foot corridor between Atlanta Avenue and PCH for public access between the southern end of the Pacific Electric ROW and PCH. This requirement may be waived if an alternative is provided or if the corridor is deemed unnecessary by the City. Any proposal for an alternative must be approved by the Planning Commission. DTSPNW.DOC 41 Downtown Specific Plan Revised 9/20/94 � z .. z ;:::•i,z;ar::;:;.:::;';i;:;::;;s;'::;::;J:::: � ir`i::::Ei::is<' ;isi,'.:.`:::'::;.Cj.�;:;;,;: :...:, � , V •• x z n O G i s1i:::< ,'ii 1:i::;:iii;•r.:: `iii;S ;¢i`i: \ .;::.>'i �'i i°'?'.;..c.:_,::..:r;: �� - F1 n- I PACIFIC COAsr 11 N ___---- - O 1 Q m HUNTINGTON BEACH CALIFORNIA ? z° PLANNING DEPARTMENT DISTRICT 8 DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN DfO Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A 4.10 DISTRICT #8: -HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL Purpose. This District is intended to allow high density residential uses. New residential development will provide a population base to help support the commercial and office uses in the Downtown area. Boundaries. District#8 includes two consolidated parcels; one parcel is bounded on the north by Atlanta Avenue, on the east by Huntington Street, on the south by the proposed Walnut Extension and on the west by Lake Street. The second includes the area north of the proposed Walnut Avenue extension between Huntington Street and Beach Boulevard. 4.10.01 Permitted Uses. (a) The following list of uses and any new construction may be allowed in District No. 8 subject to the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. For example: Permanently attached residential uses; including multi-family housing, condominiums, stock-cooperatives or apartments. Public transportation center. 4.10.02 Minimum Parcel Size. No minimum parcel size shall be required in this District. However, prior to approval of any development, a conceptual plan for Sub-area a or Sub-area b shall be approved by the Planning Commission. Development which is in conformance with the site plan may then be permitted. 4.10.03 Maximum Density/Intensity. The maximum allowable number of residential dwelling units shall be 1 du/ 1,452 square feet of net lot area or thirty (30) units per net acre. 4.10.04 Maximum Buildiniz Height. The maximum building height shall be fifty (50) feet. 4.10.05 Maximum Site Coveraee. The maximum site coverage shall be fifty(50) percent of net site area. 4.10.06 Setback(.Front Yard). The minimum front yard setback for all structures exceeding forty-two (42) inches in height shall be twenty (20) feet. Note: An additional ROW dedication will be required to provide for the Walnut Avenue extension. 4.10.07 Setback Side Yard).. The minimum exterior side yard requirement shall be twenty (20) feet. Exception: The minimum exterior yard requirement from Beach Boulevard shall be twenty-five (25) feet. 4.10.08 Setback (Rear Yard). The minimum rear yard setback shall be twenty (20) feet. 4.10.09 Setback (Upper Stow). That portion of structures which exceed thirty-five (35) feet in height shall be set back a minimum of one hundred (100) feet from the northern exterior property line. 4.10.10 Open Space. No public open space shall be required in this District. DTSPNW.DOC 42 DowntoNNm Speck Plan Revised 9/20/94 Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A 4.10.11 Corridor Dedication. Development in District#8 shall require the dedication of a twenty(20) foot corridor between Atlanta Avenue and PCH for public access between the southern end of the Pacific Electric ROW and PCH. This requirement may be waived if the corridor is deemed unnecessary by the City. Any proposal for an alternative must be approved by the Planning Commission. 4.10.12 Resource Production Overlay. A portion of District#8 is designated with an oil suffix (0,01). Within this area all the requirements of the Resource Production Overlay shall apply(see Section 4.14). 4.10.13 Conservation Overlay A portion of District#8 has been designated with a conservation overlay. Within this area all requirements of the Conservation Overlay shall apply(see Section 4.15). DTSPNW.DOC 43 Downtown Specific Plan Revised 9/20/94 D i O�y F-1 E OUVE _ N N Z n F F T Z r Z� _Z F = Q .. VYALNV� aopq——_ ............ PACIFIC COAST FIW1! O a HUNTINGTON BEACH CALIFORNIA mZ DISTRICT 9 DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLA ?IQ w PLANNING DEPARTMENT ® D ^�r Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A 4.11 DISTRICT 49: COMMERCIAL/RECREATION Purpose. The purpose of this District is to encourage large, coordinated development that is beach-oriented and open to the public for both commercial and recreational purposes. Boundaries. District#9 is bounded by PCH on the south, Beach Boulevard on the east, Huntington Street on the west, and on the north by the proposed Walnut Avenue extension. 4.11.01 Permitted Uses. (a) The following list of commercial recreation uses in District No. 9 may be allowed. Other related uses not specified herein may be allowed subject to the approval of the Director. A change of use shall be subject to the approval of the Director. For example: Retail sales Tourist related uses Outdoor dining pursuant to S.4.2.32 (b) The following list of uses and any new construction, or change of such use in District No. 9 may be allowed subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit. For example: Dancing and/or Live entertainment Hotels, motels Recreational facilities Restaurants 4.11.02 Minimum Parcel Size. No minimum parcel-size shall be required for this District. However, prior to approval of a Conditional Use Permit by the Planning Commission for any development, a master site plan for the entire District shall be approved by the Planning Commission. Development which is in conformance with the site plan may then be permitted. 4.11.03 Maximum Density/Intensi y. The maximum intensity of development shall be calculated by floor area ratio (FAR) for this District. The floor area ratio shall apply to the entire project area. Floor area ratios shall be calculated on net acreage. (a) The maximum floor area for developments in this District shall be calculated with a multiple of 3.0. 4.11.04 Maximum Building Height. No maximum building height shall be required. 4.11.05 Maximum Site Coverage. The maximum site coverage shall be thirty-five (35) percent of the net site area. Note: A maximum of twenty-five (25) percent of the net site area can be used for parking and vehicular accessways. 4.11.06 Setback Front Yard). The minimum front yard setback for all structures exceeding forty-two (42) inches in height shall be fifty(50) feet, from PCH and Beach Boulevard. 4.11.07 Setback Side Yard). The minimum exterior side yard requirement shall be twenty (20) feet. DTSPNW.DOC 44 Downtown Specific Plan Revised 9/20/94 Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A Exception: The minimum exterior yard requirement from Beach Boulevard shall be fifty (50) feet. 4.11.08 Setback (Rear Yard). The minimum rear yard setback shall be twenty(20) feet. Note: An additional ROW dedication will be required to provide for the Walnut Avenue extension. 4.11.09 Setback(Upper Stor). No upper story setback shall be required. 4.11.10 Open Space. Development projects within this District shall provide public open space. A minimum of twenty-five (25) percent of the net site area must be provided for such a purpose. This area shall be available for public or semi-public uses for recreational purposes. Open space must have minimum dimensions of twenty-five(25)feet in each direction . Paved areas devoted to streets, driveways and parking areas may not be counted toward this requirement. A maximum of fifteen (15) percent of the required twenty-five (25) percent may be enclosed recreation space such as gyms, handball courts, health clubs, interpretive centers or similar facilities. A fee may be imposed for the use of such facilities. 4.11.11 Pedestrian Over amass. A pedestrian overpass may be required to connect the development in this District to the City Beach, as a condition of approval for any new development on, or further subdivision of, parcels within the District. The City may waive this requirement if the City determines that overpasses are unnecessary or impractical considering the type and design of new developments. 4.11.12 Mobile home District. A portion of District#9 is zoned for mobile home use. Within this mobile home area, the provisions of the Mobile home District of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code shall apply (see Section 4.16). DTSPNW.DOC 45 Downtovm Specific Plan Revised 9/20/94 D O•d O O fJ y O A <�1 %'Ci \ VAR- O / OUVE �r W �i (4 a u Z g WAINU� 1 _ .D a ............... -! PACIFIC comer►„�,� - -�_- ..... .. .... .::....... ..........:.:.:..:...:.:::.... .. 0 a K z HUNTINGTON BEACH CALIFORNIA DISTRICT 10 �o PLANNING DEPARTMENT D O WN TO DOWNTOWN N SPECIFIC PLAN D o Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A 4.12 DISTRICT #10: PIER-RELATED COMMERCIAL Purpose. This District is intended to provide for commercial uses on and alongside the pier which will enhance and expand the public's use and enjoyment of this area. Uses are encouraged which capitalize on the views available from the pier and the unique recreational or educational opportunities it affords. At the same time, care must be exercised to insure that the major portion of the pier will remain accessible to the public at no charge, for strolling, fishing or observation. Boundaries. Shall be consistent with the Coastal Element of the General Plan. 4.12.01 Permitted Uses. (a) The following list of pier related commercial uses in District No.-10 may be allowed. Other related uses not specified herein may be allowed subject to the approval of the Director. A change of use shall be subject to the approval of the Director. For example: Bait and tackle shops Beach rentals Retail sales (beach-related) Outdoor dining pursuant to S.4.2.32 (b) The following list of uses and any new construction, or change of such use in District No. 10 may be allowed subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit. For example: Aquariums Commercial uses or public recreation facilities (beach-related) Museums Parking lots that will not result in the loss of recreational sand area. Tiered parking is permitted within the Downtown Specific Plan area on existing lots seaward of Pacific Coast Highway provided the parking is designed so that the top of the structures including walls, etc., are located a minimum of one foot below the maximum height of the adjacent bluff. Restaurants (including fast food with take out windows) Note: Only parking uses are permitted in this District northwest of Sixth Street. 4.12.02 Minimum Parcel Size. No minimum parcel size shall be required in this District. 4.12.03 Maximum Density/Intensity. No maximum density or intensity requirement shall be applied in this District. 4.12.04 Maximum Height. The maximum building heights shall be twenty-five (25) feet and no more than two (2) stories above the pier level. Exception: The maximum building height on the pier(excluding the end of the pier cafe) and northwest of the pier shall be one (1) story. No maximum building height shall be required for lifeguard towers or other facilities necessary for public safety. No parking surface or structure shall exceed the minimum of one foot below the maximum height of the adjacent bluff. 4.12.05 Maximum Site Coverage. No maximum site coverage shall be required. DTSPNW.DOC 46 Downtm%m Specific Plan Revised 9/20/94 Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A Exception: No more than twenty-five (25) percent of the pier shall be covered by any building or roofed structure. In addition, buildings or other roofed structures.shall not be constructed along more than twenty-five (25) percent of the perimeter of the pier. 4.12.06 Setback(Front Yard). No minimum front yard setback shall be required. 4.12.07 Setback(Side Yard). No minimum side yard setback shall be required. 4.12.08 Setback(Rear Yard). No minimum rear yard setback shall be required. 4.12.09 Setback(Upper StoU). No minimum upper story setback shall be required. 4.12.10 Open Space. Public open space and pedestrian access shall be major considerations of development in this District. All new development shall provide sufficient clear width along the length of the pier for public access, emergency and service vehicles. In addition, public walkways along the pier edge or around the perimeter of new development must be provided. DTSPNW.DOC 47 Do«mtown Specific Plan Revised 9/20/94 V .Ff�-Hu H ,t ,. [EDO[DID Do Ell 1-11 uu �_ � �aa�oa0ao0oaoa�oo��. [illcl000 .............. CJ(�00 00 00 00 ED 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 oy pflr .............* D .....:...::::::::. ._] 77. l 5106194 DIST-11.1CM jo .� Q N HUNTINGTON BEACH CALIFORNIA DISTRICT 11 D` PLANNING DEPARTMENT DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A .4.13 DISTRICT #11: BEACH OPEN SPACE Pu ose. This District is intended to preserve and protect the sandy beach area within the Downtown Specific Plan boundaries while allowing parking and auxiliary beach- related commercial and convenience uses. Approximately half of the beach frontage in the District is City beach; the remainder is owned by the State of California. Boundaries. District #11 is bounded by PCH on one side and the Pacific Ocean on the other. The District extends from Goldenwest Street to Beach Boulevard, except for the area which is part of District #10. 4.13.01 Permitted Uses. (a) The following list of Beach Open Space uses and public facilities in District No. 11 may be allowed subject to approval of the Design Review Board. Other related uses or public facilities not specified herein may be allowed subject to the approval of the Design Review Board. Any change of such use or public facilities shall be subject to the approval of the Director. For example: Access facilities Basketball Courts Beach concession stands* Bicycle trails and support facilities Fire rings Paddle board courts Parking lots that will not result in the loss of recreational sand area. Tiered parking is permitted within the Downtown Specific Plan area on existing lots seaward of Pacific Coast Highway provided the parking is designed so that the top of the structures including walls, etc., are located a minimum of one foot below the maximum height of the adjacent bluff. Park offices + playground equipment Public Restrooms Public transit facilities and associated structures, dressing rooms or showers** Shoreline construction that may alter natural shoreline process, such as groins, cliff retaining walls, pipelines, outfalls that are designed to eliminate adverse impacts on local shoreline sand supply Trails (bicycle or jogging) and support facilities Volleyball net supports *Note: Beach concession stands shall be limited to twenty-five hundred (2500) square feet and spaced at intervals no closer than one thousand (1,000) feet. Beach concession structures shall be located within or immediately adjacent to paved parking or access areas. **Note: Public transit facilities may only be constructed within the existing paved parking areas or in areas which are not part of the beach. 4.13.02 Minimum Parcel Size. No minimum parcel size shall be required . 4.13.03 Maximum Density/Intensity. No maximum density or intensity requirement shall be applied in this District. 4.13.04 Maximum Buildin.Q Heim. The maximum building heights shall be limited to twenty (20) feet. DTSPNW.DOC 48 DowntoNm Specific Plan Revised 9/20/94 Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A Exceptions: No maximum building height shall be required for lifeguard towers or other facilities necessary for public safety. No parking surface or structure shall exceed the adjacent elevation of PCH. 4.13.05 Maximum Site Coverage. No maximum site coverage shall be required. 4.13.06 Setback (Front Yard). No minimum front yard setback shall be required. 4.13.07 Setback (Side Yard). No minimum side yard setback shall be required. 4.13.08 Setback (Rear Yard). No minimum rear yard setback shall be required . 4.13.09 Setback(Upper Story). No minimum upper story setback shall be required. 4.13.10 Open Space. Public open space and pedestrian access shall be major considerations of - development in this District. 4.13.11 Parking. No additional parking shall be required for new development in this District. Construction which proposes the removal of existing parking, shall provide for the replacement of that parking on a one-for-one basis within the District. 4.13.12 Resource Production Overlay. A portion of District#11 is designated with an Oil Suffix (0,01). Within this area, all the requirements of the Resource Production Overlay shall apply(see Section 4.14). DTSPNW.DOC 49 Downto«,n Specific Plan RLN ised 9/20/94 Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A OIL DISTRICT OVERLAY MAP Figure 4.14 DTSPNW.DOC 50 Downtown Speck Plan Revised 9/20/94 Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A 4.14 RESOURCE PRODUCTION OVERLAY Purpose. The Downtown Specific Plan area overlies long-productive oil pools. Many facilities are still operating because of the extent of the remaining reserves, therefore oil production will continue to be permitted in parts of this area. The City provides for oil facilities by designating oil "suffix" zoning Districts in connection with an underlying base zone such as a commercial or residential District. Both oil facilities allowed by suffix and the other uses allowed by the base zone are permitted. Currently, the City has two oil suffixes the "0" which allows existing oil wells and attendant facilities but no new wells, and the "0V which allows the drilling of new wells in addition to all uses in the "0" District. These suffixes, with certain modifications, are also employed in this Specific Plan. In addition to the oil suffixes three Resource Production Overlays have been identified. Existing and/or expanded oil production may continue in these areas provided that the additional conditions outlined in this subsection are met. 4.14.01 Oil Overlay "A" The regulations in this overlay District facilitate continued oil recovery, but require all new facilities to be concentrated into a screened, soundproofed and landscaped expansion of the existing oil site and encourage the expeditious removal of existing wells from oil overlay "B". Boundaries. Oil overlay "A" includes an existing oil island located in District#2, between 19th and 18th streets from Pacific Coast Highway to the area is Walnut Avenue. Rewlations. New wells and related facilities shall be permitted in accordance with the - 0 1 suffix and related provisions in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code provided, however, that the following additional conditions are met: (a) Any new well must be part of a secondary or other enhanced oil recovery project of used as a replacement of an existing well. (b) A schedule for abandonment of all wells operated by the project proponent which are located within Bolsa Chica State Beach shall be submitted to and approved by the Director of Development Services prior to the drilling of any new well. This schedule may be amended at the discretion of the Director of Development Services. (c) The project proponent shall agree to a memorandum of understanding with the City as a condition for approval, stating that no new wells shall be drilled by that company on Bolsa Chica State Beach (oil overlay "B") nor shall the existing wells be redrilled except, in such cases where: 1)the redrilled well will be produced by a "subsurface" or "down-hole" pump, only, or 2) the redrilled well will be produced by other new technology with fewer visual and environmental impacts than a conventional ball and plunger, pump, or 3) an intensified screening plan is approved the Director of Development Services which substantially improves the appearance of the area. (d) The operation site hall be screened by a wall, fence, or structure in keeping with the character of the area. The site shall also be landscaped so as to ensure visual compatibility with the surrounding area. A screening and landscaping plan must be submitted to and approved by the Director. All structures shall generally conform to the height limits and setback requirements of the base District. The Director DTSPNW.DOC 51 Dowmtown Specific Plan Revised 9/20/94 Ord. No.3239 Exhibit A may waive these restriction if it would result in better overall soundproofing, odor reduction and/or visual compatibility. 4.14.02 Oil Overlay 'B" The regulations in this overlay facilitate continued oil recovery, wells may be redrilled if surface pumping units are replaced.with a subsurface ones. Drilling of new wells may be permitted but only if the result is a significant reduction in the amount of space used for oil operations on the beach. Boundaries. Oil overlay "B" comprises a section of Bolsa Chica State Beach currently in oil production in District#11 between Goldenwest and 1 lth streets. Regulations. Wells may be redrilled in accordance with the -0 suffix in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code provided, however, that the following additional conditions are met: (a) The operator submits a report to the Department of Development Services explaining why there is no other feasible, environmentally less damaging inland site (such a report must be approved by the Director); or agrees to a memorandum of understanding with the City stating that the redrilled well will be produced by a subsurface or down-hole pump or other new technology with fewer visual and environmental impacts than a conventional ball and plunger pump. (b) A schedule for abandonment of all wells operated by the project proponent which are located within Bolsa Chica State Beach shall be submitted to and approved by the Director of Development Services prior to the drilling of any new well. This schedule may be amended at the discretion of the Director of Development Services. (c) All redrilling operations shall be limited to a period from October 1 to May 31, except for emergencies for which the-Fire Chief may waive these seasonal restrictions, but shall require soundproofing in accordance with Title 15 of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code. New wells may be permitted if they are part of an overall consolidation plan which significantly reduces the area used for oil facilities or expedites the removal of existing oil facilities within the overlay area. A consolidation plan must be submitted to the Director of Development Services for approval before a permit for drilling any new well will be issued. All drilling operations must be conducted in accordance with the requirements of the 01 suffix in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. 4.14.03 Oil Overlay "C" The regulations in the overlay facilitate continued oil recovery and provides for future oil production needs. Boundaries. Oil overlay "C" is an irregularly shaped site in District #8A between Lake Street and Huntington Avenue and Atlanta Avenue. Regulations. Well drilling and redrilling shall be permitted in accordance with Title 15 of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code and with the 0 or 01 suffix and related provisions in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. A conceptual site plan for the entire overlay area must be submitted prior to permitting any project development or subdivision of land within the overlay. The plan shall include at least one (1) oil island of not less than two (2) acres in size for new oil well drilling and oil production. Such island(s) shall be incorporated into the overall development plan so that noise, odor and DTSPNW.DOC 52 Downtowm Specific Plan Revised 9/20/94 Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A visual impacts on the residences are minimized, and safe access to the oil site(s) is provided. Findings that at least one such island so designed is incorporated into the plan shall be made by the Planning Commission before approving any development project. 4.15 CONSERVATION OVERLAY Purpose. The conservation overlay is intended to regulate those areas which have been preliminary identified as wetlands. Upon determination by the California Department of Fish and Game that an area is classified as a wetland the conditions of this overlay shall apply Boundary. The State Department of Fish and Game has identified an area within District 8B as containing .8 acres of existing wetland and 1.4 acres of restorable wetland. The 2.2 acre area is immediately adjacent to Beach Boulevard (see Figure 4.14). Regulations. Development shall be permitted only pursuant to an overall development plan for the entire overlay area and subject to the following: as a condition of any development on this parcel, topographic, vegetation, and soils information identifying the extent of any existing wetlands shall be submitted to the Director. The information shall be prepared by a qualified professional, and shall be subject to review by the California Department of Fish and Game. If any wetland is determined by the Department of Fish and Game to be severely degraded pursuant to Sections 30233 and 30411 of the California Coastal Act, or if it is less than one (1) acre in size, other restoration options may be undertaken, pursuant to the Coastal Commission's "Statewide Interpretive Guidelines for Wetlands and other Wet Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas." Conservation easements, dedications or other similar mechanisms shall be required over all wetland areas as a condition of development, to assure permanent protection. Public vehicular traffic shall be prohibited in wetland areas governed by a conservation easement. Specific drainage and erosion control requirements shall be incorporated into the project design to ensure that wetland areas are not adversely affected. No further subdivision of any parcel shall be permitted which would have the effect of dividing off environmentally sensitive habitat from other portions of such parcels for which urban uses are permitted in the City's Coastal Element until such time as the permanent protection of any wetland is assured. Within areas identified as wetlands in the coastal zone, the uses of the Coastal Conservation District shall supersede the uses of the FP 1 and FP2 district. DTSPNW.DOC 53 Downtown Specific Plan Revised 9/20/94 Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A CONSERVATION OVERLAY MAP Figure 4.15 DTSPNW.DOC 54 Downtown Specific Plan Revised 9/20/94 Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A 4.16 MOBILE HOME DISTRICT Purpose. The Downtown Specific Plan includes approximately 24 acres with a Mobile home District (MH) designation. The purpose of the Mobile home District is to permit present mobile home park uses to continue. These mobile home areas fall within Districts Seven, Eight and Nine of the Downtown Specific Plan. Boundaries. The Mobile home District encompasses parts of Districts 7, 8 and 9. The following describes the real property in two sections. Section One is approximately 6.2 acres in size located on the north side of Pacific Coast Highway between Huntington and Lake Streets. That portion of fractional Section 14, Township 6 South, Range 11 West in the Rancho Las Bolsas, City of Huntington Beach, County of Orange, State of California, as shown on a map recorded in Book 51, page 14 of Miscellaneous Maps in the office of the County Recorder of said county, described as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the centerline of Lake Street(formerly First Street) being parallel with and 37.50 feet southeasterly measured 147 feet right angles from the northwesterly line of Block 101 with the north right-of-way line of Pacific Coast Highway (formerly Ocean Avenue), also being the southeasterly extension of the southwesterly line of Block No. 101, all as shown on a map of Huntington Beach, recorded in Book 3, page 36 of Miscellaneous Maps in the office of the County Recorder of said county; thence south 41*38'l8" west 5 3.00 feet along the centerline of Lake Street to the construction centerline of Pacific Coast Highway; thence along said construction centerline the following, south 4838'18" west 53.00 feet along the centerline of Lake Street to the construction centerline of Pacific Coast Highway; thence along said construction centerline the following, south 48°21'42" east 98.26 feet to a curve concave to the northeast having a radius of 1200 feet; thence southeasterly along said curve through a central angle of 4°55'28" an arc distance of 103.14 feet; thence south 53'17'11" east 108.26 feet to a curve'concave to the northeast having a radius of 3328.60 feet; thence southeasterly along said curve through a central angle of 1°20'17" an arc distance of 77.72 feet; thence south 54°37'28" east 400.00 feet; thence leaving said construction centerline north 35°22'32" east 52.00 feet to the true point of beginning; thence south 54°37'28" east 427.26 feet; thence south 59°15'30" east 263.04 feet to the southwesterly extension of the westerly line of Huntington Street; thence 37°54'51" east 290.61 feet along said extension and said westerly line; thence north 54°05'09" west 520.00 feet; thence south 5°54'51" west 120 feet; thence south 57°32'32" west 55.85 feet; thence north 57°05'09" west 70.00 feet; thence north 12°05'09" west 120.00 feet; thence north 35°54'51" east 13 0.00 feet; thence north 54°05'09" west 170.00 feet; thence south 35°54'51" west 80.00 feet; thence north 89°05'09" west 70.00 feet; thence south 00°54'51" west 170.00 feet; thence south 80°05'09" east 83.83 feet; thence south 35°22'32" west 157.67 feet to the true point of beginning. DTSPNVJ.DOC 55 Downtown Specific Plan Revised 9/20/94 Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A Figure 4.16 DTSPNW.DOC 56 Downtov-m Speck Plan Revised 9/20/94 Ord.No.3239 Exhibit A Section Two is approximately 18 acres in size located on the west side of Beach Boulevard north of Pacific Coast Highway. Beginning at the southeast corner of the northeast quarter of the northeast quarter of said Section 14; thence south 89043'00" west 111.91 feet along the north line of the south half of the northeast quarter of said section to the true point of beginning; thence south 3°29'43" west 593.12 feet; thence south 25°32'14" west 386.94 feet; thence south 11'44'36" east 771.48 feet; thence south 80°00'00" west 82.75 feet;thence north 52000'00" west 835.00 feet;thence north 38°00'00" east 300.00 feet; thence north 50°08'13" west 173.58 feet; thence north 45°00'00" east 84.85 feet to point "A" (to be used as a reference for the exception portion of this description); thence north 43°17'55" west 714.49 feet; thence due west 40.00 feet;thence south 49°45'49" west 170.29 feet; thence north 74°28'33" west 186.82 feet; thence north 51045'58" west 420.51 feet; thence north 0017'36" east 59.76 feet to the north line of the south half of the northeast quarter of said section; thence north 89°43'00" east 1,844.00 feet along said north line to the true point of beginning. Excepting therefrom the following: beginning at said Point "A", thence north 45°00'00" east 190.00 feet to the true point of beginning; thence north 43°17'55" west 550.00.feet; thence (north 89°43'00" east 640.00 feet; thence south 3029'43" west 254.03 feet; thence south 25°32'14" west 303.23 feet; thence north 43°17'55" west 170.00 feet to the true point of beginning. Regulations. The regulations of the Downtown Specific Plan will serve as overlays for those portions of Districts Seven, Eight and Nine which retain the (MH) zone, until such time that the Mobile home District designation is removed. All areas retaining the(MH) zone shall be subject to the provisions of the Mobile home District of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. In addition, these areas are subject to the provisions of the Mobile home Overlay Zones/Removal/Rezoning/Change of Use Article of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. DTSPMV.DOC 57 Downtown Specific Plan Revised 9/20/94 Ord. No. 3239 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss: CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ) I, CONNIE BROCKWAY, 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 ordinance was read to said City Council at an regular meeting thereof held on the 3rd day of October, 1994, and was again read to said City Council at a reg lar meeting thereof held on the 17th of October, 1994, and was passed and adopted by the affirmative vote of at least a majority of all the members of said City Council. AYES: Councilmembers: Silva, Bauer, Moulton-Patterson�Winchell, Leipzig, Sullivan NOES: Councilmembers: None ABSENT: Councilmembers: Robitaille 1, Qonnie Brocir::ay CITY CLERIC of'02 City of N,,nftr,bn 3ca h and ex.,;;:cio Cfer!:of the City City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk Cct-�^eil, c:T;;; tint a synopsis of this of the City Council of the City ordinance Ons b;2&I f;:,", ed in the Daily Not on �(/ of Huntington Beach, California 41�,Mrlrdance with Cho Uty Charter of said City. Connie, Bro,-+.w&y City Clerk ex,;y City C!Qrk REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION &P p,,Ta r 40 j-- S�f Fpe Date April 4, 1994 Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members Submitted by: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administratl_,T("---� 9f Prepared by: Melanie S. Fallon, Community Development Director`` �� Subject: CODE AMENDMENT NO. 92-5/DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN REWRITE "VILLAGE CONCEPT" AND PARKING MASTER PLAN Consistent with Council Policy? [XI Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception Statement of Issue,Recommendation,Analysis,Funding Source,Alternative Actions,Attachments: STATEMENT OF ISSUE: Transmitted for City Council consideration is Code Amendment No. 92-5 the Downtown Specific Plan rewrite commonly referred to as the "Village Concept" and Parking Master Plan. The City Council has held four meetings (August 30, 1993, October 11, 1993, December 6, 1994 and March 7, 1994) to discuss the details of the plan. RECOMMENDATION: Motion to: "Take public testimony on Code Amendment No. 92-5, the Downtown Specific Plan rewrite and Downtown Parking Master Plan, close the public hearing,take straw votes on the issues and request that staff return with an ordinance and revised legislative draft of the Downtown Specific Plan and Downtown Parking Master Plan at the City Council meeting of May 16, 1994." ANALYSIS: At the City Council meeting of March 7, 1994, the City Council opened the public hearing, took public testimony, and directed staff to do the following; 1) re-advertise the public hearing to notify absentee property owners of the proposed amendments to the Specific Plan, 2) directed staff to amend the matrix of issues to include public testimony, 3) amend the on-site parking summary in the Downtown Parking Master Plan and, 4) prepare a table to demonstrate the codified parking requirements in the Downtown Parking Master Plan. Downtown Specific Plan Staff has revised the matrix of issues to include credit for existing parking spaces when an expansion and or intensification of use is proposed (attachment no. 1). The Committee and staff generally agree, however, the parking spaces that are credited shall meet minimum code requirements and remain on-site. The matrix has been revised to include all issues that have been brought to the attention of staff and the subcommittee along with a recommendation on each. Please note, consensus has not been reached on the following; 1. Page 14, minimum walking distance; 350' or 500'? 2. Page 16, alley width; 24' or 28'? 3. Page 16, curb cuts along Main Street; yes or no? 4. Page 36, boundary change between District 4 and 5; yes or no? 5. Page 50, floor area ratio in District 6; 1.25 or 1.50? 6. Page 51, upper story setback in District 6; yes or no? The Council also requested staff to clarify the list of permitted uses in each district. The intent of the changes to the list of uses is to allow the establishment of a use or change of use which conform to the nature of each district (e.g. Visitor Serving Commercial or Neighborhood Commercial) to be allowed by right without a conditional use permit. In addition, certain uses such as live entertainment, restaurants, alcohol sales, and new construction and rehab shall be required to obtain a conditional use permit. The intent of the changes is to require Planning Commission approval on certain activities but to make it easier on uses which conform to the nature of the district in which it is proposed. Staff will prepare the modified language as part of the revised legislative draft. Parking Master Plan Questions regarding the on-site parking summary in the Downtown Parking Master Plan were raised. Staff has researched this issue and has found that the I.B.I. Report omitted 52 proposed public parking spaces for Block E (Third Block West). The 52 additional parking spaces raise the ultimate downtown parking total from 1796 to 1848 spaces within the Downtown Parking Master Plan area(attachment no. 2). Discussion and questions regarding the codified parking requirements for the plan were also raised. Staff has prepared a table which demonstrates the codified parking requirements north and south of Orange Avenue (attachment no. 3). The matrix compares the current code, and the City's Report as staffs recommendation. The matrix indicates the parking space requirement per 100 sq. ft. of gross floor area (City's Zoning Code) and the reduction factor proposed for each use. Staff recommends Council approve the staff proposed reduction factor and codified parking requirements. RCA 4/4/94 2 Conclusion After extensive meetings with staff and the public, the Downtown Subcommittee reached conclusions regarding the Downtown Parking Master Plan and Downtown Specific Plan. With respect to the former, the Subcommittee agreed with the basic tenants of the shared parking concepts. They also concluded that in order for the parking plan to be executed successfully, the control mechanisms designed into the plan need to remain. The Downtown Specific Plan generated a great deal of discussion with respect to the interpretations of certain sections of the code. As can be seen in the attached matrix of issues, the staff and Subcommittee have agreed to make changes which clarify the intent of a particular provision. However, no major change to the Planning Commission's approval is being recommended by either staff or the Subcommittee. Based upon the aforementioned, staff requests that the Council take straw votes on the issues, direct staff to incorporate the Council's recommendations, prepare an ordinance, and prepare a revised legislative draft of the Downtown Specific Plan and Downtown Parking Master Plan, and return to the City Council with a final document. FUNDING SOURCE: Not applicable. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: The Council may take one of the following actions: 1. Approve Code Amendment No. 92-5, as recommended by the Planning Commission and modified by the Downtown Subcommittee. or, 2. Direct the Downtown Subcommittee to hold additional meetings to finalize the outstanding issues, re-advertise the public hearing, and return to a date certain. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Revised Downtown Subcommittee Table of Issues 2. Revised Downtown On-Site Parking Summary (Page 11) 3. Table of Codified Parking Requirements 4 Amended District 4 Map 5. Amended District 5 Map 6. Letter from Bob and Connie Mandic dated March 2, 1994 7. Letter from Faye Ogden dated February 27, 1994 8. Letters from Michael Tater dated September 27, 1993 and December 4, 1993 9. Downtown Huntington Beach Parking Master Plan (Planning Commission approved July 7, 1993) 10. RCA dated March 4, 1994 MTU:MF:HZ:hf,t( RCA 4/4/94 �' 3 CODE-AMENDMENT#92-5IDOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN SUBCOMMITTEE REVIEW APRIL 4, 1994 PAGE NO. CODE ISSUE PLANNING PUBLIC COMMENTS COMMITTEE STAFF SECTION COMMISSION COMMENTS RECOMMENDATION ACTION Pg. 2 4.0.04 Build to Line No change Clarify/delete No change No change Definition Pg. 3 4.0.04 Facade No change Clarify change - "of to "or" Agree with Committee Definition Recommendation Pg. 4 4.0.04 FAR No change Clarify "building site" to Agree with Committee Definition "gross floor area"; Recommendation add "net site area" Pg. 4 4.0.04 Gross Floor No change None Add - Definition of Agree with Committee Definition Area Gross Floor Area to DTSP Pg. 4 4.0.04 Public Open No change Clarify Add "general" to Agree with Committee Definition Space public Recommendation PgA 4.0.04 Public Open No change None Add - Language to Agree with Committee Definition Space augment "Public Open Space" definition Pg. 4 4.0.04 Setback No change Clarify No change No change Definition Pg. 8 4.2.01(d) Required No change change - H.B. Ordinance Add - "Or as Agree with Committee Exception Parking Code to Downtown Master required by the Recommendation (General Parking Plan Downtown Master Provision) Parking Plan" '+ Pg. 8 4.2.01(d) Non- No change Inability to re-finance due Modify Div. 9 to Agree with Committee T (General conforming to non-conforming status address issue Recommendation Provision) Downtown Specific Plan I hfca925 Subcommittee Review PAGE NO. CODE ISSUE PLANNING PUBLIC COMMENTS COMMITTEE STAFF SECTION COMMISSION COMMENTS RECOMMENDATION ACTION Pg.9 4.2.04(a) Maximum 15' First Story Add-"Interior Floor to Agree with Planning Agree with Committee (General Building 10" Second Story, Interior Ceiling" Commission action and Planning Commission Provision) Height etc. (Commercial) Pg. 12 4.2.13 Parking Except as change - "All Add only - "Or as Agree with Committee (General provided in developments" to "All required by the Recommendation Provision) Section 4.2.29 existing or new Downtown Master (Affordable Developments" and "H.B. Parking Plan" Housing) Ordinance Code to Downtown Master Parking Plan" Pg. 14 4.2.13(A) Parking Parking in Dist. 3, Add- Dist. 2 to Master Do not include Dist. Do not include Dist. 2 in (General (Commercial) 4, 5, 6 and 10, on- Parking Plan, Eliminate 2, eliminate 350' parking plan and modify Provision) site or as modified 350' walking distance limitation. Add - 350' to 500' limitation by the Parking limitation "Or by payment of Master Plan. an in-lieu parking Balance within fee walking distance not to exceed 350'. Pg. 14 4.2.13(b) Screening of Require lot to be Add - exception: For lots Agree with Planning Agree with Committee (General Parking Lot screened that abut alley side only Commission action and Planning Commission Provision) action Pg. 14 4.2.14(E) Landscaping No change Add-exception for lots that Agree with Planning Agree with Committee (General (require screening) abut alley side only Commission action and Planning Commission Provision) action Pg. 16 4.2.15(E) Street No change change - City to City Agree to modify Agree with Public (General Vacation Council, Add- subject to Comment Provision) Public Hearing Pg. 16 4.2.15 (f) Street No change None change: "5 feet" to Agree with Committee (General Vacation "max 42 inches" Recommendation Provision) 2 PAGE NO. CODE ISSUE PLANNING PUBLIC COMMENTS COMMITTEE STAFF SECTION COMMISSION COMMENTS RECOMMENDATION ACTION Pg. 16 4.2.16(A) Access Ways Commercial/ Commercial/Mixed Use, 24' alley; modify to 28' alley; no curb cuts (General Mixed Use, alley alley 20', allow existing allow curb cuts along Main St. Provision) 24' curb cuts (Main Street) (Main) min.100' Pg. 16 4.2.16(A) Access Ways No change Add -Note: No more than Agree with Public Agree with Public (General 1/2 of the total alley Comment Comment Provision) dedication shall be from one side Pg. 26 4.4.01 Permitted Uses change - "Shall be Add - Single Family Add: Single Family; Agree with Committee (Dist. 2) permitted" to Residential subject to DRB only "May be allowed" Eliminate - Subject to CUP approval Pg. 26 4.4.03 Density, Lot Less than 50' - Less than 50' add: 11,500 Agree with Planning Agree with Committee (Dist. 2) size-frontage 1DU, 50' -4DU, sq. ft. of net lot area. Not Commission action and Planning Commission 5 F up to 100'-30 to exceed 2 units per 25' of action units, 10 F to full frontage block-35 units (all net acre) Pg. 27 4.4.07 Setback(side No change Add-Tandem parking may Agree with Planning Agree with Committee (Dist. 2) yard) be allowed Commission action and Planning Commission action Pg. 27 4.4.08 Setback(rear No change Add -Note: No more than Agree with Public Agree with Public (Dist. 2) yard) 1/2 of the total alley Comment Comment dedication shall be from one side Pg. 36 4.6 Boundary Boundary change: Do not change boundary Agree with Public Agree with Planning (Dist. 4) From Dist. 5 to Comment Commission action Dist. 4 (Portion of) Pg.36 4.6.01(Dist.4) Permitted Use No change Allow option for Agree with Public Agree with Committee commercial Comment 3 PAGE NO. CODE ISSUE E PLANNING PUBLIC COMMENTS COMMITTEE STAFF SECTION COMMISSION COMMENTS RECOMMENDATION ACTION Pg. 40 4.7 Boundary Boundary change: Do not change boundary Agree with Public Agree with Planning (Dist. 5) From Dist. 5 to Comment Commission action Dist. 4 (Portion of) Pg. 41 4.7.01(A) Permitted Uses New construction change to - Permitted uses Permitted Uses Agree with Committee (Dist. 5) and establishment shall include but not be require No CUP, (New format throughout of commercial limited to the following new construction document) uses may be subject to a CUP and change of allowed subject to certain uses require a CUP CUP Pg. 43 4.7.01(d) Commercial No change Allow all commercial uses Agree with Public Agree with Committee (Dist. 5) Uses on the first floor to be Comment and Public Comment allowed on the second Pg. 45 4.7.08 Setback(rear ROW- 24' (Alley ROW- 20' (Alley Width) ROW-24'(Alley ROW-28'(Alley Width) (Dist. 5) yard) Width) Width) Pg. 45 4.7.10 Open Space No change Add - Interior parcels, 150' Agree with Planning Agree with Committee (Dist. 5) or more, 10% open space, Commission action, and Planning Commission delete "amenity" delete "amenity" action Pg. 48 4.8.01(A) Permitted Uses New construction change to: - Permitted uses Permitted Uses Agree with Committee (Dist. 6) and establishment shall include but not be require No CUP, (New format throughout of commercial limited to the following new construction document) uses may be subject to a CUP and change of allowed subject to certain uses require a CUP CUP Pg. 50 4.8.03 Density (FAR) FAR 1.25 FAR 1.5 Agree with Public Agree with Planning (Dist. 6) Comment Commission action Pg. 51 4.8.08 Setback(rear change ROW to Add - structures to be ROW 24';add Note ROW to 28' and add (Dist. 6) yard) 24" cantilevered to the rear only Note only property line, and change - ROW to 20', note: 1/2 total alley dedication from one side only 4 PAGE NO. CODE ISSUE PLANNING PUBLIC COMMENTS COMMITTEE STAFF SECTION COMMISSION COMMENTS RECOMMENDATION ACTION Pg. 51 4.8.09 Setback No change change - To 10' from Agree with Public Agree with Planning (Dist. 6) (Upper Story) second story facade Comment Commission action Pg. 51 4.8.10 Open Space No change Add - Interior parcels, 150' Agree with Planning Agree with Committee (Dist. 6) or more, 10% open space, Commission action, and Planning Commission delete "amenity" delete "amenity" action Pg. 51 4.10.01 Permitted Uses No change None Include - Public Agree with Committee (Dist. 8) Transportation Center Option Pg. 55 4.9.10(Dist.7) Open Space No change None Require min. 10% Agree with Committee Open Space DTSP/DTPMP No change None Add - Reference Agree with Committee "SILENT" when DTSP/DTPMP is silent that Division 9 is applicable DOWNTOWN MASTER'PARKING PLAN SUBCOMMITTEE REVIEW PAGE NO. CODE ISSUE PLANNING PUBLIC COMMENTS COMMITTEE STAFF SECTION COMMISSION COMMENTS RECOMMENDATION ACTION Pg. 6 Parking Plan Bldg. sq. ft. No change Take cap off, allow market No change Agree with Committee caps driven development and Planning Commission action Pg. 9 Parking Plan Public vs. No change Allow only public parking No change Agree with Committee private spaces to be used in the and Planning Commission parking plan action 5 PAGE NO. CODE ISSUE PLANNING PUBLIC COMMENTS COMMITTEE STAFF SECTION COMMISSION COMMENTS RECOMMENDATION ACTION Pg. 18 Parking Plan Codify No change Codify Parking Reduction Agree with Public Agree with Committee Parking based upon IBI report Comment and Public Comment Reductions Pg. 19 Parking Plan Area 1 vs. No change Allow the plan to be No change Agree with Committee Area 2 (N/S governed under the area 1 and Planning Commission of Orange) scenario action Pg. 19 Parking Plan Bldg. Sq. Ft. No change Existing sq. ft. and uses are Agree with Public Agree with Committee and Uses "parked" in public parking Comment Add- existing parking supply; Demo and rebuild must conform to code and same sq. ft. - no additional remain on-site parking required. Allow "credit" for existing spaces to expand/intensify Pg. 21 Parking Plan Alternative No change Identify future location Maintain option for Agree with Committee (Future) City to purchase Parking Sites property Pg. 22 Parking Plan In Lieu Fees No change Reduction in fee, require to No change Agree with Committee be used for new public and Planning Commission parking action 6 In addition to the 402 on street public parking spaces , the Downtown area has 1, 111 existing parking spaces in structured facilities, 309 spaces in existing surface lots with an additional 216 plus spaces planned. On-site parking has always been a major component of large development projects . The combined studies indicate that the total parking supply available at maximum build out will be approximately 1, 984 spaces . There are 1, 714 parking spaces in Area 1 and 270 spaces in Area 2 . These spaces are a combination of on-street public, on-site public and on-site private spaces . Continued monitoring of the Downtown areas parking supply will be a necessary task as the uses change over time. Downtown On-Site Parking Summary Block AREA 1 EXISTING PROPOSED FINAL A 56 75 75 B 296 --- 296 C 6 --- 6 D 815 --- 815 E 132 52 52 F 25 --- 25 Subtotal 1,330 127 1,269 Block AREA 2 EXISTING PROPOSED FINAL G 17 --- 17 H 61 89 150 I 10 --- 10 Subtotal 88 216 1,446 Total 1,418 164 1,394 Total 1,582 Ultimate Total 1,446 On-Street 402 TOTAL DOWNTOWN PARKING - 1.984 ULTIMATE DOWNTOWN PARKING - L848 Parking Master Plan -11- ( 1915D) ATm,::, 4A6wT • 2. 03/24/94 Downtown Parking Master Plan Codified Parking Requirements New Parking Standard (Reduction Factor) Land Use .H.B. Code Area 1 South Area 2 North (Percentage Reduced) (Percentage Reduced) Retail 1:200 1:250 1:400 (20%) (50 %) Restaurant 1:100 1:150 1:100 (34%) (0 %) Office 1:250 1:1,000 1:500 (75 %) (50 %) A TAtJkA4A EuT Qo. ADDED TO DISTRICT 4 � UUU PECAN ORANGE ••. :. •; •;• OLIVE F� H Fr .� z WALNUTEL Z H :• �- z w JL ' JL L EE- F v LT. PACIFIC COAST HWY. PACIFIC OCEAN 3 D DM CDR m DISTRICT 4 1 DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING DIVISION REMOVED FROM DISTRICT 5 PECAN ORANGE •: •� •�• ••• ••• •• :• •.• :. '•• •: •• ., .�. .� OLIVE •: � •.• •. •: •.• •: :• •.• ': E-+ H r� r� •• x •• •�� coo �•�WALNU T= cr Z F JL z w m x z o H � CIO L u Uw PACIFIC COAST HWY. PACIFIC OCEAN - " Y� PISf-SB CDA ,fftk DISTRICT 5 1 - DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING DIVISION �EN'r 'tao, rj From Bob & Connie Mandic RE- Block H Dist. 6 3/2/94 Honorable Committee Members, The following are clarifications of a few of the issues that-were raised at the February 24, 1994 Subcommittee meeting. 1. The following page contains the submittal that was given to the Subcommittee at an early meeting that was agreed to by the Subcommittee concerning parking for existing buildings. This issue was omitted from the staff charts at the last meeting and you asked us to provide the wording. DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN (SHARED PARKING) The Guwntuwn Is almust completed. All the large currrrrier-cial parcels I-rave, projects that Ildve either been built or approved. All that is left are small commercial parcels with little or no opportunity for cor'rsolydation. The City neeos to design a plan that will encourage these small proper ty owners to develop their property in order to finally finish the redevelopment of bowntown Huntington Beach. I:eeping in mind that council is dealing with individual small remaining parcel-, we r ecorrrnerut the following. All exsisting commercial buildings and their uses shall be considered parKed in the "PUBLIC PAPi.1116ISUPPLY" with Ilurre of the pr ivdte par king, that rndy be lucated on the site, t3t:en Into consideration. In the event a property owner tears down Isis/her exsisting buliding arid rebUlidS o new building of the same square footage and use no new NO ina mill Lie required. [1his i_-, what the parking study says] Any expansion of the square footage or the increase of intensity of any exsisting con,irnercial building in district~ i thru 6 must be parked to the new park ing code as follows. A. The property owner shall recieve credit for any exsisting onsite private parking Sp3ces. This credit snal I apply to the expansion anvor the increase of intensity of use. B. Any additionally required parking shall be paid through the in-lieu parking fee. [This gives the few remaining property owners the incentive to replace their old buildings with new buildings at no additional cost to the city] 2. Pg. 16 4.2.16 Curb Cuts This issue was not addressed by the committee on the chart. This is a very important issue to the merchants in our district. Following are the comments from a submittal given the subcommittee earlier. (next page) Access from Main Street for neighborhood commercial is extremely important. Also if the back portion of the block develops residential, funneling all the traffic down the alley seems incompatible. Pg. 16 4.2.16 Existing curb cuts along Main Street should be allowed to be used for new development. This is very important to merchants in our district. Since District #6 is supposed to be resident serving we intend to put some con- venience parking on site for commercial uses along Main Street. People are not likely to go around back to an alley to hunt for a parking place behind a building. Also, the uses farther up Main Street need all the help they can get to be successful. We need the right to retain existing curb cuts along Main Street to give access to some convenience parking. The access onto Main has not been a problem throughout the years and should not be in the future. There are no existing curb cuts in the first blocks. The third block only has one curb cut at the U.S. Post Office, which is used by employees and trucks. Above Orange has a curb cut at Townsquare that serves residents of the townhomes and all residential and commercial under- ground parking. The Art Center is on the fifth block and has a curb cut into the brand new parking lot the city just redid and did not eliminate in favor of alley access. The precident is already set and we feel necessary for the future success of the upper areas of Main Street. 3. Pg. 50, 4.8.03 Floor Area Ratio Following is a chart comparing the old and new Specific Plan on density and Floor Area Ratio and comparing districts. OLD District NEW DU FAR District #1 (PCH) 25 DU FAR 1 (max. was 30 DU District # 2 (Res. PCH) less than 50'=1 DU 50'=4 DU NO FAR 51 - 100'=30 DU 101' - 1 Blk.=35 DU (max. was 35 DU) less than 2 Blk=2.0 District # 3 less than 2 31k. = ? FAR 2.0 2- 1 Blk. =2.5 (1st Blk) 2 - 1 Blk. = ? FAR 2.5 1 BLk. =3.25 max. =35 DU FAR 3.0 (max. was 35) District #4 less than 50'=1 DU (6th & 5th St. ) 51 - 100' =30DU NO FAR 101' - 1 Blk.=35DU less than 2 Blk.=1.5 District #5 2 Blk.=2.0 (2nd & 3rd Blk) 1 Blk.=2.5 mar.. =25 DU FAR 2.0 (avg. =2.0) less than 100' =1.25 District #6 100' to 2 Blk =1.5 (4th Blk) less than 2 Blk.=? FAR 1.25 2 Blk - 1 Blk =2.0 2 Blk or greater=? FAR 2.0 1 Blk =2.25 max. =25DU (avg. =1.75) District #7 FAR 3.0 As you can see from this comparison,the small property owner in District 6 is severly penalized unlike anyone else downtown. Owning more than 100' is far short of owning 2 a block and the reduction of FAR to 1.25 equals a 30% reduction. All other districts only lowered the top density number and kept the small property owners the same or made them higher as in district 5. If you average the FAR figures as in district 5 the average for district 6 is 1.75FAR. District 6 was never intended to be a low density area as evidenced by the old maximum of 2.25 which Townsquare and Bayshore Condos took advantage of on either side of our property. Keeping 100' to 2Blk. at 1.5FAR is FAIR and will allow business to rebuild wi€hdUt an unfair penalty for being in district 6. On the following page are previous comments. Pg. 50 The Floor Area Ratio for less than z block should be 1.5. The way it is currently written at 1.25 for less than z block unfairly "targets" the small prop.owners who own over 100' but far less than 1-2 block. The change from gross to net and 6 stories to 3 stories has already restricted development. But to further reduce FAR severely devalues property. 1.25 is the lowest density downtown and was written when you were trying to encourage small property owners to consolidate. Now, there is no incentive for block con- solidation. These are small parcels and eliminating 1 or 3 units makes a big difference to a small owner trying to make a project pencil out with no government subsidy. 4. Pg 51, 4.8.08 Cantelevered structure to rear property line This item was always a given and we just added it in our comments as a clarification since it was not spelled out in district 6 as in other districts. In meetings with the City Administrator and Planning Staff when we went over what we could build on site under the new plan, staff always drew in the cantilevering to show how square footage could be obtained in our district. This routinely done on many buildings downtown. 5. Pg. 19 Area 1 vs. Area 2 ( North & South of Orange) For FAIRNESS and EQUITY to small property owners above Orange they should be given the same parking benefits as those below Orange. Without a similar reduction in parking code requirements above Orange will never be able to compete with businesses below Orange. There will be NO incentive for property owners to redevelop their properties. Block H above Orange is taking the hardest hit of any area downtown. Lowest FAR Lowest residential density No curb cuts Heaviest concentration of new parking ONLY DISTRICT THAT ACTUALLY SHOWS A DECREASE IN SQUARE FOOTAGE OVER WHAT EXISTS TODAY The tables on the following pages reference the above. Please give these comments serious consideration. As remaining small property owners we are looking forward to becoming part of the NEW downtown and have been waiting for many years. Now that it is our turn it seems that we are being penalized for mistakes that were made in the first blocks. The fourth block is logically next in line for development. The conditions imposed by the current specific plan proposal will make it uneconimical to build. Property values will decline and we hope we are not being made a target for future Redevelopment Agency acquisition of our property. OCTOBER, 1993 IBI REPORT DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN (Building Square Footage Analysis) i Existing/Occupied' RETAIL RESTAURANT OFFICE TOTAL BLOCK A: 16,550 3,750 -0- 20,300 BLOCK B: 49,258 17,793 11,000 78,051 BLOCK C: 37,365 30,785 22,175 90,325 BLOCK D: 24,073 5,000 2,431 31,504 BLOCK E: 7,625 -0- 4,500 12,125 BLOCK F: 15,000 -0- 12,825 27,825 BLOCK G: 13,700 -0- 5,700 19,400 L BLOCK H: 24,500 _ -0- 2,250 26,750/ , BLOCK I: 2-1500 7,946 10,000 20,446 SUBTOTAL: 190,571 65,274 70,881 326,726 GRA�.TD TOTAL: 326.726 SF 305 Oranee 2,500 2,500 -0- OCTOBER, 1993 IBI REPORT DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN (Building Square Footage Analysis) Anticipated EXISTING PROPOSED DIFFERENCE BLOCK G: 401 Main Street 7,700 7,700 -0- 405 Main Street N/A 4,000 4,000 (+) 411 Main Street 3,300 3,300 -0- 417 Main Street 2,500 2,500 -0- 419 Main Street 2,200 2,200 -0- BLOCK-H:._ _ -- --- — — 410 - 440 Main Street 32,250 20,000 12,250 (� 504 Main Street BLOCK I: 520 Main Street 5,280 - 5,280 -0- 522 Main Street 2,666 2;666 -0- 526 Main Street 2,500 2,500 -0- 538 Main Street 10,575 10,575 -0- . n OCTOBER, 1993 IBI REPORT DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN (Building Square Footage Analysis) Anticipated EXISTING PROPOSED DIFFERENCE BLOCK A: 3,500 5,000 1,500 (+) BLOCK B: 17,125 15,500 1,625 (-) BLOCK C: -0- -0- -0- BLOCK D: -0- -0- -0- BLOCK E: -0- -0- -0- BLOCK F: 19,575 19,700 8,425 (+) BLOCK G: 15,700 19,700 4,000 (+) BLOCK H: 32,250 20,000 12,250 BLOCK I: 21.021 21.021 -0- TOTAL: 109,171 109,221 50 OCTOBER, 1993 IBI REPORT DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN (Building Square Footage Analysis) Anticipated i RETAIL RESTAURANT OFFICE TOTAL BLOCK A 5,000 6,414 0 11,414 BLOCK B 13,375 8,000 0 21,375 BLOCK C 0 13,738 0 13,738 BLOCK D 0 3,600 0 3,600 BLOCK E 0 0 0 0 BLOCK F 24,200 4,000 13,000 41,200 BLOCK G 15,000 0 0 15,000 BLOCK H 2O,000 0 0 201000 ; BLOCK I 0 0 -0 0 SUBTOTAL: 77,575 35,752 13,000 126,327 GRAND TOTAL: 126.327 (Excludes. 10,575 sf Art Center) + 10,575 136,902 Mayor and City Council Members December 1, 1993 Page two In Area 2, located north of Orange Avenue, the Agency owns the building at 438 Main Street. The City owns the Main Street Library Branch and the Arts Center. The requirement for the Agency/City to acquire additional land in Area 2 has been analyzed by staff for the availability of land, costs involved and the potential need for eminent domain to assemble property. Five locations were analyzed including the Terry Buick lot and the Third Block West sites in Area 1. A report is attached of each location indicating site location, lot size, number of parcels to be consolidated, potential for parking spaces and land cost. In summary, these include the following. Site 1 is the Terry Buick lot which is already owned by the Agency and scheduled to be used for a parking lot with approximately 70 spaces. This property is located in Area 1. Site 2, the Third Block West project, has an agreement with developers Newcomb/Tillotson with the Agency's option to add 200 parking spaces at a cost of $2.5 million. This site is located in Area 1 and not Area 2. Site 3 at 400 Main Street can be developed with 133 spaces at an estimated cost of$2.7 million. Use of eminent domain is anticipated with relocation costs to be added. Site 4 (as recommended by the Planning Commission) may be purchased for $3 million and yield 108 spaces. Eminent domain may be required with extensive business and residential relocation and clearance costs. Site 5 at 600 Main Street would cost approximately $4.9 million with costs between $500,000 and $7 million to develop with 240 to 890 parking spaces. Eminent domain may be required. The property is currently used as a parking lot. ithin Area 2, the Art Center, Central Library and Town Square blocks are for the most part, completely developed. The remaining block, 400 block of Main Street on the east side, contains businesses such as a laundry, Mandic Motors, Electric Chair and some residential on the Lake Street side. No development plans have been proposed or submitted for this block by the property owners. Under the guidelines of the Downtown Specific Plan, development could occur with adequate parking onsite. Any future residential development must be parked to code on site. No residential projects downtown have been allowed to place parking offsite. Potential commercial development would be limited to 20_,00.0 square_ feet. This is the square footage of development that must be parked�f ' ___- CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN REVIEW Downtown On-SiteFARE CK EXISTING PROPOSED ELIMIN. FUTURE Parking SummaryA 1 56 75 (56) 75 296 0) 0 0 296 6 0 0 6 8290) 0 0 829 132 0 (132) 0 25 0 0 25 otals 1 ,344 75 (188) 1 ,231 AREA 2 G 17 r? 0 17 H 61 86 0 150 1 10 0 10 sub Totals 88 89 0 177 Totals 1,432 164 08) 1,408 Note: (1) Structure Exhibit 10 Faye Ogden 1211 Montego Street Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 February 27, 1994 The Honorable Linda Moulton Patterson , Mayor , and City Council for the City of Huntington Peach 2000 Main Street Huntington Peach , CA 92648 Dear Mayor Patterson and Council Members Due to a previous commitment, I will not be able to attend your March 7 meeting. Nonetheless, I thank you for the opportunity to submit these written comments regarding the City 's downtown redevelopment plans. I was a resident of Huntington Beach for twenty-five years until a recent move up north. I continue to own property in the downtown area and , in fact, intend to move back to Huntington Peach sometime in the next few years. The parcel of property I own is located at the corner of Third and Orange. I invested in this property in the mid- 1970s, so I have watched with keen interest as the City's various downtown redevelopment plans have taken shape . over the years. What I am now seeking is merely fair and equal treatment. Quite simply, the new parking and density restrictions under consideration are completely arbitrary and unacceptable. Because my property happens to be located on the northern side of Orange Street_ , in the fourth block , or "Area 6" , it would carry with it stricter parking requirements and lowed c density allowances than the property across the street ! The new parking requirement would treat properties above Orange differently -from those below Orange. This woulcL6 = L r-)r"rn greatly devalue my property and others north of Orange Streets.) yG since it would make . it impossible for us to rebuild and compete with anyone developing property in the first three :: blocks of downtown. cf� / I T To make matters worse, under the proposal before the Council , density limits are also- being lowered in Area 6 unfairly and unreasonably. We have already gone from net to gross acreage, which has the effect of lowering density and accomplishes the City 's goals of meeting the Village Concept. To go even further and lower our floor area ratio as well is in effect a double hit , and would severely affect small property owners like me who could most likely only build a few units anyway. In short, and to repeat , all I want is fair and equal treatment. I love the City of Huntington Beach and I want to be part of the new downtown. I have met with the other property owners in Area 6 and agree with all the recommendations they have presented. I appreciate your consideration of my comments and I urge you to vote Yes on their recommendations. Sincerely Faye Ogden `� /O: city council O1, : Michael Tater ; Owner two continious lots Dist . 5 Comm. zoned SUBJECT: DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN CODE AMENDMENT RECEIVER !DATE : September 27 , 1993 CITY CLERK CITY CF Dear City Counci 1 Members and Mayor , QCT q 14 13 P11 '93 I am very much against the proposed specific plan code amendment #92-5 . My property has been in our family for thirty years , and during that time we have turned down many offers due to the valuable zoning of the property .As a property owner in the affected area this plan is discriminating and unfair . Approval of #92-5 will cause great financial loss by moving my property into a new District ; a District which doesn't have commercial zoning, doesn't allow a third story , restricts to a smaller building and has far fewer business and building capabilities . The current specific plan adopted November 1983 puts my property into Dist . 5 . Dist . 5 is zoned as : Mixed-Use;Commercial /Office/ Residential .District 5 encompasses the Main St. Core area from the alley between 5th & 6th to the alley between 2nd and 3rd and from Walnut to Orange . In the new "DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN CODE AMENDMENT" the boundaries change putting my property into Dist 4. Dist . 4 is zoned Mixed-Use: Office Residential . Through these new plans I will be denied the ability to build commercial including but not limited to Restaurants, Night clubs with entertainment, Cabarets , Dancing and/or live entertainment as a primary/accessory use, Liquor stores ,Retail Sales, Retail Uses , Parking lots and garages , Museums , Laundromats , Ice cream parlors,Meat or fish markets , Plazas , Reducing salon, Shoe stores , Sporting goods , Tailor shops , Travel agency, Art gallery , Bakeries , Boat and marine supplies, and about forty other designated uses . These preceding permitted uses were taken directly out of the current "Downtown Specific Plan" adopted November 1983 as code #4 . 7 .01 , for my lots in District 5 . It would not be fair , nor make sense for my lots fronting on 5th St . not to stay in the same District 5 as my opposite side of 5th St . Being the fact that I face the same street as the opposite side .of 5th St . and bear the same traffic I should remain in the same District 5 . On October 19 , 1992 1 filed a letter with the city counc i 1 opposing the Coultroup project #92- 17 in which Coultroup was granted waiver for 496 parking spaces needed for the commercial portion of his project. I spoke to the city council expressing my worries that my block could never be built because Coultroup would use up the necessary parking. I also told Mike Adams at a Town Hail meeting last year (regarding the new specific plan) that its unfair to give waiver for Coultroup ' s 496 needed parking spaces . Mike Adams said that if Coultroup ' s plan passes than all the rest of the commercial -1- �1l -2- zoned areas in the redevelopment areas will have their parking requirements waived too . Mike Adams also said that he would see that the boundaries don ' t change on my block , after I accused the city of changing my properties zoning so I would no longer be commercial and therefore not be entitled to the parking waiver received by Coultroup . It ' s no surprise I was lied to after reading an article in the newspaper dated August 12 , 1993 regarding Huntington Beach Community Development in which it said " lying by supervisors in the department had been identified as a "behavioral pattern and characteristic attributable to the department . "" If after all these years of investment and payment of property taxes , the zoning and permitted uses changes due to strong arm tactics to bring about boundary changes and subsequent District changes I will suffer irreparable financial losses . The losses suffered will be so great It will force me to vigorously protect my properties ' s value through legal action against the City of Huntington Beach, each individual council member and any one else who can be held accountable to this systematic approach to devalue my property. Before this has to happen, please deny this very unfair amendment. Than o ;/ M i 6hae 1 Tater RECE'VELiMND MAUt A - P"...i OF THE RECORD AT \� fc�pJNY1� 1` Io. MEETING RECEIVED CITY CLERK �1 C!1 Y OF 1, AA N0. HUNTII,GTON E: ?. CALIF. OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK DEC 37 #93 ' CONNIE BROCKWAY TO: City Council , and Howard Zelefsky FROM: Michael Tater ;Owner two continious lots Dist . 5 Comm. zoned SUBJECT: DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN CODE AMENDMENT #92-5 DATE : December 4 , 1993 IDear City Council Members ,Mayor , Howard Zelefsky , I am writing to you again, to urge you to not alter the current boundaries of Dist . 5 from Specific Plan dated November 1983, see my previous letter dated September 27 , 1993. The value of my property ( in our family for 30 years) , will suffer greatly if this District change is implemented by the City Council . On October 25 , 1993 the City Council approved Resolution 6522 , establishing an in- lieu parking fee for all of the Downtown Specific Plan area, for $400/ space. With this parking plan approved my block is now ready to build WE HAVE FINALLY OVERCOME THE MAJOR PROBLEM OF WHERE TO PUT THE CARS, now that we can pay for off site parking because you passed resolution # 6522 . My family held on to this property for about thirty years patiently waiting for you to fulfill your promise of off site parking so we could build commercial as zoned. Now our reward for trusting in you and waiting is for you to change the boundaries of District 5 so that we cannot build our lifelong dream of commercial . It is not fair ,nor make sense for you to change the boundaries to force us into District 4, where we would be able to build only half the size as in District 5 . Plus in Dist . 4 we could no longer build commercial , instead we would have to build offices . We all know as fact that downtown the offices just don ' t rent, but the commercial does rent . Therefore we are lucky to have property that is zoned commercial , specially now that the parking in- lieu resolution approved . To force us into District 4 will strip us of our valuable zoning , reduce drastically our allowable building size and permitted uses . Furthermore it makes far more sense to have both sides of Fifth Street with complementing uses . If you don ' t leave our property in District 5 we will be forced into litigation with The City Of Huntington Beach . We feel you are discriminating against us . How do you explain that while attempting to downzone our current allowable building size, you give the Coultroup project (on Fifth St . ) all the variances they request to grow in building size ignoring all setbacks . The Fifth Amendment to the U . S . Constitution states : " . . . nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation . " " U. S . courts have ruled that regulations and other policies that prevent a property owner from using property as the owner wants , or that adversely affect the value of property, can be viewed as a taking or "partial " taking . In such cases , just compensation is due a property owner . " c Downtown Huntington Beach PARKING MASTER PLAN i I � Planning Commission Approved July 7, 1993 DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN Table of Contents Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 History. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 ThePlan. . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 ParkingSupply. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Parking Utilization. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Parking Demand. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20 Attachments : 1. Existing and Proposed Land Use Analysis 2 . Parking Structure Utilization Survey 3 . Downtown On-Street Parking Survey 4 . Downtown Parking Analysis DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN INTRODUCTION Historically, in the City of Huntington Beach, parking has been the number one issue of concern when considering any proposed change. That concern has transformed into the driving consideration for approving or denying development projects in the Downtown area . The provision of adequate parking is vital to the successful operation of any commercial area . Residents, business owners, visitors, developers and planners each have different definitions of the word adequate when it pertains to -parking. Parking strategies for the Downtown Huntington Beach area are complicated further by the proximity of the beach and the different types of parking needs for the various beach uses . Over the years, Huntington Beach has - had a number of parking strategies prepared. These studies have identified various procedures to satisfy the parking needs of different types of users . Over time, it has been necessary to modify the recommendations to accommodate the ever changing desires of the City' s redevelopment efforts . Despite these changes the basic principals still hold true. Parking spaces for Downtown shoppers - should be provided in convienent locations within or immediately adjacent to the Downtown area, and should be in both on-street and off-street locations (including parking lots and structures) . Presently, public parking opportunities exist in the Downtown area . A public parking structure has been constructed and on-site subterranean parking facilities have been provided in private development projects . This, coupled with a restriping of the public streets to accommodate diagonal parking, has provided the downtown area with a current surplus of parking spaces . The purpose of this study is to assure that an -adequate supply of parking is planned to accommodate the remainder of Downtown development and rehabilitation. Parking Master Plan -1- (1915D) o m' a QQ�QQO fl( IIDQ?p p'l Qo may a D� 6dfl °�� p ��II._000G7O��,1 •nnoo� fC7�l� O 0 0�CCI7D� ��OOOt�� Op��O� \ y F -Awl - r r� rf I 111f1 it ._�� rl� •� ���1`:�r'(� t_�' r' /�l „�> (,t��• V, a I1rl fj o • � i �: HISTORY In 1985, the City (in conjunction with the firm of Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Quade and Douglas , Inc. ) prepared a Parking Facilities Plan. The general concept for the plan was based on Downtown Huntington Beach becoming a major activity center in the region, providing a variety of shopping, dining and recreational opportunities to visitors, as well as, year round residents . The plan called for four (4) parking structures of 300 spaces each in remote corners of the Downtown. This scheme along with on-street and off-street parking was intended to accommodate approximately 500, 000 square feet of retail/restaurant/office activity including three (3) hotels . The parking demand projections for this plan - were based on the assumption that parking facilities are more efficiently utilized when a group of different land uses share a parking facility. Therefore, a reduction factor of 20% of the City' s parking code requirement was recommended . This was justified by the mix of uses in the core area . However, due to the high cost of - land assembly and construction cost associated with four (4) separate structures, this plan was not pursued. In 1986 a new Downtown Master Plan was prepared by 3D International and adopted by the City. This plan identified two (2) parking structures of 600 spaces each in the Downtown core area. One (1) in the second block and one (1) in the third block both within one-half (1/2) block of Main Street . These structures along with subterranean parking under both the Main-Pier Phase I and Main-Pier Phase II projects and expanded parking facilities along the ocean side of Pacific Coast Highway would be able to accommodate over 1, 000, 000 square feet of Downtown commercial activity. This plan was partially implemented with the construction of two (2) levels of . parking (296 spaces) below the Main-Pier Phase I project (Pierside Pavilion) and with the construction of the first public parking structure in the second block of Main Street (815 spaces) . However, in an effort to pursue additional redevelopment projects and attempt to make each project more cost effective, the additional parking structure in the third block and the subterranean parking in the Main-Pier Phase II project were eliminated. The result of these actions and the desire to reduce land use intensities created the need to prepare the Downtown Village Concept and a new Downtown Parking Master Plan. Parking Master Plan -3- (1915D) LEGEND % PARKING MASTER PLAN / \ AREA 1 A. Main Pier Two B. Pierside Pavilion/Pier Colony \�/ \ C. Second Block Rehab. D. H.B. Promenade E. Third Block West F. Post Office Block 40\ ��9 AREA 2 / / 'L�9 G. Town Square < ✓ H. Forth Block East I. Art Center Block ORANGE — — —AVE. 1 OLIVE AVE. N ~ ... <: F- Z :< I . _ r i = Q Z Z - -� - -' — ' WALNUT AVE. — i r I Parking Master Plan ,, (PMA PN.COM THE PLAN The new Downtown Parking Master Plan is based on a shared parking concept . Shared parking in effect allows one (1) parking space to serve two (2) or more individual land uses without conflict . Shared parking relies on the variations in the peak parking demand for different uses . In other words parking demands will fluctuate in relationship to the mix of uses by hour, day of week and season. The proper mix will create an interrelationship among different uses and activities which result in a reduction of the demand for parking . Therefore, an overall reduction to the City' s required parking should be -permitted. The effectiveness of a shared parking - plan is dependent upon the control of many variables . Of prime concern is the location and availability of parking facilities . The location of parking in relation to Downtown commercial areas is constrained by the availability of land, its high cost (either in dollars or in lost opportunities) and the distance which people are willing to walk from centralized lots or structures to reach their destination. Studies have shown that in order to. receive optimum utilization by shoppers, a parking facility should be within 300 to 500 feet of the commercial use which it serves . For workers, or other- people who are _parking for the whole day, the. distance can be as great as 1, 500 feet . These constraints must be considered when evaluating possible locations for parking facilities : The Downtown core area is centered along the Main Street commercial corridor. The Downtown Master Plan encourages a concentration of commercial activity along Main Street and, thus producing the greatest parking demand. Parking Master Plan -5- (1915D) DOWNTOWN LAND USE MASTER PLAN Block Restaurant Retail Office Miscellaneous AREA 1 (square feet) (square feet) (square feet) (square feet) A 22,798 30,953 40,299 B 31,773 27,834 16,000 30,000 C 29,785 37,365 22,175 (1,750 D 5,000 24,073 3,000 seat theatre) E ------- 19,000 8,000 F 4,000 A 24,200 13,000 Sub Total 93,356 162,425 102,474 AREA 2 G ------- 25,000 4,700 10,575 H ------- 20,000 ------- (Art Ctr) I 7,946 2,500 ------- Sub total 7,946 47,500 4,700 Total 101,302 209,925 107,174 Master Plan 100,000 220,000 100,000 50,000 Parking Master Plan -6- (1915D) In order to properly analyze the distinctively different parking needs, this commercial corridor divides into two (2) distinct areas north and south of Orange Avenue. Area 1 - The area south of Orange Avenue along Main Street provides the greatest amount of public parking opportunities both off-street and on-street . Area 1 will have the greatest number of visitor serving and seasonal commercial uses including year round entertainment . This area will also have the greatest concentration of expanded commercial, restaurant and office uses, and therefore, the majority of the public parking spaces should be provided in this area . Area 2 - The area north of Orange Avenue along Main Street provides limited amounts of public parking opportunities . This area is still part of the Downtown core. However, the commercial uses in Area 2 will cater more to the year round residents, therefore, additional on-street short term parking (20 minute) should be provided. This area will be a mixed use area with a significant amount of residential uses, therefore, the need for commercial and restaurant parking has been reduced . Another variable in providing an adequate supply of parking concerns the mix of anticipated activities and uses in the Downtown area . The success of this parking plan depends on controlling the types and amounts of retail, restaurant and office uses in the Downtown. The Downtown Master Plan anticipates a total development scenario of approximately 450, 000 to- 500, 000 square feet of commercial activity. The final variable requires the implementation of regulations to the parking resources through parking rates, time limits and other methods which should be adjusted periodically to maintain the optimum use of all parking facilities . Parking Master Plan -7- (1915D) LEGEND A. Main Pier Two B. Pierside Pavilion/Pier Colony ♦ C. Second Block Rehab. D. H.B. Promenade �/� / \ ♦ E. Third Block West F Post Office Block G. Town Square I y� H. Forth Block East I. Art Center Block sf - I - \ ORANGE AVE. ♦ P. '1'G,r♦ f I f fMr ���'F♦ OLIVE — — E.— N \ =I Izl D - �� rl z z __ -- _ - -------------- - _ _ � N WALNUT _ --------'_-- 11 B 11 PACIFIC COAST HWY. I I I I - I I - . — — — Downtown Metered Parking Parkina Master Plan „ R101MPCDR PARKING SUPPLY The first step in the preparation of the Downtown Parking Master Plan is to know the amount of public parking facilities currently available. An inventory of the existing Downtown on-street parking spaces was prepared by the City' s Traffic Engineering staff and a verification study was conducted by Robert Bein, William Frost and Associates (Attachment No. 3) . - This study surveyed each block in the Downtown area and determined the on-street parking potential . The survey indicates approximately 778 total on street parking spaces are available in the Downtown area . The study reveals that nearly forty percent of these parking spaces are unmet ered and the majority of them are only charging $. 25 per hour. Although the survey identified 778 total parking spaces only half of those -spaces are suitable for the -commercial demands of the Downtown area . The remaining spaces are either in residential areas or are too great a distance from the commercial uses . DOWNTOWN ON STREET PARKING SUMMARY BLOCK Metered Free Total AREA 1 -Third Street 21 27 48 Main Street 82 82 Fifth Street 116 116 Walnut Avenue 14 7 21 Olive Avenue 11 15 26 Orange Avenue 16 16 Sub Totals 244 65 309 AREA 2 Metered Free Total Main Street 39 9 48 Pecan Avenue 17 17 Frankfort Avenue 10 10 Acacia Avenue 18 18 Sub'Totals 39 54 93 Totals 283 119 402 Parking Master Plan -9- (1915D) LEGEND A. Main Pier Two B. Pierside Pavilion/Pier Colony / C. Second Block Rehab. D. H.B. Promenade E• Third Block West F Post Office Block I G. Town Square ( y H. Forth Block East I ��y L Art Center Block f� AW ORANGE AVE. OLIVE AVE. n M N - __ -- WALNUT AVE. - - PACIFIC COAST HWY. L - - - -- - ( D ( - - - - - -.- - - - - - -- - - - - - -- - i i I , Off Street Parking Lots Parkins Master Pion ... raFFSIPICCnM In addition to the 402 on street public parking spaces, the Downtown area has 1, 111 existing parking spaces in structured facilities, 309 spaces in existing surface lots with an additional 164 plus spaces planned. On-site parking has always been a major component of large development projects . The combined studies indicate that the total parking supply available at maximum build out will be approximately 1, 984 spaces . There are 1, 714 parking spaces in Area 1 and 270 spaces in Area 2 . These spaces are a combination of on-street public, on-site public and on-site private spaces . Continued monitoring of the Downtown areas parking supply will be a necessary task as the uses change over time . Downtown On-Site Parking Summary Block AREA 1 EXISTING PROPOSED FINAL A 56 75 75 B 296 . --- 296 C 6 --- 6 D 815 --- 815 E 132 --- 0 F 25 --- 25 Subtotal 1,330 75 1,217 B ock AREA 2 EXISTING _PROPOSED FINAL G 17 --- 17 H 61 89 150 I 10 --- 10 Subtotal 88 89 177 Total 1,418 164 1,394 Total 1,582 Ultimate Total 1,394 On-Street 402 TOTAL DOWNTOWN PARKING - 1984 ULTIMATE DOWNTOWN PARKING - 1.796 Parking Master Plan -11- (1915D) PARKING STRUCTURE UTILIZATION STUDY TIME 2-19-93 2-20-93 5-29-93 5-30-93 5-31-93 OF DAY No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % 10:00 am 36 4.4 43 5.3 150 18.4 131 16.1 114 14.0 12:00 pm 58 7.1 52 6.4 3:00 pm 84 10.3 165 20.2 418 51.3 413 50.7 428 52.5 6:00 pm 138 16.9 232 28.5 1 8:00 pm 425 52.1 370 45.4 278 34.1 12:00 am 367 45.0 272 33.4 70 8.6 Note: Total Public Parking Spaces 815 Source: Greer 8nd Co. City of Huntingtin Beach Department of Community Services Parking Master Plan -12- (1915D) PARKING UTILIZATION In order to better determine the true effectiveness of a shared parking approach for Huntington Beach, Greer and Company prepared a Downtown Parking Analysis (see Attachment No . 4) . This study reviewed the inventory of existing public and private parking spaces and then surveyed the utilization of these spaces . The study also reviewed the existing and proposed land uses and the current . and future parking demand. The study indicated that the on-street metered parking spaces are used nearly 100% of the time during peak business hours, while the subterranean parking facilities within the Mai-n Pier I . project are used less than 25% of the time. The study also . showed strong activity in the use of the parking lots in the third block on Main Street (50%) , while the public parking structure usage for the same time period was only 20-30% of capacity. The - study then concluded that the area had a great surplus of parking opportunities . . During the time of this study the Downtown area was approximately 10% vacant. However, due to the time of year when the study was conducted, additional information was necessary. Therefore, the Downtown Parking Analysis survey information has been augmented with operational statistics of the Downtown Parking Structure for selective peak periods . The additional survey data' was collected over Memorial Day weekend (May 29 - 31, 1993) . During this weekend, the City experienced good weather conditions, thereby increasing the parking demand. The survey revealed that on this busy weekend with numerous' new businesses open, there were still nearly half of the spaces in the parking structure available for use at the peak demand times . Parking Master Plan -13- (1915D) LEGEND , -:X / PARKING MASTER PLAN AREA A. Main Pier Two B. Pierside Pavilion/Pier Colony C. Second Block Rehab. D. H.B. Promenade E. Third Block West F. Post Office Block / 1 \�'L�9 AREA 2 G. Town Square ?� H. Forth Block-East I. Art Center Block - ORANGE — — —AVE. OLIVE AVE. 4.; z F Q Z Z WALNUT AVE.10 JL y _ B .:. :PAQ IFS:C,4AU HW _ I J Parking Master Plan -14- fPAWTPN.CDR1 PARKING DEMAND The final analysis compares the intended mix of uses and the number of parking opportunities . The shared parking concept relies on three (3) assumptions which will result from the proper blend of uses and activities . 1. The first assumption recognizes that various uses have different peak parking demands . For example retail and restaurant uses have a peak parking period different from offices . In Huntington Beach many of the restaurant uses also have different peak times . Some restaurants cater to a morning and lunch customers- while . others are primarily open for dinner . Time differentials can also refer to seasonal activity which demands different attention. Huntington Beach has always experienced a greater demand of its parking resources in the summer months . 2 . The second assumption is based on the idea that people who work and live in an area also shop in that same area. This captive market of office workers and residents are likely to be many of the restaurant and retail customers . This is particularly true for the Downtown area, due to its rather isolated location from other commercial centers . 3 . The third assumption derives from observation that in an active commercial center patrons generally shop at numerous locations on a single auto trip. In order to realize this concept a variety of activities must be offered in the commercial center . The plan does not address residential parking in the shared parking concept . - All required residential parking shall be provided on-site for each project . Parking Master Plan -15- (1915D) DOWNTOWN VACANCY RATES (February 1993) BLOCK SQUARE FOOTAGE % VACANT A 50, 500 21. 19 (10, 700 sf) B 75, 607 11 . 08 (8, 375 sf) C 90, 925 0 D 32, 073 0 E 25, 163 26 . 62 (8, 538 sf) F 27, 825 0 G 29 , 700 11 . 11 (3 ,300 sf) H 32 ,250 24 . 81 (8 , 000 sf) I 21, 021 0 Total : 385, 064 10 . 11 (38, 913 sf) Source: City of Huntington Beach Departments of Community Development and Economic Development Parking Master Plan -16- (1915D) As stated before, maximum buildout for the Downtown area will be between 450, 000 - 500, 000 square feet of commercial activities . Area one will contain approximately 350, 000 to 400, 000 square feet with the remaining 50, 000 to 100, 000 square feet of activity occurring in Area 2 . The traditional code required parking for this intensity and mix of commercial activities would indicate a need for approximately 2, 700 parking spaces in Area 1. This would require 1, 000 additional parking spaces over the current and anticipated supply. Although this is a 40% reduction, the mix of - activities is ideal for the shared parking - approach. A comparable - reduction of- 33% is also identified for Area 2 (code required parking is approximately 300 spaces with a supply of approximately 200 spaces) . Therefore, the Downtown Parking Master Plan proposes an overall reduction of the code required number of parking spaces based on these assumptions along with a proposed maximum buildout of commercial activities . Parking Master Plan -17- (1915D) DOWNTOWN PARKING REQUIREMENTS Block Code Required Parking with (Reduction Factor) Restraurant Retail Office Misc. Total - Adjusted _ Area 1 (25%) (25%) (80%)- (*) Total A 230 (58) 155 (39) 160 (128) 545 (225) 320- B 320 (80) 140 (35) 64 (51). 583 (233) 1107 (399) 708 C 300 (75) 185 (46) 88 (70) 573 (191) 382 D 50 (13) 120 (30) 12 (11) 182 (54) 128 E - 95 (24) 32 (26) 127 (50) 77 F 40 (10) 120 (30) 52 (42) 212 (82) 130 Sub Total 940 (236) 815 (204) 480 (328) 583 (233) 2746(1001) 1745 Area 2 (0%) - (50%) (50%) Total G - 125 (63) 19 (10) 144 (73) 71 H - 100 (50) 100 (50) 50 I 80 (0) 13 (7) 93 ( 7) 86 Sub Total 80 (0) 238 (120) 19 (10) 337 (130) 207 Total 1020 (236) 1053 (324) 427 (338) 583 (233) 3033(1131) 1902 Reduction: 1 space for every 5 seats Parking Master Plan -18- (1915D) RECOMMENDATIONS In order to determine the appropriate amount of parking which should be available, an adjusted parking demand was calculated using the previously stated assumption. This adjusted parking requirement was calculated for both Area 1 and Area 2 . The location and type of parking resources available in the Downtown area recognizes that two different and distinct implementation approaches ' are necessary for each of the areas . Area 1 - In Area 1 the restaurant and retail parking requirement was reduced by twenty-five percent and the office requirement by eighty percent . In addition the theatre parking requirement was reduced from the existing code requirement of one parking space for every third seat to one parking space for every fifth seat.. This reduction As based on surveys conducted by the theatre industry. These reductions recognize the time differential and captive market concepts . Expanding commercial activity in this area remains the focus of the Downtown Master Plan, however, no additional parking for new or expanded commercial, restaurant and office uses should be required. The majority of public parking opportunities currently exist in this area and the current parking supply exceeds the parking demand. This parking supply will continue to be adequate provided the total square footage of uses do not exceed the Master Plan - projections . As a means of assuring an adequate future supply of public parking spaces, a site should be identified and preserved for potential parking structure. This area should be within the Main Pier- II project area . Parking Master Plan -19- (1915D) Area 2 - In Area 2 the retail and office requirement was reduced by fifty percent . This recognizes that the retail activity will be primarily convenience commercial catering to local residents on short term shopping trips . The office parking requirement reduction is based on the minimal number of office opportunities and the apparent demand that any new office uses will need to provide on-site parking . Restaurant uses were not given a reduction factor . Numerous conflicts are created between restaurant and residential uses, therefore, restaurants should be required to provide one hundred percent of their parking requirement on-site. The existing Downtown public parking facilities are not conveniently located for use in this area, thus, a combination of expanded on-street and on-site parking may be -necessary for new or expanded commercial uses . However, providing the commercial activity remains primarily service related commercial, the existing supply of on-street and on-site parking should be sufficient for anticipated uses . All future development projects must be carefully reviewed for parking concerns . The mix of commercial and residential activities can justify a parking reduction and additional parking may not be necessary. To further assure parking availability all parking spaces should be limited term (20 minutes maximum) . Also a site should be identified and preserved for a potential surface parking area. This location should be near the intersection of 6th and Lake Streets . Parking Master Plan -20- (1915D) ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS In order to assure the most efficient and effective use of the City' s parking facilities, the following recommendations should be implemented: City Initiated: Immediate Implementation: I. Increase the parking meter fee from $.25 per hour to $1 . 00 per hour for all downtown meters with a two (2) hour maximum stay. 2 . Maximize the amount of on-street parking spaces to diagonal and reduce the number of parallel spaces . 3 . Prior to the Downtown Parking Master Plan becoming - operational, the Redevelopment Agency/City must identify and acquire two (2) sites, one (1) in Area 1 and one (1) in Area 2 for future parking opportunities . 4 . Designate two (2) additional parking facility locations : a. Include an option for an additional parking structure in - the Main-Pier Phase II project area, Block 104 . b. Include a surface parking facility at the north end, between Sixth Street and Pecan Avenue, adjacent to Lake Street . 5 . Eliminate all free public parking locations in the downtown. 6 . Improve the signage for parking facilities . - Short Term (within 1 year) : 1 . Require residential parking passes for the non-commercial districts in the downtown area. 2. Require the mandatory purchase of annual parking passes for all employees at the time of business license renewal . 3 . Require designated employee parking areas in the remote portions .of all parking facilities . 4 . Conduct annual parking analysis to forecast when actual number of spaces available requires new parking resources . 5 . Investigate use of shared beach - parking to accommodate after 6: 00 p.m. peak hour uses, e.g . restaurant, theaters, and/or employee. Parking Master Plan -21- (1915D) Based on Entitlements : 1. Require on-site parking for all projects one-half (1/2) block or greater in size. 2 . Require that any parking in-lieu fees be full cost recovery based on the parking requirement for specific uses . However, allow that these fees be paid over an amortization period. 3 . Require valet parking once the maximum buildout of restaurant activity has been obtained. 4 . Commercial projects greater than 10, 000 square feet in size shall be required to submit a parking management plan consistent with the Downtown Parking Master Plan. 5 . Require valet and/or remote parking for special events and activities . Parking Master Plan -22- (1915D) CONCLUSION The provision of adequate parking is vital to the successful operation of any commercial area . Therefore, many controls will be necessary and rates adjusted to maintain an adequate supply of conveniently located public parking . The required parking by City codes does not take into consideration the public use patterns of the Downtown area . Establishing the overall parking demand for the Downtown simply by adding the peak parking requirements for individual land uses produces an estimate that is unrealistically high. The true parking demand needs to be determined for mixed use project. The mixed use project identified for Downtown Huntington Beach in the Master Plan can be accomplished with limited additional public parking facilities and proper land use and operational controls . ATTACHMENTS 1 . Existing and Proposed Land Use Analysis 2 . Parking Structure Utilization Survey 3 . Downtown On-Street Parking Survey 4 . Downtown Parking Analysis Parking Master Plan -23- (1915D) EXISTING AND PROPOSED LAND USE ANALYSIS Prepared by the Department of Community Development MAY 1993 ATTACHMENT NO. LEGEND A. Main Pier Two B. Pierside Pavillion/Pier Colony C. Second Block Rehab. D. H.B. Promenade E. Third Block West F. Post Office Block G. Town Square H. North Main Street Block I. Art Center Block 1 S� It s� H o� 1 G ' S: r �o Orange Ave. u u ✓aui u u `.��� F V) 1 _ u Ln Ulive Ave. S�^ C D Walnut Ave. A B I c L e9 C y t0VIL Pacific Coast Highway I — 1 - i I AT Ar.HMENT NO. to Block A Existing and Proposed Development PRE-DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ADDRESS USE SIZE PARKING NAME RETAIL RESTAURANT OFFICE OTHER PARKING 101 Main Retail 2,500 0 Abdelmuti Project 13,953 2,798 30,299 75 Residential (13 du) 109 Main Retail 2,500 0 111 Main Retail 2,500 O 113 Main Retail 2,500 0 115 Main Retail 2,500 0 Office 2,500 406 PCH Restaurant 2,200 0 410 PCH Retail 4,000 10 (A-1) 117 Main Restaurant 2,500 0 Coultrup Project 12,000 20,000 10,000 N/A Office 2,500 119 Main Retail 2,500 0 (Block 104) 121 Main Retail 2,500 0 123 Main Retail 1,500 2 416 PCH Retail 3,000 12 Residential (4 du) 122 5th Auto Sales 12,000 12 (A-2) 151 5th Theatre 5,500 50 Coultrup Project n/a n/a n/a Residential (80 du) 501 Walnut Office 1,500 0 (Block 105) 505 Walnut Residential 1,200 0 0 du) 504 PCH Retail 1,250 0 508 PCH Restaurant 1,250 8 _D Residential 2 _ 0 du) 520 PCH Retail 1,500 16 (A-3) Residential (1 du) .i 127 Main Retail 3,500 6 Lane/Terry(A-4) 5,000 n/a 513 Walnut Retail 2,500 0 Worthy Project (A-5) Bed Breakfast 0 2 du) 12 Residential 0 2 du) �) 519 Walnut Retail 800 0 128 6th Residential (1du) TOTAL: 30,9531 22,798 40,299 87 Block B Existing and Proposed Development PRE-DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ADDRESS USE SIZE PARKING NAME RETAIL RESTAURANT OFFICE OTHER PARKING 112 Main Retail 2,500 Pierside Pavilion 14,459 23,773 16,000 Theatre (1750 seats) 296 114 Main Retail 2,500 Residential (4 du) 306 PCH Nite Club 5,500 25 302 PCH Auto Repair 8,250 115 3rd Auto Repair 4,500 12 301 Walnut Office 2,400 311 Walnut Office 2,000 317 Walnut Retail 1,000 (B 1) Residential (1du) 102 PCH 85 Pier Colony Residential 0 30 du) 112 3rd 24 118 3rd Res. (2 du) 120 3rd Res. 0 du) 122 3rd Res. (4 du) 124 3rd Res. 0 du) 217 Walnut Res. (1 du) 215 Walnut Res. 0 du) 213 Walnut Res. (1 du) 121 2nd Res. 0 du) (8-2) 126 Main Retail/Res. (6 5,875 Standard Market (B- 5,875 3,000 du) 3) 116 Main Retail 2,500 2,500 118 Main Retail 2,500 2,500 120 Main Retail 2,875 2,500 122 Main Retail 1,250 2,500 124 Main Retail 2,125 2,500 TOTAL: 27,834 31,773 16,000 296 C� r.. t i Block C Existing and Proposed Development PRE-DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ADDRESS USE SIZE PARKING NAME RETAIL RESTAURANT OFFICE OTHER PARKING 201 Main Restaurant 2,125 4,500 5,000 203 Main Retail 2,875 205 Main Retail 1,650 1,650 207 Main Retail 4,900 4,900 209 Main Restaurant 2,000 2,000 211 Main Retail 2,625 2,625 675 213 Main Retail 540 540 213 1/2 Main Restaurant 585 585 Patio 1,000 215 Main Restaurant 1,750 1,750 1,800 Res. (6 du) Patio 750 217 Main MTG Room 1,000 1,000 Patio 1,500 221 Main Retail 2,500 6 4,250 9,100 4,200 223 Main Retail 1,750 Residential (4 du) 411 Olive Retail 2,000 6 4,400 2,400 412 Walnut Restaurant 1,800 3,600 Office 1,800 202 5th Res. (6 du) 1,600 Police 1,600 206 5th Res. (1 du) 208 5th Restaurant 4,000 2 1,000 3,000 Res. (2 du) Patio 500 214 5 th Auto Repair 5,000 5,000 3,000 218 5th Office 1,000 2 2,500 2,500 220 5th Office 1,000 2 2,500 2,500 222 5th Retail/Res. 3,500 4 3,500 3,500 (2 du) TOTAL: 37,3651 29,785 22,1751 1,600 it r.. a Block D Existing and Proposed Development PRE-DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ADDRESS USE SIZE PARKING NAME RETAIL RESTAURANT OFFICE OTHER PARKING 202 Main Retail 5875 Main Promenade 24,073 5,000 3,000 815 1750 208 Main Office 5,500 210 Main Retail 2,750 212 Main Retail/Res. 2,750 (6 du) 214 Main Retail/Res. 2,750 (6 du) 218 Main Retail 5,875 220 Main Retail 1,250 10 222 Main Office 1,500 224 Main Retail 2,938 226 Main Retail 2,938 228 Main Retail/Res. 2,938 6 (6 du) 209 3RD n/a 40 211 3RD Res. (6 du) 218 3RD n/a 30 221 3RD Res. 0 du) 223 3RD Res. (2 du) 225 3RD n/a 24 321 Walnut Office 1,000 TOTAL: 24,0731 5,000 3,0001 815 t Block E Existing and Proposed Development PRE-DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ADDRESS USE SIZE PARKING NAME RETAIL RESTAURANT OFFICE OTHER PARKING 303 Main Retail 500 12 Third Block West 19,000 8,000 Residential (68 du) 134 (comm) 305 Main Retail/Res. 1,750 4 (8 du) 307 Main Retail/Res. 1,750 4 (8 du) 309 Main Retail 2,938 8 311 Main Retail 1,600 20 325 Main n/a 40 302 5TH Retail 5,500 20 Office 5,500 310 5TH Retail/Res. 2,125 (2 du) 314 5TH Office 3,500 328 5TH Res. (1 du) 320 5TH n/a 25 TOTAL: 19,000 0 8,000 134 Block F Existing and Proposed Development PRE-DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ADDRESS USE SIZE PARKING NAME RETAIL RESTAURANT OFFICE OTHER PARKING 316 OhVe Post Office 3,575 5,000 Post Office 3575 316 Main (F-1) 318 Main Retail 1,250 6 6,000 4,000 8,000 320 Main Retail 1,250 6 322 Main Office 1,000 6 324 Main Office 1,000 2 326 Main Office 2,250 6 328 Main Retail 4,250 (F-2) 303 3rd Auto Repair 8,250 (F-3) 13,200 315 3rd Office 2,500 24 2,500 305 Orange Office 2,500 6 2,500 TOTAL: 24,200 4,000 13,000 1 . 1 t. Block G Existing and Proposed Development PRE-DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ADDRESS USE SIZE PARKING NAME RETAIL RESTAURANT OFFICE OTHER PARKING 420 5th Retail 2,500 Town Square 10,000 Residential (89 du) 15 (comm.) 416 Orange Res. 0 du) 408 5th Res. 0 du) 410 5th Res. (1 du) 412 5th Office 1,000 416 5th Res. 0 du) (G-1) 401 Main Retail 7,700 7,700 405 Main Retail We 17 4,000 411 Main Retail 3,300 3,300 417 Main Office 2,500 2,500 419 Main Office 2,200 2,200 TOTAL: 25,000 4,700 15 �r j � r. Block H Existing and Proposed Development PRE-DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ADDRESS USE SIZE PARKING NAME RETAIL RESTAURANT OFFICE OTHER PARKING 410 Main Retail 6,900 24 Fourth Block East 20,000 Residential (100 du) 150 424 Main Retail 8,500 428 Main Retail 5,500 438 Main Retail 2,550 440 Mein Retail 2,500 504 Main Retail (4 du) 6,300 401 Lake Res. (1 du) 405 Lake Res. (1 du) 407 Lake Res. 0 du) 409 Lake Res. (1 du) 421 Lake Res. (3 du) 427 Lake Res. (1 du) 431 Lake Res. (4 du) 435 Lake Res. (4 du) 437 Lake Res. (1 du) 443 Lake Res. 0 du) 505 Lake Res. (1 du) 201 Pecan Res. (1 du) 205 Pecan Res. (1 du) 209 Pecan Res. 0 du) TOTAL: 20,000 150 1 Block I Existing and Proposed Development PRE-DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ADDRESS USE SIZE PARKING NAME RETAIL RESTAURANT OFFICE OTHER PARKING 520 Main Restaurant 5,280 5,280 522 Main Restaurant 2,666 2,666 526 Main Retail/Res. 2,500 2,500 (3 du) 538 Main Office 10,575 10 Art Center 10,575 10 TOTAL: 2,500 7,946 10,575 10 1 , CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH TO Jim Engle Community Services Department FROM : Steve Benson , DATE : June 1 , 1993 SUBJECT MAIN PROMENADE PARKING STRUCTURE MEMORANDUM The following shows the number of autos parked at the Main Promenade during the past twelve • months. This number includes all paid autos, validations, pass holders, vendors and miscellaneous vehicles. n AUTOS - 1993 - May . . . . . . . . 29,812 April . . . . . . 27,887 March . . . . . . 28,236 February . . . 22, 188 January . . . . 21 ,470 1992 - December . . . 18,286 November . . . 21 ,646 October . . . . 20,238 September . . 21 ,284 Cj1i, Q�P9 ��73 August . . . . . 28,544 `��11�QN/�•�l��TQF July . . . . . . . 25,597 1Qp*i� June . . . . . . . 17,673 417 TOTAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . .282,861 Memorial Weekend - May 29, 30 & 31 , 1993 10 A.M. 3 P.M. 8 P.M. MIDNIGHT May 29 . . . . . . 150 418 425 367 30 . . . . . . 131 413 370 272 31 . . . . . . 114 428 278 70 TOTAL . . . . . . . 395 1 ,259 1 ,073 709 = 3,436 SB/p ATTACHMENT NO. 2 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH DOWNTOWN ON-STREET PARKING SURVEY SUMMARY x JUNE 81 1992 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS TRAFFIC ENGINEERING ATTACHMENT NO-Ja, 1 l ice' CITY OF HUNTIIVGTOI�1 BEACH INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION Ml;nTiNGTON BEACH TO: Robert E. Eichblatt, P.E., City Engineer FROM: James D. Otterson, P.E., P.L.S., Traffic Engine DATE: June 8, 1992 SUBJECT: Maximum Potential Parking Spaces in the Downtown Specific Plan Area INTRODUCTION An inventory of the existing downtown on-street parking spaces was conducted by the Traffic Engineering staff early this year. The result of that effort has now been finalized with the assistance of Robert Bein, William Frost and Associates (RBF). RBF has conducted extensive field verification of on-street parking. RBF has submitted a report on the findings with substantial evidence (i.e. AutoCad drawings for each downtown block) in support of the findings. A summary of the findings is presented herein. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS The Downtown parking survey .covered an area bounded by Pacific Coast Highway on the south, First Street on the east, Sixth Street. on the west, and Acacia Avenue on the north. The parking survey in May of 1992 found that there were 465 "defined" on-street parking spaces. "Defined" means that the parking space is either metered or marked on the pavement, for the purpose of this report. These "defined" parking spaces included 441 metered parking spaces and 24 marked but not metered parking spaces. In addition, there were a total of 7,395 linear feet of curb space "undefined" for on-street parking (i.e. parking space is neither metered nor marked on the pavement). These 7,395 linear feet of curb space can be marked on the pavement (or metered) for 313 on-street parking spaces. The total number of possible on- street - parking spaces in the study area is 778 spaces. The attached table (8 pages) presents an inventory of the on-street park- ing spaces by "block face" (i.e. one side of street between two cross streets). These "block face" counts can be aggregated to show the parking supply for each downtown block to enable a comparison of the supply with the forecasted 1 A=A ^1 I AY-♦1Y w 1.^. demand which is usually expressed on a block by block basis, or in any other manner as may be desired. FUTURE CONDITIONS The existing conditions may change in the future. For instance, since Walnut Avenue between First and Sixth Streets is classified as an Arterial Street curb parking on Walnut Avenue may be prohibited in the future. 46 existing plus 22 potential on-street parking spaces will be affected. The number of possible parking spaces in the study area will be reduced from 778 to 710 (i.e. 778 - 68 = 710) spaces. Additionally, potential future land developments in the downtown area may necessitate new curb cuts (and red curbs adjacent to the _ - curb cuts) which will also reduce the existing curb space for parking. PARKING METERS The marking of parking spaces on the pavement and/or the installation of parking meters will help to define the parking spaces and increase the existing utilization of curb space for parking. If parking meters are preferred over marking (i.e. painting) parking stalls, it is recommended that no parking meters be installed on any street north of Orange Avenue. Attachment: Parking Inventory (Table showing parking spaces by street and side of street). c.c. Ray Silver, Assistant City Administrator L s F. Sandoval, Director of Public Works arbara Kaiser, Director, Economic Development Mike Adams, Director of Community Development Department Ron Hagan, Director of Community Services Department 2 HUNTINGTON BEACH DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN AREA Page I of 8 VEHICULAR PARKING STUDY Jut) Number: 28709 Date: 0/2/92 L`•XISTINC CsXISTING CNI,STING METERED/ MARKED ;UNMARKED. PROPOSED STREET .` FROM 'GO MARJC.I;p. (UNMETE42ED) ;PARl�ING. PARKING PARKING SPACES PARKING SPACES (FT) SPACES FIRST STREET Pacific Coast Highway Walnut Avenue Wcm side of street 0 0 0 0 East side of street 0 0 0 0 FIRST STREET Walnut Avcnuc Olive Avcnuc West side of street 13 0 0 17 East side of street 19 0 0 20 FIRST STREET Olive Avcnuc Orange Avenue/ West side of street Altanta Avenue 0 0 0 0 East side of street 0 0 0 0 FIRST STREET SUBTOTAL 32 0 0 37 SECOND STREET Pacific Coast Highway Walnut Avenue West side of street 9 0 0 9 East side of street 9 0 0 9 SECOND STREET Walnut Avcnuc Olive Avcnuc West side of street 13 0 0 13 D East side of street 12 0 0 12 SECOND STREET Olive Avenue Orange Avcnuc Em West side of street 12 0 0 12 m East side.of street 12 0 0 12 z SECOND STREET SUBTOTAL G7 0 0 67 C) :EXIS"fIN.G EXISTING EXISTING;. METERGD/ MARKED UNNf':A K E D PROPOSED STREET I RnA1 '1.O MARICI.1) (lIN�41:'1'liltl:l)) 1'AItKINC: PARKING PARKING SPACES PARKING SPACES (I='I') SPACES THIRD STREET Walnut Avenue Olive Avenue. West side of street 11 0 0 1 1 Eust side of street 10 0 0 10 THIRD STREET Olive Avenue Orange Avenue West side of street 0 0 231 11 Eust side of street 0 0 330 16 LAKE STREET Ortmgc Avenue. Pecan Avenuc West side of street 0 0 526 24 East side of street 0 0 363 16 LAKE STREET Pecan Avenue Frankfort Avenuc West side of street 0 0 107 5 East side of street 0 0 155 7 LAKE STREET Frankfort Avenue Acacia Avenue, West side of street 0 0 54 3 East side of street 0 0 112 5 THIRD STREET/LAKE STREET SUBTOTAL 21 01 1,878 108 7 C a n Page 3of8 GX{STING EXISTING );XISTiNC MET I-RED/ MARKED t1N,M ARKED PROPOSED STREET FROM TQ MARKlrD (U.NMETERED) PA:RRING. PARKING PARKIN.G.S,PACES PARKING SPACES (FT) SPACES MAIN STREET Pacific Coast Highway Walnut Avenue Wcst side of street 10 0 0 10 East side of street 14 0 0 14 MAIN STREET Walnut Avenue Olive Avcnuc West side of street 8 0 0 8 East side of street 16 0 0 16 MAIN STREET Olive Avenue Orange Avenue West side of street 18 0 0 18 East side of street 16 0 0 16 MAIN STREET West side of street Orange Avenue Frankfort Avenue 24 0 0 24 East side of street Orange Avenue Pecan Avcuue 15 0 0 15 MAIN STREET Wctit side of street East side of street Pecan Avenue Frankfort Avenue 0 2 0 2 MAIN STREET West side of street Frankfort Avenue Acacia Avenue 0 3 0 3 East side of street Frankfort Avenue Acacia Avcnuc 0 4 0 4 MAIN STREET SUBTOTAL 121 _ 9 0 130 n m z z o . Page 4 of 8 LIS`I[NG EXISTING .EXISTING METERED/ MARKED UNMARKED PROPOSED 'MARKED (UNMETERED)STREET FROM PARKIN.G PARKING PARKING SPACL•S PARKING SPACES (FT) SPACES FIFTH STREET Pacific Coasl Ilighwny Wulnul Avenue West side of street l8 0 0 18 East side of street 20 0 0 20 37i FIFTH STREET Walnut Avcnue Olive Avenue West side of street 20 0 0 20 East side of street 19 0 0 19- FIFTH STREET Olive Avenuc Orange Avenue ICI West side of street 22 0 0 22 It East side of street 17 0 0 17 FIFTH STREET SUBTOTAL 116 0 0 116 SIXTH STREET Pacific Coasl Highway Walnut Avenuc West side of street 0 0 173 7 -East side of strect 0 0 146 6 SIXTH STREET Walnut Avenuc Olive Avcnue West side of street 0 0 272 11 East side of street 0 0 282 13 SIXTH STREET Olive Avenuc Orange Avenuc West side of street 0 0 287 13 East side of street 0 0 272 11 n SIXTH STREET Orange Avenue Main Street West side of strect 0 0 556 25 East side of street, 0 0 443 18 m SIXTH STREET SUBTOTAL 0 oil2,431 104 G. 0 l Page 5 of 8 EXISTING EXISTIN.O :EXISTING :MET•ERLD/ My RK'ED UNM:A,RKED PROPOSED STREET FROM TO M:A. RCQ (UNMLTCRGD), ;PARKING PARKING PAI KIN.GrSPACES PARKING:6-.4C:ES (FT) SPACES WALNUT AVENUE Sixth Street Fifth Street North side of street 0 0 188 7 South side of street 0 0 204 9 WALNUT AVENUE Fifth Street Main Street North side of street 5 0 39 5 South side of street 5 0 45 7 WALNUT AVENUE Mnin Street Third Street North side of street 4 2 0 6 South side of street 0 0 97 3 WALNUT AVENUE Third Street Second Street North side of strut 6 0. 0 6 South side of street 7 0 0 8 WALNUT AVENUE Second Street Ist Street North side of street 7 0, 0 7 South side of street 10 0 0 10 WALNUT AVENUE SUBTOTAL 44 2 573 68 D 7 Z _ Papa 6 of 8 LXISTING LiXISf1NG EXISTING MET-ERED/ MARKED UNMARKED PROPOSED STREET FROM TO MARKED (UNMETERED) PARKING PARKING PARKING.SPACES PARKING SPACES (1="I') SPACES OLIVE AVENUE Sixth Street Fifth Strw North side of street 0 0 186 7 South side of street 0 0 157 5 OLIVE AVENUE Fifth Street Main Street North side of street 2 4 0 6 South side of street 4 0 85 7 OLIVE AVENUE Main Strcct Third Street North side of street 2 3 35 5 South side of street 3 4 0 8 OLIVE AVENUE: Third Street Second Slrccl Nurth side of*street 9 0 0 9 South side of street 9 0 0 9 OLIVE AVENUE Second Street Ist Street North side of street 6 0 0 5 South side of street 5 2 0 7 OLIVE AVENUE SUBTOTAL , 40 13 463 68 n m z z o Page 7 of 8 :;EXISTING EXISTING EXISTING: METERED/ MAtKED :UNMARKED PROPOSED STREET PROM TO PARKING PARKINGIARC PA[tfCING SPACES PARKING SPACES (FT) SPACES ORANGE AVENUE Sixth Street Fifth Street North side of street 0 0 231 10 South side of street 0 0 72 3 ORANGE AVENUE Fifth Street Main Street North side of street 0 0 98 4 South side of street 0 0 0 0 ORANGE AVENUE Maiq Street Third Street North side of street 0 0 154 5 South side of street 0 0 173 7 ORANGE AVENUE Third Street Sccond Street North side of street 0 0 0 0 South side of street 0 0 155 6 ORANGE AVENUE Sccond Street 1st Street North side of strcct 0 0 0 0 South side of street 0 0 0 0 1T PECAN AVENUE Main Street Lake Street North side of street 0 0 236 9 South side of street 0 0 221 8 PECAN AVENUE SUBTOTAL 0 0 457 17 CFRANKFORT AVEN Main Street Lake Street North side of street 0 0 106 4 South side of street 0 0. 134 6 rl s i FRANKFORT AVENUE SUBTOTAL 0 0 240 10 _s ' Page 8of8 EXISTING EXISTING EXISTING 'METERED/ MARKED UNMARKED PROPOSED STREET FROM TO MARKED ..(.UNMETERED) :P..P,RICING PARKING PARKING SPACES PARKING SPACES (rT) SPACES. ACACIA AVENUE Main Street Lake Street North side of street 0 0 240 10 South side of street 0 0 230 8 ACACIA AVENUE SUBTOTAL 01 0 470 18 TOTAL 441 24 7,395 778 7 a TI G= IC DOWNTOWN. PARKING......... .. ANALYSIS for :: : DOWNTOWN HUNTIN T N E SPECIFIC PLAN ........ .;.:. is�.-...;�....:.•.., .�. S n ;.:.`"i:'.:;: i":: PREPARED;: FOR: CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ;.... ... PREPARED".BY."; . : . . GREER CO En;ineers and Planners Anaheim, California APRIL 1993 NTi'A ^I 1t Mr"L 1r L �.. `J 7 � Y INTRODUCTION \\\ This report presents the results of the parking surveys and analyses for the proposed Downtown Specific Plan for the City of Huntington Beach. The Downtown area encompasses an 11-block core area and 7 blocks of peripheral area. A Downtown area map is shown in Figure 1 and identifies the various blocks within the study area. ATTACHMENT N0. 1a- Greer& Co., Engineers& Planners Downlown Parking Plan (359-01) City of Hunrinvrnn Rinrh t Ix LJ I (II � -1 I f� I � � I r /�' �,� � L- J, BLOCKS DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN, HUNTINGTON BEACH STUDY METHODOLOGY The study methodology consisted of surveys of the existing parking system within the Downtown area and analyses to identify parking demand parameters with which to project future parking needs for the development of the Downtown area in accordance with the Specific Plan: 1. Data Collection: Field surveys were conducted to inventory the existing public parking supply within the study area. The inventory included publicly owned and operated parking spaces both on-street and off-street, and privately owned parking spaces generally available for use by the general public. Residential parking was excluded from the inventory. 2. Parking Occupancy Survevs:. Surveys of parking occupancy, ie. the.number of parked vehicles at a given time, were conducted for both a weekday and a weekend day. Surveys were conducted for all on-street parking spaces and all public parking within the survey area. Surveys were conducted on Friday, February 19, 1993, and Saturday, February 20, 1993. The surveys were conducted at half hour intervals between 9:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. throughout both survey days. The survey data is presented in Appendix tables of this report. 3. Existing Parking Demand Analyses: Based on generalized land use data provided by City, staff, a parking demand ratio was determined for peak parking conditions. The peak parking demand ratio identifies the number of parked vehicles per. 1,000 square feet of existing development and reflects the mix of uses presently reflected in the study area. 4. Comparison of Parking Ratios: The peak parking demand ratio was compared to parking demand ratios provided by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) and the Urban Land Institute (ULI), and well as to code parking requirements for the generalized land uses. 5. Analvsis of Parking Demand Ratios: Using the current mix of land uses in the Downtown and the ITE and ULI parking demand ratios, the existing peak parking ratio for Downtown ATTACHMENT NO. � Greer& Co., Engineers& Planners Downtown Parking Plan (359-01) .-:_. r - as determined through the survey was segregated into parking ratios for each of the major land use categories. 6. Proi cted Parking Needs: Applying the parking ratios to the projected land uses within the Specific Plan together with an analysis of shared parking potential, the future parking needs for Downtown was projected. 7. Parking Locations: The spatial distribution of future parking needs was examined on a block by block basis. The space demand for each block together with the pedestrian emphasis for the village concept were used to identify the location of future parking and the number of spaces at each site. The City's "Main Promenade" parking structure was used as the central focus for parking within the Downtown area, particularly south of Orange Avenue. 8. Documentation: This report was prepared to document the objectives of the study, the data surveys, assumptions, analyses, conclusions and findings of the study, and to present specific recommendations for implementation of the Downtown parking plan. f ATTACHMENT NO. e Greer& Co., Engineers& Planners Downlown Parking Plan (359-01) ^- -11, - . '11 r PARKING SURVEYS This report chapter presents a discussion of the parking surveys and presents the survey results. PARKING INVENTORY The existing parking spaces in the Downtown study area were inventoried in order to establish an accurate count of spaces along with information as to any time restrictions, metered vs. unmetered, marked or unmarked, and parking fees for either pay parking or meter fees. The parking inventory included all on-street parking spaces within the study area including those that are used primarily for residential_parking. The off-street spaces.were limited to those spaces that are generally available for use by the general public. The "public" off-street parking spaces included those that are owned and operated by the City for general public parking, and those privately owned and operated spaces that are available to the public for customer or patron parking. For example, the survey did not include those off-street parking spaces at the Post Office that are used for parking and/or loading of postal trucks. The results of the parking inventory is tabulated in Table 1 and shown on Figures 2 through 4. Within the core area consisting of Blocks "A" through "I", there are currently a total of 1,880 parking. spaces with 430 on-street spaces and 1,450 off-street spaces. South of Orange Avenue, there are a total of 1,706 parking spaces with 342 on-street spaces and 1,364 off-street spaces. North of Orange, there a total of 174 parking spaces with 88 on-street spaces and 86 off-street spaces. The uses within these blocks are primarily commercial with some residential interspersed. The peripheral area includes the . five blocks designated B-1, C-1, D-1, E-1 and F-1, which lie between 5th and 6th Streets from Walnut to Orange, the block between 1st and 2nd Streets and between PCH and Walnut, and the blocks between 2nd and 3rd from Walnut to Orange. The uses in these blocks are primarily residential with the exception of a portion of the block between 1st and 2nd Streets from PCH to Walnut. Within the peripheral area, there are a total of 207 parking spaces with only 12 off-street parking spaces and the remaining 195 parking spaces are on-street. ATTACHMENT NO. Greer& Co., Engineers& Planners Downtown Parking Plan (359-011 -- - TABLE 1 PARKING INVENTORY GREER 8 CO. DOWNTOWN HUNTINGTON BEACH Engineers and Planners e xeevzeeee:eeveveeveeve=evaveevvvvevvvvvv===evevevvvvaveveavvevvvva-���--avevve--�----==vvvvvv�----vve-- -__-- ==vvevvevvvvvvvvvveeeeeee=eeeee==e CURB MARKED METERED 20-24 COST MARKED LOADING 20 MIN OFF BLOCK 2 HR 1 HR MIN HC NR 1 HR 20 MIN HC UNMARKED (YELLOW) (GREEN) STREET TOTAL -------------------------- --- ------------------------- ------------------- ------------------------- ---------- ------------------- ---------- ---------- Al ON-STREET BY BLOCK FACE ------------------------ 5TH 12 25C/hr 12 WALNUT 6 25C/hr 1 7 MAIN 12 25C/hr 12 PCH 7 25C/hr 7 ------------------------------- ------------------------- -----------=------- ------------------------- ---------- ------------------- ---------- ---------- A2 ON-STREET BY BLOCK FACE ------------------- 6TH 7 7 WALNUT 2 9 11 5TH 17 25C/hr 17 PCH 1 25C/hr 1 OFF STREET ------------------------ Public-Permit 2 54 56 ------------------------------- ------------------------- ------------------- ------------------------- ---------- -- ---------- ---------- ---------- B ON-STREET BY BLOCK FACE ------------------------ MAIN 11 2 13 WALNUT T 3 25C/30 min 10 1ST 9 25C/30 min 9 PCH 0 OFF STREET, Pierside Pavilion S1/30min 300 300 $6 max ------------------------------- ------------------------- ------------------- --------------- -------- ---------- ------------------- ---------- ---------- C ON-STREET BY BLOCK FACE ----------------------- 5TH 16 2 18 OLIVE 2 4 2 8 MAIN 6 2 8 WALNUT 8 8 OFF STREET ------------------------ Life Center 6 6 ------------------------------- ------- ----- ------------------- ------------------------- ---------- ------------------- ---------- ---------- D ON-STREET BY BLOCK FACE ------------------------ MAIN 14 2 16 OLIVE 3 3 6 3RO 11 25C/hr 11 WALNUT 4 2 6 OFF STREET t ------------------------ Main Promenade 830 830 TABLE 1 cont. PARKING INVENTORY GREER 8 CO. DOWNTOWN HUNTINGTON BEACH Engineers and Planners CURB MARKED METERED 20-24 COST MARKED LOADING 20 MIN OFF BLOCK 2 HR 1 IIR MIN HC NR 1 IIR 20 MIN IIC UNMARKED (YELLOW) (GREEN) STREET TOTAL ------------------------------- ------------------------- ------------------- ------------------------- ---------- ------------------- ---------- ---------- E ON-STREET BY BLOCK FACE ------------------------ 5TH 15 25C/hr 15 ORANGE NP MAIN 22 25C/hr 22 WALNUT 3 25C/hr 4 7 OFF STREET ------------------------ Office 10 10 Public Lot 33 33 Public Lot 2 48 50 Open Lot 41 41 ------------------------------- ------------------------- ------------------- ------------------------- ---------- ------------------- ---------- ---------- F ON-STREET BY BLOCK FACE ------------------------ MAIN 12 1 4 . 17 ORANGE 5 2 2 9 3RD 10 1 11 WALNUT 2 3 5 OFF STREET -Office 25 25 ------------------------------- ------------------------- ------------------- ------------------------- ---------- ------------------- ---------- ---------- G ON-STREET BY BLOCK FACE ------------------------ 6TH 20 20 MAIN 7 15 2 2 26 ORANGE 17 2 19 OFF STREET ------------------------ Retail 17 17 --------- -------- ------------------------------------------------- TOTALS -- CORE AREA / SOUTH 127' 69 14 4 9 2 22 6 78 10 2 1364 1706 ---------------------------------------------------- ----- ---- --------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------=-=--------- ------------- ----- ---- 1 TABLE 1 cont. PARKING INVENTORY GREER 8 CO. DOWNTOWN HUNTINGTON BEACH Engineers and Planners CURB MARKED METERED 20-24 COST MARKED LOADING 20 MIN OFF BLOCK 2 MR 1 HR MIN IIC HR 1 HR 20 MIN HC UNMARKED (YELLOW) (GREEN) STREET TOTAL ------------------------------- ------------------------- ------------------- ------------------------- --------- ------------------- ---------- ---------- H1 ON-STREET BY BLOCK FACE ------------------------ MAIN 11 2 13 PECAN 8 8 LAKE 23 23 ORANGE 5 5 OFF STREET ------------------------ Laundramat 7 7 ------------------------------ ------ -- ------ ------------------------ --------- ------------------- ---------- -------- H2 ON-STREET BY BLOCK FACE ------------------------ MAIN 2 2 6TH 4 4 LAKE 4 4 PECAN 3 5 8 OFF STREET ------------------------ Retail 12 12 Retail 10 10 Nicoles Restaurant 32 32 ------------------------------- ----------------------- ------------------- ------------------------- ---------- ------------------- ---------- ---------- 1 ON-STREET BY BLOCK FACE ------------------------ MAIN 1 2 3 ACACIA 8 8 LAKE 3 3 6TH 7 7 OFF STREET ------------------------ Office 25 25 a xaxxxxaa===x==axxaxxx=xxxxxxxxxxx=a==xxx==xxxx=a=xaxax=xxxexxxxxxxxxx=====xx=v===c===x=====cxxcxxxcccxxxx-------------�-xxcx===cx=acxc=xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx= TOTALS -- CORE AREA / NORTH 0 0 0 0 17 0 0 0 69 0 2 86 174 ----- ------- ---------- --------------------------- TOTAL --------------------------------------- -------______------------------------ ------------------- --- - ---- ----12 6 1 ----2-----------------------------1------------------13 1 ---------------- 0 2 706 TOTAL -- CORE AREA / NORTH I 0 0 0 0 I I 17 0 0 0 I 69 I 0 2 I 6 ( 174 ----_________________ ---- ---------------=========-------------- ------ _-__---------__-=---- - --------- - ---- TOTALS -- CORE AREA --- TOTAL 127 69 14 3 26 2 22 6 147 10 4 1450 1880 ---------------------------------------------------=--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ` a TABLE 1 cont. PARKING INVENTORY GREER $ CO. DOWNTOWN HUNTINGTON BEACH Engineers and Planners CURB MARKED METERED . 20-24 COST MARKED LOADING 20 MIN OFF BLOCK 2 HR 1 HR MIN HC NR 1 HR 20 MIN HC UNMARKED (YELLOW) (GREEN) STREET TOTAL ------------------------------- ------------------------- ------------------- ------------------------- ---------- ------------------- ---------- ---------- et ON-STREET BY BLOCK FACE ------------------------ 2ND 91 25C/30 min 9 WALNUT 10 25C/30 min 10 1ST NP PCH 3 (6HR) 25C/15 min 3 ------------------------------- ------------------------- ------------------- ------------------------- ---------- ------------------- ---------- ---------- Cl ON-STREET BY BLOCK FACE ------------------------ 6TH 13 13 OLIVE 7 7 5TH 17 25C/hr 17 WALNUT 9 9 ------------------------------- ------------------------- ------------------- ------------------------- ---------- ------------------- ---------- ---------- 01 ON-STREET BY BLOCK FACE ------------------------ 3RD 10 25C/hr 10 OLIVE 9' 25C/hr 9 2ND 13 25C/hr 13 WALNUT 6 25C/hr 1 7 OFF STREET ------------------------ Office 12 12 ------------------------------- ------------------------- ------------------- ------------------------- ---------- ------------------- ---------- ---------- E1 ON-STREET BY BLOCK FACE ------------------------ 6TH 13 13 ORANGE 5 5 5TH 18 25C/hr 18 OLIVE A 9 9 ------------------------------- ------------------------- ------------------- ------------------------- ---------- ------------------- ---------- ---------- F1 ON-STREET BY BLOCK FACE ------------------------ 3RD 15 15 ORANGE 7 7 2ND 12 25C/hr 12 OLIVE 9 25C/hr 9 TOTALS - PERIPHERAL AREA 116 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 78 0 0 • 12 207 -------------- ---------------- ------------------- - - ------ ---------- - ------- TOTALS - CORE AREA 127 69 14 3 26 2 22 6 147 10 4 1450 1880 TOTALS - PERIPHERAL AREA 116 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 78 0 0 12 207 - ------------- ------------------------- ---------- ------------------- ---------- ---------- GRAND TOTALS 243 69 14 3 26 2 23 6 225 10 4 1462 2087 2 LOW 7 UM MOP 3 t3 um 3 MTN 14 min 18 MTA-A UTA-A ft 17. I-L .1 Uf MTR-A(_) -14 14-TR-A/2-MTR- -Cc \Ire- ----rj I i I I � =I�� � ���� �= O I �\ ``� M/Mltl/14»O/ i3�IlA'------�+ _, �\ ��� t���, two"Am Ilk N1. n ON - STREE 5 L_:Ll in srazu PARKING SUPPLY DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN, HUNTINGTON BEACH i pYe.e pamil _J L_ to,. 10 33 Noe. -- p1101b i �I �.- /: //� � �c`�0 � ,� �/ \_ \'•� w Ul eo -J 17 /,� \ SAC r 1 r ap. ap. r o o fQ j a I panarol pubne d I n1oM / // � / ^•`• �rf•✓ ; raM an�1 YaM flflfT �— • • / i -� I �---- -----------� - -- -/ /D 830 / .p. \ pu6ne r-- is -- 830 —1 r r r a10 uatn Act-3TIEf17 el 112 P. r ----- , I j j I Inc.P2. - -- - -- f r if rw u a nawvf z ; i j----� OFF - S T R E E T �- -- - �jl r �-- --- --- ---- --------.-� ---- -' PARKING SUPPLY —� �---- ---- -- --------- ----------;r-----------':�' IN., N, DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN, HUNTINGTON BEACH L-.---iTOG _j I I'M .1. x79rllM No tu 13 UW < P, p b5a perrrdf V, a 141 R 14 MIR 18 MTA-A \> mun \' / <" 11, .1 > IS UTA-A ..........r qj>' x ZZ!fcp ' , 6 Of p la F � , � •ems I ZI I 17 /,"F ' x e Dom putAa % Lp. ' 4 L__ L-- - p - la 1 I 1 . / iVia-y A7 • 14 MTR-A/ZUTR- CC D 830 i f 7W� 1f— \\/ Pop. blla 23 830 or p. file' MTR 1 —1 u—r-1 aro stmirT 10 MIA Inc. e- OR N 5 MTFL 12 LLv I win T7. AlP, T1 0 NP--SEFREEEFT 4f PARKING SUPPLY in IfICET DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN, HUNTINGTON BEACH Within the entire study area, there are 2,087 parking spaces with 625 on-street parking spaces and 1,462 off'-street parking spaces. PARKING OCCUPANCY SURVEYS Parking occupancy surveys were conducted throughout the study area on Friday and Saturday, February 19 and 20, 1993. The surveys were conducted at each half hour between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. The intent was to identify the number of parked vehicles at each survey period throughout the day. The utilization of existing on-street and off-street parking spaces was determined as a percentage of the total available parking spaces. The survey data for each block face and for each off-street parking area is presented in Appendix Tables A-l. The tables are presented for each individual block within the study area, including the peripheral area. The parking occupancy data is summarized by block in Table 2. For Friday, the peak parking occupancy occurred at 5:30 p.m. with 32.1 percent or 670 of 2,087 parking spaces occupied throughout the study area. Within the core area, peak parking occupancy also occurred at 5:30 p.m. with 30.0 percent or 564 of 1,880 parking spaces occupied. The south core area i southerly of Orange Avenue also reached peak occupancy at 5:30 p.m. with 28.9 percent occupancy with i 493 of 1,706 parking spaces occupied. The north core area reached peak occupancy at 6:00 p.m. with 42.5 percent occupancy with 74 of 174 parking spaces occupied. The peripheral area, which is I predominantly residential, demonstrated higher parkin; occupancies ranging from 42 to 52 percent occupancy rates. Generally, throughout the study area, parking occupancy rates steadily increased Q 7 percent a :0 a.m t 2 percent a m Similar patterns w throughout the day from 1 .6 p t 9 0 o � .1 p cent t 5.�0 p. S m paste s were exhibited in the core area increasing from 14.8 percent at 9:00 a.m. to 30.0 percent at 5:30 p.m., and within the south core area increasing from 12.7 percent at 9:00 a.m. to 28.9 percent at 5:30 p.m. For Saturday, peak parkin; occupancy rates were slightly higher than for Friday. Peak parking occupancy occurred at 6:00 p.m. throughout the study area and within the core. Throughout the study area, peak parking occupancy reached 37.0 percent, while within the core area, it reached 35.0 percent. Within the south core area, occupancy rates ranged from 15.2 percent at 9t00 a.m. generally increasing to 33.8 percent at 6:00 p.m. Within the north core area, occupancy rates fluctuated between a low of 42.0 percent to a high of 50.6 percent throughout the day. In the peripheral area, occupancy rates also fluctuated throughout the day between a lo\v of 43.0 percent and a high of 55.1 percent. In general terms, parking utilization ranged-between 30 and 37 percent of the total available parking spaces at periods of peak occupancy on both Friday and Saturday. Similar percentages apply for the core area with only 30 to 35 percent of the available parking spaces occupied at peak parking periods. Within the south core area, the percentages are slightly lower with the larger parking facilities available. Peak parking occupancy ranges between 29 and 34 percent. Within the north core area with smaller off- street lots available and most parking being available as on-street parking, peak parking occupancies generally ranged between 31 and 50 percent. Substantial parkin spaces are available throughout the Downtown area throughout the da4. y. ATTACHMENT NO. Greer& Co., Engineers& Planners Downtown Parking Plan (359-01) City ofHuntinelon Beach 11 LE 2 EXISTING PARKING - SUMMARY GREER 8 CO. DOWNTOWN HUNTINGTON BEACH Engineers and Planners (ING SUPPLY EXISTING SPACES BY BLOCK -, CORE CORE CORE Al A2 B C D E F G SOUTH Ill H2 1 NORTH TOTAL OF SPACES 38 92 332 48 869 178 67 82 1706 56 72 46 174 1880 ---------------------------------------•- ---------------------------------=----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------ OCCUPANCY NO. X N0. % NO. X NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. X NO. Y. NO. % NO. % NO. % NO X NO. X NO. X 2-19-93 PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC OF DAY a.m. 18 47.4% 18 19.6% 28 8.4% 23 47.9% 46 5.3% 29 16.3% 34 50.7% 20 24.4% 216 12.77 23 41.1% 20 27.8% 20 43.5% 63 36.2% 279 14.8% 21 55.3% 27 29.3X 29 8.7'/. 26 54.2% 46 5.3% 35 19.7% 26 38.8% 20 24.4% 230 13.5% 21 37.5% . 24 33.3% 15 32.6% 60 34.5% 290 1' )0 20 52.6% 26 28.3% 27 8.1% 29 60.4% 56 6.4% 35 19.7% 36 53.7. 18 22.0% 247 14.5% 25 44.6% 23 31.9% 13 28.3% 61 35.1% 308 1. i0 25 65.8% 29 31.5% 40 12.0% 28 58.3% 62 7.1X 50 28.1% 37 55.2% 25 30.5% 296 17.4% 20 35.77 22 30.6% 12 26.1% 54 31.0% 350 18.6% )0 25 65.8% 28 30.4% 40 12.0% 29 60.4% 65 7.5% 50 28.1% 38 56.7'/. 26 31.7'/. 301 17.6% 17 30.4% 22 30.6% 17 37.OY. 56 32.2% 357 19.0% i0 a.m. 26 68.4% 31 33.77 41 12.3% 29 60.4% 69 7.9% 51 28.7% 39 58.2% 24 29.3% 310 18.2% 25 44.6% 22 30.6% 16 34.8% 63 36.2% 373 19.8% 1 37 97.4% 38 41.3% 51 15.4% 27 56.3% 83 9.6% 62 34.8% 46 6B.7% 27 32.9% 371 21.7-/ 19 33.9% 25 34.7/ 18 39.1% 62 35.6% 433 23.0% 10 P.M. 34 89.5% 43 46.71A 59 17.8% 29 60.4% 87 10.0% 64 36.0% 47 70.1% 34 41.5% 397 23.3% 30 53.6% 23 31.9% 19 41.3% 72 41.4% 469 24.9% .36 94.7% 41 44.6% .56 16.9% 27 56.3% 88 10.1% 61 34.3% 41 61.2% 32 39.0% 382 22.4% 18 32.1% 25 34.TX 18 39.1% 61 35.1% 443 23.6% 1 33 86.8% 46 50.0% 65 19.6% 23 47.9% 99 11.4% 71 39.9% 50 74.6% 28 34.1X 415 24.37 19 33.97 21 29.2% 14 30.4% 54 31.0% 469 24.9% 1 35 92.1% 53 57.6% 70 21..1% 25 52.1X 110 12.7% 67 37.6% 47 70.1% 30 36.6% 437 25.6% 23 41.1% 23 31.9% 16 34.8% 62 35.6% 499 26.5% 1 36 94.7% 52 56.5% 75 22.6% 28 58.3% Ill 12.8% 69 38.8% 44 65.7'/. 30 36.6% 445 26.1% 26 46.4% 20 27.8% 13 28.3% 59 33.9% 504 26.8% I 35 92.1% 51 55.4% 79 23.8% 29 60.4% 116 13.3% 65' 36.5% 39 58.2% 39 47.6% 453 26.6% 22 39.3% 25 34.7% 17 37.0% 64 36.8% 517 27.5% 1 29 76.3% 41 44.6% 80 24.1% 32 66.Irl 119 13.77 64 36.0% 42 62.7% 42 51.2% 449 26.3% 22 39.3% 22 30.6% 16 34.8% 60 34.5% 509 27.1% 1 35 92.1% 47 51.1% 80 . 24.17 30 62.5% 127 14.6% 72 40.4% 44 65.7% 39 47.6% 474 27.8% 22 39.3% 21. 33.37 15 32.67 61 35.1% 535 28.5% I 35 92.1X 43 46.77 86 25.9% 26 54.2% 144 16.6% 74 41.6% 43 64.2% 34 41.5% 485 28.4% 23 41.1% 22 30.6% 16 34.8% 61 35.1X 546 29.0% 33 86.8% 38 41.3% 87 26.2% 24 50.0% 156 18.0% 73 41.0% 46 68.77 35 42.7-/ 492 28.8% 22 39.3% 22 30.6% 17 37.0% 61 35.1X 553 29.4% i 32 84.2% 48 52.2% 79 23.8% 22 45.8% 168 19.3% 67 37.6X 46 68.77 31 37.8% 493 28.9% 22 39.3% 28 38.9% 21 45.7-4 71 40.8% 564 30.0% 1 P.M. 32 84.2% 43 46.7% 78 23.5% 22 45.8% 173 19.9% 66 37.1% 42 62.7% 30 36.6% 486 28.5% 25' 44.6% 28 38.9% 21 45.7X 74 42.5% 560 29.8% ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------ OCCUPANCY NO. X N0. X NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. X NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. % 2-20-93 PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC OF DAY, a.m. 20 52.6% 28 30.4% 33 9.9% 23 47.9% 57 6.6% 37 20.8% 32 47.8% 30 36.6% 260 15.2% 25 44.6% 23 31.9% 27 58.7% 75 43.1% 335 17 'tX 22 57.9% 26 28.3% 38 11.4% 26 54.2% 61 7.0% 39 21.9% 31 46.3% 31 37.8% 274 16.1% 25 44.6% 23 31.9% 29 63.0% 77 44.3% 351 ' 0 27 71.1% 34 37.0% 44 '13.3% 28 58.3% 64 7.4% 43 24.2% 28 41.8% 30 36.6% 298 17.5% 32 57.1X 26 36.1% 28 60.9% 86 49.4% 384 2u.4% 0 27 71.1% 42 45.7% 46 13.9% 31 64.6% 68 7.8% 48 27.OX 35 52.2% 33 40.2% 330 19.3% 30 53.6% 24 33.3% 25 54.3% 79 45.4% 409 21.8% 0 31 81.6% 46 50.OX 50 ,15.1% 32 66.7% 69 7.9% 52 29.2% 35 52.2% 34 41.5% 349 20.5% 29 51.8% 23 31.9% 28 60.9% 80 46.0% 429 22.8% 0 a.m. 27 71.1% 47 51.1% 47 14.2% 29 60.4% 70 8.1% 57 32.OY. 37 55.2% 32 39.0% 346 20.3% 31 55.4% 25 34.77 32 69.6% 88 50.6% 434 23.1% 25 65.8% 51 55.4% 55 16.6% 26 54.2% 75 8.6% 57 32.0% 36 53.7% 37 45.1% 362 21.2% 31 55.4% 31 43.1X 24 52.2% 86 49.4% 448 23.8% 0 P.M. D 25 65.8% 49 53.3% 60 18.1% 27 56.3% 118 13.6% 53 29.8% 30 44.8% 36 43.9% 398 23.3% 28 50.0% 30 41.77 23 50.0% 81 46.6% 479 25.5% 25 65.8% 56 60.9% 63 19.0% 26 54.2% 158 18:2% 46 25.8% 30 44.8% 40 48.8% 444 26.0% 31 55.4% 29 40.3% 23 50.0% 83 47.7% 527 28.0% 24 63.2X 54 58.77 68 20.5% 26 54.2% 183 21.1% 57 32.0% 30 44.8% 36 43.9% 478 28.0%, 30 53.6% 24 33.3% 28 60.9% 82 47.1% 560 29.8% Z, 28 T3.7% 48 52.2% 78 23.5% 32 66.7% 195 22.4% 61 34.3% 31 46.3% 35 42.T'/. 508 29.8% 25 44.6% 32 44.4% 29 63.0% 86 49.4% 594 31.6% 27 71.1% 48 52.2% 77 23.2% 30 62.5% 192 22.1% 58 32.6% 2T 40.3% 35 42.7'/. 494 29.0% 21 37.5% 29 40.3% 29 63.0% 79 45.4% 573 30.5% 37 97.4% 57 62.0% 78 23.5% 29 60.4% 192 22.1% 49 27.5% 25 37.3% 41 50.0% 508 29.8% 21 37.5% 33 45.8% 19 41.3% T3 4Z.OX 581 30.9% 35 92.1% 63 68.5% 91 27.4% 34 70.8% 193 22.2% 49 27.5% 22 32.8% 41 50.0% 528 30.9% 30 53.6% 30 41.7% 22 47.8% 82 47.1% 610 32.4% jZ 31 81.6% 58 63.0% 91 27.4% 29 60.4% 21B 25.1% 52 29.2% 28 41.8% 37 45.1% 544 31.9% 28 50.0% 29 40.3% 21 45.79. 78 44.8% 622 33.1% m 32 84.2% 60 65.2% 95 28.6% 26 54.2X 215 24.T% 59 33.1% 31 46.3% 40 48.8% 558 32.7% 26 46.4% 31 43.1% 22 47.8% 79 45.4% 637 33.9% z 29 76.3% 58 63.0% 99 29.8% 25 52.1% 227 26.1% 58 32.6% 31 46.3% 42 51.2% 569 33.4% 28 50.0% 32 44.4% 23 50.0% 83 47.7% 652 34.T% 32 84.2% 52 56.5% 87 26.2% 26 54.2% 248 28.5% 49 27.5% 30 44.8% 36 43.9% 560 32.8% 23 41.1% 41 56.9% 21 45.7% 85 48.9% 645 34.3% P.M. 29 76.3% 44 47.8% 80 24.1% 28 58.3% 270 31.1% 53 29.8% 32 47.8% 40 48.8% 576 33.8% 24 42.9% 41 56.9% 17 37.0% 82 47.1% 658 35.0% Z TABLE 2 cont. EXISTING PARKING - SUMMARY GREER $ CO., _ ' EXISTING PARKING - SUMMARY DOWNTOWN HUNTINGTON BEACH Engineers and Planners DOWNTOWN HUNTINGTON BEACH ------- ------ -------- - --------------------- ----------------- -----------------------___----- -------____---------- PARKING SUPPLY EXISTING SPACES BY BLOCK - PERIPHERAL PARKING SUPPLY 81 C1 D1 E1 F1 TOTAL •CORE PERIPHERAL TOTAL NO. OF SPACES 22 46 51 45 43 207 NO. OF SPACES 1880 207 2087 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------ ------------------------------------------- ------------ PKG OCCUPANCY NO. Y NO. X NO. Y NO. Y NO. Y NO. Y. PARKING OCCUPANCY NO. X NO. X N0. X FRI, 2-19-93 PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC DATE PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC TIME OF DAY TIME OF DAY 9:00 a.m. 6 27.3% 22 47.8% 21 41.2% 18 40.0% 21 48.8% 88 42.5% 9:00 a.m. 279 14.8% 88 42.5X 367 17.6% 9:30 7 31.8% 22 47.8% 21 41.2% 19 42.2% 21 48.8% 90 43.5X 9:30 290 15.4% 90 43.5% 380 18.2% 10:00 10 45.5% 24 52.2% 21 41.2% 14 31.1% 20 46.5% 89 43.0% 10:00 308 16.4% 89 43.0% 397 19.0% 10:30 9 40.9% 25 54.3% 24 47.1% 18 40.0% 22 51.2% 98 47.3% 10:30 350 18.6% 98 47.3% 448 21.5% 11:00 9 40.9% 24 52.2% 21 41.2% 18 40.0% 20 46.5Y. 92 44.4% 11:00 357 19.0% 92 44.4% 449 21.5% 11:30 a.m. 9 40.9% 28 60.9% 20 39.2% 18 40.0% 18 41-.9X 93 .44.9% 11:30 a.m. 373 19.8X 93 44.9% 466 22.4% NOON 13 0.1% 31 67.4% 18 35.3X 17 37.8% 23 53.57 102 49.37 NOON 433 23.0% 102 49.3X 535 25.71 12:30 p.m. 14 63.6% 29 63.0% 22 43.1% 16 35.6% 24 55.8% 105 50.71A 12:30 p.m. 469 24.9% 105 50.7% 575 27.5% 1:00 15 68.2% 32 69.6% 23 45.1% 13 28.9% 24 55.8% 107 51.77 1:00 443 23.6% 107 51.7% 551 26.4X 1:30 11 50.0% 31 67.4% 18 35.3% 18 40.0% 22 51.2% 100 48.3% 1:30 469 24.9% 100 48.3% 569 27.3% 2:00 14 63.6% 28 60.9% 20 39.2X 15 33.3% 22 51.2% 99 47.8% 2:00 499 26.5% 99 47.8% 598 28.7% 2:30 15 68.2% 26 56.5% 25 49.0% 15 33.3% 20 46.5% 101 48.8% 2:30 504 26.8% 101 48.8X 605 29.0% 3:00 14 63.6% 30 65.2% 25 49.0% 17 37.8% 22 51.2% 108 52.2% 3:00 517 27.5X 108 52.2% 626 30.0% 3:30 15 68.2% 27 58.77 22 43.1X 16 35.6% 22 51.2% 102 49.3% 3:30 509 27.1% 102 49.3X 611 29.3X 4:00 15 68.2% 25 54.3% 19 37.3% 16 35.6% 19 44.2% 94 45.4% 4:00 535 28.5% 94 45.4% 629 30.2% 4:30 14 63.6% 26 56.5% 18 35.3X 17 37.8% 22 51.2% 97 46.9% 4:30 546 29.0% 97 46.9% 643 30.8X 5:00 13 59.1% 25 54.3% 26 51.OX 17 37.8% 20 46.5% 101 48.8% 5:00 553 29.4% 101 48.8X 654 31.4X 5:30 13 59.1% 26 56.5% 24 47.1% 17 37.8% 25 58.1% 105 50.7% 5:30 564 30.0% 105 50.7% 670 32.1X 6:00 p.m. 11 50.0% 27 58.71A 28 54.9X 16 35.6X 23 53.5% 105 50.7% 6:00 p.m. 560 29.8% 105 50.7X 666 31.9X ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------ ------------------------•------------------ ------------ PKG OCCUPANCY NO. Y. NO. Y NO. X NO. % NO. % NO. % PARKING OCCUPANCY NO. X NO. X NO. Y. SAT, 2-20-93 PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC DATE PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC TIME OF DAY TIME OF'DAY 9:00 a.m. 15 68.2% 26 56.5% 22 43.1% 21 46.71 20 46.5% 104 50.2% 9:00 a.m. 335 , 17.8% 104 50.2% 440 21.1% 9:30 16 72.7% 28 60.9% 23 45.1% 20 44.4% 23 53.5% 110 53.1% 9:30 351 18.7X 110 53.1% 462 22.1% 10:00 16 72.7%, 26 56.5% 23 45.1% 21 46.7% 22 51.2% 108 52.2% 10:00 384 20.4X 108 52.2X 493 23.6X 10:30 13 59.1% 27 58.7% 20 39.2% 16 35.6% 21 48.8% 97 46.9% 10:30 409 21.8% 87 42.OX 496 23.8% 11:00 16 72.7%, 29 63.0% 18 35.3% 19 42.2% 22 51.2% 104 50.2% 11:00 429 22.8% 104 50.2% 534 25.6% 11:30 a.m. 14 63.6% 30 65.2% 17 33.3% 20 44.47.. 20 46.5% 101 48.8% 11:30 a.m. 434 23.1X 101 48.8% 535 25.7% NOON 14 63.6% 30 65.2% 16 31.4% 16 35.6% 21 48.8% 97 46.9% NOON 448 23.8Y. 97 46.9% 545 26.1% Z 12:30 p.m. 13 59.1% 31 67.4% 18 35.3% 19 42.2% 19 44.2% 100 48.3% 12:30 p.m. 479 25.5% 100 48.3% 579 27.8% 1:00 13 59.1% 31 67.4% 18 35.3% 20 44.4X, 21 48.8% 103 49.8% 1:00 527 28.0% 103 49.8% 630 30.2% 1:30 12 54.5% 33 71.7Y. 17 33.3% 18 40.0% 20 46.5% 100 48.3% 1:30 560 29.8% 100 48.3% 660 31.6% 2:00 12 54.5% 33 71.7% 25 49.0% 19 42.2% 20 46.5% 109 52.7% 2:00 594 31.6% 109 52.7% 704 33.7% 2:30 13 59.1% 33 71.7% 23 45.1% 24 53.3% 20 46.5% 113 54.6% 2:30 573 30.5% 113 54.6% 687 32.9% rT 3:00 16 72.7% 3,2 69.6% 22 43.1% 21 46.7•,C 23 53.5% 114 55.1% 3:00 581 30.9% 114 55.1% 696 33.3% ,G. 3:30 13 59.1X 31 67.4X 20 39.2% 18 40.OY. 20 46.5% 102 49.3% 3:30 610 32.4% 102 49.3% 712 34.1% 4:00 16 72.7% 27 58.7Y. 18 35.3% 18 40.0% 23 53.5% 102 49.3% 4:00 622 33.1X 102 49.3% 724 34.7% 4:30 15 68.2% 24 52.2% 17 33.3% 15 33.3% 22 51.2% 93 44.9% 4:30 637 33.9X 93 44.9% 730 35.OX L 5:00 15 68.2% 23 50.0% 18 35.3% 13 28.9X 20 46.5% 89 43.0% 5:00 652 34.TX 89 43.OX 741 35.5X �. 5:30 14 63.6% 24 52.2% 25 49.0% 14 31.1% 21 48.8X 98 47.3% 5:30 645 34.3X 98 47.3% 743 35.6X • 6:00 p.m. 18 81.8% 28 60.9% 30 58.8% 16 35.6% 22 51.2% 114 55.1% 6:00 p.m. 658 35.0% 114 55.1% 773 37.0% -J EXISTING PARKING DEMAND ANALYSIS Using the current development pattern within the core area, a parking demand ratio can be calculated for the present mix of uses within the Downtown area. Because much of the current parking, both on- street and off'-street is open to general parking, the parking demand ratio is reflective of not only current parking demands but also of the current shared parking that takes place by the various uses in Downtown. It would be representative of a realistic or practical parking requirement for future Downtown development. Based on data from City staff, the following uses presently exist within the Downtown core area as separated for the north and south areas of the core: Block Office Retail- Restaurant Theater A 40,920 sf 32,110 sf 17,303 sf B 36,000 sf 35,846 sf 23,773 sf 1,750 seats C 17,461 sf 31,652 sf 23,329 sf D 4,000 sf 24,000 sf 4,000 sf E 8,000 sf 19,000 sf F 12,000 sf 14,000 sf Subtotal 118,381 sf 156,608 sf 68,405 sf 1,750 seats G 25,000 sf H 2O,000 sf I 5,000 sf 5,000 sf Subtotal 0 50,000 sf 5,000 sf 0 Total 118,381 sf 206,608 sf 73,405 sf 1,750 seats Assuming 15 square feet per seat for the theater, or a total of 26,250 square feet, there is a total of 369,644 square feet of existing development within the south core area, and 55,000 square feet within the north core area. Peak parking demand for the south core area was 493 vehicles on Friday and 576 vehicles on Saturday. The peak parking demand ratio would be 1.33 spaces per 1,000 square feet of use for Friday and 1.56 spaces per 1,000 square feet for Saturday. For the north core area, the peak parking demand was 74 vehicles for Friday and 88 vehicles for Saturday. The peak parking demand ratio would be 1.35 spaces per 1,000 square feet for Friday and 1.60 spaces per 1,000 square feet for Saturday. These parking demand ratios are remarkably similar for the two core areas. ATTACHMENT NO. Greer& Co., Engineers& Planners Downtown Parking Plan raSo_n>> _. ._. . COMPARISON OF PARKING RATIOS A comparison was made of the actual parking demand for various hours of the day versus the calculated parking demand using parking demand rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE)' and the shared parking factors from the Urban Land Institute (ULI). The peak parking demand ratios obtained from ITE for the four land use categories are presented below: Edda Saturdav office 2.79 spaces/1,000 sf NA (assumed 0) retail 3.23 spaces/1,000 sf 3.97 spaces/1,000 sf restaurant 10.79 spaces/1,000 sf*- 11.43 spaces/1,000 sf* theater- 0.19 spaces/seat 0.19 spaces/seat * assumes an average between family restaurant and quality restaurant -`'-These parking demand ratios were applied to the development area for each of the uses within the south core area. The ULI factors were applied for the monthly variation and for the hourly variation each day � f9i a weekday and a Saturday. Comparisons for the*south core area for five time periods throughout the day were calculated and are summarized below. FRIDAY SATURDAY ACTUAL CALCULATED - ACTUAL -CALCULATED PARKING PARKING PARKING PARKING l PERIOD DEMAND DEMAND DEMAND DEMAND 9:00 a.m. 216 504 260 419 noon 371 981 362 1,186 2:00 p.m. 437 1,156 508 956 4:00 p.m. 474 998 544 857 6:00 p.m. 493 1,063 576 997 For the Friday comparison, the calculated parking demand was significantly larger than the actual parking demand by a factor ranging between 2.11 and 2.65. The Saturday comparison also showed a calculated parking demand larger than the actual, but by a smaller factor ranging between 1.58 and 1.88 except for the noon period, which was larger by a factor of 2.36. On the average, the actual parking demand was approximately 42 percent of the calculated parking demand for Friday and about 55 percent of the calculated parking demand for Saturday. ' Parking Generation, Second Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers,Washington, D.C., 1987. O'Greer& Co., Engineers& Planners � n �1--� As applied to Downtown Huntington Beach, the ULI shared parking methodology should reflect a reduction in the ITE peak parking rates to provide results based on the calibration above using current parking demand data. Based on the results of the existing parking demand analysis, the ITE peak parking demand rates should be reduced to approximately 55 percent for the weekday rates and approximately 70 percent for the Saturday rates. This would allow a factor of safety of some 13 to 15 percent over and above the actual rates of 42 percent and 55 percent for a weekday and a Saturday, respectively, as calculated above. ATTACHMENT N0.LA�, _ Greer& Co., Engineers&Planners Downtown Parking Plan (359-011 ^- •• — - PROJECTED PARKING NEEDS FUTURE PEAK PARKING DEMAND RATIOS In order to reflect actual parking demand rates as presently exhibited in the Downtown area, the future peak parking demand ratios should reflect the reductions in the ITE peak parking demand rates to be used in the ULI shared parking analysis. Based on these analyses, the ITE peak parking demand rates should be reduced to approximately 55 percent for weekday rates and 70 percent for the Saturday rates. The peak parking rates to be applied for future projections of parking needs would be the following based on applying these reductions to the ITE rates presented earlier: ' F Friday Saturday office 1.53 spaces/1,000 sf NA (assumed 0) retail 1.78 spaces/1,000 sf 2.78 spaces/1,000 sf restaurant 5.93 spaces/1,000 sf* 8.00 spaces/1,000 sf* theater 0.10 spaces/seat 0.13 spaces/seat * assumes an average between family restaurant and quality restaurant The rates were applied to the projected future land uses as presented in the Downtown Specific Plan to identify future parking needs by block for the core area. Again, these projections do not include parking needs for residential uses. Residential parking is to be provided entirely on-site for each residential development project and will not utilize or share the Downtown commercial parking. AMCHMENT N0. �_ Greer& Co., Engineers& Planners Downtown Parting Plan (359-01) .-:.. _mot,.._.:-- -- r---.- .— v Block Office Retail Restaurant Other A 10,000 sf 45,000 sf 10,000 sf 12 units bed/breakfast B 16,000 sf 34,459 sf 23,773 sf 1,750 seats C 12,000 sf 40,000 sf 10,000 sf D 4,000 sf 24,000 sf 4,000 sf E 8,000 sf 20,000 sf F 20,000 sf 10,000 sf Subtotal 70,000 sf 173,459 sf 47,773 sf 12 units bed/breakfast 1,750 seats G 30,000 sf H 30,000 sf I 5,000 sf 5,000 sf Subtotal 0 65,000 sf 5,000 sf 0 Total 70,000 sf 238,459 sf 52,773 sf 12 units bed/breakfast 1,750 seats A 1 ing these peak parking demand rates and the ULI shared parking factors to the projected land use PPYZIP quantities results in the projected parking demands for each block. Of Projected Parking Needs ! Weekdav Saturday Block Noon 2:00 6:00 Noon 2:00 ,6:00 A 102 109 106 104 130 133 B 190 277 311 186 281 400 C 99 106 101 95 119 126 D 49 51 48 53 64 62 E 37 38 25 35 42 27 F 41 43 18 18 21 14 Subtotal 518 624 609 491 657 762 G 39 39 33 53 63. 41 H 39 39 33 53 63 41 1 21 24 32 21 28 43 Subtotal 99 102 98 127 154 125 Total 617 726 707 618 811 887 Greer& Co., Engineers&Planners Downtown Parking Plan (359-01) A ni I&Jr-AIT Kin a► -. ..- -- Based on the above analyses, the projected peak parking demand for the core area of Downtown will be a total of 887 parking spaces. However, if separate consideration is given to the north and south areas of the core, the peak parking requirement for the south core area would be 762 parking spaces with an additional 154 parking spaces required for the north core area. This is a combined total of 916 parking spaces. ATTACHMENT NO. ►A_. Greer&Co., Engineers& Planners Downtown Parking Plan (359-01) City of Huntington Beach 21 7 , _ r TABLE A-1 EXISTING PARKING BLOCK Al GREER & CO. DOWNTOWN HUNTINGTON BEACH Engineers and Planners ------------- PARKING SUPPLY EXISTING SPACES ON-STREET BY BLOCK FACE OFF-STREET 5TH WALNUT MAIN PCH TOTAL 1 2 3 4 TOTAL TOTAL NO. OF SPACES 12 7 12 7 38 0 38 ------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------- ------------ PARKING OCCUPANCY NO. X NO., X NO. X NO. X NO. X NO. X NO. % NO. X NO. X NO. % NO. X FR1, 2-19-93 PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC TIME OF DAY 9:00 a.m. 4 33.3% 2 28.6% 11 91.7% 1 14.3% 18 47.4% 18 47.4% 9:30 4 33.3% 4 57.1% 12 100.0% 1 14.3% 21 55.3% 21 55.3% 10:00 1 8.3% 8 114.3% 7 58.3% 4 57.1% 20 52.6% 20 52.6% 10:30 3 25.0% 6 85.7% 11 91.714 5 71.4% 25 65.8% 25 65.8% 11:00 3 25.0% '6 85.7% 11 91.7% 5 71.4% 25 65.8% 25 65.8% 11:30 a.m. 3 25.0% 7 100.0% 12 100.0% 4 57.1% 26 68.4% 26 68.4% NOON 10 83.3% 9 128.6% 12 100.0% 6 85.7X 37 97.4% 37 97.4% 12:30 p.m. 8 66.7/ 8 114.3% 12 100.0% 6 85.7X 34 89.5% 34 89.5% 1:00 9 75.0% 9 128.6% 12 100.0% 6 85.7A 36 94.71A 36 94.7X 1:30 9 75.0% 6 85.7% 12 100.0% 6 85.7Y. 33 86.8% 33 86.8% 2:00 9 75.0% 9 128.6% 12 100.0% 5 71.4% 35 92.1% 35 92.1% 2:30 9 75.0% 9 128.6% 12 100.0% 6 85.7% 36 94.7% 36 94.7% 3:00 8 66.7Y- 8 114.3% 12 100.0% 7 100.0% 35 92.1% 35 92.1% 3:30 7 58.3% 7 100.0% 12 100.0% 3 42.9X 29 76.3% 29 76.3% 4:00 9 75.0% 8 114.3% 12 100.0% 6 85.7% 35 92.1% 35 92.1% 4:30 9 75.0% 7 100.0% 12 100.0% 7 100.0% 35 92.1% 35 92.1% 5:00 7 58.3% 9 128.6% 12 100.0% 5 71.4% 33 86.8% 33 86.8% 5:30 8 66.7/ 8 114.3% 12 100.0% 4 57.1% 32 84.2% 32 84.2% 6:00 p.m. 9 75.0% 7 100.0% 11 91.7% 5 71.4% 32 84.2% 32 84.2% ------------------------------ --------------------------------------------------------- ------------ PARKING OCCUPANCY NO. X NO. X NO. % NO. % NO. X NO. X NO. X NO. X NO. X NO. X NO_ X SAT, 2-20-93 PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC TIME OF DAY 9:00 a.m. 2 16.7/ 4 57.1% 12 100.OX 2 28.6% 20 52.6% 20 52.6% 9:30 3 25.0% 6 85.7% 12 100.OX 1 14.3% 22 57.9% 22 57.9X 10:00 4 '33.3% 8 114.3% 12 100.0% 3 42.9% 27 71.1% 27 71.1% 10:30 5 41.7% 7 100.0% 12 100.0% 3 42.9% 27 71.1% 27 71.1X D 11:00 5 41.7/. 9 128.6% 12 100.0% 5 71.4% 31 81.6% 31 81.6% 11:30 a.m. 3 25.0% 7 100.0% 12 100.OX 5 71.4% 27 71.1% 27 71.1% NOON 4 33.3% 6 85.7% 12 100.0% 3 42'.9X 25 65.8% 25 65.8% 12:30 p.m. 4 33.3% 6 85.7% 12 100.0% 3 42.9% 25 65.8% 25 65.8% 1:00 5 41.7/ 6 85.7% 12 100.OX 2 28.6% 25 65.8% 25 65.8% M 1:30 4 33.3% 5 71.4% 12 100.0% 3 42.9% 24 63.2% 24 63.2% z 2:00 5 41.7% 7 100.0% 12 100.0% 4 57.1% 28 T3.7% 28 73.7% 2:30 5 41.7/ 7 100.0% 12 100.0% 3 42.9% 27 71.1% 27 71.1% 3:00 11 91.7/. 9 128.6% 12 100.0% 5 71.4% 37 97.4% 37 97.4% z 3:30 12 100.0% 8 114.3% 12 100.0% 3 42.9% 35 92.1% 35 92.1% O 4:00 10 83.3% 8 114.3% 11 91.7% 2 28.6% 31 81.6% 31 81.6% 4:30 11 91.7% 9 128.6% 10 83.3% 2 28.6% 32 84.2% 32 84.2% 5:00 9 75.0% 7 100.0% 12 100.0% 1 14.3% 29 76.3% 29 76.3% 5:30 7 58.3% 8 114.3% 12 100.0% 5 71.4% 32 84.2% 32 84.2% 6:00 p.m. 8 66.7X 6 85.7Y. 11 91.7% 4 57.1% 29 76.3% 29 76.3% t*_;' TABLE A-1 EXISTING PARKING BLOCK QZ ✓ r GREER & CO. DOWNTOWN HUNTINGTON BEACH Engineers and Planners PARKING SUPPLY EXISTING SPACES ON-STREET BY BLOCK FACE OFF-STREET 6TH WALNUT 5TH PCH TOTAL 1 2 3 4 TOTAL TOTAL NO. OF SPACES 7 11 17 1 36 56 56 92 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------- ------------ PARKING OCCUPANCY NO. X NO. X NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. Y. NO. X NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. X FR1, 2-19-93 PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC' TIME OF DAY 9:00 a.m. 5 71.4% 4 36.4% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 9 25.0% 9 16.1% 9 16.1% 18 19.6% 9:30 6 85.7% 8 72.7Y. 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 14 38.9% 13 23.2% 13 23.2% 27 29.3% 10:00 6 85.7% 8 72.7% 1 5.9% 0 0.0% 15 41.71A 11 19.6% 11 19.6% 26 28.3% 10:30 6 85.7% 8 72.7Y. 2 11.8% 0 0.0% 16 44.4% 13 23.2% 13 23.2% 29 31.5% 11:00 6 85.77. 8 72.7% 2 11.8% 0 0:0X 16, 44.4% 12 21.4% 12 21.4% 28 30.4% 11:30 a.m. 7 100.0% 8 72.7% 3 17.6% 1 100.0% 19 52.8% 12 21.4% 12 21.4% 31 33,7% NOON 6 85.7A 8 72.7% 6 35.3% 3 300.0% 23 63.9% 15 26.8% 15 26.8% 38 41.3% 12:30 p.m. 5 71.4% 7 63.6% 15 88.2% 0 0.0% 27 75.0% 16 28.6% 16 28.6% 43 46.7% 1:00 5 71.4% 6 54.5% 14 82.4% 1 100.0% 26 72.2% 15 26.8% 15 26.8% 41 44.6% 1:30 4 57.1% 8 72.7% 15 88.2% 3 300.0% 30 83.3% 16 28.6% 16 28.6% 46 50.0% 2:00 7 100.0% 8 72.7/. 17 100.0% 4 400.0% 36 100.0% 17 30.4% 17 30.4% 53 57.6% 2:30 7 100.OX 8 72.77. 18 105.9% 4 400.0% 37 102.8% 15 26.8% 15 26.8% 52 56.5% 3:00 6 853X 7 63.6% 16 94.1% 4 '400.0% 33 91.77 18 32.1% 18 32.1% 51 55.4% 3:30 5 71.4% 6 54.5% 15 B8.2X 3 300.0X 29 80.6% 12 21.4% 12 21.4% 41 44.6% 4:00 6 85.7% 7 63.6% 17 100.0% 2 200.0% 32 88.9% 15 26.8Y. 15 26.8% 47 51.1X 4:30 5 71.4% 8 72.7A 14 82.4% 3 300.0% 30 83.3% 13 23.2% 13 23.2% 43 46.7% 5:00 7 100.0% 6 54.5% 10 58.8% 4 400.0% 27 75.0% 11 19.6% 11 19.6% 38 41.3% 5:30 6 85.77. 8 72.77. 15 88.2% 4 400.0% 33 91.7/ 15 26.8% 15 26.8% 48 52.2% 6:00 p.m. 7 100.0% 8 72.7/. 12 70.6% 2 200.0% 29 80.6% 14 25.0% 14 25.0% 43 46.7X ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------- ------------ PARKING OCCUPANCY NO. X NO. Y. NO. X NO. X NO. % N0. Y. NO. Y. NO. X NO'. X NO. Y. NO. X SAT, 2-20-93 PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC TIME OF DAY 9:00 a.m. 7 160.0% 6 54.57 2 11.8% 0 0.07 15 41.7A 13 23.2% 13 23.2% 28 30.4% 9:30 5 71.4% 9 81.8% 1 5.9% 1 100.0% 16 44.4% 10 17.9% 10 17.9% 26 28.3% 10:00 8 114.3% 9 81:8X 3 17.6% 0 0.0% 20 55.6% 14 25.0% 14 � 25.0% 34 37.0% 10:30 9 128.6% 9 81.8% 4 23.5% 1 100.0% 23 63.9% 19 33.9% 19 33.9% 42 45.71 ® 11:00 9 128.6% 9 81.8% 5 29.4% 3 300.0% 26 72.2% 20 35.7Y. 20 35.77. 46 50.0% ! 11:30 a.m. 9 128.6% 9 81.8% 4 23.5% 4 400.0% 26 72.2% 21 37.5% 21 37.5% 47 51.1% Z NOON 10 142.9% 8 72.7A 6 35.3% 4 400.0% 28 77.8% 23 41.1% 23 41.1% 51 55.4% 12:30 p.m. 8 114.3% 9 81.8% 6 35.3% 5 500.0% 28 77.8% 21 37.5% 21 37.5% 49 53.3% 1:00 10 142.9% 9 81.8% 6 35.3% 6 600.0% 31 86.1% 25 44.6% 25 44.6% 56 60.9% 1:30 11 157.1% 9 81.8% 5 29.4% 5 500.OY. 30 83.3% 24 42.9% 24 42.9% 54 58.7% 2:00 9 128.6% 8 72.71A 5 29.4% 6 600.0% 28 77.8% 20 35.7/. 20 35.7% 48 52.2% 2:30 9 128.6% 8 72.7A 7 41.2% 5 500.0% 29 80.6% 19 33.9% 19 33.9% 48 52.2% 3:00 7 100.0% 7 63.6% 12 70.6% 5 500.0% 31 86.1% 26 46.4% 26 46.4% 57 62.OX z 3:30 8 1140X 10 90.9% 16 94.1% 8 800.0% 42 116.7/. 21 37.5% 21 37.5% 63 68.5% ^� 4:00 8 114.3% 6 54.5% 17 100.0% 7 700.0% 38 105.6% 20 35.7% 20 35.77. 58 63.0% 4:30 7 100.0% 8 72.7% 15 88.2% 8 800.0% 38 105:6% 22 39.3% 22 39.3% 60 65.2% L 5:00 6 85.7% 9 81.8% 10 58.8% 8 800.0% 33 91.71A 25 44.6% 25 44.6Y. 58 63.0% 5:30 5 71.4% 8 72.74 10 58.8% 6.600.0% 29 80.6% 23 41.1% 23 41.1% 52 56.5% C 6:00 p.m. 6 85.7% 7 63.6% 8 47.1% 4 400.0% 25 69.4% 19 33.9% 19 33.9% 44 47.8% TABLE A-1 EXISTING PARKING BLOCK B / GREEK 8 CO. DOWNTOWN HUNTINGTON BEACH Engineers and Planners ---------------------=--------------- ---------- ------ --- -----------____----------------- ------------- PARKING SUPPLY EXISTING SPACES ON-STREET BY BLOCK FACE OFF-STREET' MAIN WALNUT 2ND PCH TOTAL 1 2 3 4 TOTAL TOTAL NO. OF SPACES 13 10 9 NP 32 300 300 332 ---------------------------------------------•-•---- ----------------------- --------------------------------------------------------- ------------ PARKING OCCUPANCY NO. X NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. % FR1, 2-19-93 PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC TIME OF DAY 9:00 a.m. 12 92.3% 2 20.0% 2 22.2% 16 50.0% 12 4.0% 12 4.0% 28 8.4% 9:30 12 92.3% 2 20.0% 2 22.2% 16 50.0% 13 4.3% 13 4.3% 29 8.7% 10:00 12 92.3% 2 20.0% 1 11.1% 15 46.9% 12 4.0% 12 4.0% 27 8.1% 10:30 12 92.3% 2 20.0% 1 11.1% 15 46.9% 25 8.3% 25 8.3% 40 12.0% 11:00 12 92.3% '2 20.0% 1 11.1% 15 46.9% 25 8.3% 25 8.3% 40 12.0% 11:30 a.m. . 12 92.3% 2 20.0% 2 22.2% 16 50.0% 25 8.3% 25 8.3% 41 12.3% NOON 12 92.3% 7 70.0% 3 33.3% 22 68.8% 29 9.7% 29 9.7% 51 15.4% 12:30 p.m. 12 92.3% 8 80.0% 1 11.1% 21 65.6% 38 12.7% 38 12.7X 59 17.8% 1:00 12 92.37 7 70.0% 2 22.2% 21 65.6% 35 11.7Y. 35 11.7% 56 16.9% 1:30 12 92.3% 9 90.0% 7 77.8% - 28 87.5% 37 12.3% 37 12.3% 65 19.6% 2:00 12 92.1% 11 110.0% 8 88.9% 31 96.9% 39 13.0% 39 13.0% 70 21.1% 2:30 12 92.3% 13 130.OX 8 .88.9% 33 103.1% 42 14.0% 42 14.0% 75 22.6% 3:00 12 92.37 10 100.0% 6 66.7X 28 87.5% 51 17.0% 51 17.0% 79 23.8% 3:30 12 92.3% 12 120.0% 7 77.8% 31 96.9% 49 16.3% 49 16.3% 80 24.1% 4:00 12 '92.3% 10 100.0% 6 66.7% 28 87.5% 52 17.3% 52 17.3% 80 24.1% 4:30 12 92.3% 12 120.0% 7 77.8% 31 96.9% 55 18.3% 55 18.3% 86 25.9% 5:00 12 92.3% 13 130.0% 8 88.9% 33 103.1% 54 18.0% 54 18.0% 87 26.2% 5:30 12 92.3% 8 80.0% 9 100.0% 29 90.6% 50 16.7% 50 16.77 79 23.8% 6:00 p.m. 12 92.3% 12 120.0% 7 77.8% 31 96.9% 47 15.7'/. 47 15.7% 78 23.5% ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------- ------------ PARKING OCCUPANCY NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. X NO. % NO. % NO. X SAT, 2-20-93 PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC TIME OF DAY D 9:00 a.m. 12 92.3% 4 40.0% 5 55.6% 21 65.6% 12 4.0% 12 4.0% 33 9.9% 9:30 12 92.3% 5 50.0% 6 66.7% 23 71.9% 15 5.0% 15 5.0% 38 11.4% 10:00 12 92.3% 8 80.0% 7 77.8% 27 84.4% 17 5.7"/. 17 5.7% 44 13.3% D 10:30 11 84.6% 9 90.0% 8 88.9% 28 87.5% 18 6.0% 18 6.0% 46 13.9% 11:00 12 92.3% 11 110.0% 9 100.0% 32 100.0% 18 6.0% 18 6.0% 50 15.1% 11:30 a.m. 12 92.3% 11 110.0% 9 100.0% 32 100.0% 15 5.0% 15 5.0% 47 14.2X NOON 12 92.3% 8 80.0% 9 100.0% 29 90.6% 26 8.7% 26 8.7% 55 16.6% 12:30 p.m. 12 92.3% 8 80.0% 9 100.0% 29 90.6% 31 10.3% 31 10.3% 60 18.1% n 1:00 12 92.3% 7 70.0% 9 100.0% 28 87.5% 35 11.7% 35 11.77 63 19.OX 1:30 11 84.6% 9 90.0% 9 100.0% 29 90.6% 39 13.0% 39. 13.0% 68 20.5% 2:00 12 92.3% 11 110.0% 9 100.0% 32 100.0% 46 15.3% 46 15.3% 78 23.5% 2:30 10 76.9% 10 100.OX 8 88.9% 28 87.5% 49 16.3% 49 16.3% 77 23.2% z 3:00 12 92.3% 7 70.0% 7 77.8% 26 81.3% 52 17.3% 52 17.3% 78 23.5% O 3:30 12 92.3% 11 110.0% 9 100.0% 32 100.0% 59 19.7-/. 59 19.77 91 27.4% 4:00 12 92.3% 12 120.OX 7 77.8% 31 96.9% 60 20.0% 60 20.0% 91 27.4% rr 4:30 12 92.3% 10 100.0% 8 88.9% 30 93.8% 65 21.7/. 65 21.7% 95 28.6% X 5:00 10 76.9% 9 90.0% 8 88.9% 27 84.4X 72 24.0% 72 24.0% 99 29.8X 5:30 11 84.6% 10 100.0% 6 66.7% 27 84.4% 60 20.0% 60 20.0% 87 26.2% 6:00 p.m. 12 92.3% 8 80.0% 9 100.0% 29 90.6% 51 17.0% 51 17.0% 80 24.1% kE' y , r ,• R t s TABLE A-1 EXISTING PARKING BLOCK C GREER $ CO. DOWNTOWN HUNTINGTON BEACH Engineers and Planners ------ -- ---- ------ ------ ------------------- - ---- -----------PARKING SUPPLY SUPPLY EXISTING SPACES ON-STREET BY BLOCK FACE OFF-STREET 5TH OLIVE MAIN WALNUT TOTAL 1 2 3 4 TOTAL TOTAL NO. OF SPACES 18 8 8 8 42 6 6 48 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------- ------------ PARKING OCCUPANCY NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. X NO. % NO. % NO. % FRI, 2-19-93 PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC TIME OF DAY 9:00 a.m. 3 16.7% 3 37.5% 5 62.5% 7 87.5% 18 42.9% 5 83.3% 5 83.3% 23 47.9% 9:30 5 27.8% 4 50.0% 5 62.5% 7 87.5% 21 50.0% 5 83.3% 5 83.3% 26 54.2% 10:00 5 27.8% 4 50.0% 7 87.5% 7 87.5% 23 54.8% 6 100.0% 6 100.0% 29 60.4% 10:30 4 22,2% 4 50.0% 6 75.0% 7 87.5% 21 50.0% 7 116.7Y. 7 116.7% 28 58.3% 11:00 4 22.2% 3 37.5% 7 87.5% 8 100.0% 22 52.4% 7 116.7% 7 116.7% 29 60.4% 11:30 a.m. 3 16.7/. 5 62.5% 7 87.5% 8 100.0% 23 54.8% 6 100.0% 6 100.0% 29 60.4% NOON 4 22.2% 5 62.5% 6 75.0% 7 87.5% 22 52.4% 5 83.3% 5 83.3% 27 56.3% 12:30 p.m. 5 27.8% 4 50.0% 6 75.0% 7 87.5% 22 52.4% 7 116.77 7 116.7% 29 60.4% 1:00 4 22.2% 4 50.0% 5 62.5% 7 87.5% 20 47.6% 7 116.7% 7 116.7% 27 56.3% 1:30 4 22.2% 4 50.0% 5 62.5% 6 75'.0% 19 45.2% 4 66.7/. 4 66.7% 23 47.9% 2:00 5 27.8% 3 37.5% 5 62.5% 7 87.5% 20 47.6% 5 83.3% 5 83.3% 25 52.1% 2:30 5 27.8% 3 37.5% 6 75.0% 7 87.5% 21 50.0% 7 116.7% 7 116.7% 28 58.3% 3:00 5 27.8% 5 62.5% 5 62.57 7 87.5% 22 52.47 7 116.7% 7 116.7% 29 60.4% 3:30 6 33.3% 6 75.0% 5 62.5% 8 100.0% 25 59.5% 7 116.7/. 7 116.7-/ 32 66.7% 4:00 6 33.3% 6 75.0% 4 50.0% 8 100.0% 24 57.1% 6 100.0% 6 100.0% 30 62.5% 4:30 5 27.8% 4 50.0% 4 50.0% 7 87.5% 20 47.6% 6 100.OY. 6 100.0% 26 54.2% 5:00 4 22.2% 3 37.5% 3 37.5% 7 87.5% 17 40.5% 7 116.7/. 7 116.7% 24 50.0% 5:30 4 22.2% 3 37.5% 4 50.0% 6 75.0% 17 40.5% 5 83.3% 5 83.3% 22 45.8% 6:00 p.m. 4 22.2% 3 37.5% 4 50.0% 6 75.0% 17 40.5% 5 83.3% 5 83.3% 22 45.8% ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------- ------------ PARKING OCCUPANCY NO. X NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. % SAT, Z-20-93 PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC TIME OF DAY D 9:00 a.m. .3 '16.7/. 5 62.5% 5 62.5% 7 87.57 20 47.6Y. 3 50.0% 3 50.0% 23 47.9% 9:30 6 33.3% 3 37.5% 7 87.5% 7 87.5% 23 54.8% 3 50.0% 3 50.0% 26 54.2% 10:00 6 33.3% 4 50.0% 7 87.5% 7 , 87.5% 24 57.1% 4 66.77. 4 66.7% 28 58.3% D 10:30 6 33.3% 5 62.5% 8 100.0% 8 100.0% 27 64.3% 4 66.77. 4 66.7% 31 64.6% � 11:00 5 27.8% 7 87.5% 7 87.5% 7 87.5% 26 61.9% 6 100.0% 6 100.0% 32 66.7% l 11:30 a.m. 4 22.2% 4 50.0% 8 100.0% 7 87.5% 23 54.8% 6 100.0% 6 100.0% 29 60.4% NOON 4 22.2% 4 50.0% 5 62.5% 8 100.O% 21 50.0% 5 83.3% 5 83.3% 26 54.2X 12:30 P.M. 4 22.2% 3 37.5% 8 100.0% 7 87.5% 22 52.4% 5 83.3% 5 83.3% 27 56.3% m 1:00 3 16.7% .4 50.0% 7 87.5% 7 87.5% 21 50.0% 5 83.3% 5 83.3% 26 54.2% Z 1:30 4 22.2% 4 50.0% 7 87.5% 7 87.5% 22 52.4% 4 66.7/. 4 66.7% 26 54.2% 2:00 5 27.8% 5 62.5% 9 112.5% 8 100.0% 27 64.3% 5 83.3Y. 5 83.3% 32 66.7% 2:30 5 27.8% 5 62.5% 8 100.0% 7 87.5% 25 59.5% 5. 83.3% 5 83.3% 30 62.5% Z 3:00 5 27.8% 5 62.5% 8 100.0% 7 87.5% 25 59.5% 4 66.711 4 66.7% 29 60.4% O 3:30 7 38.9% 8 100.0% 6 75.0% 7 87.5% 28 66.7/. 6 100.0% 6 100.0% 34 70.8% 4:00 5 27.8% 5 62.5% 6 75.0% 5 62.5% 21 50.0% 8 133.3% 8 133.3% 29 60.4% 4:30 3 16.r/ 4 50.0% 7 87.5% 6 75.0% 20 47.6% 6 100.0% 6 100.0% 26 54.2% 5:00 2 11.1% 4 50.0% 7 87.5% 7 87.5% 20 47.6% 5 83.3% 5 83.3% 25 52.1% N 5:30 3 16.7% 4 50.0% 8 100.0% 7 87.5% 22 52.4% 4 66.7 4 66.7% 26 54.2% 6:00 p.m. 4 22.2% 6 75.0% 8 100.OX 8 100.0% 26 61.9% 2 33.3% 2 33.3% 28 58.3X r TABLE A-1 EXISTING PARKING BLOCK D GREER 8 CO. DOWNTOWN HUNTINGTON BEACH Engineers and Planners PARKING SUPPLY' EXISTING SPACES ON-STREET BY BLOCK FACE OFF-STREET MAIN OLIVE 3RD WALNUT TOTAL 1 2 3 4 TOTAL TOTAL NO. OF SPACES 16 6 11 6 39 830 830 869 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------- ------------ PARKING OCCUPANCY NO. X NO. X NO. X NO. % NO. % NO. X NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. X FR1, 2-19-93 PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC TIME OF DAY 9:00 a.m. 13 81.3% 4 66.7% 3 27.3% 0 0.0% 20 51.3% 26 3.1% 26 3.1% 46 5.3% .9:30 12 75.0Y. 3 50.0% 3 27.3% 0 0.0% 18 46.2% 28 3.4% 28 3.4% 46 5.3% 10:00 12 75.0% 3 50.0% 4 36.4% 1 16.7% 20 51.3% 36 4.3% 36 4.3% 56 6.4% 10:30 14 87.5% 4 66.7X 5 45.5% 1 16.7X 24 61.5% 38 4.6% 38 4.6% 62 7.1% 11:00 14 87.5% 5 83.3% 3 27.3% 2 33.3% 24 61.5% 41 4.9% 41 4.9% 65 7.5% 11:30 a.m. 16 100.0% 3 50.0% 4 36.4% 0 0.0% 23 59.0% 46 5.5% 46 5.5% 69 7.9% NOON 15 93.8% 5 83.3% 3 27.3% 2 33.3% 25 64.1% 58 7.0% 58 7.0% 83 9.6X 12:30 p.m. 16 100.0% 5 83.3% 5 45.5% 1 16.7% 27 69.2% 60 7.2% 60 7.2% 87 10.0% 1:00 16 100.0% 4 66.71% 5 45.5% 1 16.7% 26 66.77. 62 7.5% 62 7.5% 88 10.1% 1:30 16 100.0% 6 100.0% 4 36.4% 3 50.0% 29 74.4% 70 8.4% 70 8.4% 99 11.4% 2:00 15 93.8% 7 116.7/. 6 54.57 4 66.77 32 82.1% 78 9.4% 78 9.4% 110 12.7/. 2:30 14 87.5% 6 100.0% 7 63.6% 4 66.7% 31 79.5% 80 9.6% 80 9.6% 111 12.8% 3:00 15 93.B% 6 100.0% 6 54.5% 5 83.3% 32 82.1% 84 10.1% 84 10.1% 116 13.3% 3:30 13 81.3% 4 66.7% 8 72.7% 3 50.0% 28 71.8% 91 11.0% 91 11.0% 119 13.7% 4:00 14 87.5% 5 83.3% 6 54.5% 4 66.7% 29 74.4% 98 11.8% 98 11.8% 127 14.6% 4:30 14 87.5% 5 83.3% 7 63.6% 4 66.1Y. 30 76.9% 114 13.7Y. 114 13.7-A 144 16.6% 5:00 16 100.0% 4 66.7% 8 72.7Y. 6 100.0% 34 87.2% 122 14.7Y. 1ZZ 14.7% 156 18.0% 5:30 15 93.8% 6 100.07 9 81.8% 6 100.07 36 92.37 132 15.97 132 15.9% 168 19.3% 6:00 p.m. 15 93.8% 6 100.0% 9 81.8% 5 83.3% 35 89.7/ 138 ' 16.6% 138 16.6% 173 19.9% ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------ ------------------------------- ------------ PARKING OCCUPANCY NO. % NO. X NO. % NO. % NO. X NO. % NO. X NO. % NO. Y. NO. X NO. X SAT, 2-20-93 PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD 'OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC TIME OF DAY 9:00 a.m. 12 75.0% 3 50.0% 2 18.2X 0 0.OY. 17 43.67 40 4.87 40 4.8% 57 6.6% 9:30 13 81.3% 1 16.77. 4 36.4% 1 16.7/ 19 48.7% 42 5.1% 42 5.1% 61 7.0% 10:00 12 75.0% 3 50.0% 5 45.5% 1 16.77 21 53.8% 43 5.2% 43 5.2% 64 7.4% 10:30 13 81.3% 3 50.0% 4 36.47. 1 16.7% 21 53.8% 47 ' 5.7/. 47 5.7/ 68 7.8% 11:00 13 81.3% 1 16.7/ 4 36.4% 0 0.0% 18 46.2% 51 6.1% 51 6.1% 69 7.9% D 11:30 a.m. 14 87.5% 3 50.0% 3 27.3% 0 ., 0.0% 20 51.3% 50 6.0% 50 6.0% 70 8.1% NOON 14 87.5%- 5 83.3% 3 27.3% 1 16.7/ 23 59.0% 52 6.3% 52 6.3X 75 8.6% 12:30 p.m. 13 81.3% 5 83.3% 4 36.4% 2 33.3% 24 61.5% 94 11.3% 94 11.3% 118 13.6% 1:00 12 '75.0% 6 100.0% 3 27.37. 2 33.3% 23 59.0% 135 16.3% 135 16.3% 158 18.2% 1:30 13 81.3% 7 116.71% 4 36.4% 2 33.3% 26 66.7/ 157 18.9% 157 18.9% 183 21.1% m 2:00 16 100.0% 4 66.7% 8 72.7X 4 66.7% 32 82.1% 163 19.6% 163 19.6% 195 22.4% z 2:30 14 87.5% 3 50.0% 7 63.6% 4 66.77. 28 71.8% 164 19.8% 164 19.8% 192 22.1% 3:00 13 81.3% 4 66.T/. 7 . 63.6% 3 50.0% 27 69.2% 165 19.9% 165 19.9% 192 22.1% 3:30 15 93.8% 3 50.0% 6 54.5% 1 16.7% 25 64.1% 168 20.2% 168 20.2% 193 22.2% z 4:00 15 93.8% 5 83.3% 4 36.4% 1 16.7% 25 64.1% 193 23.3% 193 23.3% 218 25.1% O 4:30 16 100.0% 5 83.3% 5 45.5% 2 33.3% 28 71.8% 187 22.5% 187 22.5% 215 24.77 5:00 16 100.0% 5 83.3% 6 54.5% 4 66.7% 31 79.5% 196 23.6% 196 23.6% 227 26.1% r 5:30 16 100.0% 6 100.0% 8 72.77 4 66.rA 34 87.2% 214 25.8% 214 25.8% 248 28.5% r 6:00 p.m. 16 100.0% 6 100.0% 10 90.9% 6 100.0% 38 97.4% 232 28.0% 232 28.OX 270 31.1% !I TABLE A-1 EXISTING PARKING BLOCK E ., 4F GREER 8 CO. DOWNTOWN HUNTINGTON BEACH Engineers and Planners ------------ PARKING SUPPLY EXISTING SPACES ON-STREET BY BLOCK FACE OFF-STREET 5TH ORANGE MAIN OLIVE TOTAL 1 2 3 4 TOTAL TOTAL NO. OF SPACES 15 0 22 7 44 10 33 50 41 134 178 --------------------------------------------------------------------=------- --------------------------------------------------------- ------------ PARKING OCCUPANCY NO. % NO. % NO. X NO. % NO. X NO. X NO. X NO. X NO. X NO. X N0. X FR1, 2-19-93 PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKO OCC PK0 OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC . PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC TIME OF DAY . 9:00 a.m. 0 0.0% U.C. 0.0% 4 57.1% 4 9.1% 2 0.0% 4 12.1% 5 10.0% 14 34.1% 25 18.7% 29 16.3% 9:30 1 6.7% U.C. 0.0% 4 57.1% 5 11.4% 4 0.0% 4 12.1% 6 12.0% 16 39.0% 30 22.4% 35 19.7% 10:00 1 6.7Y. U.C. 0.0% 3 42.9% 4 9.1% 3 0.0% 8 24.2% 2 4.0% 18 43.9% 31 23.1% 35 19.7% 10:30 0 0.0% U.C. 0.0% 7 100.0% 7 15.9% 3 0.0% 9 27.3% 7 14.0% 24 58.5% 43 32.1% 50 28.1% 11:00 0 0.0% U.C. 0.0% 6 85.7% 6 13.6% 3 0.0% 8 24.2% 7 14.0% 26 63.4% 44 32.8% 50 28.1% 11:30 a.m. 0 0.0% U.C. 0.0% 5 71.4% 5 11.4% 4 0.0% 8 24.2% 7 14.0% 27 65.9% 46 34.3% 51 28.7% NOON 0 0.0% U.C. 0.0% 7 100.0% 7 15.9% 5 0.0% 7 21.2% 13 26.0% 30 73.2% 55 41.0% 62 34.8% 12:30 p.m. 0 0.0% U.C. 0.0% 8 114.3% 8 18.2% 4 0.0% 7 21.2% 13 26.0% 32 78.0% 56 41.8% 64 36.0% 1:00 1 6.7% U.C. 0.0% 7 100.0% 8 18.2% 4 0.0% 7 21.2.% 13 26.0% 29 70.7% 53 39.6% 61 34.3% 1:30 2 13.3% U.C. 0.0% 6 85.7% 8 18.2% 4 0.0% 6 18.2% 15 30.0% 38 92.7A 63 47.0% 71 39.9% 2:00 0 0.0% U.C. 0.0% 8 114.3% 8 18.2% 4 0.0% 7 21.2% 12 24.0% 36 87.8% 59 44.0% 67 37.6X 2:30 1 6.7% U.C. 0.0% 9 128.6% 10 22.7% 3 0.0% 6 18.2% 13 26.0% 37 90.2% 59 44.0% 69 38.8% 3:00 0 0.0% U.C. 0.0% 6 85.7% 6 13.6% 5 0.0% 7 21.2% 14 28.0% 33 80.5% 59 44.0% 65 36.5% 3:30 0 0.0% U.C. 0.0% 7 100.0% 7 15.9% 4 0.0% 7 21.2% 11 22.0% 35 85.4% 57 42.5X 64 36.0% 4:00 0 0.0% U.C. 0.0% 7 100.0% 7 15.9% 4 0.0% 8 24.2% 12 24.0% 41 100.0% 65 48.5X 72 40.4X 4:30 0 0.0% U.C. 0.0% 9 128.6% 9 20.5% 3 0.0% 8 24.2% 13 26.0% 41 100.0% 65 48.5% 74 41.6% 5:00 1 6.7/. U.C. 0.0% 8 114.3% 9 20.5% 4 0.0% 8 24.2% 13 26.0% 39 95.1% 64 47.8% 73 41.0% 5:30 2 13.3% U.C. 0.0% 6 85.7% 8 18.2% 3 0.0% 7 21.2% 12 24.0% 37 90.2% 59 44.0% 67 37.6% 6:00 p.m. 1 6.7% U.C. 0.0% 7 100.0% 8 18.2% 4 0.0% 7 21.2% 10 20.0% 37 90.2% 58 43.3% 66 37.1% ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------- ------------ PARKING OCCUPANCY NO. X NO. X NO. X NO. X NO. X NO. X NO. X NO. X NO. X NO. X NO. X SAT, 2-20-93 PKO OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC _PKD, OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC TIME OF DAY D. 9:00 a.m. 0 0.0% U.C. 0.0% 7 100.0% 7 15.9% 0 0.0% 6 18.2% 11 22.0% 13 31.7% 30 22.4% 37 20.8% 9:30 0 0.0% U.C. 0.0% 6 85.7% 6 13.6% 0 0.0% 4 12.1% 13 26.0% 16 39.0% 33 24.6% 39 21.9% 10:00 2 13.3% U.C. 0.0% 5 71.4% 7 15.9% 0 , 0.0% 2 6.1% 13 26.0% 21 51.2% 36 26.9% 43 24.2% D 10:30 1 6.7/. U.C. 0.0% 6 85.7% 7 15.9% 0 0.0% 3 9.1% 15 30.0% 23 56.1% 41 30.6% 48 27.0% 11:00 0 0.0% U.C. 0.0% 5 71.4% 5 11.4% 0 0.0% 3 9.1% 12 24.0% 32 78.0% 47 35.1% 52 29.2% 11:30 a.m. 2 13.3% U.C. 0.0% 7 100.0% 9 20.5X 0 0.0% 3 9.1% 13 26.0% 32 78.0% 48 35.8% 57 32.OX NOON 2 13.3% U.C. 0.0% 6 85.7% 8 18.2% 0 0.0% 1 3.0% 13 26.0% 35 85.4X 49 36.6X 57 32.0% 12:30 p.m. 2 13.3% U.C. 0.0% 8 114.3% 10 22.77. 0 0.0% 4 12.1% 11 22.0% 28 68.3% 43 32.1% 53 29.8% ('n 1:00 2 13.3% U.C. 0.0% 7 100.0% 9 20.5% 0 0.0% 3 9.1% 9 18.0% 25 61.OX 37 27.6X 46 25.8% 1:30 2 13.3% U.C. 0.0% 8 114.3% 10 22.7% 0 0.0% 2 .6.1% 13 26.0% 32 78.0% 47 35:1% 57 32.0X 2:00 2 13.3% U.C. 0.0% 8 114.3% 10 22.7Y. 0 0.0% 5 15.2% 10 20.0% 36 87.8% 51 38.1% 61 34.3X 2:30 2 13.3% U.C. 0.0% 9 128.6% 11 25.0% 0 0.0% 4 12.1% 12 24.0% 31 75.6% 47 35.1% 58 32.6X z 3:00 3 20.0% U.C. 0.0% 7 100.0% 10 22.7% 0 0.0% 3 9.1% 9 18.0% 27 65.9% 39 29.1% 49 27.5% O 3:30 4 26.7/. U.C. 0.0% 7 100.0% 11 25.OX 0 0.0% 5 15.2% 8 16.0% 25 61.0% 38 28.4X 49 27.5% 4:00 3 20.0% U.C. 0.0% 6 85.7% 9 20.5% 0 0.0% 5 15.2% 7 14.0% 31 75.6X 43 32.1% 52 29.2% 4:30 3 20.0% U.C. O.OX 8 114.3% 11 25.0% 0 0.0% 5 15.2% 10 20.0% 33 80.5% 48 35.8% 59 33.1% 5:00 3 20.0% U.C. 0.0% 7 100.OX 10 22.7% 0 0.0% 4 12.1% 8 16.0% 36 87.8X 48 35.8% 58 32.6% 5:30 2 13.3% U.C. 0.0% 9 128.6% 11 25.0% 0 0.0% 3 9.1% 6 12.0% 29 70.rA 38 28.4% 49 27.5X 6:00 p.m. 2 13.3% U.C. 0.0% 8 114.3% 10 22.7% 0 0.0% 3 9.1% 7 14.0% 33 80.5X 43 32.1% 53 29.8% TABLE A-1 EXISTING PARKING BLOCK F GREER 8 CO. DOWNTOWN HUNTINGTON BEACH �•. Engineers and Planners PARKING SUPPLY EXISTING SPACES ON-STREET BY BLOCK FACE OFF-STREET MAIN ORANGE 3RD OLIVE TOTAL 1 2 3 4 TOTAL TOTAL NO. OF SPACES 17 9 11 5 42 25 25 67 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------- ------------ PARKING OCCUPANCY NO. % NO. X NO. X NO. X NO. % NO. X NO. % NO. X NO. X NO. % NO. X FRI, 2-19-93 PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC TIME OF DAY 9:00 a.m. 6 35.3% 4 44.4% 9 81.8% 1 20.0% 20 47.6% 14 56.0% 14 56.0% 34 50.7% 9:30 3 17.6% 4 44.4% 7 63.6% 1 20.0% 15 35.77 11 44.0% 11 44.0% 26 38.8% 10:00 8 47.1% 4 44.4% 10 90.9% 5 100.0% 27 64.3% 9 36.0% 9 36.0% 36 53.TX 10:30 8 47.1% 4 44.4% 10 90.9% 6 120.0% 28 66.7% 9 36.0% 9 36.0% 37 55.2% 11:00 9 52.9% 4 44.4% 11 100.0% 5 100.0% 29 69.0% 9 36.0% 9 36.0% 38 56.7% 11:30 a.m. 9 52.9% 4 44.4% 12 109.1% 5.100.0% 30 71.4% 9 36.0% 9 36.0% 39 58.2% NOON 12 70.6% 2 22.2% 11 100.0% 10 200.0% 35 83.3% 11 44.0% 11 44.0% 46 68.7% 12:30 p.m. 13 76.5% 2 22.2% 12 109.1% 9 180.0% 36 85.7% 11 44.0% 11 44.0% 47 70.1% 1:00 11 64.T/. 3 33.3% 10 90.9% 7 ,140.0% 31 73.8% 10 40.0% 10 40.0% 41 61.2% 1:30 17 100.0% 3 33.3% 10 90.9% 7 '140.0% 37 88.1% 13 52.0% 13 52.0% 50 74.6% 2:00 15 88.2% 3 33.3X 9 81.8% 7 140.0% 34 81.0% 13 52.0% 13 52.0% 47 70.1% 2:30 14 82.4% 2 22.2% 9 81.8% 9 180.0% 34 81.0% 10 40.0% 10 40.0% 44 65.7% 3:00 12 70.6% 3 33.3% 7 63.6% 8 166.07 30 71.4% 9 36.0% 9 36.0% 39 58.2% 3:30 13 76.5% 3 33.3% 8 72.7% 7 140.0% 31 73.8% 11 44.0% 11 44.0% 42 62.7% 4:00 14 82.4% 3 33.3% 6 54.5% 7 140.0% 30 71.4% 14 56.0% 14 56.0% 44 65.7% 4:30 17 100.0% 3 33.3% 5 45.5% 7 140.0% 32 76.2% 11 44.0% 11 44.0% 43 64.2% 5:00 15 88.2% 3 33.3% 7 63.6% 8 160.0% 33 78.6% 13 52.0% 13 52.0% 46 68.7% 5:30 14 82.4% 3 33.3% 9 81.8% 8 160.0% 34 81.0% 12 48.0% 12 48.0% 46 68.7% 6:00 p.m. 14 82.4% 2 22.2% 9 81.8% 8 160.0% 33 78.6% 9 36.0% 9 36.OX 42 62.7% ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------- ------------ PARKING OCCUPANCY NO. X NO. X NO. % NO. Y. NO. % NO. X NO. % NO. X NO. X NO. % NO. X SAT, 2-20-93 PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC TIME OF DAY 9:00 a.m. 6 35.3% 3 33.3% 9 81.8% 5 100.0% 23 54.8% 9 36.0% 9 36.0% 32 47.8% 9:30 5 29.4% 2 22.2% 9 81.8% 3 60.0% 19 45.2% 12 48.0% 12 48.0% 31 46.3% 10:00 3 17.6% 2 22.2% 8 72.7% 4 80.0% 17 40.5% 11 44.0% 11 44.0% 28 41.8X 10:30 8 47.1% 2 22.2% 10 90.9% 4 80.0% 24 57.1% 11 44.0% 11' 44.OX 35 52.2% 11:00 7 41.2% 3 33.3% 11 100.0% 3 60.0% 24 57.1% 11 44.0% 11 44.0% 35 52.2% 11:30 a.m. 7 41.2% 3 33.3% 13 118.2% 3 60.0% 26 61.9% 11 44.0% 11 44.0% 37 55.2% NOON 8 47.1% 2 22.2% 12 109.1% 2 40.0% 24 57.1% 12 48.0% 12 48.OX 36 53.7% 12:30 p.m. 7 41.2% 2 22.2% 9 81.8X 2 , 40.0% 20 47.6% 10 40.0% 10 40.0% 30 44.8% (T1 1:00 8 47.1% 2 22.2% 9 81.8% 2 40.0% 21 50.0% 9 36.0% 9 36.0% 30 44.8% Z 1:30 9 52.9% 2 22.2% 9 81.8% 2 40.0% 22 52.4% 8 32.0% 8 32.0% 30 44.8% _.{ 2:00 6 35.3% 3 33.3% 8 72.T/. 2 40.0% 19 45.2% 12 48.0% 12 48.0% 31 46.3% 2:30 4 23.5% 4 44.4% 7 63.6% 3 60.0% 18 42.9% 9 36.0% 9 36.0% 27 40.3% z 3:00 3 17.6% 2 22.2% 6 54.5% 5 100.0% 16 38.1% 9 36.0% 9 36.OX 25 37.3% Q 3:30 2 11.8% 3 33.3% 7 63.6% 3 60.0% 15 35.7'/. 7 28.0% 7 28.0% 22 32.8% • 4:00 3 17.6% 3 33.3% 10 90.9% 4 80.0% 20 47.6% 8 32.0% 8 32.0% 28 41.8% 4:30 4 23.5% 3 33.3% 11 100.0% 4 80.0% 22 52.4% 9 36.0% 9 36.0% 31 46.3% 5:00 3 17.6% 3 33.3% 11 100.0% 4 80.0% 21 50.0% 10 40.0% 10 40.0% 31 46.3% (� 5:30 2 11.8% 3 33.3% 11 100.0% 3. 60.0% 19 45.2% 11 44.0% 11 44.0% 30 44.8% (\� 6:00 p.m. 3 17.6% 3 33.3% 1Z 109.1% 3. 60.0% 21 50.OX 11 44.0% 11 44.0% 32 47.8% fa Y. ' + jot.01 TABLE A-1 EXISTING PARKING BLOCK G GREER 8 CO. DOWNTOWN HUNTINGTON BEACH : Engineers and Planners PARKING SUPPLY EXISTING SPACES ON-STREET BY BLOCK FACE OFF-STREET 6TH MAIN ORANGE TOTAL 1 2 3 4 TOTAL TOTAL NO. OF SPACES 20 26 19 65 17 . 17 82 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- --- --------------------------------------------------------- ------------ PARKING OCCUPANCY NO. % NO. X NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. X NO. X NO. % NO. % NO. X NO. X FR1, 2-19-93 PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD • OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC TIME OF DAY 9:00 a.m. 5 25.0% 7 26.9% 8 42.1% 20 30.8% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 20 24.4% 9:30 4 20.0% 7 26.9% 8 42.1% 19 29.2% 1 5.9% 1 5.9% 20 24.4% 10:00 4 20.0% 8 30.8% 3 15.8% 15 23.1X 3 17.6% 3 17.6% 18 22.0% 10:30 4 20.0% 12 46.2% 6 31.6% 22 33.8% 3 17.6% 3 17.6% 25 30.5% 11:00 5 25.0% 12 46.2% 6 31.6% 23 35.4% 3 17.6% 3 17.6% 26 31.7% 11:30 a.m. 5 25.0% 9 34.6% 7 36.8% 21 32.3% 3 17.6% 3 17.6% 24 29.3% NOON 7 35.0% 9 34.6% 8 42.1% 24 36.9% 3 17.6% 3 17.6% 27 32.9% 12:30 p.m. 7 35.0% 15 57.7Y. 8 '42.1% 30 46.2% 4 23.5% 4 23.5% 34 41.5% 1:00 5 25.0% 14 53.8% 8 42.1% 27 41.5% 5 29.4% 5 29.4% 32 39.0% 1:30 3 15.0% 11 42.3% 11 57.9% 25 38.5% 3 17.6% 3 17.6% 28 34.1% 2:00 4 20.0% 12 46.2% 11 57.9% 27 41.5% 3 17.6% 3 17.6% 30 36.6% 2:30 4 20.0% 11 42.3% 9 47.4% 24 36.9% 6 35.3% 6 35.3% 30 36.6% 3:00 4 20.0% 16 61.5% 12 63.2% 32 49.2% 7 41.2% 7 41.2% 39 47.6% 3:30 5 25.0% 18 69.2% 11 57.9% 34 52.37 8 47.1% 8 47.1X 42 51.2% 4:00 5 25.0% 14 53.8% 12 63.2% 31 47.7% 8 47.1% 8 47.1% 39 47.6% 4:30 3 15.0% 11 42.3% 12 63.2% 26 40.0% 8 47.1% 8 47.1% 34 41.5% 5:00 4 20.0% 14 53.8% 12 63.2% 30 46.2% 5 29.4% 5 29.4% 35 42.7% 5:30 5 25.0% 15 57.7% 6 31.6% 26 40.0% 5 29.4% 5 29.4% 31 37.8% 6:00 p.m. 4 20.0% 12 46.2% 6 31.6% 22 33.8% 8 47.1% 8 47.1% 30 36.6% ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------- ------------ PARKING OCCUPANCY NO. Y. NO. X NO. X NO. % NO. % NO. X NO. % NO. Y. NO. X NO. X NO. X SAT, 2-20-93 PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD .00C PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC TIME OF DAY 9:00 a.m. 2 10.0% 13 50.0% 12 63.Z% 27 41.5% 3 17.6% 3 17.6% 30 36.6% 9:30 3 15.0% 13 50.0% 12 63.2% 28 43.1% 3 17.6% 3 17.6% 31 37.8% 10:00 3 15.0% 13 50.0% 11 57.9% 27 41.5% 3 17.6% 3 17.6% 30 36.6% 10:30 3 15.0% 13 50.0% 12 63.2% 28 43.1% 5 29.4% 5 29.4% 33 40.2% A 11:00 2 10.0% 14 53.8% 11 57.9% 27 41.5% 7 41.2Y. 7 41.2% 34 41.5X 11:30 a.m. 1 5.0% 14 53.8% 11 57.97. 26 40.0% 6 35.3% 6 35.3% 32 39.0% = NOON 2 10.0% 14 53.8% 12 63.27.. 28 43.1% 9 52.9% 9 52.9% 37 45.1% 12:30 p.m. 3 15.0% 12 46.2% 12 63.2% 27 41.5% 9 52.9% 9 52.9% 36 43.9% 1:00 3 15.0% 15 57.7% 12 63.2% 30 46.2% 10 58.8% 10 58.8% 40 48.8% m 1:30 4 20.0% 9 34.6% 14 73.'rl 27 41.5% 9 52.9% 9 52.9% 36 43.9% z 2:00 4 20.0% 13 50.0% 10 52.6% 27 41.5% 8 47.1% 8 47.1% 35 42.77 2:30 4 20.0% 12 46.2% 11 57.9% 27 41.5% 8 47.1% 8 47.1% 35 42.7% 3:00 4 20.0% 15 57.7% 14 73.7% 33 50.8% 8 47.1% 8 47.1% 41 50.OX .Z 3:30 4 20.0% 14 53.8% 14 73.7/ 32 49.2% 9 52.9% 9 52.9X 41 50.0% O 4:00 5 25.0% 12 46.2% 13 68.4% 30 46.2% 7 41.2% 7 41.2% 37 45.1% 4:30 8 40.0% 13 50.0% 12 63.2% 33 50.8% 7 41.2% 7 41.2% 40 48.8% 5:00 9 45.0% 11 42.3% 13 68.4% 33 50.8% 9 52.9% 9 52.9% 42 51.2% 5:30 8 40.0% 9 34.6% 12 63.2% 29 44.6% 7 41.2% 7 41.2% 36 43.9X 6:00 p.m. 9 45.0% 11 42.3% 12 63.2% 32 49.2% 8 47.1% 8 47.1% 40 48.8% TABLE A-1 EXISTING PARKING BLOCK H1 GREER & CO. DOWNTOWN HUNTINGTON BEACH Engineers and Planners ---------- ----------------- --------- --------------_----____--------------------------------- .PARKING SUPPLY EXISTING SPACES ON-STREET BY BLOCK FACE OFF-STREET MAIN PECAN LAKE ORANGE TOTAL 1 2 3 4 TOTAL TOTAL NO. OF SPACES 13 8 23 5 49 7 7 56 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------- ------------ PARKING OCCUPANCY NO. Y. NO. X NO. % NO. % NO. Y. NO. X NO. Y. NO. Y. NO. % NO. X NO. % FR1, 2-19-93 PKD OCC PKD OCC PKO OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC TIME OF DAY 9:00 a.m. 3 23.1% 2 25.0% 10 43.5%. 4 80.0% 19 38.8% 4 57.1% 4 57.1% 23 41.1% 9:30 3 23.1% 2 25.0% 10 43.5% 4 80.0% 19 38.8% 2 28.6% 2 28.6% 21 37.5% 10:00 7 53.8% 1 12.5% 10 43.5% 4 80.0% 22 44.9% 3 42.9% 3 42.9% 25 44.6% 10:30 5 38.5% 1 12.5% 10 43.5% 3 60.0% 19 38.8% 1 14.3% 1 14.3% 20 35.7% 11:00 3 23.1% '1 12.5% 10 43.5% 3 60.0% 17 34.7% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 17 30.4% 11:30 a.m. 9 69.2% 1 12.5% 10 43.5% 3 60:0X -23 46.9% 2 28.6% 2 28.6% 25 44.6% NOON 5 38.5% 1 12.5% 10 43.5% 2 40.0% 18 36.7A 1 14.3% 1 14.3% 19 33.9% 12:30 p.m. 8 61.5% 3 37.5% 15 65.2% 3 60.0% 29 59.2% 1 14.3% 1 14.3% 30 53.6% 1:00 6 46.2% 2 25.0% 8 34.8% 1 20.0% 17 34.77.. 1 14.3% 1 14.3% 18 32.1% 1:30 9 69.2% 1 12.5% 7 30.4% 2 40.0% 19 38.8% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 19 33.9% 2:00 9 69.2% 1 12.5% 10 43.5% 1 20.0% 21 42.9% 2 28.6% 2 28.6% 23 41.1% 2:30 10 76.9% 2 25.0% 12 52.2% 1 20.0% 25 51.OX 1 14.3% 1 14.3% 26 46.4% 3:00 7 53.8% 2 25.0% 12 52.2% 1 20.0% 22 44.9% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 22 39.3% 3:30 9 69.2% 2 25.0% 10 43.5% 1 20.0% 22 44.9% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 22 39.3% 4:00 9 69.2% 1 12.5% 11 47.8% 1 20.0% 22 44.9% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 22 39.3% 4:30 7 53.8% 1 12.5% 11 47.8% 1 20.0% 20 40.8% 3 42.9% 3 42.9X 23 41.1% 5:00 6 46.2% 1 12.5% 11 47.8% 2 40.0% 20 40.8% 2 28.6% 2 28.6% 2Z 39.3% 5.30 7 53.8% 1 12.5% 10 43.5% 2 40.0% 20 40.8% 2 28.6% 2 28.6% 22 39.3% 6:00 p.m. 6 46.2% 2 25.0% 11 47.8% 2 40.0% 21 42.97 4 57.1% 4 57.1% 25 44.6% ----------------- ----------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------- ------------ PARKING OCCUPANCY NO. X NO. % NO. X NO. Y. NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. Y. NO. Y. NO. X NO. Y. SAT, 2-20-93 PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKO OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC TIME OF DAY 9:00 a.m. 6 46.2% 2 25.0% 13 56.5% 2 40.0% 23 46.9% 2 28.6% 2 28.6% 25 44.6% 9:30 6 46.2% 2 25.0% 13 56.5% 2 40.0% 23 46.9% 2 28.6% 2 28.6% 25 44.6% D 10:00 9 69.2% 2 25.0% 13 56.5% 3 60.0% 27 55.1% 5 71.4% 5 71.4% 32 57.1% 10:30 9 69.2% 3 37.5% 12 52.2% 3 60.0% 27 55.1% 3 42.9% 3 42.9% 30 53.6% 11:00 9 69.2% 3 37.5% 13 56.5% 3 60.0% 28 57.1% 1 14.3% 1 14.3% 29 51.8% � A 11:30 a.m. 9 69.2% 4 50.0% 13 56.5% 3 60.0% 29 59.2% 2 28.6% 2 28.6% 31 55.4% NOON 9 69.2% 4 50.0% 14 60.9% 3 60.0% 30 61.2% 1 14.3% 1 14.3% 31 55.4% ` 12:30 p.m. 9 69.2% 3 37.5% 11 47.8% 3 60.0% 26 53.1% 2 28.6% 2 28.6% 28 50.0% _ 1:00 8 61.5% 2 25.0% 15 65.2% 4: 80.0% 29 59.2% 2 28.6% 2 28.6% 31 55.4% 1:30 8 61.5% 1 12.5% 15 65.2% 5 100.0% 29 59.2% 1 14.3% 1 14.3% 30 53.6% m 2:00 8 61.5% 2 25.0% 11 47.8% 4 80.0% 25 51.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 25 44.6% z 2:30 6 46.2% 2 25.0% 9 39.1% 4 80.0% 21 42.9% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 21 37.5% 3:00 6 46.2% 1 12.57 10 43.5% 4 80.0% 21 42.9% 0 O.OY. 0 0.0% 21 37.5% 1 3:30 6 46.2% 4 50.0% 14 60.9% 4 80.0% 28 57.1% 2 28.6% 2 28.6% 30 53.6% z 4:00 6 46.2% 4 50.0% 13 56.5% 4 80.0% 27 55.1% 1 14.3% 1 14.3% 28 50.0% O 4:30 6 46.2% 1 12.5% 12 52.2% 5 100.0% 24 49.0% 2 28.6% 2 28.6% 26 46.4% 5:00 6 46.2% 2 25.0% 14 60.9% 5 100.0% 27 55.1% 1 14.3% 1 14.3% 28 50.0% r 5:30 6 46.2% 1 12.5% 11 47.8% 4 80.0% 22 44.9% 1 14.3% 1 14.3% 23 41.1% y 6:00 p.m. 6 46.2% 1 12.5% 12 52.2% 4 80.0% 23 46.9% 1 14.3% 1 14.3% 24 42.9% _b I,Y .YY �t��K•�f , \ � \ -N"I'l TABLE A-1 EXISTING PARKING BLOCK H2 ;' GREER $ CO. DOWNTOWN HUNTINGTON BEACH - �'�. Engineers and Planners ------------- PARKING SUPPLY EXISTING SPACES ON-STREET BY BLOCK FACE OFF-STREET MAIN 6TH LAKE PECAN TOTAL 1 2 3 4 TOTAL TOTAL NO. OF SPACES ' 2 4 4 8 18 12 10 32 54 72 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------- ------------ PARKING OCCUPANCY NO. Y. NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. X NO. % NO. X NO. % NO. X NO. % FR1, 2-19-93 PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PK0 OCC PKD OCC TIME OF DAY 9:00 a.m. 1 50.0% 1 25.0% 0 0.0% 4 50.0% 6 33.3% 6 50.0% 3 30.0% 5 15.6% 14 25.9% 20 27.8% 9:30 1 50.0% 1 25.0% 0 0.0% 6 75.0% 8 44.4% 7 58.3% 3 30.0% 6 18.8% 16 29.6% 24 33.3% 10:00 0 0.0% 1 25.0% 0 0.0% 7 87.5% 8 44.4% 6 50.0% 3 30.0% 6 18.8% 15 27.8% 23 31.9% 10:30 0 0.0% 1 25.0% 0 0.0% 6 75.0% 7 38.9% 6 50.0% 3 30.0% 6 18.8% 15 27.8% 22 30.6% 11:00 1 50.0% 2 50.0% 0 0.0% 5 62.5% 8 44.4% 5 41.7-/. 4 40.0% 5 15.6% 14 25.9% 22 30.6% 11:30 a.m. 1 50.0% 2 50.0% 0 0.0% 5 62.5% 8 44.4% 5 41.7% 3 30.0% 6 18.8% 14 25.9% 22 30.6% NOON 1 50.0% 1 25.0% 0 0.0% 6 75.0% 8 44.4% 5 41.7-/. 5 50.0% 7 21.9% 17 31.5% 25 34,71A 12:30 p.m. 0 0.0% 2 50.0% 0 0.0% 6 75.0% 8 44.4% 6 50.0% 3 30.0% 6 18.8% 15 27.8X 23 31.9X 1:00 1 50.0% 1 25.0% 0 0.0% 6 75.0% 8 44.4% 6 50.0% 5 50.0% 6 18.8% 17 31.5% 25 34.7-/. 1:30 0 0.0% 1 25.0% 0 0.0% 7 87.5% 8 44.4% 5 41.7% 3 30.0% 5 15.6% 13 24.1X 21 29.2X 2:00 0 0.0% 1 25.0% 1 25.0% 7 87.5X 9 50.0% 4 33.3% 5 50.0% 5 15.6% 14 25.9% 23 31.9% 2:30 0 0.0% 1 25.OX 1 25.0% 6 75.0% 8 44.4X 5 41.7-/. 4 40.0% 3 9.4% 12 22.2% 20 27.8X 3:00 1 50,0X 2 50.0% 2 50.0% 6 75.0% 11 61.1% 6 50.07 4 40.07 4 12.57 14 25.9% 25 34.7X 3:30 1 50.0% 1 25.0% 2 50.0% 6 75.0% 10 55.6% 3 25.0% 2 20.0% 7 21.9% 12 22.2% 22 30.6% 4:00 2 100.0% 1 25.0% Z 50.0% 6 75.0% 11 61.1% 4 33.3% 2 20.0% 7 21.9% 13 24.1% 24 33.3% 4:30 1 50.0% 1 25.0% 3 75.0% 4 50.0% 9 50.0% 5 41.7-/. 2 20.0% 6 18.8% 13 24.1% 22 30.6% 5:00 1 50.0% 1 25.0% 3 75.0% 5 62.5% 10 55.6% 4 33.37 2 20.0% 6 18.8% 12 22.2% 22 30.6X 5:30 1 50.0% 1 25.OX 3 75.0% 6 75.0% 11 61.1% 6 50.0% 2 20.0% 9 28.1% 17 31.5% 28 38.9% 6:00 p.m. 0 0.0% 2 50.0% 3 75.0% 7 87.5% 12 66.7% 6 50.0% 1 10.0% 9 28.1% 16 29.6% 28 38.9% ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------- ------------ PARKING OCCUPANCY NO. X NO. X NO. X NO. % NO. X ' NO. X NO. % NO. X NO. Y. NO. X NO. X SAT, 2-20-93 PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKO OCC PKD OCC TIME OF DAY I D 9:00 a.m. 0 0.07 1 25.0% 0 0.0% 6 75.0% 7 38.9X 4 33.3% 2 20.0% 10 31.3% 16 29.6% 23 31.9% 9:30 0 0.0% 1 25.0% 0 0.0% 6 75.OX 7 38.9% 3 25.0% 2 20.0% 11 34.4% 16 29.6% 23 31.9% 10:00 1 50.0% 1 25.0% 0 0.0% 6 75.0% 8 44.4% 5 41.7'/. 3 30.OX 10 31.3% 18 33.3% 26 36.1X D 10:30 0 0.0% 1 25.0% 0 0.0% 6 75.0% 7 38.9% 6 50.0% 3 30.OX 8 25.0% 17 31.5% 24 33.3% 11:00 10 0.0% •1 25.0% 0 0.0% 6 75.OX 7 38.9% 6 50.0% 2 20.0% 8 25.0% 16 29.6% 23 31.9% 11:30 a.m. 0 0.0% 1 25.OX 0 0.0% 6 75.0% 7 38.9X 7 58.3% 3 30.0% 8 25.0% 16 33.3X 25 34.7% NOON 1 50.0% 2 50.0% 2 50.0% 5 62.5% 10 55.6% 7 58.3% 4 40.0% .10 31.3% 21 38.9% 31 43.1X 12:30 p.m. V 50.0% 1 25.0% 2 50.0% 6„ 75.0% 10 55.6% 7 58.3% 4 40.0% 9 28.1% 20 37.0% 30 41.7% m 1:00 0 0.0% 2 50.0% 2 50.0% 6 75.0% 10 55.6% 8 66.7% 4 40.0% 7 21.9% 19 35.2% 29 40.3% z 1:30 0 0.0% 1 25.0% 1 25.0% 5 62.5% 7 38.9% 6 50.0% 3 30.OX 8 25.0% 17 31.5% 24 33.3% 2:00 0 0.0% 1 25.0% 3 75.0% 6 75.OX 10 55.6% 8 66.7'/- 4. 40.0% 10 31.3% 22 40.7/ 32 44.4% �. 2:30 1 50.0% 1 25.0% 2 50.0% 5 62.5% 9 50.0% 8 66.7'/. 3 30.0% 9 .28.1% 20 37.0% 29 40.3X 3:00 0 0.0% 1 25.OX 4 100.0% 6 75.OX 11 61.1% 8 66.7% 4 40.0% 10 31.3% 22 40.7% 33 45.8% 3:30 0 0.0% 1 25.0% 3 75.0% 5 62.5X 9 50.0% 7 58.3% 4 40.0% 10, 31.3% 21 38.9% 30 41.7% Q 4:00 0 0.0% 1 25.0% 3 75.0% 5 62.5% 9 50.0% 6 50.0% 4 40.0% 10 31.3% 20 37.0% 29 40.3% -r 4:30 0 0.0% 1 25.OY. 4 100.0% 5 62.5% 10 55.6% 6 50.0% 4 40.0% 11 34.4% 21 38.9% 31 43.1X •+� 5:00 0 0.0% 1 25.OX 5 125.0% 6 75.0% 12 66.7",C 8 66.7'/. 3 30.0% 9 28.1% 20 37.OX 32 44.4% 5:30 0 0.0% 1 25.0% 4 100.0% 5 62.5% 10 55.6X 8 66.77 3 30.0% 20 62.5% 31 57.4% 41 56.9X 6:00 p.m. 0 0.0% 1 25.0% 3 75.0% 5 62.5% 9 50.0% 8 66.7X 3 30.0% 21 65.6% 32 59.3% 41 56.9X J J•l�y TABLE A-1 EXISTING PARKING BLOCK 1 GREER $ CO. DOWNTOWN HUNTINGTON BEACH Engineers and Planners ___________ PARKING SUPPLY EXISTING SPACES ON-STREET BY BLOCK FACE OFF-STREET MAIN ACACIA LAKE 6TH TOTAL 1 2 3 4 TOTAL TOTAL No, of SPACES 3 8 3 7 21 25 25 46 -------------------------- ---------------------------=-- --------------------------------------------------------- ------------ PARKING OCCUPANCY NO. X NO. X NO. % NO. X NO. X NO. % NO. % NO. X NO. % NO. X NO. X FRI, 2-19-93 PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC TIME OF DAY 9:00 a.m. 1 33.3% 2 25.0% 1 33.3% 3 42.9% • 7 33.3% 13 52.0% 13 52.0% 20 43.5% 9:30 0 0.0% 1 12.5% 1 33.3% 1 14.3% 3 14.3% 12 48.0% 12 48.0% 15 32.6% 10:00 1 33.3% 0 0.0% 1 33.3% 1 14.3% '3 14.3% 10 40.0% 10 40.0% 13 28.3% 10:30 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 33.3% 2 28.6% 3 14.3% 9 36.0% 9 36.0% 12 26.1% 11:00 1 33.3% '2 25.0% 1 33.3% 4 57.1% 8 38.1% 9 36.0% 9 36.0% 17 37.0% 11:30 a.m. 0 0.0% 1 12.5% 1 33.3% 4 57.1% 6 28.6% 10 40.0% 10 40.OX 16 34.8% NOON 3 100.0% 2 25.0% 0 0.0% 2 28.6% 7 33.3% 11 44.0% 11 44.0% 18 39.1% 12:30 p.m. 2 66.77 2 25.0% 0 0.0% 4 57.1% 8 38.1% 11 44.0% 11 44.0% 19 41.3% 1:00 0 0.0% 1 12.5% 0 0.0% 5 71.4% 6 28.6% 12 48.0% 12 48.0% 18 39.1% 1:30 1 33.3% 1 12.5% 0 0.0% 3 42.9% 5 23.8% 9 36.0% 9 36.OX 14 30.4% 2:00 1 33.3% 1 12.5% 1 33.3% 4 57.1% 7 33.3% 9 36.0% 9 36.0% 16 34.8% 2:30 0 0.0% 2 25.0% 0 0.0% 2 28.6% 4 19.0% 9 36.0% 9 36.0% 13 28.3% 3:00 2 66.7% 1 12.5% 1 33.3% 4 57.1% 8 38.1% 9 36.0% 9 36.0% 17 37.0% 3:30 0 0.0% 1 12.5% 1 33.3% 4 57.1% 6 28.6% 10 40.0% 10 40.0% 16 34.8% 4:00 0 0.0% 2 25.0% 1 33.3% 2 28.6% 5 23.8% 10 40.0% 10 40.0% 15 32.6% 4:30 1 33.3% 2 25.0% 1 33.3% 2 28.6% 6 28.6% 10 40.0% 10 40.0% 16 34.8% 5:00 0 0.0% 2 25.0% 1 33.3% 4 57.1% 7 33.3% 10 40.0% 10 40.0% 17 37.0% 5:30 0 0.0% 3 37.5% 2 66.7% 5 71.4% 10 47.6X 11 44.0% 11 44.0% 21 45.7X 6:00 p.m. 1 33.3% 1 12.5% 2 66.7X 5 71.4% 9 42.9% 12 48.0% 12 48.0% 21 45.7% ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------- ------------ PARKING OCCUPANCY NO. X NO. X NO. X NO. % NO. X NO. X NO. X NO. % NO. X NO. X NO. X SAT, 2-20-93 PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC TIME OF DAY , D 9:00 a.m. 0 0.0% 2 25.OX 2 66.7/ 4 57.1% 8' 38.1% 19 76.0% 19 76.0% 27 58.7% 9:30 0 0.0% 2 25.0% 2 66.7% 5 71.4% 9 42.9% 20 80.0% 20 80.0% 29 63.0% 10:00 1 -33.3% 3 37.5% 2 66.7% 4 57.1% 10 47.6% 18 72.0% 18 72.0% 28 60.9% D 10:30 0 0.0% 3 37.5% 2 66.7% 3 42.9% 8 38.1% 17 68.0% 17 68.0% 25 54.3% 11:00 2 66.7% 3 37.5% 2 66.7% 4 57.1X 11 52.4% 17 68.0% 17 68.0% 28 60.9% 11:30 a.m. 1 33,3% 4 50.0% 2 66.7X- 4 57.1% 11 52.4% 21 84.0% 21 84.0% 32 69.6% = NOON 0 0.0% 3 37.5% 1 33.3% 2 28.6% 6 28.6% 18 72.0% 18 72.0% 24 52.2% 12:30 p.m. 1 33.3% 2 25.0% 2 66.7% 3 42.9% 8 38.1% 15 60.0% 15 60.0% 23 50.0% m 1:00 1 33.3% 3 37.5% 1 33.3% 2 28.6% 7 33.3% 16 64.0% 16 64.0% 23 50.0% Z 1:30 2 66,7/. 2 25.0% 2 66.77. 4 57.1% 10 47.6% 18 72.0% 18 72.0% 28 60.9% 2:00 2 66.7% 4 50.0% 2 66.7% 2 28.6% 10 47.6% 19 76.0% 19 76.0% 29 63.0% 2:30 1 33.3% 3 37.5% 2 66.77. 3 42.9X 9 42.9% 20 80.0% 20 80.0% 29 63.0% Z 3:00 0 0.0% 3 37.5% 2 66.7*/ 3 42.9% 8 38.1% 11 44.0% 11 44.0% 19 41.3% 3:30 2 66.77 3 37.5% 2 66.7/ 4 57.1% 11 52.4% 11 44.0% 11 44.0% 22 47.8% 4:00 2 66.79. 2 25.0% 2 66.77. 3 42.9% 9 42.9X 12 48.0% 12 48.0% 21 45.7% 4:30 3 100.0% 3 37.5X 1 33.3% 4 57.1% 11 52.4% 11 44.0% 11 44.0% 22 47.8% 5:00 0 0.0% 4 50.0% 3 100.0% 6 85.7% 13 61.9% 10 40.0% 10 40.OX 23 50.0% 5:30 1 33.3% 3 37.5% 0 0.0% 4 57.1% 8 38.1% 13 52.0% 13 52.0% 21 45.7% 6:00 p.m. 0 0.0% 3 37.5X 0 0.0% 4 57.1% 7 33.3% 10 40.0% 10 40.0% 17 37.0% 'awl�" � r,,(i t► TABLE A-1 EXISTING PARKING BLOCK B1 A� GREER 8 CO. DOWNTOWN HUNTINGTON BEACH Engineers and Planners PARKING SUPPLY 'EXISTING SPACES ON-STREET BY BLOCK FACE OFF-STREET 2ND WALNUT 1ST PCH TOTAL 1 2 3 4 TOTAL TOTAL NO. OF SPACES 9 10 NP 3 22 22 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------- ------------ PARKING OCCUPANCY NO. X NO. % NO. X NO. % NO. X NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. Y. NO. X NO. X FRI, 2-19-93 PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC TIME OF DAY 9:00 a.m. 4 44.4% 2 20.0% 0 0.0% 6 27.3% 6 27.3% 9:30 4 44.4% 3 30.0% d 0.0% 7 31.8% 7 31.8% 10:00 6 66.7% 4 40.OX 0 0.0% 10 45.5% 10 45.5% 10:30 5 55.6% 4 . 40.0% 0 0.0% 9 40.9% 9 40.9% 11:00 5 55.6% 4 40.0% 0 0.0% 9 40.9% 9 40.9% 11:30 a.m. 4 44.4% 4 40.0% 1 33.3% 9 40.9% 9 40.9% NOON 6 66.7X 5 50.0% 2 66.77 13 59.1% 13 59.1% 12:30 p.m. 8 88.9% 6 60.OX 0 0.0% 14 63.6% 14 63.6% 1:00 8 88.9% 6 60.0% 1 33.3% 15 68.2% 15 68.2% 1:30 9 100.0% 2 20.0% 0 0.0% 11 50.0% 11 50.0% 2:00 9 100.0% 5 50.0% 0 0.0% 14 63.6% 14 63.6% 2:30 9 100.0% 6 60.0% 0 0.0% 15 68.2% 15 68.2% 3:00 8 88.9% 5 50.0% 1. 33.3% 14 63.6% 14 63.6% 3:30 9 100.0% 6 60.0% 0 0.0% 15 68.2% 15 68.2% 4:00 9 100.0% 5 50.0% 1 33.3% 15 68.2% 15 68.2% 4:30 9 100.0% 4 40.OX 1 33.3% 14 63.6% 14 63.6% 5:00 9 100.0% 3 30.OX 1 33.3% 13 59.1% 13 59.1% 5:30 8 88.9% 5 50.OX 0 0.0% 13 59.1% 13 59.1% 6:00 p.m. 8 88.9% 2 20.0% 1 33.3% 11 50.0% 11 50.0% ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------- ------------ PARKING OCCUPANCY NO. % NO. % NO. X NO. % NO. X NO. X NO. X NO. % NO. X NO. X NO. X SAT, 2-20-93 PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD. OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC TIME OF DAY 9:00 a.m. 9 100.0% 6 60.0% 0 0.0% 15 68.2% 15 68.2% p, 9:30 9 100.0% 6 60.0% 1 33.3% 16 72.7X 16 72.7% 10:00 9 100.0% 6 60.OX 1 33.3% 16 72.7% 16 72.7% 10:30 8 88.9% 5 50.0% 0 0.0% 13 59.1% 13 59.1% 11:00 9 100.0% •6 60.OX 1 33.3% 16 72.77 16 72.7% -� 11:30 a.m. 9 100.0% 4 40:0% 1 33.3% 14 63.6% 14 63.6% NOON 9 100.0% 4 40.0X 1 33.3% 14 63.6% 14 63.6% = 12:30 p.m. 9 100.0% 4 40.0% 0, 0.0% 13 59.1% 13 59.1% 1:00 9 100.0% 4 40.0% 0 0.0% 13 59.1% 13 59.1% -n 1:30 9 100.0% 3 30.OX 0 0.0% 12 54.5% 12 54.5% 2:00 9 100.0% 3 30.OX 0 0.0% 12 54.5% 12 54.5% 2:30 9 100.0% 4 40.0% 0 0.0% 13 59.1% 13 59.1% 3:00 9 100.0% 5 50.OX 2 66.7/ 16 72.7X 16 72.7% z 3:30 9 100.0% 4 40.OX 0 0.0% 13 59.1% 13 59.1% 4:00 8 88.9% 5 50.OX 3 100.0% 16 72.7% 16 72.7% 4:30 8 88.9% 4 40.0% 3 100.0% 15 68.2% 15 68.2% y 5:00 7 77.8% 5 50.0% 3 100.0% 15 68.2X 15 68.2% 5:30 6 66.7% 5 50.OX 3 100.0% 14 63.6% 14 63.6% 6:00 p.m. 9 100.0% 6 60.0% 3 100.0% 18 81.8% 18 81.8% 1 TABLE A-1 EXISTING PARKING BLOCK C1 GREER 8 CO. DOWNTOWN HUNTINGTON BEACH Engineers and Planners ------------ ----------- ------------------------- PARKING SUPPLY EXISTING SPACES ON-STREET BY BLOCK FACE OFF-STREET 6TH OLIVE 5TH WALNUT TOTAL 1 2 3 4 TOTAL TOTAL NO. OF SPACES 13 7 17 9 46 0 46 -----------------'----------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------- ------------ PARKING OCCUPANCY NO. X NO. X NO. X NO. % NO.. X NO. X NO. X NO. X NO. X NO. % NO. % FRI, 2-19-93 PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD. OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC TIME OF DAY 9:00 a.m. 6 46.2% 2 28.6% 6 35.3% 8 88.9% 22 47.8% 22 47.8% 9:30 6 46.2% 2 28.6% 6 35.3% 8 88.9% 22 47.8% 22 47.8% 10:00 7 53.8% 4 57.1% 5 29.4% 8 88.9% 24 52.2% 24 52.2% 10:30 6 46.2% 3 42.9X 7 41.2% 9 100.0% 25 54.3% 25 54.3% 11:00 6 46.2% 3 42.9% 8 47.1% 7 77.8% 24 52.2% 24 52.2% 11:30 a.m. 6 46.2% 3 42.9X 10 58.8% 9 100.0% 28 60.9% 28 60.9% NOON 7 53.8% 5 71.4% 11 64.7% 8 88.9% 31 67.4% 31 67.4% 12:30 p.m. 8 61.5% 4 57.1% 10 58.8% 7 77.8% 29 63.0% 29 63.OX 1:00 7 53.8% 4 57.1% 13 76.5% 8 88.9% 32 69.6% 32 69.6% 1:30 7 53.8% 3 42.9% 14 82.4% 7 77.8% 31 67.4% 31 67.4% 2:00 6 46.2% 3 42.9% 1Z 70.6% 7 77.11% 28 60.9% 28 60.9% 2:30 5 38.5% 5 71.4% 11 64.7% 5 55.6% 26 56.5% 26 56.5% 3:00 6 46.2% 6 85.7% 12 70.6% 6 66.7% 30 65.2% 30 65.2% 3:30 6 46.2% 5 71.4% 10 58.8% 6 66.714 27 58.7% 27 58.7% 4:00 7 53.8% 5 71A X 8 47.1% 5 55.6% 25 54.3% 25 54.3% 4:30 7 53.8% 3 42.9% 9 52.9% 7 77.8% 26 56.5X 26 56.5% 5:00 6 46.2% 4 57.1% 10 58.8% 5 55.6% 25 54.3% 25 54.3% 5:30 8 61.5% 3 42.9% 11 64.7% 4 44.4% 26 56.5% 26 56.5% 6:00 p.m. 8 61.5% 3 42.9% 11 64.7X 5 55.6% 27 58.7% 27 58.7% ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------- ------------ PARKING OCCUPANCY NO. % NO. X NO. % NO. X NO. X NO. X NO. Y. NO.' X NO. X NO. X NO. X SAT, 2-20-93 PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC TIME OF DAY 9:00 a.m. 8 61.5% 3 42.9% 6 35.3% 9 100.0% 26 56.5% 26 56.5% 9:30 10 76.9% 3 42.9% 7 41.2% 8 88.9% 28 60.9% 28 60.9X 10:00 8 61.5% 3 42.9% 7 41.2X 8 88.9% 26 56.5% 26 56.5X fl 10:30 9 69.2% 4 57.1% 6 35.3% 8 88.9% 27 58.7X 27 58.7X 11:00 9 69.2% 5 71.4% 8 47.1% 7 77.8% 29 63.0% 29 63.0% 11:30 a.m. 8 61.5% 5 71.4% 10 58.8% 7 77.8% 30 65.2% 30 65.2% D NOON 7 53.8% 5 71.4% 11 64.7% 7 77.8% 30 65.2% 30 65.2% 7 12:30 p.m. 7 53.8% 5 71.4% 12 70.6% 7 77.8% 31 67.4% 31 67.4% 1:00 7 53.8% 4 57.1% 13 76.5% 7 77.8% 31 67.4% 31 67.4% �. 1:30 7 53.8% 5 71.4% 14 82.4% 7 77.8% 33 71.7X 33 71.7% a' 2:00 6 46.2% 6 85.7% 13 76.5% 8 88.9% 33 71.7% 33 71.7% "j 2:30 6 46.2X 7 100.0% 12 70.6% 8 88.9% 33 71.'rl 33 71.rA 3:00 7 53.8% 6 85.7% 12 70.6% 7 77.8% 32 69.6% 32 69.6% .� 3:30 7 53.8% 5 71.4% 13 76.5% 6 66.7% 31 67.4% 31 67.4% 4:00 6 46.2% 4 57.1% 11 64.7% 6 66.7% 27 58.7X 27 58.71A 4:30 6 46.2Y 3 42.9% 9 52.9% 6 66.7X 24 52.2% 24 52.2% 5:00 6 46.2% 2 28.6% 8 47.1% 7 77.8% 23 50.0% 23 50.0% 5:30 7 53.8% 2 28.6% 10 58.8% 5 55.6% 24 52.2% 24 52.2X 6:00 p.m. 9 69.2% 2 28.6% 12 70.6% 5 55.6% 28 60.9% 28 60.9% J� TABLE A-1 EXISTING PARKING BLOCK 01 GREER $ CO. DOWNTOWN HUNTINGTON BEACH Engineers and Planners --------------- --- PARKING SUPPLY EXISTING SPACES ON-STREET BY BLOCK FACE OFF-STREET 3RD OLIVE 2ND WALNUT TOTAL 1 2 3 4 TOTAL TOTAL NO. OF SPACES 10 9 13 7 39 12 12 51 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------- ------------ PARKING OCCUPANCY NO. % NO. % NO. X NO. X NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. X NO. X FR1, 2-19-93 PKD OCC PKD OCC PKO OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC TIME OF DAY 9:00 a.m. 5 50.0% 4 44.4% 5 38.5% 4 57.1% 18 46.2% 3 25.0% 3 25.0% 21 41.2% 9:30 6 60.0% 4 44.4% 5 38.5% 3 42.9% 18 46.2% 3 25.0% 3 25.0% 21 41.2% 10:00 6 60.0% 5 55.6% 5 38.5% 3 42.9% 19 48.7% 2 16.7*/ 2 16.7% 21 41.2% 10:30 6 60.0% 5 55.6% 7 53.8% 4 .57.1% 22 56.4% 2 16.7Y. 2 16.7% 24 47.1% 11:00 5 50.0% 3 33.3% 6 46.2% 5 71.4% 19 48.7Y. 2 16.7Y. 2 16.7% 21 41.2% 11:30 a.m. 6 60.0% 4 44.4% 6 46.2% 3 42.9% 19 48.7% 1 8.3% 1 8.3% 20 39.2% NOON 6 60.0% 3 33.3% 4 30.8% 2 28.6% 15 38.5% 3 25.0% 3 25.0% 18 35.3% 12:30 p.m. 6 60.0% 5 55.6% 6 46.2% 3 '42.9% 20 51.3% 2 16.7-/. 2 16.7X 22 43.1% 1:00 7 70.0% 4 44.4% 6 46.2% 3 42.9% 20 51.3% 3 25.0% 3 25.0% 23 45.1% 1:30 4 40.0% 4 44.4% 5 38.5% 3 42.9% 16 41.0% 2 16.77. 2 16.7% 18 35.3% 2:00 5 50.0% 4 44.4% 5 38.5% 4 57.1% 18 46.2% 2 16.7% 2 16.7% 20 39.2% 2:30 5 50.0% 5 55.6% 6 46.2% 5 71.4% 21 53.8% 4 33.3% 4 33.3% 25 49.0% 3:00 6 60.0% 5 55.6% 7 53.8% 5 71.4% 23 59.0% 2 . 16.7/ 2 16.7% 25 49.0% 3:30 7 70.0% 3 33.3% 5 38.5% 4 57.1% 19 48.7% 3 25.0% 3 25.0% 22 43.1% 4:00 6 60.0% 3 33.3% 4 30.8% 3 42.9% 16 41.0% 3 25.0% 3 25.0% 19 37.3% 4:30 6 60.0% 4 44.4% 3 23.1% 2 28.6% 15 38.5% 3 25.0% 3 25.0% 18 35.3% 5:00 8 80.0% 5 55.6% 5 38.5% 4 57.1% 22 56.4% 4 33.3% 4 33.3% 26 51.OX 5:30 7 70.0% 5 55.6% 6 46.2% 4 57.1% 22 56.4% 2 16.7-/. 2 16.7% 24 47.1% 6:00 p.m. 9 90.0% 4 44.4% 6 46.2% 4 57.1% 23 59.0% 5 41.7% 5 41.7% 28 54.9X ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------- ------------ PARKING OCCUPANCY NO. X NO. % NO. X NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. X NO. X SAT, 2-20-93 PKD OCC PKD OCC PK0 OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC TIME OF DAY 9:00 a.m. 6 60.0% 4 44.,4% 6 46.2% 3 42.9% 19 48.77 3 25.0% 3 25.0% 22 43.1% 9:30 6 60.0% 4 44.4% 6 46.2% 4 57.1% 20 51.3% 3 25.0% 3 25.0% 23 45.1X �. 10:00 6 60.0% 5 55.6% 5 38.5% 4 57.1% 20 51.3% 3 25.0% 3 25.0% 23 45.1% 10:30 6 60.0% 4 44.4% 5 38.5% 3 42.9% 18 46.2% 2 16.7/ 2 16.7% 20 39.2X 1 11:00 5 50.0% 3 33.3% 5 38.5% 4 57.1% 17 43.6% 1 8.3% 1 8.3% 18 35.3% 11:30 a.m. 4 40.0% 4 44.4% 4 30.8% 3 42.9% 15 38.5% 2 16.7*4 2 16.7X 17 33.3% - . NOON 4 40.0% 4 44.4% 3 23.1% 3 42.9% 14 35.9% 2 16.77 2 16.7% 16 31.4% � 12:30 p.m. 4 •40.0% 5 55.6% 2 15.4% 4 57.1% 15 38.5% 3 25.0% 3 25.0% 18 35.3% 1:00 2 20.0% 5 55.6% 3 23.1% 4 57.1% 14 35.9% 4 33.3% 4 33.3% 18 35.3% 1:30 2 20.0% 4 44.4% 3 23.1% 4 57.1% 13 33.3X 4 33.3% 4 33.3% 17 33.3X 2:00 9 90.0% 3 33.3% 3 23.1% 5 71.4% 20 51.3% 5 41.77 5 41.77 25 49.0% n 2:30 7 70,0% 4 44.4% 3 23.1% 4 57.1% 18 46.2% 5 41.7/ 5 41.7% 23 45.1% 3:00 7 70.0% 3 33.3% 4 30.8X 5 71.4% 19 48.7% 3 25.0% 3 25.0% 22 43.1% 3:30 5 50.0% 5 55.6% 3 23.1% 3 42.9% 16 41.,0% 4 33.3% 4 33.3Y. 20 39.2% 4:00 6 60.0% 5 55.6% 3 23.1% 2 28.6% 16 41.0% 2 16.7% 2 16.7% 18 35.3% ^� 4:30 6 60.0% 4 44.4% 3 23.1% 2 . 28.6% 15 38.5% 2 16.7% 2 16.7% 17 33.3% ✓ 5:00 7 70.0% 3 33.3% 3 23.1% 2 28.6% 15 38.5% 3 25.0% 3 25.0% 18 35.3% 5:30 8 80.OX 5 55.6% 5 38.5% 3 42.9% 21 53.8% 4 33.3% 4 33.3% 25 49.0% F 6:00 P.M. 10 100.0% 5 55.6% 6 46.2X 3 42.9% 24 61.5% 6 50.0% 6 50.0% 30 58.8% TABLE A-1 EXISTING PARKING BLOCK E1\ GREER 8 CO. DOWNTOWN HUNTINGTON REACH Engineers and Planners - --------------------- -------------- PARKING SUPPLY EXISTING SPACES ON-STREET BY BLOCK FACE OFF-STREET 6TH ORANGE 5TH OLIVE TOTAL 1 2 3 4 TOTAL TOTAL NO. OF SPACES 13 5 18 9 45 0 45 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------- --------•--- PARKING OCCUPANCY NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. X NO. % NO. % NO. % N0. % NO. % NO. % FR1, 2-19-93 PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC TIME OF DAY 9:00 a.m. 3 23.1% 6 120.0% 6 33.3% 3 33.3% 18 40.0% 18 40.0% 9:30 3 23.1% 7 140.0% 5 27.8% 4 44.4% 19 42.2% 19 42.2% 10:00 2 15.4% 5 100.0% 5 27.8% 2 22.2% 14 31.1% 14 31.1% 10:30 3 23.1% 5 100.0% 6 33.3% 4 44.4% 18 40.0% 18 40.0% 11:00 3 23.1% 5 100.0% 6 33.3% 4 44.4% 18 40.0% 18 40.0% 11:30 a.m. 3 23.1% 5 100.0% 6 33.3% 4 44.4% 18 40.0% 18 40.0% NOON 3 23.1%. 4 80.0% 5 27.8% 5 '55.6% 17 37.8% 17 37.8% 12:30 p.m. 2 15.4% 4 80.0% 5 27.8% 5 55.6% 16 35.6% 16 35.6% 1:00 2 •15.4% 4 80.0% 3 16.7% 4 44.4% 13 28.9% 13 28.9% 1:30 2 15.4% 5 100.0% 6 33.3% 5 55.6% 18 40.0% 18 40.0% 2:00 2 15.4% 4 80.0% 5 27.8% 4 44.4% 15 33.3% 15 33.3% 2:30 3 23.1% 4 80.0% 4 22.2% 4 44.4% 15 33.3% 15 33.3% 3:00 2 15.4% 5 100.0% 5 27.8% 5 55.6% 17 37.8% 17 37.8% 3:30 3 23.1% 4 80.0% 5 27.8% 4 44.4% 16 35.6% 16 35.6% 4:00 3 23.1% 4 80.0% 5 27.8% 4 44.4% 16 35.6% 16 35.6% 4:30 4 30.8% 5100.0% 4 22.2% 4 44.4% 17 37.8% 17 37.8% 5:00 3 23.1% 5 100.0% 4 22.2% 5 55.6% 17 37.8% 17 37.8% 5:30 3 23.1% 4 80.0% 5 27.8% 5 55.6% 17 37.8% 17 37.8% 6:00 p.m. 2 15.4% 5 100.0% 5 27.8% 4 44.4% 16 35.6% 16 35.6% ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------•---------- ------------ PARKING OCCUPANCY NO. % NO. % NO. X NO. X NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. % SAT, 2-20-93 PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC. PKD OCC PKD OCC TIME OF DAY 1 9:00 a.m. 8 61.5% 3 60.0% 5 27.8% 5 55.6% 21 46.7% 21 46.7% 9:30 7 53.8X 3 60.0% 5 27.8% 5 55.6% 20 44.4% 20 44.4X 10:00 5 38.5% 5 100.0% 7 38.9% 4 44.4% 21 46.7% 21 46.7% 10:30 3 23.1% 4 80.0% 6 33.3% 3 33.3% 16 35.6% 16 35.6% 11:00 4 30.8% 5 100.0% 8 44.4% 2 22.2% 19 42.2% 19 42.2% n 11:30 a.m. 6 46.2% 6 120.0% 8 44.4% 0 0.0% 20 44.4% 20 44.4% NOON 2 15.4% 5 100.0% 6 33.3% 3 33.3% 16 35.6% 16 35.6% 12:30 p.m. 5 38.5% 5 100.0% 7 38.9% 2 22.2% 19 42.2% 19 42.2% 1:00 3 23.1% 5 100.0% 8 44.4% 4 44.4% 20 44.4% 20 44.4% ri1 1:30 3 23.1% 5 100.0% 6 33.3% 4 44.4% 18 40.0% 18 40.OX z 2:00 4 30.8% 5 100.0% 7 38.9% 3 33.3% 19 42.2% 19 42.2% -i 2:30 6 46.2% 6 120.0% 8 44.4% 4 44.4% 24 53.3% 24 53.3% z 3:00 7 53.8% 6 120.0% 5 27.8% 3 33.3% 21 46.7.6 21 46.7% 3:30 6 46.2% 7 140.0% 3 16.7% 2 22.2% 18 40.0% 18 40.0% 4:00 4 30.8% 5 100.0% 6 33.3% 3 33.3% 18 40.0% 18 40.OX 4:30 3 23.1% 4 80.0% 4 22.2X 4 44.4% 15 33.3% 15 33.3% 5:00 3 23.1% 4 80.0% 2 11.1% 4 44.4% 13 28.9% 13 28.9% 5:30 4 30.8% 4 80.0% 3 16.7% 3 33.3% 14 31.1% 14 31.1X 6:00 p.m. 5 38.5% 4 80.0% 5 27.8% 2 22.2% 16 35.6% 16 35.6% f TABLE A-1 EXISTING PARKING BLOCK F1 GREER 8 CO. DOWNTOWN HUNTINGTON BEACH Engineers and Planners PARKING SUPPLY + EXISTING SPACES ON-STREET BY BLOCK FACE OFF-STREET 3RD ORANGE 2ND OLIVE TOTAL 1 2 3 4 TOTAL TOTAL NO. OF SPACES 15 7 12 9 43 0 43 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------- ------------ PARKING OCCUPANCY NO. % NO. % NO. X NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. X NO. 7. NO. X NO. % FR1, 2-19-93 PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC TIME OF DAY 9:00 a.m. 11 73.3% 4 57.1% 4 33.3% 2 22.2% 21 48.8% 21 48.8% 9:30 11 73.3% 4 57.1% 4 33.3% 2 22.2% 21 48.8% 21 48.8% 10:00 12 80.0% 2 28.6% 3 25.0% 3 33.3% 20 46.5% 20 46.5% 10:30 12 80.0% 3 42.9% 4 33.3% 3 33.3% 22 51.2% 22 51.2% 11:00 12 80.0% 2 28.6% 3 25.0% 3 33.3% 20 46.5% 20 46.5% 11:30 a.m. 12 80.0% 0 0.0% 1 8.3% 5 55.6% 18 41.9% 18 41.9% NOON 15 100.0% 2 28.6% 4 33.3% 2 22.2% 23 53.5% 23 53.5% 12:30 p.m. 16 106.7% 2 28.6% 3 25.0% 3 33.3% 24 55.8% 24 55.8% 1:00 16 106.7Y. 2 28.6% 3 25.0% 3 33.3% 24 55.8% 24 55.8% 1:30 12 80.0% 2 28.6% 4 33.3% 4 44.4% 22 51.2% 22 51.2% 2:00 13 86.7% 2 28.6% 3 25.0% 4 44.4% 22 51.2% 22 51.2% 2:30 11 73.3% 2 28.6% 3 25.0% 4 44.4% 20 46.5% 20 46.5% 3:00 12 80.0% 2 28.6% 4 33.3% 4 44.4% 22 51.2% 22 51.2% 3:30 13 86.7% 2 28.6% 4 33.3% 3 33.3% 22 51.2% 22 51.2% 4:00 11 73.3% 2 28.6% 3 25.0% 3 33.3% 19 44.2% 19 44.2% 4:30 12 80.0% 3 42.9% 4 33.3% 3 33.3% 22 51.2% 22 51.2% 5:00 12 80.0% 2 28.6% 3 25.0% 3 33.3% 20 46.5% 20 46.5% 5:30 14 93.3% 3 42.9% 4 33.3% 4 44.4% 25 58.1% 25 58.1% 6:00 p.m. 13 86.7Y. 3 42.9% 4 33.3% 3 33.3% 23 53.5% 23 53.5% -------------------------------------------------------------------- ------- --------------------------------------------------------- ------------ PARKING OCCUPANCY NO. X NO. X NO. X NO. Y. NO. % NO. X NO. % NO. X NO. X NO. % NO. % SAT, 2-20-93 PKD OCC PKO OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC PKD OCC TIME OF DAY 9:00 a.m. 12 60.0% 2 28.6% 2 16.7% 4 44.4% 20 46.5% 20 46.5% 9:30 14 93.3% 3 42.9% 3. 25.0% 3 33.3% 23 53.5% 23 53.5% D 10:00 14 93.3% 3 42.9% 3 25.0% 2 •22.2% 22' 51.2% 22 51.2% 10:30 13 86.77. 3 42.9% 2 16.7% 3 33.3% 21 48.8% 21 48.8% 11:00 15 100.0% 3 42.9% 2 16.7% 2 22.2% 22 51.2% 22 51.2% D 11:30 a.m. 12 80.0% 3 42.9% 2 16.7% 3 '33.3% 20 46.5% 20 46.5% n NOON 12 80.0% 3 42.9% 4 33.3% 2 22.2% 21 48.8% 21 48.8% 1Z:30 p.m. 12 80.0% 3 42.9% 2 16.7% 2 22.2% 19 44.2% 19 44.2% 1:00 12 80.0% 3 42.9% 3 25.0% 3 33.3% 21 48.8% 21 48.8% 1:30 12 80.0% 3 42.9% 3 25.0% 2 22.2% 20' 46.57 20 46.5% m 2:00 12 80.0% 3 42.9% 3 25.0% 2 22.2% 20 46.5% 20 46.5% Z 2:30 12 80.0% 4 57.1% 2 16.7X 2 22.2% 20 46.5% 20 46.5% 3:00 12 80.0% 4 57.1% 4 33.3% 3 33.3% 23 53.5% 23 53.5% 3:30 10 66.7Y. 4 57.1% 3 25.0% 3 33.3% 20 46.5% 20 46.5% Z 4:00 11 73.3% 5 71.4% 3 25.0% 4 44.4% 23 53.5% 23 53.5% 4:30 12 80.0% 4 57.1% 2 16.7% 4 44.4% 22 51.2% 22 51.2% 5:00 11 73.3% 3 42.9% 3 25.0% 3 ,33.3% 20 46.5% 20 46.5% 5:30 11 73.3% 4 57.1% 4 33.3% 2 22.2% 21 48.8% 21 48.8% 6:00 p.m. 12 80.0% 4 57.1% 2 16.7% 4 44.4% 22 51.2% 22 51.2% •.;jll r %,1 a lut ltmgron beach ' P.O. BOX �..<..,,.,,,,_...,.,...,...�.,�� r�T01y ,.��.U•.----: 190 CALIFroRNIA 92648 �' ' �' Us PosTAUEE s MAR 24 �4 ram:` x 7 e ^ FIRST G$ ASS MA F1 t [� J i f 9701080 • t 024-122-02 '-Richard A. Harlow E iV� 111 1 OTh St . tington Bh CA •9 C sEN Ogr vq •o�h E 9,'FOM1► r=s 4 Itlt,ll till Ill,11,tl,ll,t,i„111„11 If fill Ill 11 r ro ^ a� 024—14.7-25_-- wqR� Richard �'�- A• Harlow Jbo ►� 111 1 OTh St . Huntington Bh CA 92648 ; � � 4 C 04. �vqR �q • OFO r, ii t (( ((ii !y ]] f `1L`64+-"}►80t 02 li,ll,,,l,i,illttl„i►)) )itl �111l��!! !!I!! !!till 11111Illi111111111 CLERK of Huntington Beac OX 190 CALIFORNIA 92648 �. a s 4 €• fA MAR 24 _ e IRSt■¢ e! r, 'ma's e F epP ! \ i (. rSS ` QALIF i 44E reR-' x n r + i'L, 01080 • ft I A — 024-147-15 ` Thomas R. rzl 5199 E. cific Coast HWY Long B ch CA 90804 ruouk.-mv i w"a I ruDLw Nu I ICE, 'I PUBLIC NUTICE5 I PUBLIC NUTICE5 I PUBLIC NUTICE5 I PUBLIC gUTICES NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 92-5/ DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN CODE AMENDMENT/ "VILLAGE CONCEPT" AND DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN (CONTINUED FROM MARCH 7, 1994, CITY COUNCIL MEETING) NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Huntington Beach City Council will hold a public hearing in the Council Chambers at the Huntington Beach Civic Center, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California, on the date and at the time indicated below to receive and consider the statements of all persons who wish to be heard relative to the application described below. DATE/TIME: , Monday, April 4, 1994, 7:00 PM APPLICATION NUMBER: Code Amendment No. 92-5/Downtown Specific Plan Code Amendment/ "Village Concept" and Downtown Parking Master Plan APPLICANT: City of Huntington Beach LOCATION: An area bounded by Golden West Street, Pacific Coast Highway, Beach Boulevard ZONE: Downtown Specific Plan REQUEST: To amend the Downtown Specific Plan for the purpose of scaling down development standards, creating three(3) planning nodes, establishing affordable housing standards and a comprehensive parking management plan. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Covered by the Downtown Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report COASTAL STATUS: Local Coastal Plan Amendment ON FILE: A copy of the proposed request is on file in the City Clerk's Office, 2000 Main Street. Huntington Beach, California 92648, for inspection by the public. A copy of the staff report will be available to interested parties at City Clerk's Office after April 1, 1994. ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to attend said hearing and express opinions or submit evidence for or against the application as outlined above. Written communications may be sent to the City Clerk. If you challenge the City Council's action in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City at, or prior to,the public hearing. If there are any further questions please call Herb Fauland, Associate Planner at (714) 536-5271. Connie Brockway, City Clerk City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street T-Inntinntnn RPanh ('A 07(dQ [71 n1 G2�_G777' es A. 8nnton, (Go e3uslness Name statemani —�,a,o,,,o„� —,..a—ncmuus q I Statement I The following persons are The follow Statement partner, 1851 tas Hrncac ,The h qa g persons are The following persons are Business Name(s) listed husmess_as: _I abov_e_p�;2.28-94. NVId IVI:D3dS NM0I.NAA0G ilk 9-Z6# IN,3VYCIN3VYV 3000' w r ♦ n I ♦ � II B ` B C ' -- - - - - ® \ ♦ Nbf330 3Id13dd- 0 /III L 00 � 00 0 DODD .� � � a000O� F � , � - o o O D o o aa000�o�oa� �.. oo �_ � o �• O DO OD DO 00 � DO � PROOF OF PUBLICATION STATE OF CALIFORNIA) ) SS. County of Orange ) I am a Citizen of the United States and a resident of the County aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to or interested in the below entitled matter. I am a principal clerk of the HUNTINGTON BEACH INDEPENDENT, a newspaper of general circulation, printed and published in the City of Huntington Beach, County of Orange, State of California, and that attached Notice is a true and complete copy as was printed and published in the Huntington Beach and Fountain Valley issues of said newspaper to wit the issue(s) of: March 24, 1994 1 declare, under penalty of perjury, that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on March 24 199 4 at Costa Mesa, California. R Signature NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING �, _ U;, CODE AMENDMENT NO. 92-5/ DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN CODE AMENDMENT/ "VILLAGE CONCEPT" AND DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN (CONTINUED FROM MARCH 7, 1994, CITY COUNCIL MEETING) NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Huntington Beach City Council will hold a public hearing in the Council Chambers at the Huntington Beach Civic Center, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California,on the date and at the time indicated below to receive and consider the statements of all persons who wish to be heard relative to the application described below. DATEMME: Monday, April 4, 1994, 7:00 PM APPLICATION NUMBER: Code Amendment No. 92-5/Downtown Specific Plan Code Amendment/ "Village Concept" and Downtown Parking Master Plan APPLICANT: City of Huntington Beach LOCATION: An area bounded by Golden West Street,Pacific Coast Highway,Beach Boulevard ZONE: Downtown Specific Plan REQUEST: To amend the Downtown Specific Plan for the purpose of scaling down development standards, creating three(3)planning nodes, establishing affordable housing standards and a comprehensive parking management plan. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Covered by the Downtown Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report COASTAL STATUS: Local Coastal Plan Amendment ON FILE: A copy of the proposed request is on file in the City Clerk's Office,2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California 92648, for inspection by the public. A copy of the staff report will be available to interested parties at City Clerk's Office after April 1, 1994. ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to attend said hearing and express opinions or submit evidence for or against the application as outlined above. Written communications may be sent to the City Clerk. If you challenge the City Council's action in court,you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City at, or prior to,the public hearing. If there are any further questions please call Herb Fauland, Associate Planner at (714) 536-5271. Connie Brockway, City Clerk City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 (714) 536-5227 000000 � 00000 IV =Don on 0 If � o PACIFIC - OCEAN CODE AMENDMENT #92-5 DOWNTOWN SPECIAL PLAN PUBLIC HEARING REQUEST SUBJECT: DEPARTMENT: MEETING: NUMBER OF OTHER PU LIC HEARINGS: (PER- Initial) AUTHORIZATION: (2-6.2t2 �...�.� Ray ver Assistant City Administrator Approved by City Administration COVER SHEET EQR CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARINGS N/A YES NO ( ) Was City Council or Planning Commission public hearing notice typed on Wang? If appeal, are appellant and applicant shown on legal notice? ( ) ( ) If housing is involved, is "legal challenge paragraph" included? ( ) ( ) If Coastal Development Permit, are the RESIDENT labels attached and is the Coastal Commission Office on the labels? ( ) Is Title Company verification letter attached? ( ) ( ) Were the latest Assessor's Parcel Rolls used? fC � ( ) ( ) Is the appellant's name and address part of the labels? ( ) Is day of public hearing correct - Monday/Tuesday? ( ) Has the City Administrator's Office authorized the public hearing to be set? u, ( ) ( ) Is there an Environmental Status to be approved by Council. Are the appella applicant's ames and addresses on mailing labels? "ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to attend said hearing and express opinions or.submit to the City Clerk written evidence for or against the application as outlined above. If there are any further questions please, call (insert name of Planner) at 536-5227." For Public Hearings at the City Council level,please insert the above paragraph of the public hearing notice: 4� CONNIE BROCKWAY, CITY CLERK CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 2000 MAIN STREET - 2ND FLOOR HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92648 (714) 536-5227 1350K - 9/93 023-138-10 023-139-02 023-161-06 Gary Garfield Huntington Beach Co Herbert V. Swanigan 16027 Ventura Blvd. No. 50 P.O. Box 7611 17132 Harbor Bluffs Cir Encino CA 91436 San Francisco CA 94120 Huntington Bh CA 92649 023-161-08 023-161-12 023-161-17 Gary W. Lawson Lowell D. Zehnder Bonnie M. Doolan 18180 Devonwood Cir 206 15th St . 415 Signal Rd. Fountain Vly CA 92708 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Newport Beach CA 92663 023-161-19 023-161-20 023-161-22 Bonnie M. Doolan Bonnie M. Doolan Daniel J. Salerno 415 Signal Rd. 415 Signal Rd. 504 Pierside Cir Newport Beach CA 92663 Newport Beach CA 92663 Huntington Bh CA 92648 023-161-23 023-161-25 023-161-27 Stevan Karl Brad James J. Hoffman Noeline Khaw 315 12Th St . 1221 Sea Terrace 14062 Bexley St . Huntington Bh CA 92648 Irving TX 75060 Westminster CA 92693 023-161-31 023-162-13 023-162-14 William J. Sullivan J. Carlos Maggi Peter A. Mazzagatte 7612 Woodwind Dr. 11232 Kensington Rd. 8282 Monique Way Huntington Bh CA 92647 Rossmoor CA 90720 Cypress CA 90630 023-162-15 023-162-16 023-162-21 Azmy N. Dimyan James E. Holton Dewey Davide 19381 Coralwood Lane 7201 Wellesley Ave. P.O. Box F Huntington Bh CA 92646 Westminster CA 92683 Huntington Bh CA 92648 023-162-25 023-162-26 023-162-27 Peter J. Fehervari Kevin C. Kelter Kevin C. Kelter 1837 Alpha St . 5362 Oceanus Dr. No. A 5362 Oceanus Dr. No. A S Pasadena CA 91030 Huntington Bh CA 92649 Huntington Bh CA 92649 023-162-29 023-163-03 023-163-08 Lowell D. Zehnder Wesley Grant Crawford IIAMS Mary N 206 15th St . 1150 E. Cypress Ave . 24175 Minnetonka Lane Huntington Bh CA 92648 Glendora CA 91740 El Toro CA 92630 023-163-09 023-163-10 023-163-12 Lowell D. Zehnder Lowell D. Zehnder John M. Thompson 206 15th St . 206 15th St . 147 Via Undine Huntington •Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Newport Beach CA 92663 023-163-13 023-163-15 023-163-18 James P. Eich John C. Alfonso California Fed' L BK 1820 W. Grand Ave . 6662 Kiowa Rd. 5700 Wilshire Blvd. No. Alhambra CA 91801 Westminster CA 92683 Los Angeles CA 90036 023-163-20 023-163-24 023-163-25 Lowell D. Zehnder Beulah C. Lerner Beulah C. Lerner 206 15th St . 323 Lido Sound 323 Lido Sound Huntington Bh CA 92648 Newport Beach CA 92663 Newport Beach CA 92663 023-164-01 023-164-02 023-164-06 Donn R. Parsch Vera Michaels Alexander Marilyn O. Houchen 78-939 Montego Bay Cir 53361 Rd 432 10366 Powderhorn River C Bermuda Dunes CA 92201 Bass Lake CA 93604 Fountain Vly CA 92708 023-164-09 023-164-10 023-164-14 Virbhandas Asrani Arjun Ralph H. Bauer Lowell D. Zehnder 25442 Wagon Wheel Cir 16511 Cotuit Cir 206 15th St . Laguna Hills CA 92653 Huntington Bh CA 92649 Huntington Bh CA 92648 023-165-01 023-165-02 023-165-09 Shell Western E & P Inc Shell Western E & P Inc Shell Western E & P Inc P.O. Box 2099 P.O. Box 2099 P.O. Box 2099 Houston TX 77252 Houston TX 77252 Houston TX 77252 023-165-12 023-166-03 023-166-05 Shell Western E & P Inc Thomas Madigan Robert P. Mandic P.O. Box 2099 P.O. Box 127 1112 Main St . Houston TX 77252 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 023-166-07 023-166-09 023-166-10 Leonard O. Lindborg Huntington Beach Company State of California 30110 Crown Valley PKY P.O. Box 7611 Laguna Niguel CA 92677 San Francisco CA 94120 023-166-11 023-166-12 023-167-02 Leonard O. Lindborg Leonard O. Lindborg Southridge Investments 30110 Crown Valley PKY 30110 Crown Valley PKY 5362 Oceanus Dr. Laguna Niguel CA 92677 Laguna Niguel CA 92677 Huntington Bh CA 92649 023-167-03 023-167-11 023-168-09 Chris Bovy Alan A. Ankerstar Robert D. Bolen 526 18th St . 6792 Corral Cir 1818 Pine St . Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Beach CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 023-168-10 024-031-01 024-031-02 Southridge Homes Ptnshp Clyde Armijo Byron Morgan 5362 "Oceanus Dr. 21632 Kanakoa Lane 523 1OTh St . Huntington Bh CA 92649 Huntington Bh CA 92646 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024-031-04 024-031-07 024-031-09 Edward T. Conlon Richard Burton Wann Henry J. Winkler 227 9th St . P.O. Box 6291 240 E. Altura Dr. Huntington Bh CA 92648 Orange CA 92613 Fullerton CA 92635 024-031-12 024-031-13 024-031-14 Lowell D. Zehnder Lowell D. Zehnder Joseph G. Nicosia 206 15th St . 206 15th St . 4330 Barranca PKY Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Irvine CA 92714 024-031-15 024-032-01 024-032-02 Chris Bovy Alvin M. Coen Joe E. Huskins 526 18th St . 5792 Meadowbrook Dr. 19811 Shorecliff Lane Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92649 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024-032-06 024-032-07 024-032-23 Alvin M. Coen Clive R. H. Couper Raymond Haws 5792 Meadowbrook Dr. 1206 E. Fern Dr. 177 Riverside Ave. No. F Huntington Bh CA 92649 Fullerton CA 92631 Newport Beach CA 92663 024-032-24 024-033-01 024-033-02 Galitzen Trust Harriet Goban Jack E. Dotson 9770 James River Cir 126 Via Mesa Grande 19701 Quiet Bay Lane Fountain Valley CA 92708 Redondo Beach CA 90277 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024-033-05 024-033-11 024-033-13 Lawrence A. Gibson James P. Eich J. Alan Campbell 11931 Emerald St . 1820 W. Grand Ave . 2425 Creekside Run Garden Grove CA 92645 Alhambra CA 91801 Chino CA 91709 024-033-16 024-033-21 024-033-23 John A. Galkin California Fed' L BK Carl Frederick Shrawder 101 Huntington St . 5700 Wilshire Blvd. 14934 Stonesboro Pl . Huntington Bh CA 92648 Los Angeles CA 90036 Sherman Oaks CA 91403 024-034-01 024-034-02 024-034-04 Lorraine Lowe Ralph H. Bauer Helene K. Goodman 4508 Guava Ave . 16511 Cotuit Cir 17052 Palmdale St . Seal Beach CA 90740 Huntington Bh CA 92649 Huntington Beach CA 9264 024-034-05 024-034-13 024-034-14 V. A. Arjun Lorraine N. Lowe Gary K. Lessenger 25442 Wagon Wheel Cir 4508 Guava Ave . 8614 Darter Cir Laguna Hills CA 92653 Seal Beach CA 90740 Fountain Vly CA 92708 024-034-18 024-034-19 024-034-20 Collin Chan Victor H. York Brad Streelman 1920 E. Alto Lane 19890 Pleasant View Dr. 3190 N. Long Beach Blvd. Fullerton CA 92631 Groveland CA 95321 Long Beach CA 90807 024-034-22 024-034-24 024-035-01 Eleanor Blatt Cole Marie Fulwider Virbhandas A. Arjun 4021 Figaro Cir 1732 Main St . 25442 Wagon Wheel Cir Huntington Bh CA 92649 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Laguna Hills CA 92653 024-035-11 024-035-12 024-036-01 Lowell D. Zehnder Lowell D. Zehnder John T. Sherman 206 15th St . 206 15th St . 9149 Lindante Dr. Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Whittier CA 90603 024-036-04 024-036-05 024-036-06 Ralph H. Bauer Donald T. Yasuda Constance J. Brucker 16511 Cotuit Cir 2800 S. Main St . No. D 5770 Via Del Potrero Huntington Bh CA 92649 Santa Ana CA 92707 Yorba Linda CA 92687 024-036-10 024-036-11 024-036-12 Achim Hesselink Michael A. Cosentino Terry L. Wesseln 3 Hutton Center No. 900 1050 Braemoor Dr. 22519 San Joaquin Dr. W Santa Ana CA 92707 Downers Grove IL 60515 Canyon Lake CA 92587 024-038-04 024-038-08 024-038-09 Goodman Helen K Trust Michael W. Niccole Craig H. Lewis 17052 Palmdale St . 400 3rd St . 23341 Via Guadix Huntington Beach CA 92647 Huntington Beach CA 92648 Mission Viejo CA 92691 024-038-10 024-038-11 024-038-14 Barbara Lucille Simmet William C. Goodman Arturo Filippe 1392 Gwen Ave . 17052 Palmdale St . 1300 N. Potrero Santa Ana CA 92705 Huntington Beach CA 92647 S San Gabriel CA 91770 024-121-07 024-121-22 024-121-23 Robert F. Gardiner W. David Mello Paul Y. Chen 805 W. South Mountain Ave . 4825 Hillard Ave . 1808 W. Cedar St . No. A Phoenix AZ 85041 La Canada CA 91011 Alhambra CA 91801 024-121-28 024-122-01 024-122-02 Scott Friedland David E. Tsong Richard A. Harlow 5926 Manola Way 20381 Craimer Lane 111 1OTh St . Los Angeles CA 90068 Huntington Bh CA 92646 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024-122-04 024-122-07 024-122-09 Edward J. Supernowicz William R. Paxson Antone John Roitz P.O. Box 4 Rancho Del Sol 115 9th St . P.O. Box 2087 Camino CA 95709 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Montclair CA 91763 024-123-01 024-123-07 024-123-08 Evelyn M. Cochran Baron Investment Cc Sylvia W. Augustine 225 11Th St . 15321 Transistor Lane 1851 W. Vista Way No. 26 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92649 Vista CA 92083 024-123-13 024-123-14 024-123-15 Nancy Joan Moore Merle Anderson Mehler John M. Thompson 107 Sonora St . 2254 Via Puerta No. A 147 Via Undine Newport Beach CA 92663 Laguna Hills CA 92653 Newport Beach CA 92663 024-124-01 024-124-04 024-124-05 Anthony R. Ursino Evelyn M. Cochran Evelyn M. Cochran 121 19th St . No. 6 225 11Th St . 225 11Th St . Huntington Beach CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024-124-06 024-124-08 024-124-09 Evelyn M. Cochran Mao Ta Chen Horace C. Stovall 225 11Th St . 1856 E. Via Arroyo 948 11Th St . Huntington Bh CA 92648 La Verne CA 91750 Huntington Beach CA 9264 024-124-10 024-124-13 024-124-16 Jitendra P. Barot Nazmi Ali Robert F. Gardiner 1102 Pacific Coast HWY 706 Pacific Coast HWY 805 W. South Mountain Av Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Phoenix AZ 85041 024-124-18 024-141-01 024-141-02 Margaret Cookerley Milne W. Gregory Randolph Kaul 1030 Main St . 4817 Hayter Ave . 11821 Morgan Lane Huntington Bh CA 92648 Lakewood CA 90712 Garden Grove CA 92640 024-141-03 024-141-04 024-141-05 Surendra P. Barot 011ie S . Feemster Clint Woodington 118 11Th St . 1594 W. Sumac Lane 2755 S . 4th Ave. No. 965 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Anaheim CA 92802 Yuma AZ 85364 024-141-08 024-141-09 024-141-10 Donald Galitzen Robert J. Runk Robert A. Pedersen 9770 James River Cir 3 Macon 1313 E. Ave Q-12 Fountain Vly CA 92708 Irvine CA 92720 Palmdale CA 93550 024-141-11 024-141-12 024-141-14 Peter 0. Youngsma Dennis Niccole Majid Harb P.O. Box 327 400 3rd St . 1900 Pacific Coast HWY N Surfside CA 90743 Huntingtn Bch CA 92648 Huntington Beach CA 9264 024-141-17 024-141-19 024-142-01 Fin' L Svcs / . Southern C. Robert R. Allen Larry Bailey 17770 Cartwright Rd. P.O. Box 610 21282 Antigua Lane Irvine CA 92714 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92646 024-142-05 024-142-06 024-142-08 Mardene Miller Ronald H. Wood Thomas J. Battaglia 215 Elmwood Dr. 19681 Quiet Bay Lane 18872 MacArthur Blvd. Co Bluffs IA 51503 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Irvine CA 92715 024-142-09 024-142-10 024-142-12 Felix Veiga Felix Veiga Michael G. Tater 2044 S . Hacienda Blvd. 2044 S . Hacienda Blvd. 16136 Twinkle Cir Hacienda Hgts CA 91745 Hacienda Hgts CA 91745 Huntington Bh CA 92649 024-142-13 024-142-14 024-142-16 Felix Veiga Felix Veiga Mike Ali 2044 S . Hacienda Blvd. 2044 S . Hacienda Blvd. 19105 Beachcrest Lane No Hacienda Hgts CA 91745 Hacienda Hgts CA 91745 Huntington Bh CA 92646 024-142-17 024-142-18 024-142-21 Felix Veiga Andrew Stupin Felix Veiga 2044 S . Hacienda Blvd. 220 5th St . 2044 S. Hacienda Blvd. Hacienda Hgts CA 91745 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Hacienda Hgts CA 91745 024-142-22 024-143-01 024-143-04 Felix Veiga Redevelopment Agency City Redevelopment Agency Cit 2044 S . Hacienda Blvd. 2000 Main St . 2000 Main St . Hacienda Hgts CA 91745 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024-143-08 024-143-09 024-143-10 Redevelopment Agency City Redevelopment Agency City Beach Redevelopment Ag H 2000 Main St . 2000 Main St . 2000 Main St . Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024-143-11 024-143-12 024-143-17 Redevelopment Agency City James E. Koller James E. Koller 2000 Main St . 16001 Ballantine Lane 16001 Ballantine Lane Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92647 Huntington Bh CA 92647 024-143-19 024-143-20 024-143-23 Redevelopment Agency City James Edward Koller Redevelopment Agency Cit 2000 Main St . 16001 Ballantine Lane 2000 Main St . Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92647 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024-143-25 024-144-01 024-144-02 Redevelopment Agency City Ruth Larson Robert D. Bolen 2000 Main St . 271 E. 42nd St . 1818 Pine St . Huntington Bh CA 92648 Sn Bernrdno CA 92404 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024-144-03 024-144-04 024-144-10 Robert D. Bolen United States of America Ruth Larson 1818 Pine St . No Address 271 E . 42nd St . Huntington Bh CA 92648 No Address Sn Bernrdno CA 92404 024-144-11 024-144-12 024-144-14 Leon E. Dubov Ben Trainer Y. H. Sun 20222 Deervale Lane 2364 3rd St . 16721 Carousel Lane Huntington Bh CA 92646 San Francisco CA 94107 Huntington Bh CA 92649 024-145-08 024-145-10 024-145-12 Angelo Rinaldi Fern S . Larson Merle E. Cade P.O. Box F 4134 Country Club Dr. 17532 Metzler Lane Huntington Bh CA 92648 Lakewood CA 90712 Huntington Bh CA 92647 024-145-13 024-145-16 024-145-18 Merle E . Cade Steffen D. Hagene James E. Osterman 17532 Metzler Lane 19200 Stevens Creek Blvd. 520 Meadowview Dr. Huntington Bh CA 92647 Cupertino CA 95014 La Canada Flt CA 91011 024-145-21 024-145-22 024-145-23 Francis W. Stocker Theresa A. Whaley John Price Mc Roberts 10241 Camden Cir 19431 Ranch Lane No. 105 Hasi No. 64913 Villa Park CA 92667 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Apo AE 09839 024-145-24 024-145-26 024-145-27 Daniel Joseph Salerno Robert D. Gourley Thomas C. Van Tuyl 504 Pierside Cir 2201 Cielo Pl . 1722 Park St . Huntington Bh CA 92648 Arcadia CA 91006 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024-145-28 024-145-29 024-145-31 Douglas V. Myhra Thomas C. Van Tuyl Stella Miller P.O. Box 505 1722 Park St . 2660 Point Del Mar Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Corona Dl Mar CA 92625 024-145-32 024-145-33 024-145-35 Denis Gallonio Julie Gallo Angelo Rinaldi Brian H. Relin P.O. Box 1312 P.O. Box F 1404 N. Tustin Ave . No. Arcadia CA 91077 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Santa Ana CA 92701 024-146-02 024-146-03 024-146-06 Ruby Scott Michael George Tater James M. Briggs 7821 Talbert Ave . 16136 Twinkle Cir 14312 Willow Lane Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92649 Tustin CA 92680 024-146-07 024-146-10 024-146-12 Andrew Stupin Blanche A. Wood Mohamad Shankal 3701 Birch St . No. 210 201 5th St . 10667 El Morro Cir Newport Beach CA 92660 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Fountain Valley CA 92708 024-146-13 024-146-14 024-146-15 Tadashi Nakase Choong Hee Rhee Andrew Stupin 10171 Northampton Ave. P.O. Box 1041 3701 Birch St . No. 210 Westminster CA 92683 Huntington Bh CA 92647 Newport Beach CA 92660 024-146-16 024-146-17 024-146-18 Bernard L. Davis Tadashi Nakase Kathy Kyote Aw 607 11Th St . 10171 Northampton Ave . 15258 E. El Selinda Dr. Huntington Bh CA 92648 Westminster CA 92683 Hacienda Hgts CA 91745 024-146-19 024-147-01 024-147-03 Tadashi D. Nakase Beach Redevelopment Ag Hu Andrew Stupin 10171 Northampton Ave . 2000 Main St . 3701 Birch St . Westminster CA 92683 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Newport Beach CA 92660 024-147-08 024-147-09 024-147-14 Beach Redevelopment Ag Hun Clyde Joseph Mazzotti Douglas M. S. Langevin 2000 Main St. 19051 Holly No. 11 8196 Pawtucket Dr. Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Beach CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92646 024-147-15 024-147-23 024-147-25 Thomas R. Wurzl Pauline M. Cooper Richard A. Harlow 5199 E. Pacific Coast HWY P.O. Box 723 111 1OTh St . Long Beach CA 90804 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024-147-28 024-147-30 024-147-31 Marjorie T. Decker William G. Gallegos City of Huntington Beach 8877 Lauderdale Ct . 210 5th St . P.O. Box 190 Huntington Bh CA 92646 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024-147-33 024-147-34 024-147-35 Redevelopment Agency of Th Redevelopment Agency of C Taylor Family Trust 2000 Main St . 2000 Main St . 220 Via San Remo Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Newport Beach CA 92663 024-147-36 024-147-38 024-147-40 Coast Specialties Project Yenti Lin Thomas A. Caverly 633 E. Chapman Ave . 209 Main St . 553 Temple Hills Dr. Orange CA 92666 Huntington Beach CA 92648 Laguna Beach CA 92651 024-151-01 024-151-02 024-151-03 Robert L. T. Smith Don E. King Henry C. Volker 2015 E. Ocean Blvd. 3036 Marna Ave. 19382 Woodlands Lane Newport Beach CA 92661 Long Beach CA 90808 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024-151-05 024-151-07 024-151-08 Ashoka Investments David N. Byrd Choong H. Rhee 129 6th St . 4800 Candleberry Ave . P.O. Box 1041 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Seal Beach CA 90740 Huntington Bh CA 92647 024-151-09 024-151-10 024-151-20 Michael L. Schowalter William A. Reid Johnny Kitabjian 350 Freeman Ave . 5520 E. 2nd St . No. 1-339 2435 Bella Vista Dr. Long Beach CA 90814 Long Beach CA 90803 Vista CA 92084 024-151-25 024-151-26 024-151-27 John Bogosian Ardem Horemian Choong H. Rhee 2475 Queensberry Rd. 2475 Queensberry Rd. P.O. Box 1041 Pasadena CA 91104 Pasadena CA 91104 Huntington Beach CA 9264 024-151-28 024-151-29 024-152-01 Sav-Mor Oil Co Sav-Mor Oil Co Shirley D. Worthy 5150 Wilshire Blvd. No. 10 5150 Wilshire Blvd. No. 1 801 13Th St . Los Angeles CA 90036 Los Angeles CA 90036 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024-152-05 024-152-10 024-152-11 Beach Redevelopment Ag Hun Salvator W. Cracchiolo Blanche A. Wood 2000 Main St. 6691 Shire Cir 201 5th St . Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024-152-12 024-152-13 024-152-14 Blanche A. Wood Redevelopment Agency City Beach Redevelopment Ag H 201 5th St . 2000 Main St . 2000 Main St . Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024-153-01 024-153-02 024-153-03 Redevelopment Agency of Ci Redevelopment Agency of C Redevelopment Agency of 2000 Main St . 2000 Main St . 2000 Main St . Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024-153-04 024-153-07 024-153-10 Victoria Jean Lane Gary V. Mulligan Redevelopment Agency Cit 637 Frankfort Ave. 504 Main St . No. A 2000 Main St . Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024-153-11 024-153-12 024-153-13 Eldon Willard Bagstad Abdelmuti Development Co Abdelmuti Development Co 901 Catalina Ave. 101 Main St . 113 Main St . Seal Beach CA 90740 Huntington Beach CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024-153-14 024-153-15 024-153-16 Abdelmuti Development Co Abdelmuti Development Co Redevelopment Agency of 113 Main St. 113 Main St . 2000 Main St . Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024-153-18 024-153-19 024-153-20 Frank Alfonso Abdelmuti Development Co Abdelmuti Development Co 6630 Vickiview Dr. 113 Main St . 113 Main St . Canoga Park CA 91307 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024-154-01 024-154-02 024-154-04 Adel Mustafa Zeidan Blanche A. Wood William Enright 200 Pacific Coast HWY No. 201 5th St . 3419 Via Lido No. 287 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Newport Beach CA 92663 024-154-17 024-161-01 024-161-11 Ox Pierside Corp Alfred J. Palladino Dorothy E . Parnakian 350 S. Figueroa St . No. 60 106 Olive Ave. 78-7234 Puuloa Rd. Los Angeles CA 90071 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Kailua Kona HI 96740 024-161-12 024-161-14 024-162-01 Satenig Deundian Alfred J. Palladino Beach Resorts Inc 317 2nd St . 106 Olive Ave . 222 5th St . Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Beach CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024-162-03 024-162-16 024-162-17 Harold E. Tomkins Carolin S . Resendez Carmel A. Ling 76-580 California Dr. P.O. Box 167 5401 Mesagrove Ave. Palm Desert CA 92260 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Whittier CA 90601 024-162-22 024-162-24 024-163-01 Carolin S . Resendez Genevieve Tr #1 Vanian City of Huntington Beach 222 2nd St . 2405 Kenilworth Ave . P.O. Box 190 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Los Angeles CA 90039 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024-163-02 024-163-08 024-163-09 Thomas Holwerda Beach Resorts Inc Ralph Peck 6736 Hillpark Dr. No. 401 222 5th St . 8404 Lexington Rd. Los Angeles CA 90068 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Downey CA 90241 024-163-10 024-163-11 024-163-12 Beach Resorts Inc Beach Resorts Inc Allen L. Nelson 222 5th St . 222 5th St . 8404 Lexington Rd. Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Downey CA 90241 024-163-13 024-163-14 024-164-01 Allen Nelson Iowa Sage Limited Partner Hayward C. Johnson 8404 Lexington Rd. 25258 Cabot Rd. No. 229 2236 Vista Grande Dr. Downey CA 90241 Laguna Hills CA 92653 Vista CA 92084 024-164-07 024-164-08 024-164-10 Dennis Niccole Joseph A. Mauri Carmel A. Ling 400 3rd St . 119 Via Toluca 5401 Mesagrove Ave . Huntingtn Bch CA 92648 San Clemente CA 92672 Whittier CA 90601 024-164-11 024-164-13 024-164-14 Henry Dellano Coast Special Proj #2 Ora .Resorts Beach 8412 Country Club Dr. 2123 Granada Ave . 222 5th St . Buena Park CA 90621 Newport Beach CA 92661 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024-164-15 024-164-16 024-165-02 Beach Resorts Inc Beach Resorts Inc Charles E. Cather 222 5th St . 222 5th St . 2292 N. Long Beach Blvd. Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Long Beach CA 90806 024-165-06 024-165-07 024-165-08 Russell Lee Watkins Vance J. Derigo Robert R. Allen 1686 Fig Tree Ct . P.O. Box 1325 P.O. Box 610 Hemet CA 92545 Sandpoint ID 83864 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024-165-10 024-165-11 024-165-12 Steven Jay Felli Steven Jay Felli HSUEH Ronald 1877 Nueva Vista Dr. 1877 Nueva Vista Dr. 7111 Stonewood Dr. La Habra CA 90631 La Habra CA 90631 Huntington Bh CA 92647 024-165-13 024-165-15 024-165-16 Bernard Mason Richard P. Spindler Bernard Mason 825 12Th St . P.O. Box 552 825 12Th St . Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024-165-18 024-165-21 024-165-23 Dewey D. Davide Dewey Davide Robert B. Goodrich P.O. Box 342 P.O. Box F P.O. Box 368 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Beach CA 9264 024-271-04 Huntington Beach Co P.O. Box 7611 San Francisco CA 94120 024-171-01 024-171-06 024-171-07 Pacific Coast Homes Pacific Coast Homes A. M. Pedersen P.O. Box 7611 P.O. Box 7611 610 Main St . San Francisco CA 94120 San Francisco CA 94120 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024-171-10 024-171-13 024-171-14 Pacific Coast Homes Pacific Coast Homes Pacific Coast Homes P.O. Box 7611 P.O. Box 7611 P.O. Box 7611 San Francisco CA 94120 San Francisco CA 94120 San Francisco CA 94120 024-171-15 024-172-01 024-172-02 Pacific Coast Homes John R. Knox James Travis Mc Beath P.O. Box 7611 13472 Tulane St . 19522 Westwinds Lane San Francisco CA 94120 Westminster CA 92683 Huntington Bh CA 92646 024-172-03 024-172-05 024-172-06 James T. McBeath Virgil E . Brewster Virgil E. Brewster 19522 Westwinds Lane 7922 Speer Ave . 7922 Speer Ave . Huntington Bh CA 92646 Huntington Bh CA 92647 Huntington Bh CA 92647 024-172-07 024-172-10 024-172-11 Philip Zisakis Lewie Derigo Hertha Lovisa Backlund 16351 Tufts Lane 807 Main St . 302 13Th St . Huntington Bh CA 92647 Huntington Beach CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024-172-12 024-173-03 02.4-173-04 City of Huntington Beach Lewie Derigo Robert J. Koury 2000 Main St . 807 Main St . P.O. Box 65176 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Beach CA 92648 Los Angeles CA 90065 024-173-05 024-175-02 024-176-08 Andrew Stupin City of Huntington Beach TNR Development Corporat 3701 Birch St . P.O. Box 190 5200Warnerave No. 207 Newport Beach CA 92660 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Beach CA 9264 024-171-01 024-171-06 024-171-07 Pacific Coast Homes Pacific Coast Homes A. M. Pedersen P.O. Box 7611 P.O. Box 7611 610 Main St . San Francisco CA 94120 San Francisco CA 94120 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024-171-10 024-171-13 024-171-14 Pacific Coast Homes Pacific Coast Homes Pacific Coast Homes P.O. Box 7611 P.O. Box 7611 P.O. Box 7611 San Francisco CA 94120 San Francisco CA 94120 San Francisco CA 94120 024-171-15 024-172-01 024-172-02 Pacific Coast Homes John R. Knox James Travis Mc Beath P.O. Box 7611 13472 Tulane St . 19522 Westwinds Lane San Francisco CA 94120 Westminster CA 92683 Huntington Bh CA 92646 024-172-03 024-172-05 024-172-06 James T. McBeath Virgil E. Brewster Virgil E. Brewster 19522 Westwinds Lane 7922 Speer Ave. 7922 Speer Ave . Huntington Bh CA 92646 Huntington Bh CA 92647 Huntington Bh CA 92647 024-172-07 024-172-10 024-172-11 Philip Zisakis Lewie Derigo Hertha Lovisa Backlund 16351 Tufts Lane 807 Main St . 302 13Th St . Huntington Bh CA 92647 Huntington Beach CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 024-172-12 024-173-03 024-173-04 City of Huntington Beach Lewie Derigo Robert J. Koury 2000 Main St . 807 Main St . P.O. Box 65176 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Beach CA 92648 Los Angeles CA 90065 024-173-05 024-175-02 024-176-08 Andrew Stupin City of Huntington Beach TNR Development Corporat 3701 Birch St . P.O. Box 190 5200Warnerave No. 207 Newport Beach CA 92660 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Beach CA 9264 023-131-04 023-131-10 023-131-11 Richard Makimoto John R. Mc Cowan James Ji Hu Wang 645 S . Rockridge Pl . P.O. Box 217 5762 Bellfield Lane Anaheim CA 92807 Dana Point CA 92629 Huntington Bh CA 92648 023-131-12 023-131-20 023-131-21 Stuart I . Venook James W. Burns Ocean Pointe Partners 34 Deerspring 4270 Madison Ave . 520Broadway No. 100 Irvine CA 92714 Culver City CA 90232 Santa Monica CA 90401 023-131-24 023-132-12 023-132-16 Ocean Pointe Partners Ursula A. Coffin Joan M. Meister 520Broadway No. 100 12180 Santa Paula Rd. 427 19th St . Santa Monica CA 90401 Ojai CA 93023 Huntington Bh CA 92648 023-132-22 023-132-23 023-132-28 James T. Rea James T. Rea Eileen A. Murphy 222 22nd St . 222 22nd St . 201 21st St . Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 023-132-35 023-133-01 023-133-07 Richard Marvin Wilbur Billie Janet Slutsky Richard Makimoto 379 Saddlehorn Trl 266 21st St . 645 S. Rockridge P1 . Palm Desert CA 92260 Huntington Beach CA 92648 Anaheim CA 92807 023-133-13 023-133-15 023-133-16 Chris D. Alicki Shell Western E & P Inc James Christopher Sampso 817 Frankfort Ave . P.O. Box 2099 10093 La Quinta Cir Huntington Bh CA 92648 Houston TX 77252 Fountain Vly CA 92708 023-133-17 023-133-25 023-133-26 Robert E. Freeman Michael F. Grant William B . Lewis 19541 Canberra Lane 202 E. Hampton Dr. A7 Surfside Ave . Huntington Bh CA 92646 Pineville LA 71360 Surfside CA 90743 023-133-32 023-133-33 023-134-02 Security Trust Company John P. Thompson Chaur-Yang Tarng P.O. Box 1589 6252 Priscilla Dr. 10382 La Tortola Cir San Diego CA 92112 Huntington Bh CA 92647 Fountain Vly CA 92708 023-134-14 023-134-15 023-134-20 Eight Ocean Eight Ocean Neria Yomtoubian P.O. Box 579 P.O. Box 579 P.O. Box 3595 Dana Point CA 92629 Dana Point CA 92629 Newport Beach CA 92659 023-134-21 023-134-28 023-134-29 Neria Yomtoubian Raymond G. Durda Raymond G. Durda P.O. Box 3595 6661 Morning Tide Dr. 6661 Morning Tide Dr. Newport Beach CA 92659 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 023-135-02 023-136-05 023-137-04 Flo E. Roche Flo Huntington Beach Co Huntington Beach Company 3204 S. Greenville St . P.O. Box 7611 P.O. Box 7611 Santa Ana CA 92704 San Francisco CA 94120 San Francisco CA 94120 023-137-09 023-138-01 023-138-09 James M. Cole Merle Anderson Mehler William J. Janowski P.O. Box 5577 2254 Via Puerta No. A P.O. Box 2284 Huntington Beach CA 92615 Laguna Hills CA 92653 Seal Beach CA 90740 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 92-5/ DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN CODE AMENDMENT/ "VILLAGE CONCEPT" AND DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN (CONTINUED FROM MARCH 7, 1994, CITY COUNCIL MEETING) NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Huntington Beach City Council will hold a public hearing in the Council Chambers at the Huntington Beach Civic Center, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California, on the date and at the time indicated below to receive and consider the statements of all persons who wish to be heard relative to the application described below. DATE/TIME: Monday, April 4, 1994, 7:00 PM APPLICATION NUMBER: Code Amendment No. 92-5/Downtown Specific Plan Code Amendment/ "Village Concept" and Downtown Parking Master Plan APPLICANT: City of Huntington Beach LOCATION: An area bounded by Golden West Street,Pacific Coast Highway, Beach Boulevard ZONE: Downtown Specific Plan REQUEST: To amend the Downtown Specific Plan for the purpose of scaling down development standards, creating three(3)planning nodes, establishing affordable housing standards and a comprehensive parking management plan. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Covered by the Downtown Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report COASTAL STATUS: Local Coastal Plan Amendment ON FILE: A copy of the proposed request is on file in the City Clerk's Office, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California 92648, for inspection by the public. A copy of the staff report will be available to interested parties at City Clerk's Office after April 1, 1994. ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to attend said hearing and express opinions or submit evidence for or against the application as outlined above. Written communications may be sent to the City Clerk. If you challenge the City Council's action in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City at,or prior to,the public hearing. If there are any further questions please call Herb Fauland,Associate Planner at (714) 536-5271. Connie Brockway, City Clerk City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 (714) 536-5227 �m�mm fl �no UD rMoon n°0 o� o ` o ou -PACIFIC- OCEAN v CODE AMENDMENT #92-5 DOWNTOWN SPECIAL PLAN NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING �,� — ,c28CltDj, CODE AMENDMENT NO. 92-5/ DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN CODE AMENDMENT/ "VILLAGE CONCEPT" AND DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN (CONTINUED FROM MARCH 7, 1994, CITY COUNCIL MEETING) NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Huntington Beach City Council will hold a public hearing in the Council Chambers at the Huntington Beach Civic Center, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California, on the date and at the time indicated below to receive and consider the statements of all persons who wish to be heard relative to the application described below. DATEMME: Monday,April 4, 1994, 7:00 PM APPLICATION NUMBER: Code Amendment No. 92-5/Downtown Specific Plan Code Amendment/ "Village Concept" and Downtown Parking Master Plan APPLICANT: City of Huntington Beach LOCATION: An area bounded by Golden West Street,Pacific Coast Highway,Beach Boulevard ZONE: Downtown Specific Plan REQUEST: To amend the Downtown Specific Plan for the purpose of scaling down development standards, creating three(3)planning nodes, establishing affordable housing standards and a comprehensive parking management plan. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Covered by the Downtown Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report COASTAL STATUS: Local Coastal Plan Amendment ON FILE: A copy of the proposed request is on file in the City Clerk's Office, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California 92648, for inspection by the public. A copy of the staff report will be available to interested parties at City Clerk's Office after April 1, 1994. ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to attend said hearing and express opinions or submit evidence for or against the application as outlined above. Written communications may be sent to the City Clerk. If you challenge the City Council's action in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City at,or prior to,the public hearing. If there are any further questions please call Herb Fauland,Associate Planner at (714) 536-5271. Connie Brockway, City Clerk City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 (714) 536-5227 1 1-it 1 i ..ii.i+ i ;JIVIt]VJI 1 �11 IUI IU Jb�g °3wapanp�N �� VLZ06 V3 y419NI1N�� ' 'aiBisa sTTtH s4utTTo2i 08Z alps 'pa ands IaAJIS 809 t oEaS to saTiaS gnTO 33 .T 9L-T8Z-8Z0 Q3�lfa�'3.?13+7�1Q ;fir"�iCi�YfN�s��� � �� � � MZ6` O'4osa8 uof6uilunH y s 1. 1 ` `w� 6!1ti �9 �3 151E aaaroas 06Lx08 •O•d Nana h�. law "4� 3 a'� 40 a4l 10 a01H0 c .v_s -..^ 40e99 uo16u13unH 10 40 19 �,..�., �. M,.,� n.�,�.. ._. �aa10 An'AL'm>loa.18 a1uuo0 . .� /:t`Z,����.._ Y l - _ •.(�'"�"'�'T,`. .�Wit,. R, .. -,, . , ' f Connie Brockway,City Clerk h City of Huntington Beach �,.,K�...,�,.ro......,...�.9,....bs..�.a�.,��-_ \,�ia�� -%',;v,' �>� Office of the City Clerk e �1•s.rusias";j P.O. Box 190 :4y ro � MAW 24 '�4 .,. 7 � r 5 r' I i Ls Huntington Beach,CA 92648seanegq o, �,v° , �Q4 ��+ i1� fs $';s;� P'.SL1F' _:"l If":MET@R a x ► ORP ���Ej 023-381-72 I` ptJTINGTp Club Series of Seacliff (' . pti�\NppRPOagrf yd 608 Silverspur Rd. Suite 230 I' F9�, Rolling Hills Esta-te, y CA 90274 Q ISO 9 Q ' c�UNTY �P LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING Connie Brockway,City Clerk City of Huntington Beach .�� m>. �,•, �,,.. �, ;u i v� ': •. _ .. ,:: •".,:. Office of the City Clerk ��' dF _ _^`_ U. .t'tS;• - :":_ • P.O. Box 190 4'0 L J3 x ==_ ! Huntington Beach, CA 92648 • - , W � ( TRv11"tt'r1'v-0-T[ E R—j 0A1 0 04 ;7 e I - Club Series of Seacliff kV'PIR�j8 Silverspur Rd. Suite 230 I Rollings Hills Estate, CA 90274 '• fi ��pNTINGTp�, I s I COUNTY �P` LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING I • llif„!I„i,tliilt„I,!„II„!,I ", Iillilliililil{Iltlitiiillttlill 1 1 Ii l 1 II 1 1 l 1 ONIBd3H onond - 301ION IV931 K1Nnoo Or- YYI v 6J�A'3f eeoa9ooN`��� t TILZO6 VD 'SZTTH buzrto-d 9NI1N� O E Z 9:4 p2og andsaanTtS 809 .93TT0P9S ;o saTxaS qnTC 9MlQ��, 6 ..• a oan r.cs ' r 3iida 1:�31ni 0d °1� !q �� MZ6 d0` EN)E3 uot6ultunH L �T:•.. h� �ZEitlIJ jr 06l XOG 'O'd •�c��13�r,sod s n y mhal0 A3!0 a4l><o e3jg0 L% yoe98 uoj6wjun H 10 11.0 �• >hal0 f4!0 'ATamMoojg a!uuo0 Connie Brockway,City Clerk City of Huntington Beach Office of the City Clerk t I I t Zo NMI 214, P.O. Box 190 TO SENDER �-M E T F R Huntington Beach, CA 92648 F"HWIST CLASS MAIL CAL�'i j . , ko 00 0R't!ARl)jt!(3 ORDER EXPIPED----'---' 5"O'm 023-371-89 Club Series of Seacliff 608 Silver Spur Rd. #230 ��MINGTpy Rolling Hills Estates, 47 CA 90274 C-3 CZI 17, ISO, LEGAL NOTICE PUBLIC HEARING I III IiIIIIIII I lilt 11111111 11111111111111 11111111 Connie Brockway,City Clerk City of Huntington Beach t%ETU Office of the City Clerk fl1i CC S 0 41 T MAA24 'N P.O. Box 190 S 4 !3 DE Huntington Beach,CA 92648 7-1 P", FORVIARD1 :111RIST CLASS Mil CA L i NG ORDER EykpjnED7— Club Series of Seacliff 608 Silver Spur Rd. "230 Rolling Hills Estates, ���NTINGTpyA CA 90274 RP 4 17, N I LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING ----------- ONIdd3H onond - 3011ON IV931 .� h N�o� , 17LZ06 V0 tareis3 sTTTH 2UTTTOU VV0d8 b °31 �e, 0£Z ajtnS -pa .zndszaATTS 809 �gyU19NI1N��� 13TT3E9S ;o saz.zaS gnTO ZL-T8£-£Z0 i�'� 161M M �. S oeaa uoj6u11unH ; 01 • .'. 06t x08 'O'd "�' i 1. _, CF,. j ,. Pa r m.g4?A, ti r': Ja r(i a ffp r c M 10 l.p yl 10 e01�` pea8 uof6u!tunH;o Aj!0� MJalo 40'ALMM00J8 91uu00 1 Connie Brockway, City ClerkoF�. City of Huntington Beach �,.:..._�� ., .a.. -- ...� ,.� /�. Ey c`,�_ t.s.toru,: Office of the City Clerk �Tu �° a"�' °: o ( i�R .�. ¢ RN�o 6''e4 �.b y d 11AR 24 54 -r._:-_:.-j P.O. Box 190 ro ,rj' <'� R Li ,f 1 , Ml,) ' Huntington Beach, CA 92648 �� r, c� LASS 3 L 9 �..°po��`3'a IN-16r ,q F - —3 TALI : '0 OROE� l:i��l� 13 023-381-76 ' j Club Series of Seacliff 608 Silver Spur Rd. Suite 230 �NTINGtp Rollings Hills Estate, Q��`NGORYOR4rF�"F CA 90274 cF�UUNTY cP`�� LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING :ity Clerk - E Beach .nr�.,� -r �.: �. �✓�����u.a �� �,y t.�;c -�i ` -, c 9 EE weak Clerk � �' J y al) a 9 f In 24 '94 "?4 ;A 92648 {�o '� ` SS lift CCAL !;o raEreR ' - CAL%f E k74 Joyce Riddell, Exec. VP untington BeachChamber of,. Commerce �( A � f ��OFO ` �213 Main St. , #32 Huntington Beach 92648 t� / y � } 9 4 LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING 1lsf++�+i+i,Il,►tls=Ilt+l��slslsl3,iis�l43�ll,s<<II�,II�II�l�I Connie Brockway,City Clerk City of Huntington Beach �:..-....�... .._.._- �....�.... ,... .�. r., �c;,, Office of the City Clerk P.O. Box 190 'tit%:. J r MAR 24 •"4 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 py}pgyr ng r /)'; ~"4j Ri ��tJTINGTpy Samuel Scott Pievac Q� `N(OgP044 �F 19227 Seabrook Ln. - - =_= 9� Huntington _L .•T e1 cn Q c7 {� V y P 1..E{:js"'"..2T7 i..�2€3i..;.a8Z 4 fi. 4 1S92' + 21/29 !'Lf. FORWARDING :. • T •r!RE— 77, 1909 Po Oe Hi Ira+It•�i+=TON e-.riCH CA :—L ,'8—Es1.0Q cFcppNTY CP`\� RETURN TO ENDER LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING ' 11it III Ili 11+111+II11II1u111,IIIIII lilt IfIfIIIII1+III filll+:l -- ----- ------ -- - --- - - ----------------- 7 Connie Brockway,City Clerk City of Huntington Beach ��+�. x� ,K•. .:,_�. ,�., ,..� iUi GP�� \T�� %' _ _, �_,? Office of the City Clerk _ P.O. Box 190 �"ea�S4 0 R fi;aR 24 '��4 Huntington Beach, CA 92648F11_ qgQ 023-371-86 k' 1pjj D Club Series of Seacliff 608 Silver Spur Rd. 230 Hills Estates, �NTINGTp Rolling CA 90274 `,,GRP g4IE��7A cpUNTY CP LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING 11111,1II�I��I�.1�IlI+i+I1++1111.111:1111111111 lilt III I++:II+I _ _ __ - Connie Brockway,City Clerk _ City of Huntington Beach `�° ��� o t??ram,='us. ~= �, Office of the City Clerk Y`o P.O. Box 190 _ \, Huntington Beach, CA 92648 d 'r ivy tF �J � +r 1 �..!�E T C R ° t ^_ CAL 1 F G 80 .,. 023-391-09 Samuel Scott Pievac 19227 Seabrook Ln. INGTpyn Huntington Beach, CA 92648 )`IEtJA z 6IS2 ,�il3i'ii�tINGSIDE Cif: HUNT: NGTON EEACH CA�^9pery�Ca48-610_4 N FQ 17, I909.P' (� RETURN t O SENDER 1 Fpp�NTY LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING I((E��N►�,��I1��1(��li���ll:��II���ll�t���►!!(I���Il���!(���I � _ I i i i C r y`Go ix �e U T ".?R 1 SON CIT"r" OF HUNTi '-'1N SEACH C Y COUINCG-: OFF iCE April 1, 1994 Mayor Linda Moulton-Patterson and Members of the City Council 2000 Main Street Hunti ton Beach, CA 92648 De yor Moulton-Patterson: The Chamber of Commerce wishes once again to declare its support for the joint/shared parking use concept for the downtown area. Enclosed please find a copy of the original letter of support from our Board of Directors dated August 26,1993. Also enclosed are petitions signed by individuals in favor of the shared parking concept. We urge your continued support. Co ially, y7eRiddell, CCE President JR1kh 2100 Main Street,Suite 200 Huntington Beach,CA 92648 714/536-8888 ri D - 1 (FAX)714/960-7654 «neoiTeo ...�lain6er ofConrinerce August 26, 1993 Mayor Grace Winchell and Members of the City Council 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 ' Dear Mayor Winchell : The Chamber of Commerce has been a long time supporter of re- development plans in the downtown area and continues to support projects that will generate additional sales and property tax revenues. An issue that continues to re-surface over the years in the downtown is the importance of adequate parking. The Chamber agrees that an adequate supply of parking is necessary for the downtown to be successful.. And, for that reason , the Chamber supports the concept of joint use of shared parking within the downtown area in order to efficiently utilize the supply of parking. This area functions very much the same as the large shopping center or mall and should be evaluated as a single area of mixed uses, not as individual stand alone uses. There appears to be a sufficient number and variety of uses to have the joint/shared parking use concept work. It is important to note that the cost of providing parking within a parking structure is extremely expensive, making it important to have a correct balance between the need for parking spaces and the availability of such spaces. Also, it is not practical to satisfy 100% of the parking demand on worst case. (e.g. Pierfest, OP Pro, 4th of July) The Chamber believes that a "qualified estimate" of parking needs should be prepared with merchants and owners participating in utilizing the existing supply of spaces, and that a backup plan be prepared to provide additional parking if the need is demonstrated. This can be done by having a parking plan prepared to determine any increases in parking needs. If expectations are being exceeded, the backup plan should be instituted. 2100 Main Street,Suite 200 Huntington Beach,CA 92648 ri 714/536-8888 (FAX)714/960-7654 CC[LD17[D ' � w It is important to the city's economic vitality that new businesses be given the opportunity to locate within the downtown to enhance the City' s tax base by increased sales and property taxes. We urge your support of the shared parking concept. incerely, Paul Cook Chairman PCIs j cc: Uberuaga Silver r JAN 24 '94 09 46 ROBERT MAYER CORP P•2/2. ��ra�sr6er���i�rerc� �. • A• PET,ZTION IN SUPPORT OF THE CONCEPT OF JQIlV%' USE SHARSD PARKING WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN AREA. Since the downtown functions very much the same as a large shopping center or mail, It should be:-evaluat,eid as a single. . area 'of-' mixed. uses, not -as individual stand 8,20ne: uses. The' cost of providing parking within a. parking structure is extremely expensive; therefore, it is lwportati.t 'to have `a correct balance between the need for parking spaces. and ,:the: availabililty of such spaces. It Is not practical to satisfy •100% of the parking demand an worst case scenario, ••e.g. ierfest., OP Pro. The economic vitality of the city is dependent .on 'the abil'Ity of new businesses locating here. If you support the SHARED PARKING CONCEPT, please affix •your•' name on thlo petition. NAME I)AV I D CA V/6 +*- / FZM Waterfront Hilton (Print.) ADDRESS 21100 Pacific Coast Highway, 'Huntington B.caich. Zip 92648 1Vp1ME IVI�O�a-�l - �l-1 u'\ FxRm Waterfront,-Hilton (pr ). ADDRESS 21100 Pacific Coast Highway, Huntington Beach ZIp 9.2648' NAME I\` ' a te FZRM Watei front Hilton' (Print). ADDRESS 21100 Pacific Coast Highway, Huntington Bach ZIP 92648 NAME . FIRM Waterfront Hilton ADDRESS, 21100 Pacific Coast Highway, Huntin ton Beach ZZp 92648 NAME- FIRM Wa:tet-front Hilton:. (Print) ADDRESS 21100 Pacific Coast Highway, .Huntington Beach Zip 92648: NAME FIRM W.,aterfront Hilton. (Print.) ADDRESS 21100 Pacific Coast Highway, Huntington Beachg=p 9:2648 PLEASE RETURN. PETITION TO THE HU1VTI1VG2'0N BEACH`CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, 2100 MAIN ST. f2001 H.B. 92648 BY 7ANUARY 2*, 1994. 2100 Main Street$uita 200 Muntlnp[on Bach.CA 92648 � ' (FAX 711A/060-7664 i JAN 24 194 10:47 PAGE.002 JAN 24 '94 09;46 ROBERT MAYER CORP P•2i2. A. PETITION IN SUPPORT OF THE CONCEPT OF JOI1V7 '-USE SHA.RSD PARKING WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN AREA. Since the downtown functions very much the 546 as a 14Tg& shopping center or mall, it should be:•evaluated as 8 single.. area 'of•:mixed uses, not -as individual stand alone: uses. • The cost of 'Providing parking within a. parking structure is extremely expensive; therefore, it -to importat 'to have 'a` correct balance between the need for parking: -.spaces. and .:the: availabililty of such spaces. It Is not practical to satisfy I00% of the parking demand on worst case scenario, 'e.g. Fierfest., OP Pro. The economic vitality of the city .is dependent .on 'the ability of new businesses -locating here. If you support the SHARED PARKING CONCEPT, please affix your•• name on this petition. NAME nn00 �. FIRIy Waterfront Hilton (Print.) ADDRESS • 21100 Pacific Coast Highway, 'Huntington B•eaich ZIP 926:48. NAME FIRM Waterfront, Htl*ton ADDRESS 21100 Pacific Coast Highway, Huntington Beach Zip 92648' NAME FIRM Waterfront Hilton (Print), ADDRESS 21100' Pacific Coast Highway, Huntington B+�ach zip 92648 NAME . FIRM Waterfront Hilton ADDRESS 21�100 Pacific Coast Highway, Huntington Beach ZIp 92648 HAMS- FIRM Waterfront Hilton (Print) ADDRESS 21100 Pacific Coast Highway, .Huntington Beach ZIp 92648: NAME FIRM Waterfront Hilton.' (Print.) ADDRESS 21100 Pacific Coast Highway, Huntington Beach grp 92648: PLEASE RETURN. PETITION TO THE RUN27NG2*0N BEACH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, 2.100 MAIN ST. 0200, H.B. 92648 BY 7ANUARY 2*, 2994. 2100 main sweet,sullo goo 04untinacan�cn.cA B2ea8 (FAM 71A/960 7664 i> JAN 24 194 10:47 PAGE.002 3 �an�Vyyna 6 egg CI Cl denser C r-V Merce A PETITION IN SUPPORT OF THE CONCEPT OF JOINT USE SHARED PARKING WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN AREA. Since'- the downtown functions very much the same as a large shopping center or mall, it should be evaluated as a single area of mixed uses, not as individual stand alone uses. The cost of providing parking within a parking structure is extremely expensive; therefore, it is important to have a correct balance between the need for parking spaces and the availabililty of such spaces. It is not practical to ` satisfy 100% of the parking demand on worst case scenario, e.g. Pierfest, OP Pro. The economic vitality of the city is dependent on the ability of- new businesses locating here. Ii you support the SHARED PARKING CONCEPT, please affix your nai-te on this petition. NAME C�ri c`�-P L c�( �l FIRM (Print) ADDRESS Z f5 ea(Ji 131,1d • g ZIP Z 6 7 NAME K�rol? �t 2�ll FIRM (?.en4er for Ora/ dJe [1- (Prin t rr�� ADDRESS ,V � ZIP �4,P NA FIR in ADDRESS IP NAPIE FIRM ) ✓c� `•� .. , (Print) / J plof'-�Gt-1 j �✓QL3�y ZIP NAf i c- FIRM ADDRESS ZIP NAME, FIRM (Print) ADDRESS ZIP NAME FIRM .(Print) ADDRESS ZIP PLEASE RETURN PETITION TO THE HUNTINGTON BEACH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, 2100 MAIN ST. #200, H.B. 92648 BY JANUARY 21, 1994. 2100 Main Street,mite 200 Huntington Beach,C,,926^8 • 714/536-8881 (FAX) 714/960-761: cc.aoir[o r-- �ua`fiSr�;`toa f�eaCl� Clsa�sr6er Cy` irn,►rerce A PETITION IN SUPPORT OF THE CONCEPT OF JOINT USE SHARED PARKING WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN AREA. Since the downtown functions very much the same as a large shopping center or mall , it should be evaluated as a single area of mixed uses, not as individual stand alone uses. The cost of providing parking within a parking structure is extremely expensive; therefore, it is important to have a correct balance between the need for parking spaces and the availabililty of such spaces. It is not practical to satisfy 100% of the parking demand on worst case scenario, e.g. Pierfest, OP Pro. The economic vitality of the city is dependent on the ability of new businesses locating here. If lou support the SHARED PARKING CONCEPT, please affix your nai-Je on this petition. N IME �`Ie c � FIRM (Print) ADD-?rSS ID14 2 -F� i �30P fSFE, �'' ZIP C-7b NAt'E FIRM (Print) ADDRESS ZIP NAME FIRM (Print) ADDRESS ZIP NAhE _ FIRM (Print) ADDRESS -ZIP- NAPYE FIRM ADDRESS ZIP Nh:'fE FIRM 'Print) AD1.';.<ESS ZIP NAME FIRM .(Print) ADDRESS ZIP PLEASE RETURN PETITION TO THE HUNTINGTON BEACH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, 2100 MAIN ST. #200, H. H. 92648 BY JANUARY 21 , 1994. --- - 2100 Main Street, Suite 200 Huntington©each.CA 4"048 714/536-8888 (FAX)714/960-76ii .cc.aonao rf/ku, fi�-71.q-tc f?e,2e4 . Clranr6er of�pnrareroe, A PETITION IN SUPPORT OF THE CONCEPT OF JOINT USE SHARED PARKING WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN AREA. Since the downtown functions very much the same as a large shopping center or mall, it should be evaluated as a single area of mixed uses, not as individual stand alone uses. The cost of providing parking within a parking structure is extremely expensive; therefore, it is important to have a correct balance between the need for parking spaces and the availabililty of such spaces. It is not practical to satisfy 100% of the parking demand on worst case scenario, e.g. Pierfest, OP Pro. The economic vitality of the city is dependent on the ability of new businesses locating here. If you support the SHARED PARKING CONCEPT, please affix your name on this petition. NAMEj?F_B©ie!4-H S' ��© eSGh FIRM S%//Yr��/!/Yl '/:fie lL7�(Los C, (Print) ADDRESS ZIP a� NAME (P ii'n`t) / / ADDRESS //�fi/�/ T11'�crLiPC �fo�Z�r� d" NAME 'v2yti/vE /JE�!s! FIRM T/Nr¢T/a,J LieO /ZS (Print) ADDRESS ZIP Q�� NAME i/1tN0'A S Yn A'97-,(67Pv FIRM b@StkAT'04( jC1yRA?;'eS Print) p jj ADDRESS//DO l l�G�� G CO'5S1 hWf 11un1f,'►+61' IAAO.11 ZIP 9•Z��� NAME <=%G� /�' . �L�s�ee2i.- FIRM ADDRESS NAME,- FIRM ( rin ) ADDRESS„lD �r� iC/(J ��. l� ZIP NAME FIRM (Print) ADDRESS ZIP PLEASE RETURN PETITION TO THE HUNTINGTON BEACH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, 2100 MAIN ST. #200, H.B. 92648 BY JANUARY 2*1 1994. 2100 Main Street,Suite 200 Huntington Beach,CA 92648 • 714/536-8888 (FAX)714/960-7654 1CG[DIT[D �u�r`fiaG�oa f�eacl� C/ea�6er ofConrinerce - A PETITION IN SUPPORT OF THE CONCEPT OF JOINT USE SHARED PARKING WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN AREA. Since the downtown functions very much the same as a large shopping center or mall , it should be evaluated as a single area of mixed uses, not as individual stand alone uses. The cost of providing parking within a parking structure is extremely expensive; therefore, it is important to have a correct balance between the need for parking spaces and the availabililty of such spaces'. It is not practical to satisfy 100% of the parking demand on worst case scenario, e.g. Pierfest, OP Pro. The economic vitality of the city is dependent on the ability of new businesses locating here. If you support the SHARED PARKING CONCEPT, please affix your name on this petition. NAME bo e- e 6 FI RM (Print) ADDRESS b t W LV 5�r ZIP c Z ZJ 3 NAME �E(s� FIRM (Print) // ADDRESS rJ( ` '� &ff PNeng- 14up-L x4n Bch cA- ZIP �2( NAME FI RM&Wz ADDRESS `j, ZIP NAME �(,{ �},/� yle� e tAK._e yrjCL, FIRM�:51AZ yvrj � ADDRESS A0BRA4 p ;z �M , ZIP o�jp NAME S cc�G,11 �Gc,Y'I'^ FIRM ADDRESS �0 � �0 �r/�� �G6 �4 ZIP 9�07 NAME i �` C/� FIRM (Prin � j� _ ADDRESS ���/ � k4 ZIP ' NAME FIRM (Print) ADDRESS ZIP PLEASE RETURN PETITION TO THE HUNTINGTON BEACH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, 2100 MAIN ST. #200, H.B. 92648 BY RME 21 ,. 1994. 2100 Main Street,Suite 200 Huntington Beach,CA 92648 714/536-8888 rl (FAX) 714/960-7654 CCNLDITLD HfA lr c5 R'6EK I HH1 tK PF' ROBERT tiAYE:R CORP . a?'ffsr ,e,�ear� • ; A• IPg2!j7.r0N IN SUPPORT OF 21RE CONCEPT OF JOXNT '.USE SHA Vb PAR•KZIVG WX.TRXN THE DOWNTOWN AREA: Since the downtown functions vary much too se�Cei as a 1;rg& shopping center or mall, it should be •evaluat'ad as a single area 'of': mixed• uses, not as individual• stand a.2dne use$' . Thee cost of providing parking within a. parking structure is extremely expensive; therefore, it Is import#nt to have `a` correct balance between the need for parking: •spacesr. and .,the a vailabIlilty of such spaces. z't Is not px8ctical to satlo-ty I004 of the parking demand on worst case seen&r1o, 'e.g: klerfeFt, OP Pro. The economic vitality of the city .is depbAden.t on the ablUty of now businesses ,locating here. T�. you support ' the SHARED P"XZNG CONCE,FT, plh4,he� affix .your' name on th1$ pet,ltion. NAME o 10-bsen- y Fey Waterfront Hilton ADD 21100 Pacific Coast Highway, 'Huntington 13ea:ch.ZlP 92648• NAMalr „�n(l" FIRM W.a,terfront. H tl:ton A.DDRZSS 21100 Pacific Coast Highway, Huntington Keay h ZIp ' 9.2648 NAME,w ��I�) —' -FZRM . Wa'.terfront Hilton, Pr nt - d�DD.RZSS 100 Pacific Coast Highway, Huntington Beach Z=p 926'48 NAM Frey Waterfront Hilton' ADAR 55 ; 21'i 00 Pacific Coast Hiqhwav,, Huntington Beach ZIP 9?648 NailW, '' FXRM Wti -jehfront Hilton:- (. rnt ADDRkSS 1100 Pacific Coast Highway, .Huntington Beach"gXp 92648 RA NS FZRM W:atWront Hilton.' Print* J40.p4REss 1100 Pacific Coast Highway, Huntington Reachas,P 92648 1*TzjtSz ks!rURIV PZTZTZON Z9 THE HVAVTZIVGZ0N 9NAci"CRAUSSIR OF'. COMM ROW, 2100 NAXN ST. 0200, H.B. 9264'8 9r JANUARY .2*, '2994. 2100 Main St feat.Ults 200 nu/YdM1pWn nwroM C.a 83a•a Yi�ID34•apa►4 .. • fVAA stapryp.y6ai ' JAN 24 194 iG:4? _.pp .002 3 � qeu, fW- each Aanr6e�r of�pnr�i►rerte A PETITION IN SUPPORT OF THE CONCEPT OF JOINT USE SHARED PARKING WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN AREA. Since the downtown functions very much the same as a large shopping center or mall, it should be evaluated as a single area of mixed uses, not as individual stand alone uses. The cost of providing parking within a parking structure is extremely expensive; therefore, it is important to have a correct balance between the need for parking spaces and' the availabililty of such spaces. It is not practical .to satisfy 100% of the parking demand on worst case scenario, e.g. Pierfest, OP Pro. The economic vitality of the city is dependent on the ability of new businesses locating here. If you support the SHARED PARKING CONCEPT, please affix your name on this petition. NAME ��<� �� � 20���4 FIRM �� hrl�'/ /v 1 (Print) / ^ ADDRESS ,�-' U a,An �e« 1r� N` /3 , ZIP NAME FIRM Pri t)ADDRESS_, �,)--U yjsidrTyi �' ��� ZIP C / NAME (Print) ^ ADDRESS c��UJ (,(� , n-E 5f. , VW l ZIP q- 0 NAME -��fp[ G� FI RM��� ADDRESSln <p 6-Gt j ZIP NAME t--L G k 6 S 0t,4 FIRM S h e\\ o J a. ADDRESS qq 11 NP ��d� C 2cC� G3 ZIP 926L18 NAME C\ ��� ��1�'Y 1� FIRM J-W�)C-C C� (Print) fl � ADDRESS 300 ZIPA)-IA } NAME T ( in ADDRESS PLEASE RETURN PETITION TO THE HUNTINGTON BEACH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, 2100 MAIN ST. #200, H.B. 92648 BY JANUARY 21 , 1994 . 2100 Main Street,Suite 200 Huntington Beach,CA 92648 714/536-8888 (FAX)714/960-7654 �ua`fi��on�eacl� Cl�anr6er ofConrinerc� A PETITION IN SUPPORT OF THE CONCEPT OF JOINT USE SHARED PARKING WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN AREA. Since the downtown functions 'very much the same as a large shopping center or mall , it should be evaluated as a single area of mixed uses, not as individual stand alone uses. The cost of providing parking within a parking structure is extremely expensive; therefore, it is important to have a correct balance between the need for parking spaces and the availabililty of such spaces. It is not practical to satisfy 100% of the parking demand on worst case scenario, e.g. Pierfest, OP Pro. The economic vitality of the city is dependent on the ability of new businesses locating here. If you support the SHARED PARKING CONCEPT, please affix your name on this petition. NAME 6 Ut( a FIRM (Print) ADDRESS ZIP NAME r DCLOA G� FIRM (Print) ADDRESS DJ (o C) 5W E& D AU ZIP NAME C ( FIRM ADDRESS(Print) C/,-,n ZIP (D U NAME / c/V ��, i I nt'/�j FIRM (PrintADDRESS � � (J��� �%6� TI�/ /% ZIP G NAME L S FIRM ADDRESS S`! ZIP z(�C(F NAME G1A')g& FIRM (Print) ADDRESS 2 ( (o OS UV EZ-0 Z— ZIP NAME FIRM (Print ADDRESS ZIP ` PLEASE RETURN PETITION TO THE HUNTINGTON BEACH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, 2100 MAIN ST. #200, H.B. 92648 BY JANUARY 21, 1994. 2100 Main Street, Suite 200 Huntington Beach,CA 92648 • 714/536-8888 (FAX)714/960-7654 CCR[DIT[D n`�nq'toa f�eac/f Cle a�r6er�ofCoirmr erce A PETITION IN SUPPORT OF THE CONCEPT OF JOINT USE SHARED PARKING WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN AREA. Since the downtown functions very much the same as a large shopping center or mall, it should be evaluated as a single area of mixed uses, not as individual stand alone uses. The cost of providing parking within a parking structure is extremely expensive; therefore, it is important to have a correct balance between the need for parking spaces and the availabililty of such spaces. It is not practical to satisfy 100% of the parking demand on worst case scenario, e.g. Pierfest, OP Pro. The economic vitality of the city is dependent on the ability of new businesses locating here. If you support the SHARED PARKING CONCEPT, please affix your name on this petition. NAME C_�✓-/G,Ql�y�vtree- FIRM_�G/ (Print) ��ADDRESS /�"%�® ���,�/,j-• c r s� ZIP NAME.� FE F} U;-R FAJeF FIRMS SLt/ / ��jCgas ��US• ADDRESS ZIP�C�� �/% NAM FIRM` rin t) ADDRESS ZIP NAME / - -(� FIRM d 5 C/ % S (print)` ADDRESS � � g /�/ Tvi� � % - � - ZIP " NAME _ .�� G�/Ll-t.��J FIRM ADDRESS �6 6 x/ X e�x el NAME K ft T H , CO V n e. FIRM T s C.c 7"c L, ✓L, L Yl S (Print) nn ADDRESS 2 O 5 V T y• ZIP '12C L/c NAME ji m C 41 go v c-,4 S FIRM K r2 E 6 (Print) tt ADDRESS 2,21 .3 /Yla•.` .�-►ram•-F � Z_ ZIP 92 (,S-$ PLEASE RETURN PETITION TO THE HUNTINGTON BEACH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, 2100 MAIN ST. #200, H.B. 92648 BY JANUARY 21 , 1994. 2100 Main Street, Suite 200 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 714/536-8888 ri (FAX)714/960-7654 ccnuireo RECEIVED FEB 12 199` �7ua`fa b` ead C/GQirrGer oJ' Conrn�eroe A PETITION IN SUPPORT OF THE CONCEPT OF JOINT USE SHARED PARKING WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN AREA. Since the downtown functions very much the same as a large shopping center or mall, it should be evaluated as a single area of mixed uses, not as individual stand alone uses. The cost of providing parking within a parking structure is extremely expensive; therefore, it is important to have a correct balance between the need for parking spaces and the availabililty of such spaces.. It is not practical to satisfy 100% of the parking demand on worst case scenario, e.g. Pierfest, OP Pro. The economic vitality of the city is dependent on the ability of new businesses locating here. If you support the SHARED PARKING CONCEPT, please affix your name on th peti ion. NAME FIRM (Print) / ADDRESS 7 7 ZIP NAME FIRM (Print) ADDRESS 7.yz Tu/p„�� I)r # 3 ZIP ?,76W� NAME Lo FIRM Prin t ADDRESS , ZIP NAME W�a6Yrt+05M-- FIRM (Print) n ADDRESS . ZIP NAME "1 a &4A.J FIRM ADDRESS 75-s22sP'�llt�l ) ZIP 10�� NAME 5Z,17 r`Q^-� FIRM (Prin t) ADDRESS �3i�Z , /1-A/mac/10 — 11Y'/� - ZIP NAME FIRM (Print) ADDRESS ZIP%a PLEASE RETURN PETITION TO THE HUNTINGTON BEACH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, 2100 MAIN ST. #200, H.B. 92648 BY , 1994. 2100 Main Street, Suite 200 Huntington Beach,CA 92648 714/536-8888 rl (FAX)714/960-7654 ccxeoreo -/X&Aa ead CAamSer 7*c ommeree A PETITION IN SUPPORT OF THE CONCEPT OF JOINT USE SHARED PARKING WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN AREA. Since the downtown functions very much the same as a large shopping center or mall, it should be evaluated as a single area of mixed uses, not as individual stand alone uses. The cost of providing parking within a parking structure is extremely expensive; therefore, it is important to have a correct balance between the need for parking spaces and the availabililty of such spaces. It is not practical to satisfy 100% of the parking demand on worst case scenario, e.g. Pierfest, OP Pro. The economic vitality of the city is dependent on the ability of new businesses locating here. If you support the SHARED PARKING CONCEPT, please affix your name on this petition. NAML�I �i(,Qf FI RMJ`� (Print ADDRES415 �`�' � �� / ZIP NAME "D-u-4-/ - mi YL FIRM S1,1Q //V,7)(1S%,41Z/�S l�� (Print) ADDRESS_ 122 /nn 5,e '(,o CIA6rG� .�� ZIP 2 NAME �jg 07-�'JE/A-A& FIRM M�� 1/4J ZtcS19"`i 'X S (Print) _ ADDRESS /�/// G-D 1,QE1U PJ EV.7- �4,dT, T"S— 11.,A ZIP 96)4 NAME '�kI. C/01c,- FIRM ale- (Print)ADDRESS 9 ZIP 9-� 516 NAME �a/�n 'i cwG�c� h FIRMCc ADDRESS �}/�/ �7L�a L'y rr a �r_ /,� - ZIP 9--1 C- �e6 NAME "Wo Xa n FIRM (Print) ADDRESS 9/9/ „��h��fieQng �r_ ,`/ ZIP 9�6V(, NAME S 1 M�D qACj , W,<Z, FIRM p ()A 'e y % - (Print) ADDRESSa p� �f1Y1��On Q' �_�} �, ZIP PLEASE RETURN PETITION TO THE HUNTINGTON BEACH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, 2100 MAIN ST. 1200, H.B. 92648 BY JANUARY 21 , 1994. 2100 Main Street,Suite 200 Huntington Beach,CA 92648 714/536-8888 (FAX) 714/960-7654 •ccaoneo n`7fin9f a &eacl4 C�iaM6er o1`Connnerce A PETITION IN SUPPORT OF THE CONCEPT OF JOINT USE SHARED PARKING WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN AREA. Since the downtown functions very much the same as a large shopping center or mall , it should be evaluated as a single area of mixed uses, not as individual stand alone uses. The cost of providing parking within a parking structure is extremely expensive; therefore, it is important to have a correct balance between the need for parking spaces and the availabililty of such spaces.. It is not practical to satisfy 100% of the parking demand on worst case scenario, e.g. Pierfest, OP Pro. The economic vitality of the city is dependent on the ability of new businesses locating here. If you support the SHARED PARKING CONCEPT, please affix your name on this petition. NAME La,4- (��e ( FIRM (P int) _ ADDRESS Q �Xa /-�. zip 9a6 a.s` NAME /2 f t FIRM / 4101- 'r ,4A,l /yb (Print) /� y/ ADDRESS O • yo X 3 412 S / 7 � ZIP NAME—S 0"C�f) nvl -�� c, FIRM 'mC,p er, mCc t1 /l p LCC-L (Print) ADDRESS ZIP g NAME FIRMQn � 5 (Prin 0-ADDRESS Q2k ZIP NAME ADDRESS AAz--zIp NAME !' l�2 �Q 12(l)C e FIRM�'AUSO 1�C L`�od (Print) ADDRESS pp�� aWZIP NAME, -ejn �jd lbfnS FIRM t-f g- �n ADDRESS l�ji)S (:�d *�3 ZIP G� PLEASE RETURN PETITION TO THE HUNTINGTON BEACH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, 2100 MAIN ST. 1200, H.B. 92648 BY JANUARY 21 , 1994. 2100 Main Street, Suite 200 ��� Huntington Beach, CA 92648 714/536-8888 (FAX) 714/960.7654 .copini,cn 7�ua`f%��oit�eacl� - C/(ranr6e`r oJJ`Conrnrerce, A PETITION IN SUPPORT OF THE CONCEPT OF JOINT USE SHARED PARKING WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN AREA. Since the downtown functions very much the same as a large shopping center or mall, it should be evaluated as a single area of mixed uses, not as individual stand alone uses. The cost of providing parking within a parking structure is extremely expensive; therefore, it is important to have a correct balance between the need for parking spaces and the availabililty of such spaces.. It is not practical to satisfy 100% of the parking demand on worst case scenario, e.g. Pierfest, OP Pro. ' The economic vitality of the city is dependent on the ability of new businesses locating here. If you support the SHARED PARKING CONCEPT, please affix your name on this petition. NAME EF J gey&W,A FIRM S(2 1 n/00STe «S (Print 6 ADDRESS ►A LA C.ALl,Pr C,p, G,ch ZIP °IZ Yq NAME e--,44 FIRM N/9 IMU*.eS (Pr.fn t) ADDRESS �f955 I�u�itbrn7d�riv�. !!a z I P %14, NAME Roi3jy WoodhgM FIRM SIR INdus}-'r,Qs (Print) ADDRESSg2-91 Dq-1-riNo Grr&p- NuuliNghtj 1301 ZIP gZ4416P NAME� �I�- ` FIRM ADDRESS(Print) ZIP �.%� Z" 7 NAME J�D 4kXZ "(k F/L FIRM �li� Z�V4 !7-WJC-S ADDRESS l7L7� ,v6 LCLyOc� C6Z ZIP NAME (Print) ADDRESS NAME vuf�� �' FIRM (Print) ADDRESS 2- 07-,3-1 �)6/✓Cl/Ja/' ZIP PLEASE RETURN PETITION TO THE HUNTINGTON BEACH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, 2100 MAIN ST. #200, H.B. 92648 BY JANUARY 21 , 1994. 2100 Main Street,Suite 200 Huntington Beach,CA 92648 714/536-8888 (FAX)714/960-7654 cccoirco JAN 24 '94 09 46 ROBERT MAYER CORP P•2i2' A PSTZTZON IN SUPPORT OF THE CONCEPT OF 7on,47 -.usr SbTA= PARKING WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN AREA: ' Since the downtown functions very much the sae as a large shopping center or mail, .it should be: evaluated as a single. . area of-: mixed' uses, not as individual stand a, one uses. The cost of providing parking within a. parking structure is extremely expensive; therefore, it is important 'to have a . correct balance between the need for parking •spaces. and .:the: availabllilty of such spaces. It Is not pxacti.cal to satisfy 100% of the parking demand on worst case scenario, 'e.g. Plerfest., OP Pro. The economic vitality of the city .is dependent .on -the ability of new businesses locating here. If you support the SHADED PARKING CONCEPT, ple4: e affix your• name on this petition. NAME L/✓ © FIRM Waterfront Hilton (Pr nt.) ADDRESS . 21100 Pacific Coast Highway, *Huntington B.eaich ZIP 926:48 NAME ��. C�R. FZRM Waterfront.Mlton (Print)- ADDRESS p21100 Pacific Coast Highway, Huntington Beach ZIp 9-2648' NAME •�o �n�ti �—C`.e -FIRM 'Wa:tei-front Hilton; (Print). ADDRESS 21100 Pacific Coast Highway, Huntington &0a,ch ZIP 92-648 NAM —' l�`F �`a� FIRM W :t6rf.ront Hilton ADDRESS 00 Pacific Coast Highway, 1iuntin ton Beach ZZp 92648 NAl'0 FIRM Watterfront Hilton (Print) ADDR,USS 211 Pacific Coast Highway, .Huntington Beach ZIp 92648: NAME FZRM Waterfront Hilton. (Print.) ADDRESS 2 00 Pacific Coast Highway, Huntington Bea'chZrp 92648. Pl, ZASE RETURN PETITION TO THE RUNTXNG210N BEACH-:CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, 2100 MAIN ST. #2001 K.B. 92648 BY JANUARY 2*.. 1994. 2100 a 00 Hunilna[on Bw"".CA 92648(FAX)7tw/960 7664 --- --- JAN 24 '94 10:47 PAGE.002 JAN 24 '94 09 46 ROBERT MAYER CORP P.2i2. W Aeac�£ A. PETITION IN SUPPORT OF THE CONCEPT OF JOINT :USE SHARED PARKING WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN AREA: Since the downtown functions very much the sa6e as a I�rge shopping center or mall, it should ,be; ev4luated as a sfngFle• area 'of-. mixed. uses, not -as individual stand 40ne: uses. cost of providing parking within a. parking stru.cture is extremely expensive; therefore, it Is importa t 'to have '-a: . correct' balance between the need for parking'. spaces. and .:the: availabililty of such spaces. It is not practical to sat.isfy •100% of the parking demand on worst case scenario, ''e.g. Fierfest., OP Pro. The economic vitality of the city is dependent .on -the ability of new businesses -locating here. If• you support the SHARED PARKING CONCEPT, please affix .your•- name on thlo petition. NAME ,�(YY? �/����� FIRM Waterfront Hilton (Pent.). ADDRESS . 21100 Pacific Coast Highway, *Huntington B.paich ZIP 926:48• 77— NAME FrRv Wa,tei-front, Hilton l nt . ADDRESS 21100 Pacifi Coast Highway, Huntington Beach ZIP 9-2648 NAME FIRM Waterfront Hilton. . . . ' ADDRESS 21100 Pacific Coast Highway, Huntington BOa,ch ZIP 92648 NAME . (� FIRM Waterfront Hilton ADDRESS 21�100 Pacific Coast Hi hwa , Huntin ton Beach ZZP 92648 N. 1E- Q:. FIRM Watterfront Hilton' l rn : ADDR, .Sc 21100 Pacific Coast Highway, .Huntington Beach Zrp 92648: D FIRM Waterfront Hilton. (Print.) ADDRESS 21100 Pacific C st ighwa Huntington Beach glP 92648: PLEASE RETURN PETITION TO THE HUNTINGTON 9ZACR':CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, 2100 MAIN ST. 0200, H.B. 92648 BY JANUA.RY 2*, :2994. 2100 Main slree4 suit.200 Huntlnp[0n Bgtcn.CA4 M W 62648 (FA50 7t4/940-7664 . JAN 24 '94 10!47 PAGE.002 JAN 24 '94 09 46 ROBERT MAYER CORP P•2i2. y /24 f-V it Ile. eael� l�raran6er �p.,inrerce A• P97I T17ON IN SUPPORT OF THE CONCEPT OF JOINT ;USE SHARED PARKING WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN AREA: Since the downtown functions very much the sae as a large shopping center or mall, it should be:•ev42 at'k1 as a sinjle.. area of-'. mixed' uses, not -as individual stand alone. uses. :The cost of providing parking within a, parking structure is extremely expensive; therefore, it is important to have '-a: correct, balance between the need for parking spaces. and .:the: avallabililty of such spaces. It is not pxacti:cal to satisfy I00% of the parking demand on worst case scenario, e.g. Fierfest., OP Pro. The economic vitality of the city is dependent .on •the ab�Tity of now businesses locating here. If- you support the SHARED PARKING CONCEPT, please affix .your•- name on th,isr petition. NAME ��i � G/� l FIRIy Waterfront Hilton (Print.) ADDRESS • 21100 Pacific Coast Highway, 'Huntington B:eaich ZIP 92648• NAME FIRM Waterfront. Hilton �P� ADDRESS 211100 Pacific Coast Highway, Huntington Beach ZIp 9.2648 4 NAME 'a�f a (j FIRM Waterfront Hilton (Print). . � .. ADDRESS 21100 Pacific Coast Highway, Huntington Beach Zip 926'48 NAME 0 r l fin.. �- G�j FIRM Waterfront Hilton ADDRESS 21100 Pacific Coast Highway, 'Huntington Beach ZIp 92648 MARS, `�I 1 Ali Wa;tet front Hilton (Pr`� ) ADDR4USS 21100 Pacific Coast Highway, .Huntington Beach ZIp 92648: : NAME v^ FIRM Waterfront Hilton. (Print.) ADDRESS 21100 Pacific Coast Highway, Huntington Beach Zrp 92648: PZ!s"ASE RETURN PET_rTr0N To THE HUNTINGroN bRACE':CHAMBeR OF COMMERCE, 2100 MAIN ST. #2001 H.B. 92648 BY JANUARY , J994. 2t00 Main street Suita Zoo on Hun7lnpg CA 62648 .. 774m3e-a"o a I ' (FA517.14/900-7664 ----- JAN 24 194 10:47 PAGE.002 JAN 24 '94 09 46 ROBERT MAYER CORP P.2i2. a.'Read ' A P9TZTION IN SUPPORT OF THE CONCEPT OF JOIN' :USE SHARED PARKING WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN AREA. ' Since the downtown functions very much the sane as a .serge shopping center or mall, it should ,be: ev42uat6d as a 'singie. • area of': mixed' uses, not as fndi.vzdual stand al p"ne: Uses. :The cost of providing parking within a. parking structure is extremely expensive; therefore, it is importarr:t 'to have `a correct' balance between the need for parking: spaces. and .:the: a.va3labililty of such spaces. It Is not practical to satisfy 100% of the parking demand on worst case scenario, .'e.g. Vlerfest., OP Pro. The economic vitality of the city is dependent on -the ability of new businesses -locating here. If' you support the SHARED PARKING CONCEPT, please- affix .your name on this petition. NAME © 7�� v Waterfront Hilton ' FIRM ' ADDRESS • 21100 Pacific Coast Highway, 'Hun.tington B.saich ZIP 92648 NAME_ y C-U • Waterfront, Hffton Print)- ADDRESS 21100 Pacific Coast Highway, Huntington Beach ZIp 9-2648 �pp NAME % - ,{�"G� �' " 'FIRM Waterfront Hilton (print). ADDRESS 21100 Pacific Coast Highway, Huntington Beach ZIp 92648 NAME . ' �i1z '�7Z `�,c� c=ZF'I,�y Waterfront Hilton ADDRESS ,+ 21100 Pacific Coast Highway, Huntington Beath ZIp 92648 NAME, LZ4-A, )L(/1--,P�/�1/�c Z FZjy WNa:tet-front Hilton' (Pr nt) ADDRESS 21100 Pacific Coast Highway, .Huntington Beach ZIp 92648. i I - IU FIRM NAME l� ! �/l LL Waterfront Hilton.' ' !Print'_'� •. , •. ADDRESS 1100 Pacific Coast Highway, Huntington Beach grp 9:2648: Pt EASE RETURN PETXTXON TO THE HU'IOTING210N BEACH-*!CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, 2100 MAXIV ST. f200,. H.B. 92648 BY JANUARY 2*, '2994. 2100 Main WI, h. Suitt♦200 H ' uniln on p[ 6Mfh.CA B26<8 � ; (FAXq 7tAMGG-7664 JAN 24 '94 10:47 PAGE.002 JAN 24 '94 09 46 ROBERT MAYER CORP P•2i2. A. PFTITrON IN SUPPORT OF THE CONCEPT OF JOINT ;USE SHARED PARKING WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN AREA: Since the downtown functions very much the sae as a large shopping center or mall, it should be:-evaZuatvd as a single area 'of-' mixed. uses, not -as individual stand alone. uses. The cost of providing parking within a. parking structure Is extremely expensive; therefore, it Is lmportan.t to have a . correct, balance between the need for parking: spaces. and .:the avallabililty of such spaces. It Is not practl.cal to satisfy 100% of the parking demand on worst case scenario, 'e.g. Pierfest., OP Pro. The economic vitality of the city .is dependent .on 'the ability of new businesses locating here. If' you support the SHARED PARKING CONCEPT, please affix .your** name on this' petition. NAME FIRM Waterfront Hilton -(Print.) ' ADDRESS 21100 Pacific Coast Highway, 'Huntington Beaich ZIP 926:48. NAME ��� !( C.; FIRM Waterfront.Ml'ton (Print). ._. ADDRESS 21100 Pacific Coast Highway, Huntington Beath Zrp 9.2648' NAME M �1�� L- Z� Z-- ^FIRM Waterfront Hilton (Print). ADDRESS 21100 Pacific Coast Highway, Huntington Beach Zrp 92648 ,j ` 1 _ •W�:terfroni Hilton NANE . `1 ` t-�I J�` J�CAI - FIRM ADDRESS 21100 Pacific Coast Highway, Huntington Beath ZIP 92648 1Na;tehfront Hilton'. (Print) ADDRESS 21100 Pacific Coast Highway, .Huntington Beach Zrp 92648: NAME Lz-d1 FIRM Waterfront Hilton. ' {Print.) • ADDRESS 21100 Pacific Coast Highway, Huntington ReachZ=p 92648: PLEASE RETURN PETITION TO THE HUIVTINGTON B_PACS OHAriIBER OF COMMERCE, 2100 MAIN ST. 0200, H.B. 92648 BY 7AIVUARY 2*, :1994. 2100 Street,Suite 200 Hun[Inq--p[nn 6NrCh.CA 82648 � • ' 774/G36•A�8 '• .. • � . (FAX17i4/860 7664 i .. _ . . ... ... ..... .. JAN 24 194 10:47 PAGE.002 un`� n,�eacl�. 6'leam6er oJcCoirnrerce A PETITION IN SUPPORT OF THE CONCEPT OF JOINT USE SHARED PARKING WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN AREA. Since the downtown functions very much the same as a large shopping center or mall, it should be evaluated as a single area of mixed uses, not as individual stand alone uses. The cost of providing parking within a parking structure is extremely expensive; therefore, it is important to have a correct balance between the need for parking spaces and the availabililty of such spaces. It is not practical to satisfy 100% of the parking demand on worst case scenario, e.g. Pierfest, OP Pro. The economic vitality of the city is dependent on the ability of new businesses locating here. If you support the SHARED PARKING CONCEPT, please affix your name on this petition. NAMEr11)&t (11(AtAt11V 6E' n/;!�FI RM (P int 1212.5 ADDRESS &dxP Y7—& ZIP �126 NAME �. -.��( - �G� FIRM (Print) 177N{ fb -ar-G v t-e- 3 So ADDRESS ZIP q NAME <&zA-r1 A 6 0,gA FIRM (print )ADDRESS ZIP Gla — c NAME FIRM ( ri I t) ADDRES At-> Ule, ZIP -9��C-7 NAME041j�,0tC4 (���( Q� (ap/ ,FI RM�`���'t hct/� ADDRESS_ l-L '3 �v Gt. � .uu'n��D�. , &O-k ZIP (v�— NAME,- O -�C� FIRM (Pr-'?)) 2/`�_ 3.�a, ZIP ADDRESS // `7 J� NAME o VnarVY FIRM 1,0 . (Prim Q ADDRESS � �� I`�� Cj ��[/��._ZIP PLEASE RETURN PETITION TO THE HUNTINGTON BEACH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, 2100 MAIN ST. #200, H.B. 92648 BY JANUARY 21, 1994. 2100 Main Street,Suite 200 Huntington Beach.CA 92648 • 714/536-8888 (FAX) 714/960-7654 •ccpm+co Rt U ti v EL) NAR 0 0 1994, �un�iaG�n f�- eac/� CAanr6er o�`Conrnrerce A PETITION IN SUPPORT OF THE CONCEPT OF JOINT USE SHARED PARKING WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN AREA. Since the downtown functions very much the same as a large shopping center or mall, it should be evaluated as a single area of mixed uses, not as individual stand alone uses. The cost of providing parking within a parking structure is extremely expensive; therefore, it is important to have a correct balance between the need for parking spaces and the availabililty of such spaces. It is not practical to satisfy 100% of the parking demand on worst case scenario, e.g. Pierfest, OP Pro. The economic vitality of the city is dependent on the ability of new businesses locating here. If you support the SHARED PARKING CONCEPT, please affix your name on this petition. NAME FIRM lea I/ (Print) ADDRESS 0&� 13 ( /4 N S-� , .S-t� .�2 f-f . �. ZIP Zlo NAME FIRM 4<0 11 ADDRESS�)13 hfQ I n �'l�- 3 a -�-� , ZIP �co 0 NAME�()-,(1 e M A-LZgT— FIRM C,C, CXQ,Q ��,jj (Pr t) ADDRESS Jn �j �' , �� , {j- ZIP NAME d ����JG� FIRM /Ce-C2�� (Print)- ADDRESS �3 2� ^ �`�1�� �� rn ZIP NAME FIRM k)Q C� ADDRESS -Z?J � ZIP NAME,- FIRM (Printj ADDRESS 1 o I �)bj, r M-a,., 1 Z-S-6 ZIP l NAME Z.- t Vj M S FIRM G-1&AM-M f— ( t) ADDRESS Z ZIP °( 2 Z I S ����Vhll„� PLEASE RETURN PETITION TO THE HUNTINGTON BEACH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, 2100 MAIN ST. #200, H.B. 92648 BY JANUARY 21 , 1994. 2100 Main Street,Suite 200 Huntington Beach,CA 92648 714/536-8888 rl (FAX)714/960-7654 .«..o,., �ua`fi��a f�eacl� - Cl�anr6er oJ'`Coninrerce A PETITION IN SUPPORT OF THE CONCEPT OF JOINT USE SHARED PARKING WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN AREA. Since the downtown functions very much the same as a large shopping center or mall , it should be evaluated as a single area of mixed uses, not as individual stand alone uses. The cost of providing parking within a parking structure is extremely expensive; therefore, it is important to have a correct balance between the need for parking spaces and the availabililty of such spaces_. It is not practical to satisfy 100% of the parking demand on worst case scenario, e.g. Pierfest, OP Pro. The economic vitality of the city is dependent on the ability of new businesses locating here. If you support the SHARED PARKING CONCEPT, please affix your name on this petition. NAME ?NONGr k&oyF� FIRM ADDRESS1n'30) ISM' SI �/ g P'. CA ZIP vza y 6 NAME i ftA rew �Q�t[rlG(� FIRM C�OZ C ZA-2S C,Ct,41,J`t ��j ( r nt) � �` .c! ADDRESS I j14 e)CccC)�(S �✓ o.>�j geccLt C�, ZIP -C NAME �Qyl n 15 f o,nlp-S FIRM ADDRESS(Print) �w A - ya),cv\ ZIP qOWA NAME FIRM (Print) -2�ADDRESS�Q V1�J ZIP q. NAME gold 41,1all FIRM ADDRESS 1 (/1t ZIP NAME- FIRM ADDRESS ?�� / irr ��� ��� ZIP NAME P+(,{ l-A W EAM, _ FIRM (Print) ADDRESS 5I N P,�2c�SKA- `�• �C}'��. r ZIP 9090 - T PLEASE RETURN PETITION TO THE HUNTINGTON BEACH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, 2100 MAIN ST. #200, H.B. 92648 BY 21 , 1994. 2100 Main Street,Suite 200 Huntington Beach,CA 92648 714/536-8888 (FAX) 714/960-7654 .cc.auirio RECEIVED CITY CLERK CITY OF NUNTINGTON H ACH.CALIF. MkR 31 3 03 PH '94 TO: City Council FROM: Michael Tater SUBJECT: DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN CODE AMENDMENT #92-5 DATE : March 31 , 1994 Dear City Council Members , I will be out of the Country when the Spec. Plan Code Amend . comes up for vote at your next scheduled meeting of April 4 , 1994 . 1 was present at the Downtown Specific Plan Subcommittee meetings . Three City Council members were also members of this committee, they were Grace Winchell , Ralph Bauer , and Dave Sullivan . Two people termed "staff" were also members of this subcommittee, they were Howard Zelefsky and Herb Fauland . At these subcommittee meetings I brought up several issues of my opposition to the proposed District change for the property which I own . At the meetings I was able to explain to the Subcommittee why I opposed the District change. At our final Subcommittee meeting all three City Council members told me they felt the same as me, that my property should stay in the same District 5 . The only people to disagree was Howard Zelefsky and Herb Fauland . I have sent City Council letters regarding my views on this proposed District change dated Sept . 27 , 1993, December 4 ,. 1993, and January 31 , 1994. These letters were all submitted by me to the City Clerk and time stamped October 4, 1993, December 6 , 1993, and February 1 , 1994 respectively . I also left xeroxes of these letters today with the City Clerk . Please review these letters before you vote. I trust that the three Council Members that heard me at the subcommittee meetings will have you just as convinced as they are that it is only right Fifth St. West stays in District 5 . Sin `4Ta M i ae te RECEIVED CITY CLERK V l T? JT HU}iT1!!G?r;N �•.cf,CN is AL1F. TO: City Council OCT 13 F1 '33 FROM: Michael Tater ; Owner two continious lots Dist . 5 Comm. zoned SUBJECT: DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN CODE AMENDMENT DATE : September 27 , 1993 Dear City Council Members and Mayor , I am very much against the proposed specific plan code amendment #92-5 . My property has been in our family for thirty years , and during that time we have turned down many offers due to the valuable zoning of the property . As a property owner in the affected area this plan is discriminating and unfair . Approval of #92-5 will cause great financial loss by moving my property into a new District ; a District which doesn ' t have commercial zoning, doesn ' t allow a third story, restricts to a smaller building and has far fewer business and building capabilities . The current specific plan adopted November 1983 puts my property into Dist . 5. Dist. 5 is zoned as : Mixed-Use ;Commercial /Office/ Residential .District 5 encompasses the Main St . Core area from the alley between 5th & 6th to the alley between 2nd and 3rd and from Walnut to Orange . In the new "DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN CODE AMENDMENT" the boundaries change putting my property into Dist 4 . Dist . 4 is zoned Mixed-Use: Office Residential . Through these new plans I will be denied the ability to build commercial including but not limited to Restaurants , Night clubs with entertainment , Cabarets , Dancing and/or live entertainment as a primary/accessory use, Liquor stores ,Retail Sales , Retail Uses , Parking lots and garages , Museums , Laundromats , Ice cream parlors ,Meat or fish markets , Plazas , Reducing salon, Shoe stores , Sporting goods , Tailor shops , Travel agency , Art gallery , Bakeries , Boat and marine supplies , and about forty other designated uses . These preceding permitted uses were taken directly out of the current "Downtown Specific Plan" adopted November 1983 as code #4. 7 . 01 , for my lots in District 5 . It would not be fair , nor make sense for my lots fronting on 5th St. not to stay in the same District 5 as my opposite side of 5th St. Being the fact that I face the same street as the opposite side of 5th St . and bear the same traffic I should remain in the same District 5 . On October 19 , 1992 1 filed a letter with the city council opposing the Coultroup project #92-17 in which Coultroup was granted waiver for 496 parking spaces needed for the commercial portion of his project. I spoke to the city council expressing my worries that my block could never be built because Coultroup would use up the necessary parking . I also told Mike Adams at a Town Hall meeting last year (regarding the new specific plan) that its unfair to give waiver for Coultroup ' s 496 needed parking spaces . Mike Adams said that if Coultroup ' s plan passes than all the rest of the commercial -1 - -2- zoned areas in the redevelopment areas will have their parking requirements waived too. Mike Adams also said that he would see that the boundaries don' t change on my block , after I accused the city of changing my properties zoning so I would no longer be commercial and therefore not be entitled to the parking waiver received by Coultroup . It ' s no surprise I was lied to after reading an article in the newspaper dated August 12 , 1993 regarding Huntington Beach Community Development in which it said " lying by supervisors in the department had been identified as a "behavioral pattern and characteristic attributable to the department. "" If after all these years of investment and payment of property taxes , the zoning and permitted uses changes due to strong arm tactics to bring about boundary changes and subsequent District changes I will suffer irreparable financial losses . The losses suffered will be so great It will force me to vigorously protect my properties ' s value through legal action against the City of Huntington Beach, each individual council member and any one else who can be held accountable to this systematic approach to devalue my property . Before this has to happen , please deny this very unfair amendment . Than Y , Mich el Tater RECEIVED CITY CLERK C!T OF HUNTINCTph r- Ct+ C 40F. DFc 6 q 37 Pfl '93 TO: City Council , and Howard Zelefsky FROM: Michael Tater ;Owner two continious lots Dist . 5 Comm. zoned SUBJECT: DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN CODE AMENDMENT #92-5 DATE : December 4, 1993 Dear City Council Members ,Mayor , Howard Zelefsky , I am writing to you again , to urge you to not alter the current boundaries of Dist . 5 from Specific Plan dated November 1983, see my previous letter dated September 27 , 1993. The value of my property ( in our family for 30 years) , will suffer greatly if this District change is implemented by the City Council . On October 25 , 1993 the City Council approved Resolution 6522 , establishing an in- lieu parking fee for all of the Downtown Specific Plan area, for $400/ space . With this parking plan approved my block is now ready to build WE HAVE FINALLY OVERCOME THE MAJOR PROBLEM OF WHERE TO PUT THE CARS , now that we can pay for off site parking because you passed resolution # 6522 . My family held on to this property for about thirty years patiently waiting for you to fulfill your promise of off site parking so we could build commercial as zoned . Now our reward for trusting in you and waiting is for you to change the boundaries of District 5 so that we cannot build our lifelong dream of commercial . It is not fair ,nor make sense for you to change the boundaries to force us into District 4 , where we would be able to build only half the size as in District 5 . Plus in Dist . 4 we could no longer build commercial , instead we would have to build offices . We all know as fact that downtown the offices just don ' t rent , but the commercial does rent . Therefore we are lucky to have property that is zoned commercial , specially now that the parking in- lieu resolution approved . To force us into District 4 will strip us of our valuable zoning, reduce drastically our allowable building size and permitted uses . Furthermore it makes far more sense to have both sides of Fifth Street with complementing uses . If you don ' t leave our property in District 5 we will be forced into litigation with The City Of Huntington Beach . We feel you are discriminating against us . 'How do you explain that while attempting to downzone our current allowable building size, you give the Coultroup project (on Fifth St . ) all the variances they request to grow in building size ignoring all setbacks . The Fifth Amendment to the U. S . Constitution states : " . . . nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation . " " U . S . courts have ruled that regulations and other policies that prevent a property owner from using property as the owner wants , or that adversely affect the value of property , can be viewed as a taking or "partial " taking . In such cases , just compensation is due a property owner . " RECEIVED UITY i-ERN C.HUNTiN6T(1kY FES 1 f 126 '94 TO:City Council Members FROM: Michael Tater SUBJECT: DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN CODE AMENDMENT #92-5 DATE : January 31 , 1994 Dear City Council Members I am writing to inform you of some items I brought up at the Subcommittee meeting dated January 27 , 1994. 1 spoke in regards to my disagreement with the proposed Dist 5 boundary change , as I have stated in my letters to you dated September 27 , 1993 and December 4 , 1993. Grace Winchell asked me specifically what I had against the boundary change moving me from Dist . 5 to Dist 4 . 1 responded my site coverage would go from no maximum site coverage to only 50% site coverage. My front yard setback would go from 5 feet to 15 feet . My side yard setback would go from 0 feet to 5 feet . My 3rd story setback would go from 10 feet to 25 feet. My allowable height would go from 40 feet to 35 feet . My allowable zoning would go from mixed-use commercial /office/residential to mixed-use office/residential thereby denying my commercial usage. With all those new setbacks , by forcing me in a new district without commercial , I would only be left with a chopped up small project to build . It would be worth only a small fraction of what it is worth as currently in Dist. 5 . At this meeting Roy Richardson (planning commissioner) said that one private citizen was the only driving force to change my blocks boundaries to Dist . 4 from Dist . 5 . Roy Richardson , Grace Winchell , an•d Ralph Bauer all agreed that my block should not be changed to Dist. 4, and the boundaries for Dist . 5 in the Spec. Plan dated Nov . 1983 should remain intact . At this meeting I also brought up my concern that my property was not included in the IBI Report for the downtown parking plan. Sincerely , Michael Tater RECEIVED CITY CLERK CITY OF HUNTINCTON 6.F.rh. CWF. MAR 7 3 59 PH '9q PETITION ---------------------------------------------------------------- WE, THE UNDERSIGNED FIFTH STREET BUSINESS OWNERS AND FIFTH STREET PROPERTY OWNERS RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT FIFTH STREET STAY IN DISTRICT FIVE AS IT IS CURRENTLY IN THE DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN DATED NOVEMBER 1983. WE DON 'T WANT TO HAVE THE BOUNDARIES CHANGED TO FORCE US INTO DISTRICT FOUR , WE WANT TO STAY IN THE SAME DISTRICT AS THE MAIN STREET CORE AREA WITH THE SAME PERMITTED USES AND DENSITIES AND SITE COVERAGES AS WE HAVE ALWAYS HAVE BEEN. ---------------------------------- ------------------------------ NAME (signature) ADDRESS ---------------------------------- ------------------------------ a 13 h Q. s - s" K. 0 -Ak A, a Dtw , s l'MADE : s PUT OF THE RECEIV 1 .1 AT hTEMMEMNG 1 . OFFICE 1 CONNIE BROCKWAy DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN VILLAGE CO NCEPT PRESENTATION 74 ,.� �n� zms: s '�tGt•' 1 Rs��': €1� ®���e�m �taa � �4t7 9QE9:' B3�d•': Agenda The Process For Proceeding Tonight ■ A Review Of,'The Issues Where Consensus Has Been Rached ■ Outstanding Issues ■ The Process From This Point On The Process For Proceeding Tonight ■ Take a straw vote on the issues where consensus has been . reached among the Sub-Committee and Staff ■ Take individual straw votes on the six outstanding issues ■ Any Council , member who has an issue not addressed or who disagrees with the comments may bring them up for discussion Downtown Village' Concept Re�view Of Is's ues Where Consensus Has een ' Reached w � - a [WWI LL .E"� E'��`4E€:� ih•x. �. ..y§,.: ..E ;;m.G�=a.$.,:•.� "ter" a'd',t."�€'a::`;�4:'i;�i�::.�� :•'j4�•a�;t;`,., .r��•, ``i Issues Where Consensus Has Been Reached - Definitions Issue P.C. Action Committee Staff Comments Recomm. Build to Line No Change No Change No Change Facade No Change Change "of' Agree with to "or" Committee F.A.R. No Change "Building Site" Agree with to "gross floor Committee area"; add net site area" Issues Where Consensus Has Been Reached - Definitions Issue P.C. Action Committee Staff Comments Recomm . Public Open No Change Add. "general" Agree with Space to public Committee Setback No Change No Change No Change Issues Where Consensus Has Been Reached - Gen . Prov . Issue P.C. Action Committee Staff Recomm. Comments Required No Change Add "Or as Agree with Parking required by the Committee Downtown Master Parking Plan" Non No Change Modify Div. 9 to Agree with Conforming address Committee Max. Height 15' first story- Agree with P.C. Agree with both 10' Second etc. (Comm.) Issues Where Consensus Has Been Reached - Gen . Prov . Issue P.C. Action Committee Staff Comments Recomm. Parking Except as Add "Or as Agree with provided in required by Committee section 4.2 .29 the Downtown Master Parking Plan" Issues Where Consensus Has Been Reached Gen .. Prov. Issue P.C. Action '. Committee Staff Comments Recomm. Screening of Require Agree with Agree with Parking Lot Screening P.C. both Landscape No Change Agree with Agree with Parking Lots P.C. both Street No Change Agree to Change City Vacation modify to City (Main St.) Council. Add: Subject to a public hearing Issues Where Consensus Has Been Reached - Gen . Prov . Issue P.C. Committee Staff Action Comments Recomm. Street No Change Change "5' to max. Agree with Vacation 42 inches" Committee Access No Change Add "No more than Agree with Ways 1 /2 of-the total alley • Committee dedication shall be from one side" Issues Where Consensus Has Been Reached - Dist. 2 Issue P.C. Action Committee Staff Comments Recomm. Permitted Change "Shall Add "Single Agree with Uses be Permitted" family; Committee to "May be subject to allowed" DRB only" Density, Less than 50'= 1 Agree with Agree with Lot Size Du; 50'=4 DU; P .C. both and 51 ' to 100'=30 Frontage DU; 101 ' to 9 fullblock=35 DU (All net acre) Issues Where Consensus Has Been Reached - Dist. 2 Issue P.C. Action Committee Staff Comments Recomm . Setback No Change No Change No Change Side yard Setback No Change Add "No more Agree with Rear Yard than 112 of the Committee total alley dedication shall be from one side." Issues Where Consens us Has Been Reached - Dist. 5 Issue P.C. Action Committee Staff Comments Recomm. Permitted .New constr. and Permitted uses Agree with Uses establishment of require no CUP, Committee comm. uses may New constr. and (New be allowed changes of document subject to a CUP certain uses require a CUP format) Issues Where Consensus Has Been Reached - Dist. 5- ' Issue P.C. Action Committee Staff Comments Recomm. Commercial No Change Allow all Comm. Agree with Uses uses on first Committee floor to be allowed on the second Open Space No Change Agree with Agree with P.C. but both delete "amenity" Issues Where Consensus Has Been Reached , = Dist.. 6 Issue P.C. Action Committee Staff Recomm. Comments Permitted New Constr. & Permitted uses Agree with Uses establishment of require no CUP; New Committee comm. uses may constr. and changes (New document be allowed of certain uses format) subject to a CUP require a CUP Open No Change Agree with P.C. and Agree with both Space delete "Amenity" Issues Where Consensus Has Been Reached - Dist. 7 Issue P.C. Action Committee Staff Comments Recomm. Open Space No Change 10% open Agree with space Comm . Issues Where Consensus Has Been Reached - Dist . 8 , . Issue P.C. Action Committee Staff Comments Recomm . Permitted No Change Include Agree with Uses Public Trans. Committee Center option Issues Where Consensus Has Been Reached - Parking Issue P.C. Action Committee Staff Comments Recomm. Bldg. Sq. Ft. No "Change No Change No Change Caps Public vs. No Change No Change No Change Priv. Parking Codify No Change Codify Agree with Parking parking Committee Reductions . reductions into a code requirement Issues Where Consensus Has Been Reached - Parking . Issue P.C. Action Committee Staff Comments Recomm. Area 1 vs. No'-Change No Change No Change Area 2 (N/S of Orange) Future No Change Maintain Agree with Parking option for Committee Sites City to purchase property In-Lieu Fees, No Change No Change No Change Downtown Village Concept Outstanding. Is'sues t yogi rL> ay t1 i t1 k K a s Outstanding , Issues Issue P.C. Action Committee Staff Recomm. (Location) Comments Commercial Parking in Dist. Do Not include Do not include Parking 3,4,5,E and 10, Dist. 2, eliminate District 2 in the (Pg. 14 Gen. on-site or as 350' limitation. parking plan and Prov.) modified by the Add "Or by modify 350' to Parking Master payment of an 500' limitation. Plan within in-lieu parking walking distance fee." not to exceed 350 . Access Ways Comm. & Mixed 24' alley; Modify 28' Alley (Pg. 16 Gen. Use, alley 24' to allow 1 curb cut Prov.) per min. 100' of frontage (Main St.) Outstanding Issues. Issue P.C. Action Committee Staff Recomm. (Location) Comments Boundary Move boundary Do not change Agree with P.C. (Pg. 36 Dist. 4) between Dist. 5 boundary and. 4 Boundary Boundary Do not change Agree with P.C. (Pg. 40 Dist. 5) Change: From boundary Dist. 5 to Dist. 4 (Portion of) Setback ROW = 24" ROW = 24' ROW = 28' Rear Yard (Alley width) (Alley width) (Alley width) (Pg. 45 Dist. 5) Outstanding -issues Issue P.C. Action Committee Staff Recomm. (Location) Comments Density - FAR FAR 1 .25 FAR 1 .5 Agree with P.C. (Pg. 50 Dist. 6) r Setback - Row = 24' ROW = 24' and ROW = 28' and Rear Yard add note - 1/2 add note (Pg. 51 Dist. 6) total alley dedication from one side only Setback - Upper No Change Change "To 10' Agree with P.C. Story from second (Pg. 51 Dist. 6) story facade" The Process , From This Point On ■ May - 16 , 1994 - Staff returns with a revised Legislative Draft and Ordinance that incorporates all the changes ■ June 6 , 1994 - Second reading of the Ordinance ■ July, 1994 - City transmits the Ordin ance to the Coastal Commission ■ October - December, 1994 - Coastal Commission hearing date in Southern California Apartmen. t. Association ' MORANGE 12822 Garden Grove Boulevard, Suite D,Garden Grove, California 92643 (714)638-5550 FAX (714) 638-3784 April 4, 1994 RECEIVED,-AND MADE A PART OF THE RECORD AT Honorable Linda Moulton-Patterson, Mayor - N a MEETING Members of the City Council ITEM NO. City of Huntington Beach OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK 2000 Main Street CONNIE BROCKWAY Huntington Beach, California 92648 Dear Mayor Moulton-Patterson and Members of the City Council: On behalf of the Apartment Association of Orange County (AAOC), we appreciate the continuance you granted on March 7 regarding Code Amendment No. 92-5, the Downtown Specific Plan. We recognize that the continuance was granted so that AAOC and others with concerns involving the Specific Plan would have the opportunity to address them. In regards to our concerns, upon further review of Code Amendment No. 92-5, AAOC has decided to take a neutral position on this measure and therefore, will not be present during public hearing on this issue. Our association's interest in the Downtown Specific Plan stems from concerns that the plan would negatively impact owners who are trying to reconstruct a property lost to an involuntary act on the part of the owner (fire, flood, earthquake, etc.) and/or make it difficult for owners to voluntarily rehabilitate older properties. Based on conversations with city staff it is clear that these issues are already addressed in Division 9 of the Municipal Code and are not directly affected by the Downtown Specific Plan. For this reason, AAOC has taken a neutral position on Code Amendment No. 92-5. AAOC does however, remain concerned with issues regarding the reconstruction of involuntarily destroyed property and the rehabilitation of older buildings. We will be taking a close look at Division 9 and the other Huntington Beach codes which affect this issue, after which, should there continue to be issues of concern, we will bring them to the city council's attention at a future date. Thank you for your sincere consideration of our concerns. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact Rich Lambros, Director of Public Affairs, at (714) 638-7401. Sincerely, 115,*VI ____ W,vn T. Schenn David e o President Vice President Legislative ouncil A nonprofit organization for the advancement of the rental housing industry �o NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 92-5/ DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN CODE AMENDMENT/ ` "VILLAGE CONCEPT" AND DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN (CONTINUED FROM MARCH 7, 1994, CITY COUNCIL MEETING) NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Huntington Beach City Council will hold a public hearing in the Council Chambers at the Huntington Beach Civic Center, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California, on the date and at the time indicated below to receive and consider the statements of all persons who wish to be heard relative to the application described below. DATE/TIME: Monday, April 4, 1994, 7:00 PM - APPLICATION NUMBER: -Code Amendment..No. 92-5/Downtown Specific-Plan Code Amendment/ "Village Concept" and Downtown Parking Master Plan APPLICANT: City of Huntington Beach LOCATION: An area bounded by Golden West Street,Pacific Coast Highway,Beach Boulevard ZONE: Downtown Specific Plan REQUEST: To amend the Downtown Specific Plan for the purpose of scaling down development standards, creating three(3) planning nodes, establishing affordable housing standards and a comprehensive parking management plan. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Covered by the Downtown Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report COASTAL STATUS: Local Coastal Plan Amendment ON FILE: A copy of the proposed request is on file in the City Clerk's Office, 2000 Main Street, - Huntington Beach;California 92648,, for inspection-by-the public: A-copy of the staff report will- be available to interested parties at City Clerk's Office after April 1, 1994. ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to attend said hearing and express opinions or submit evidence for or against the application as outlined above. Written communications may be sent to the City Clerk. If you challenge the City Council's action in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City at, or prior to,the public hearing. If there are any further questions please call Herb Fauland,.Associate Planner at (714) 536-5271. Connie Brockway, City Clerk City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 (714) 536-5227 �m o moonH /// PACIFIC - OCEAN ` o \ o i i CODE AMENDMENT #92-5 DOWNTOWN SPECIAL PLAN } K ll Sty of Huntington Beach c` G PRESET O. BOX 190 CALIFORNIA 92"8 MR24 �FM Tr'c_RFAR�T GLASS A .• I t h r i 3,0 024-145-23 � r John Price Mc Roberts Hasi No. 64913 Apo AE 09839 mooted,left no ad€�I� ON() such wji,`per {��r,Qt �Qi1�8Cflis�F4@ 371J NO EhJ 01 ;. 89006 VD saTabilV so7 �a c .y� -0 T0� 'oDI �a x.z'E?dTTTH 9EL9 UPa@MZoH s�>uous Z0-E9T-7vz0 ! Sti9L6 VINUOdIIVO 06t XO8 'O'd WDS lei -- �- -�., u��ag uou�}unH ;o A1ID •r- CITY CLL&& . �• City of Huntington Beach-�•�.- .�-..,�.,m.y,,,,� D4 `S �liTGry : : . P.O. BOX 190 CALIFORNIA 92648 FIRST -• I ,;aiO80 c a 024-147-09 Clyde Joseph Mazzot + . 1905 ' 1 Holly No. 11 ,� •.c:;- F ;. Huntington Beach CA 9264.8: 4, `,'. \ ►`S 1 I • ;, It,i,,,,l,i,it,,,t„I�,t,���'; �fi;� �,I,�I�I,i,,,,11�„Itl time 07/02/1999 2:05:21 PM City of Huntington Beach Page 2 Office of the City Clerk Records Ref Category Subject Entered Status Document Expires Box ID Label 450.20 06/18/1984 Microfilmed Av r 189 ZZC 84-7 Applicant: CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH �p� Location: Local Coastal Area-Admiralty/PCH/etc. (Except Downtown Specific Plan)- Action date: 6/18/84 450.30 10/17/1994 Active L t;.. 5381 Code Amend 92-5/Downtown Specific Plan Village Concept -Downtown Parking Master Plan Ord 3239 10/17/94 (see file CA 640.10 3 files) 450.30 12/31/1988 Microfilmed 2102 Downtown Specific Plan Revisions Res 5894-1988 450.30 03/08/1988 Microfilmed 2103 Downtown Specific Plan Special Meeting - Council- Agency - Planning Commission - 3/8/88 450.30 12/31/1988 Microfilmed 2104 Downtown Specific Plan Revisions-Code Amendments 88-3, Ord 2942-1988 i 450.30 12/31/1983 Inactive ( 126 2124 DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN-ZC 83-2/CODE AMENDMENT 83-2 �Y cJ�r►' PROOF OF PUBLICATION STATE OF CALIFORNIA) ) SS. County of Orange ) am a Citizen of the United States and a I PUBLIC NOTICE -1 OF resident of the County aforesaid; I am CAN NOTICE CELLATIOO N OF PUBLIC HEARING over the age of eighteen years, and not a CODE AMENDMENT party to or interested in the below I • DOOWW NTTOWOW N entitled matter. I am a principal clerk of SPECIFIC PLAN CODE AMENDMENT/ ; VILLAGE the HUNTINGTON BEACH INDEPENDENT, a " AND DOWNTOWN PARKING newspaper of general circulation, printed MASTER PLAN NOTICE IS HEREBY and published in the City of Huntington GIVEN that the Huntington Beach, County of Orange, State of 1 Beach City Councilic hearing in the hold a puble California and that attached Notice is a Council Chamber at the Huntington Beach Civic r I Center, 2000 Main Street, true and complete copy as was printed Huntington Beach, Califor- nia,on the date and at the and published in the Huntington Beach time indicated below to re- ceive and consider the and Fountain Valley issues of said ; statements of all persons who wish to be heard rela- newspaper to wit the issue(s) of: i scribed to the application de bed below. DATE/TIME: PUBLIC HEARING TO BE RESET AT LATER DATE APPLICATION NUMBER:, Code Amendment No. 92- September 2, 1993 5, Downtown Specific Plan Code Amendment, "Village Concept" and Downtown Parking Master Plan APPLICANT: City of Hun tington Beach LOCATION: An area _bounded by Goldenwestl Street, Pacific Coast High-. way, Beach Boulevard and I declare, under penalty of perjury, that Sixth Street the foregoing is true and correct. Plan Downtown Specific REQUEST: To amend the Downtown Specific Plan for the purpose of scalingg' down development stand- Executed on September 2 3 alan creating three (3) P 199 planning nodes, affordable housing standards and a at Costa Mesa, California. comprehensive parking management plan. Connie Brockway, City Clerk, Huntington Beach City Council, 2000 Main Street,Hun- tington Beach, CA 92648(714 536.5227 Published Huntington ^ Beach-Fountain Valley In- dependent September 2, 1993 Signature 091-053 Connie Brockway,City Clerk �..,......_ ..,.... ,...........,,- _„� /� i%D v City of Huntington Beach 11 Office of the City Clerk APR � a5 ` = � `-` v P.O. Box 190 �", t. •� „ f, 1` V., " `r " '', Y Huntington Beach,CA 92648 i ds BYE 1 023-135- Flo E Roche ! �NTINGTp ( =204S . =rville St . I O�� „CUgYOgqrE�(T/ Sarr-a Ana CA 92704 v ROCH204 927041015 1B93 04/15/95 — _— FORWARDING TIME EXPIRED —Y ROCHE 'FLORENCE FLOFLO 32156 CAMINO CAPISTRANO STE 209 9 SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO CA 92675-3712 RETURN TO SENDER t CpUNTY CPS LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING III{{i IIt Bill ll{{II{{III all 11111111111 iiii ill I I I 1111111111 -.. -_ ..cr.9--..s.-... .-._... v:,-ss....�».wr r-E��c:�i-"tr*'cr,; .�..-•-w ._. - � i ..t _ - "�.'. ttus� I Connie Brockway,City Clerk ' City of Huntington Beach \�G7 d� -T[S.FOSr� Office of the City Clerk P.O. Box 190 t,F;a Huntington Beach,CA 92648 � �' `" � `" 024-173-05 � V ANDREW STU �� l C/0 CO INVESTMENT�pHTINGTpy 370 STREET #210 O� NCUgFUgqrF �F N BEACH CA 92660 11 190S.-� _- CpUNTY LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING t t • Y !i!I '�(IIIII�iIII'SIfIIIfI'{illlIt�l L` Connie Brockway, City Clerk .. .... .•.._......,.:. :_..�.��... ....... .- - ;--- - City of Huntington Beach i�1 U.S.PM Office of the City Clerk P.O. Box 190 �— q �„, Ar"R 7 95 ug , c C L Pt Huntington Beach CA 92648 ';.f .. ��� i r—••t 9� C c. �� ,�?a ( �^A E 1 E a-• .J n .•, F �J 974J ?d 024-145-29`,%,- R,)R, SuchEl Thomas C . Van Tuyl Ins " 722 Park St ��c:E '' ' ❑ Huntington Ph CA 926'4.8err�i _. it�f� INGTOy =hcoaPORgrF F _ V�Y4T7 04/11/95 -,RE,TURN TO SENDER o Q I *�O— QRWARD, ORDER ON FILE `UNABE TO FORWARD 9 a p9,0 OQ w L RETURN TO SENDER AUNTY LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING 1lrrrll,���,iIII 1111111111 loll IIIIIII������IIII„�II��,II���I Connie Brockway,City Clerk City of Huntington Beach Office of the City Clerk !' �� `� G�`'`_" �.s.Posrast .,<"" P.O. Box 190 APR 7 95 C -- c Huntington Beach, CA 92648 �E t ds i`e riiC , j y - - CAL It M E T E R-j r r� Al 024-145-27f�r'� jns�ffi Thomas C. Van T 4�y 1_ �Or�ja �`e. . D 1722 Park SL . NTINGT Huntington 3h CA 926a:$,r �v Oy o y v C-' _ VANT72R 1ARD 4`84.004 1 04/11/95 REN TO--SENDER NO FOR ORDER N FILE ;T UNABLE TO FORWARD �C `Fa�t 1909•�O O@ r�.; RETURN TO SENDER cpUNTY Ca ° 5. LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARIMf'j/M'. • - • r''��;- Connie Brockway,City Clerk =� �•��..-. �_ _ w.. _ _ City of Huntington Beach �. ., a�` dF `;�! `us.Pcs aor: Office of the City Clerk t• c:.v Ci A r APR 7 95 P.O. Box 190 ' . �'� Huntington Beach,CA 92648 . ' , .�k C L 66 SS f4 A C�a. CAI—I f. z 1 �4)G)52� r 024-163-08 024-163 -11 Beach Resorts Inc 222 5th St . ��NTINGTpy Huntington Bh CA 92648' , J QZ F� I7 1909.E FpppN LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING { 11 JJ ('lltlll�lll'�tlllll��Illtl�{�lt!!'�I11'Iltl�tll�lf lt�llil!!II - Connie Brockway,City Clerk ' City of Huntington Beach T•�1.. Office of the City Clerk b o �c �_, _ IS. n;TAG ; P.O. Box 190 Huntington Beach,CA 92648 s 024-151-09 /!r, MICHAEL L. SCHOWALTER 350 FREEMAN AVE t-��tJTINC Tpy LONG BEACH CA 90814 ro fiF IJRt•1 TO = Be Den 'f FOA SENDER FQ ORDER ❑t•J FILE o g r a i_tt TO FORW4+fil;t R TO SENDER AJOr pppNTY Cps LEGAL NOTICE - .l PUB�ULC.t H EA. Ri1 NGL am' •�lj�I�`�01� � `a,1 �, fJ�.:.. � t%:. .. .. i i i I S C " C1 r� rivr � y, CITY CLERK �. City of Huntington Beach Q,V" .••rl,l,"���_-�' c��o�..r...�'�.<=1�i- , , (CAL0- JAR2414P.O. BOX 190 CALIFORNIA 92648 PRES RT HRST CLASS MAIL � gym" ' f=',,; r 024-151--09 . - - 6Y He L. Schowalter c'F're eman Ave . -...L8 '4' Beach CA 90814 I r.{.T :{T T•. r. i ..1 1 i' i from the desk of: KATE WHITNEY DEPUTY CITY CLERK (714) 536-5210 G� P . P.O. BOX 190 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 ,) r i MUDD DIM I PACIFIC - OCEAN 1m�r CODE AMENDMENT #92.5 DOWNTOWN SPECIAL PLAN REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION G Date March 7, 1994 Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members u-r rs,c rrt Submitted by: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrato Prepared by: Melanie S. Fallon, Community Development Director%f s Subject: CODE AMENDMENT NO. 92-5/DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN REWRITE "VILLAGE CONCEPT" AND PARKING MASTER PLAN Consistent with Council Policy? [X] Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception Statement of Issue,Recommendation,Analysis,Funding Source,Alternative Actions,Att$& nts: STATEMENT OF ISSUE: Transmitted for City Council consideration is Code Amendment No. 92-5 the Downtown Specific Plan rewrite commonly referred to as the "Village Concept" and Parking Master Plan. The City Council has held three meetings(August 30, 1993, October 11, 1993 and December 6, 1994) to discuss the details of the plan. RECOMMENDATION: Motion to: "Take public testimony on Code Amendment No. 92-5, the Downtown Specific Plan rewrite and Downtown Parking Master Plan, close the public hearing, make recommendations on the issues and request that staff return with an ordinance and revised legislative draft of the Downtown Specific Plan at the City Council meeting of May 2, 1994." ANALYSIS: At the City Council meeting of December 6, 1993, Council opened the public hearing, took public testimony, and formed the Downtown Specific Plan Subcommittee which consists of Council Members Grace Winchell, Ralph Bauer, Dave Sullivan, and City staff. The City Council continued the public hearing to the meeting of February 22, 1994. At the City Council meeting of February 22,1994,the City Council continued the item to the meeting of March 7, 1994. The Committee has met on nine occasions to discuss the details of the Specific Plan/Parking Plan with public participation. In addition, staff has met with representatives of the Downtown to discuss their concerns. The Committee has reached a consensus on a majority of the issues discussed and has formed a recommendation. The highlights of the Committee's recommendations are discussed in the following analysis. Attached for City Council review is a summary table(Attachment No. 1) of the Subcommittee's issues and includes Public comments, Planning Commission's action, Subcommittee's recommendation, and staffs recommendation. Also attached are the Subcommittee's minutes in a question and answer format that are reflective of the discussions at each Subcommittee meeting. The staff has provided letters from the general public which outline their concerns which were discussed at the Subcommittee meetings. ANALYSIS: Downtown Subcommittee The Downtown Subcommittee met on a weekly basis to discuss the rewrite of the Downtown Specific Plan and allow public participation. The discussions centered around shared parking and the Village Concept. Specifically, the issues which were discussed are listed in the attached table along with the Committee's recommendation. The following is a brief overview of the major issues discussed at the Subcommittee's meetings. Parking Master Play The shared parking discussions focused on: • public vs private parking, • building square footage, ' • limits on development based on available parking, • parking requirements north and south of Orange Avenue, • alternative parking sites, • codifying the parking reductions, • in-lieu of parking fees. The issues were discussed at length with a recommendation on each from the Committee and a recommendation from staff. Generally,the Committee and staff agreed on a majority of the issues. Downtown Specific Plan The Downtown Specific Plan discussions centered around the following: • clarifying definitions, • distinctions between the Master Parking Plan reference and the zoning code, • height, RCA-3/7/94 2 • density, • dedications, • alley widths, • district boundary changes between Districts Four and Five, • open space, • non-conforming residential units, • requirements for a conditional use permit, • the need for a Transportation Center in District Eight. The issues were discussed at length with a recommendation on each from the Committee and a recommendation from staff. Generally, the Committee and staff agreed on a majority of the issues Conclusion After two months of extensive meetings with staff and the public, the Downtown Subcommittee reached conclusions regarding the Downtown Parking Master Plan and Downtown Specific Plan. With respect to the former, the Subcommittee agreed with the basic tenants of the shared parking concepts. They also concluded that in order for the parking plan to be executed successfully, the control mechanisms designed into the plan need to remain. The Downtown Specific Plan generated a great deal of discussion with respect to the interpretations of certain sections of the code. As can be seen in the attached table,the staff and Subcommittee have agreed to make changes which clarify the intent of a particular provision. However, no major change to the Planning Commission's approval is being recommended by either staff or the Subcommittee. Based upon the aforementioned, staff requests that the Council take straw votes on the issues, direct staff to incorporate the Council's recommendations, prepare an ordinance, and prepare a revised legislative draft of the Downtown Specific Plan, and return to the City Council with a final document. FUNDING SOURCE: Not applicable. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: The Council may take one of the following actions: 1. Approve Code Amendment No. 92-5, as recommended by the Planning Commission and modified by the Downtown Subcommittee, or, 2. Direct the Downtown Subcommittee to hold additional meetings to finalize the outstanding issues, re advertise the public hearing, and return to a date certain. RCA-3/7/94 3 ATTACHMENTS: 1. Downtown Subcommittee Table of Issues 2 Downtown Subcommittee Minutes 3. Letters from the general public 4 RCA dated February 22, 1994 MTU:MF:HZ:hf RCA-3/7/94 4 T415 I�RGE NOT USED 'i-CODEW NVj#9',V"5'/:I)� ,5 x-11 'g, ��:PUBLWCWIMENTS:::;. PAGE NO. CODE ISSUE. :::.: PLANNING+::�:*�.i-��:..... SECTION :COMMISSION.:: COMMENTS RECOMMENDATION . . ........ ACTION CT Pg. 2 4.0.04 Build to Line No change Clarify/delete No change No change Definition Pg. 3 4.0.04 Facade No change Clarify change - "of' to "or" Agree with Committee Definition Recommendation Pg. 4 4.0.04 FAR No change Clarify Remove "building" Agree with Committee Definition from gross building Recommenddtion site area Pg. 4 4.0.04 Public Open No change Clarify Add "general" to Agree with Committee Space public Recommendation Pg. 4 4.0.04 Setback No change Clarify No change No change Definition Pg. 8 4.2.01(d) Required No change change-H.B. Ordinance Add- "Or as Agree with Committee Exception Parking Code to Downtown Master required by the Recommendation (General Parking Plan Downtown Master Provision) Parking Plan" Pg. 8 4.2.01(d) Non- No change Inability to-re.-finance due Modify Div. 9 to Agee with Committee (General conforming to non-conforming status address issue Recommendation Provision) Pg.9 4.2.04(a) Maximum 15' First Story Add- "Interior Floor to Agree to consider Add "finished floor to (General Building 10" Second Story, Interior Ceiling" modification finished.ceiling". Add- Provision) Height etc. (Commercial) maximum height in feet with story limit Pg. 12 4.2.13 Parking Except as change- "All Add only - "Or as Agee with Committee (General provided in developments" to "All required by the Recommendation Provision) Section 4.2.29 existing or new Downtown Master (Affordable Developments" and "H.B. Parking Plan" Housing) Ordinance Code to Downtown Master Parking Plan" PAGE NO.. D S. PLANNIN P ..,.' C 'MMEN .S: COMMIT, >: :. ; ::STAFF:. SECTION COMMISSION COMMENTS RECOMMENDATION...:' '' ACTION Pg. 14 4.2.13(A) Parking Parking in Dist. 3, Add- Dist. 2 to Master Do not include Dist. Do not include Dist. 2 in (General (Commercial) 4, 5, 6 and 10, on- Parking Plan, Eliminate 2, but modify 350' parking plan and modify Provision) site or as modified 350' walking distance limitaton. Add - "Or 350' to 500' limitation by the Parking limitation by payment of an in- Master Plan. lieu parking fee Balance within walking distance not to exceed 350'. Pg. 14 .4.2.13(b) Screening of Require lot to be Add- exception: For lots Agree with Planning Agree with Committee (General Parking Lot screened that abut alley side only Commission action and Planning Commission Provision) action Pg. 14 4.2.14(E) Landscaping No change Add-exception for lots that Agree with Planning Agree with Committee (General (require screening) abut alley side only Commission action and Planning Commission Provision) action Pg. 16 4.2.15(E) Street No change change - City to City Agree to modify Agree with Public (General Vacation Council, Add- subject to Comment . Provision) Public Hearing Pg. 16 4.2.15 (f) Street No change None change: "5 feet" to Agree with Committee (General Vacation "max 42 inches" Recommendation Provision) Pg. 16 4.2.16(A) Access Ways Commercial/ Commercial/Mixed Use, Undecided Agree with Planning (General Mixed Use, alley alley 20', allow existing Commission action Provision) 24' curb cuts (Main Street) Pg. 16 4.2.16(A) Access Ways No change Add-Note: No more than Agree with Public Agree with Public (General 1/2 of the total alley Comment Comment Provision) dedication shall be from one side Pg. 26 4.4.01 Permitted change- "Shall be Add - Single Family Add: Single Family Agree with Planning (Dist. 2) Uses permitted" to Residential subject to DRB only Commission action "May be allowed" Eliminate - Subject to CUP <J approval Downt�5pecific Plan 2 hfca925 subcommittee Review PAGE NO, CODE ISSUE PLANNING PUBLTC'COM-MENTS'` COMMITTEE STAFF SECTION ' . '..COMM SS N: :::.<`'::; .: `>:>><: :::>:X.:> .:. : `':;:: CO :: NDA7C . N.:: N.TS... ..:.:... RECOMME RON:.:. AC`1-TON ; ;; Pg. 26 4.4.03 Density, Lot Less than 50' - Less than 50' add: /1,500 Agree with Planning Agree with Committee (Dist. 2) size-frontage 1DU, 50' - 4DU, sq. ft. of net lot area. Not Commission action and Planning Commission 5l'up to 100'-30 to exceed 2 units per 25' of action units, 101' to full frontage block-35 units (all net acre) Pg. 27 4.4.07 Setback(side No change Add-Tandem parking may Agree with Planning Agree with Committee (Dist. 2) yard) be allowed Commission action and Planning Commission action Pg. 27 4.4.08 Setback(rear No change Add-Note: No more than Agree with Public Agree with Public (Dist. 2) yard) 1/2 of the total alley Comment Comment dedication shall be from one side Pg. 36 4.6 Boundary Boundary change: Do not change boundary Undecided Agree with Planning (Dist. 4) From Dist. 5 to Commission action Dist. 4(Portion of) Pg. 40 4.7 Boundary Boundary change: Do not change boundary Undecided Agree with Planning (Dist. 5) From Dist. 5 to Commission action Dist. 4 (Portion of) Pg. 41 4.7.01(A) Permitted New construction change to -Permitted uses Permitted Uses Agree with Committee (Dist. 5) Uses and establishment shall include but not be require&CUP, (New format throughout of commercial limited to the following new construction document) uses may be subject to a CUP and change of allowed subject to certain uses require a CUP CUP Pg. 43 4.7.01(d) Commercial No change Allow all commercial uses Agree with Public Agree with Committee (Dist. 5) Uses on the first floor to be Comment and Public Comment allowed on the second Downtown Snecific Plan 3 hfca925 Subcommit •view s .PAGE NO. CODE ISSUE : PLANNING " PUBLIC COMMENTS; `' COMMITTEE ' STAFF SECTION I COMMISSION ` :: COMMENTS RECOMMENDATION ' ACTION Pg. 45 4.7.08 Setback (rear ROW - 24' (Alley ROW - 20' (Alley Width) Undecided Agree with Planning (Dist. 5) yard) Width) Commission action Pg. 45 4.7.10 Open Space No change Add- Interior parcels, 150' Agree with Planning Agree with Committee (Dist. 5) or more, 10% open space, Commission action, and Planning Commission delete "amenity" delete "amenity" action Pg. 48 4.8.01(A) Permitted New construction change to: - Permitted uses Permitted Uses Agree with Committee (Dist. 6) Uses and establishment shall include but not be require No CUP, (New format throughout of commercial limited to the following new construciton document) uses may be subject to a CUP and change of allowed subject to certain uses require a CUP CUP Pg. 50 4.8.03 Density FAR 1.25 FAR 1.5 Agree with Planning Agree with Committee (Dist. 6) (FAR) Commission action and Planning Commission action Pg. 51 4.8.08 Setback(rear change ROW to Add- structures to be Undecided, add ND-iLr. ROW to 28' and add Ike (Dist. 6) yard) 24" cantilevered to the rear only only property line, and change - ROW to 20', note: 1/2 total alley dedication from one side only Pg. 51 4.8.09 Setback No change change -To 10' from Agree with Public Agree with Planning (Dist. 6) (Upper Story) second story facade Comment Commission action Pg. 51 4.8.10 Open Space No change Add- Interior parcels, 150' Agree with Planning Agree with Committee (Dist. 6) or more, 10% open space, Commission action, and Planning Commission delete "amenity" delete "amenity" action Pg. 51 4.10.01 Permitted No change None Include - Public Agree with Committee (Dist. 8) Uses Transportation Center Option Downtown Specific Plan 4 hfca925 ,-A Subcommittee Review 4mo D O'V�— YN WOE 01 -7��'-'0774'0 '01� ;MA TE "' , , , MNI 3-i�--RNP'000 PAGE NO. CODE ISSUE PLANNING PUBLIC COMMENTS COMMITTEE STAFF SECTION COMMISSION COMMENTS RECOMMENDATION ACTION Pg. 6 Parking Plan Bldg. sq. ft. No change Take cap off, allow market No change Agree with Committee caps driven development and Planning Commission action Pg. 9 Parking Plan Public vs. No change Allow only public parking No change Agree with Committee private spaces to be used in the and Planning Commission parking plan action Pg. 18 Parking Plan Codify No change Codify Parking Reduction Agree with Public Agree with Committee Parking (i.e. 50% or 3.9/1000) into Comment and Public Comment Reductions a code requirement Pg. 19 Parking Plan Area 1 vs. No change Allow the plan to be No change Agree with Committee Area 2 (N/S governed under the area 1 and Planning Commission of Orange) scenario action Pg. 21 Parking Plan Alternative No change Identify future location Maintain option for Agree with Committee (Future) City to purchase and Planning Commission Parking Sites property action Pg. 22 Parking Plan In Lieu Fees No change Reduction in fee, require to No change Agree with Committee be used for new public and Planning Commission parking action Downtown�--eific Plan 5 hfca925 Subcommi -view Downtown Specific Plan City Council Subcommittee February 24, 1994 4:00 PM Room B-8 The following is a list of issues raised at the February 17, 1994, Subcommittee meeting: 1. The Committee took public testimony on the issue of density in District Two and the concern regarding non-conforming, the ability to re-build, and the inability to re-finance. Answer: The Committee stated that the entire area within the Downtown Specific Plan is being down-zoned in an attempt to implement a Village Concept. The non-conforming provisions of the code were discussed and the ability to rebuild through the conditional use permit process were also discussed: The in-ability to re-finance with the provision of{nay be rebuilt through the CUP process" is not satisfactory to lending institutions. Staff stated that they would look into the issue and work on satisfactory language. 2. The Committee took public testimony on the addendum which discussed the changes to District Four and Five. Answer: The Committee recommended approval of the addendum. 3. The Committee took public testimony on the density issue in District Four. Answer: The Committee indicated that they concur with the Planning Commission's recommendation on this issue. 4. The Committee requested an update on staff s meeting with the Downtown property owner's to review their concerns and recommended changes. Answer: Staff met with the property owner's for two hours on Tuesday, February 15, 1994, to discuss their concerns. Staff will prepare a table which will outline the code section, issue, Planning Commission's recommendation, Committee's recommendation, public's recommendation, and staffs recommendation. The table will be presented at the last Committee meeting on February 24, 1994. The table will also be an attachment to the Request for City Council Action (RCA) on March 7, 1994. . I DTSP 2/17/94 PAGE TWO 5. The Committee took public testimony on the issue of parking and the in-lieu fee. Answer: The Committee took the public testimony and will forward their recommendation to the full City Council. hf Downtown Specific Plan City Council Subcommittee February 17, 1994 4:00 PM Room B-8 The, following is a list of issues raised at the February 2, 1994, Subcommittee meeting: 1. The Committee requested that the discussion regarding District Four and Five be included as an addendum to the January 27j 1994 synopsis of discussion items. Answer: The following is the information that the Committee requested: The Committee discussed the recommended changes to District,Four and Five. Answer: The Committee discussed the recommended changes to the boundary between the two Districts and it was stated that the change was as a result of public input. Staff tried to explain the change from a planning point of view. The change removes the commercial activity from an area(District 5) that has existing residential uses and therefore the potential for conflicts will be reduced and or eliminated. The change provides for more compatible land uses and a greater transition zone from the commercial core. This change will provide greater compatibility with the existing, approved and proposed development along Fifth and Third Streets. The Committee also discussed the development standards between the two District's. Answer: It\vas noted that the standards in District Four are more restrictive than those in District Five. Staff explained that District Four's standards are more restrictive because the area (transition zone) is supposed to be less intense from a land use perspective (residential/office) and development standards perspective (density/height) than those allowed in District Five. t`1 DTSP 2/17/94 PAGE TWO The Committee Discussed the relationship between the boundary changes between District Four/Five and the Downtown Parking Master Plan. Answer: The Downtown Parking Master Plan area does not include the area west of the center line of Fifth St. (District Four) or the area east of the center line of Third St. (District Four). The Parking Plan addresses only the "core area" along Main St. which is the predominant commercial area of the Downtown. The core area therefore utilizes the shared parking concept and the area outside the core boundary provides 100% of the residential/office parking on site without a reduction in the number of required parking spaces. The properties throughout the Specific Plan may, however, participate in the in-lieu fee parking program. 2. The Committee requested that staff meet with the Downtown property owner's to review their concerns and recommended changes. Answer: Staff met with the property owner's for two hours on Tuesday, February 15, 1994,to discuss their concerns. Staff will prepare a table which will outline the code section, issue, Planning Commission's recommendation, Committee's recommendation,public's recommendation, and staffs recommendation. The table will be presented at the last Committee meeting on February 24, 1994. The table will also be an attachment to the Request for City Council Action(RCA) on March 7, 1994. 3. The Committee also requested additional information on the cost per space breakdown of the analysis for the alternative parking sites. Answer: Attached please find a memo from Economic Development with the analysis. hf CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH TO: Herb Fauland, Planning FROM: Keith B. Bohr, Economic Development , ' DATE: February 7, 1994 :, _ •Z ; ; Y Lv SUBJECT: Downtown Parking Alternatives Herb, as you requested, I have revised the cost breakdowns for the five downtown parking scenarios to include itemized costs on a per space basis. (note: all new pages are marked Revised 2/94) On site 5, you will notice, I also revised the land acquisition cost based on the asking price received from Pacific Coast Homes. Since the time originally prepared these analyses last November, I have received new information as it relates to the land acquisition cost for site 5. Therefore, have completely revised the costs for site 5. Further Ray Silver's memo dated December 1, 1993, should be amended accordingly (page 2, paragraph 7). xc: Ray Silver, Assistant City Administrator Barbara Kaiser, Deputy City Administrator/Economic Development % 13 Revised 2/94 SITE 1: 100 5TH Street (Terry Buick ]Got) Area - 100' x 225' = 22,500 SF Previous Acquisition Cost - $1,800,000 Options: 1) Surface Lot - 45 Construction Cost - $135,700 Per Space - $3,015 With Land Per Space - $43,015 2) 2 Levels - 90 spaces Construction Cost - $601,290 Per Space - $6,681 With Land Per Space - $26,681 3) 3 Levels - 135 spaces Construction Cost - $1,087,940 Construction Cost Per Space $8,059 With Land Per Space - $21,392 4) 3 Levels - 135 spaces (1 subterranean) Construction Cost - $1,431,510 Per Space - $10,604 With Land Per Space - $23,937 5) 4 Levels - 182 spaces Construction Cost - $1,986,340 Per Space - $10,914 With Land Per Space - $20,804 775j/2 Revised 2/94 I 2 (300 Main Street) SQUARE PARKING FOOTAGE SPACES LAND COST BLOCK 304 AP#024-143-1-25 87,500 SF 200 Spaces $2,500,000 (Subterranean) Per Space - $12,500 SITE 3 (400 Main Street) SQUARE PARKING FOOTAGE SPACES LAND COST SOCK 403 AP# 024-134- Parcels 1,2,3,9,10 & 11 35,250 SF 130 Spaces $75 SF/$2,640,000 (Surface Lot) Construction Cost - $270,790 Per Space - $2,083 With Land Per Space - $22,390 SITE 4 (500 Lake Street) SQUARE PARKING FOOTAGE SPACES LAND COST A n# 024-143-1-5 38,238 SF 108 Spaces $80 SF/$3,059,000 Parcels (Surface Lot) Construction Cost - $224,964 Per Space - $2,083 1-5 With Land Per Space - $30,407 9631 .1 Revised 2/94 SITE 5: 600 Main at Palm & LAO Area "A" - 235' x 375' = 88,125 Area "B" - 61' x 117.5' = 7,167.5 95,292.5 SF Estimated Acquisition Cost - @ $36 per SF = $3,430,000 Options: 1) Surface Lot - 240 spaces Construction Cost - $500,000 Per Space - $2,083 With Land Per Space - $16,375 2) 2 Levels - 425 spaces Construction Cost - $29135,000 y Per Space - $5,024 With Land Per Space - $13,094 3) 3 Levels - 660 spaces Construction Cost - $4,040,000 Per Space - $6,121 With Land Per Space - $11,318 4) 3 Levels - 650 spaces (1 subterranean) Construction Cost - $4,980,000 Per Space - $7,662 With Land Per Space - $12,938 5) 4 Levels - 890 spaces (1 subterranean) Construction Cost - $6,980,000 Per Space - $7,843 With Land Per Space - $11,697 \� 775j/1 rffi?^C T 794.79' / / GO ° 12�t i PRO✓ECT 937-/S-449-5/2 LOT / j 175 Ikj J./32 AC. _ � Q c• o \ 711.73' SLK L A KE 54. Au �, n I � s „ zs. So Iso Iso so ISO I iso' Zs' ,. ZS• N"\r 20 �23 2-2O �J O I 2 4 3 5 i /91 /7 1 I i Zs i Zz• ^� 37 3,5 33 3/ 2.9 27 25 23 2/ /5 /.f // ) �° 7 'i / c� ?.7 r�` `.J OR ORANGE A. 37 35 33 3/ Olt; PT. PURPOSES OAL T 75 38I 3GI 34132 30 28 2G124 221 1 /GI /4 /2 / 61 G \ •lit 3H1 36 341 �v Ia0 GUARANTEE S Q Zt• I 20 /81 I I 4;? I i m Al s �o-� 37l o, I ASSUNIES ANY LIABILITY 1 tS S. N01 TO BE REPRODUCED. I to I I I 13 14 115 �� Q I I 12 18 I 1 12 I 1 g ER,ED. WGE COUNTY ASSESSOR 199011 I I 1 • I I I I I , �,, , , , , /o.i 211' vs, so' 7%. `�. I I I so' ��r c.o• iso' s r MAIN MAIN 5r > s�k 09 f G� Downtown Specific Plan City Council Subcommittee February,2 1994 4:00 PAI Room B-7 (ADDENDUM) 10. The Committee discussed the recommended changes to District Four and Five. Answer: The Committee discussed the recommended changes to the boundary between the two Districts and it was stated that the change was as a result of public input. Staff tried to explain the change from a planning point of view. The change removes the commercial activity from an area (District 5)that has existing residential uses and therefore the potential for conflicts will be reduced and or eliminated. The change provides for more compatible land uses and a greater transition zone from the commercial core. This change will provide greater compatibility with the existing, approved and proposed development along Fifth and Third Streets. 11. The Committee also discussed the development standards behveen the hvo Districts. Answer: It was noted that the standards to District Four are more restrictive than those in District Five. Staff explained that District Four's standards are more restrictive because the area(transition zone) is supposed to be less intense from a land use perspective (residential/office) and development standards perspective (density/height) thq those allowed in District Five. 12. The Committee Discussed the relationship behveen the boundary changes - behveen District Four/Five and the Downtoivn Parking Master Plan. Answer: The Downtown Parking Master Plan area does not include the area .vest of the center line of Fifth St. (District Four) or the area east of the center line of Third St. (District Four). The Parking Plan addresses only the "core area" along Main St. which is the predominant commercial area of the Downtown. DTSP 2/2/94 PAGE TWO ADpENDUM The core area therefore utilizes the shared parking concept and the area outside the core boundary provides 100% of the residential/office parking on site without a reduction in the number of required parking spaces. The properties throughout the Specific Plan may however, participate in the in-lieu fee parking program. hf Downtown Specific Plan City Council Subcommittee February 2, 1994 4:00 PM Room B-8 The following is a list of issues raised at the January 27, 1994, Subcommittee meeting: 1. The Subcommittee members requested that the RCA for the February 22 City Council meeting include discussions regarding the Planning Commission's recommendations, Staff s recommendations, Staff s comments on the Committee's recommendations, and a discussion on the public's comments and input. Answer: Staff will include a discussion on each of the above mentioned items in the RCA for Council action on February 22, 1994. 2. The Committee discussed alley width and consistency within the document regarding alley width. Answer: The Planning Commission's recommendation of 24 feet remains, along with Staffs recommendation of 28 feet. Staff also indicated that the document would be checked for consistent language. 3. The Committee discussed District Four's development standards and the recommendations of the Planning Commission. Answer: The discussion is noted by staff. 4. The Committee discussed "build to line" and "setback" and their requirement in the Specific Plan. Answer: Staff explained the concept and the requirement for the build to line. The definition of build to line (Page 70, sec.4.0.04) is as follows: A dimension that specifies where the structure must begin. For example, "build-to-5",where ,V� the structure must extend to five feet of the lot line. DTSP 2/2/94 PAGE TWO Setback (Page 72, sec. 4.0.04)is defined as follows: A stipulated area adjacent to the lot line which must be kept free of structures over 42 inches in height. One requires a structure to be "built" within so many feet of a lot line, while the other requires that the structure be "setback" so many feet of a lot line. This build to requirement provides a pedestrian atmosphere especially along Main Street by placing the structure closer to the street. 5. More precise definitions of: Floor Area Ratio, Gross Site, and Net Site. Answer: The following definitions are provided for your information as they exist in the Specific Plan(Pages 70-72, sec. 4.0.04). Floor Area Ratio (FAR): A number which indicates how many square feet of structure can be built on a site, expressed as a multiple of the gross building site area. For example, if a site is 5,000 square feet in area and the FAR is 2.0,the square footage of a building cannot exceed 10,000 gross square feet(2.0 x 5,000). Gross Site Area: The area within the lot lines of a parcel of land before public streets, alleys,easements or other area to be dedicated or reserved for public use have been deducted. Net Site Area: The total horizontal area within the property lines of a parcel of land exclusive of all rights-of-way or easements which physically prohibit the surface use of that portion of the property for other than vehicular ingress and egress. 6. The definition of structure was requested. Answer: Section 908 of the Zoning Ordinance defines a structure as follows: A mobile home or anything constructed or erected, an edifice, or building of any kind , or any piece of work artificially built up or composed of parts joined together in some definitive manner which requires location on or in the ground, except sxvimming pools, patios, walks, tennis courts, and similar paved areas. DTSP 2/2/94 PAGE THREE 7. A discussion regarding building height occurred. Answer: No new information or changes are required. 8. A discussion regarding District Six took place. Answer: No new information or chances are required. 9. Open space, amenity, second floor open space, and the 10% public open space requirement were discussed. Answer: The definition of open space was read to the group as is defined in the Downtown Specific Plan. Public amenity was discussed. A prorated open space requirement was discussed. The credit for second floor open space was discussed. No consensus regarding open space was reached. hf Downtown Specific Plan City Council Subcommittee January 27, 1994 4:00 PM Room B-8 The following is a list of issues raised at the January 20, 1994, Subcommittee Meeting: 1. The Subcommittee members asked staff to provide them with copies of all the information provided to them from past meetings. Answer: Staff will provide the information to the Subcommittee members along with copies for the public who attend the meetings. 2. The Subcommittee members also requested a copy of the beach cities parking standards comparison exhibit. Answer: Staff will provide a copy of the exhibit. 3. The Subcommittee members received a written correspondence from Bob Bolen which expresses concerns and makes recommendations regarding the Downtown Parking Master Plan. Answer: The correspondence is attached for the Subcommittee's reference and discussion. Staff has not been able to critique the concerns and recommendations as of this date. Staff will provide a written critique and response at the February 2 meeting. hf �.3 INTERNATIONAL PARKING DESIGN, INC. Municipal Parking Standards City Office Retail Restaurant Huntington Beach 1/250 SF:0-250,000 SF; 1/200 SF 1/60 SF single parcel 1/350 SF:250,000+ SF 1/100 SF integrated center Escondido 1/300 SF (min. 4) 1/250 SF 1/100 SF plus 1/100 SF over 4,000 SF Long Beach 1/250 SF 1/250 SF 1/100 SF plus 1/40 in bar and waiting area Manhattan Beach 1/300 SF 1/200 SF:0-5,000 SF; 1/500 SF 1/250 SF:5,000+ SF Nev port Beach 1/250 SF net 1/250 SF gross 1140 SF net public area Laguna Beach 1/250 SF 1/225 SF 1/50 SF (min. 4) Oceanside 1/400 SF 1/300 SF:0-5,000 SF; 1/3 fixed seats 1/250 SF:5-20,000 SF or 1/45 SF Redondo Beach 1/300 SF 1/250 SF 1/4 fixed seats 1/50 SF of seating in area Santa Barbara 1/250 SF 1/250 SF 1/250 SF or 1/3 seats (greater of) plus bicycle parking Santa Monica 1/300 SF 1/300 SF 1/25 SF �a Downtown Specific Plan City Council Subcommittee January 20, 1994 4:00 PM Room B-8 The following is a list of questions submitted by Bob Bolen at the January 12, 1994, Subcommittee meeting: 1. "Why do we need this Specific Plan now? The document is done basically-all the big properties with opportunities for consolidation are built." Answer: State law requires the City to have zoning. The Downtown Specific Plan is the zoning for the Downtown. Development under the adopted Downtown Specific Plan is not entirely complete,however,to allow small lot development(min. 2,500 sq. ft.)to occur, and the Village Concept (down scale)to be implemented,the revisions to the adopted Specific Plan are warranted. With remnant parcels remaining in the Downtown, these revisions will allow current non-conforming parcels to develop, which would not receive the same consideration under the adopted plan. 2. "What would happen if we didn't get this plan approved?" Answer: All development would be reviewed under the adopted Downtown Specific Plan and adopted parking ordinance. 3. "What are all the ramifications of the Redevelopment Plan for the Downtown expiring in 1994?" Answer: The Main-Pier Redevelopment Plan has a duration of 35 years from the date of adoption by the City Council or until all outstanding indebtedness of the Agency shall be retired, whichever is later(Section 1.5). The Plan was adopted on September 6, 1983. Under Section 2.4,Acquisition of Property, it states that the Agency shall commence eminent domain proceedings to acquire property within the Project Area within twelve (12) years after the adoption of the Plan. This is the part of the Plan that expires in September of this year. All the ramifications of this event are difficult to answer, however, a representative from the Agency will be present to answer the question. a'� DTSP 1/20/94 . PAGE TWO 4. "Why is the Downtown being separated above and below Orange?" Answer: The Downtown Specific Plan has two districts which are separated above and below Orange Ave. The area north of Orange Ave. is an area of neighborhood commercial (District No. 6),,activities with residential uses and is a logical transition line from the commercial core (District No. 5) activities along Main St. which does not permit residential uses. The transition line was established because of the location of existing uses when the plan was first introduced. The Plan has been further defined since 1983, as the plan has been implemented. 5. "Why as of the October 25, 1993, City Council meeting did staff recommend that every property above Orange be fully parked on-site?" Answer: Staff s recommendation has not changed since the Downtown Parking Master Plan was approved by the Planning Commission on July 7, 1993. This plan is currently under consideration by the City Council. The Plan has never stated that all parking north of Orange Ave. be provided on-site. It stated that retail and office parking requirements be reduced by 50%; it did however, state that restaurant parking be given no reduction and all parking be provided on-site. The Plan went on to say that the mix of uses should receive careful consideration because of the limited area for parking opportunities. The Plan also recommended that short term (20 minute) parking be implemented and that the existing supply of parking should be sufficient for the anticipated uses. 6. "350' from the parking structure is a figure referred to in the Specific Plan as well as 450'. Where did these numbers come from? Could the City adopt any numbers?" Answer: The adopted Specific Plan discusses a range between 300 and 400 feet in Section 3.3.2, Parking (Page 45), of the Specific Plan Concept section, and then specifically states 350 feet in Section 4.2.13, Parking(Page 79), of the Development Standards section. These numbers (300', 400') are established numbers used in the parking study industry (ULI, APA) which identifies the maximum distance that people are willing to walk from a parking space or lot to an activity. The City could adopt any number that it desires, however, it is appropriate to provide information that is valid and can be substantiated through background studies, not information that has no basis or lacks validity. DTSP 1/20/94 PAGE THREE 7. "Where the build out number come from?" Answer: The maximum build out number is derived by; 1) analyzing the area that may develop under the Village Concept, 2) analyzing the potential for parking associated with the development and, 3) the potential mix of uses that will accommodate both and provide a viable Downtown. The plan has been reviewed at an American Planning Association conference and by the Urban Land Institute and has been given a positive recommendation. They noted that the Plan is moving the City in the right direction. The Plan has been further refined to address all concerns expressed at the Planning,Commission hearings before being presented to the City Council. 8. "If the revised shared parking plan is not passed, is.the City going to need to build a parking structure to accommodate the development you have already approved?" Answer: No. The projects that have been approved have; 1)provided their own on-site parking, 2) have submitted and have approved parking plans in conformance with the adopted Specific Plan and, 3) or have been granted parking variances. All of the approved projects fall under the proposed shared parking development scenario and therefore, it is not anticipated that additional public parking will be necessary. 9. "Where are each of Abdelmuti's spaces for parking in his permanent and temporary plan? Isn't his permanent parking required to be in place prior occupancy permits are granted? Is his permanent parking in place for the square footage he now has open?" Answer: A presentation of the Abdelmuti Parking Plan will be provided by staff. The condition of approval which addresses parking allows occupancy to be released as parking becomes available. The permanent parking plan is the ultimate parking solution for the project, when and if the Coultrup project moves forward. The square footage that he now has open is not being satisfied by the permanent parking plan, rather by the temporary plan. �.1 DTSP 1/20/94 PAGE FOUR 10. "Is the code being permanently changed to reflect the changes in the shared parking plan?" Answer: Yes. If the Downtown Parking Master Plan is approved, the plan will be incorporated into the Downtown Specific Plan and will be the parking code for the Downtown Specific Plan area. hf Downtown Specific Plan City Council Subcommittee January 12, 1994 4:00 PNl Room B-8 The folloNving is a list of issues raised afthe January 6. 1994. Subcommittee meeting: 1. Is the Specific Plan document before the City Council the same as the document reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission? Answer: Yes. The document reflects all the recommended amendments that the Planning Commission made to the Specific Plan. 2. How many additional parking spaces«will the upper two levels of the Main Promenade parking structure yield if a valet or stack parking system is implemented? Answer: Approximately 202 additional spaces. This number reflects a valet or stacking plan only, not a restriping of the upper two levels. Additional research will be necessary to determine the exact number, if the upper two levels are re- striped for this purpose. 3. What is the actual number of public parking spaces available in the Downtown Parking blaster Plan area? Answer: 1,020 off street and 402 on street for a total of 1,422 public parking spaces in the Downtown Parking Master Plan area. 4. How many square feet of outdoor dining area is there currently in the Downtown? Answer: 2,262 sq. ft. of area along Main St. and Pacific Coast Highway. 5. Can the Terry lot accommodate a multi-level parking structure? Answer: Yes. International Parking Design, Inc. has prepared some preliminary plans that show a multi-level parking structure(see attached). The preliminary plans indicate a yield of between 139 and 185 parking spaces. Nr Qe Le r 0 �ht h� rV LL— r., i n •� _ S � G.tion L00l� 1 -9 E4s International Parking Design,Inc. Pahmp Caw/ionh .1W1 M,v Ave" luW W-3.CoWo,-io 97626 I D _/_ ► CI j (74)667.7730 I �v v q P> --ZI'd Laval ....- -- l� rn11n r( G T I on L, Inlernallonal Parking Design,Inc. - "ary Cawdta-rs 3LSM A►w[H Agri* _ 1.0 lie L y- C 'r.,� N Lou L 'nj Egsf Inlernollonai Parking Design,Inc. vutty Cmwrkrw� JUK Ak.V/Ave" Downtown Specific Plan City Council Subcommittee January 6, 1994 4:00 PM Room B-8 The following is a list of issues raised at the December 22, 1993, Subcommittee meeting: 1. Should we reduce our minimum parcel size in all districts? Answer: Yes. In an effort to down scale(Village Concept)the type of development in the area, and permit the remnant parcels to develop, it is necessary to reduce the minimum parcel size. This will allow parcels that are non-conforming to today's minimum parcel size standard an opportunity to develop. 2. Is 2,500 square foot minimum parcel size and single family dwellings acceptable in District two. Answer: Yes. In response from property owners along PCH that have remnant parcels and have no opportunity to consolidate,the reduction in size is proposed. The development standards for this district are the standards for Oldtown/Townlot for single family dwellings(Resolution No.5760 adopted 3-2-87). 3. Should we abandon units per acre measure to determine density and substitute F.A.R.? Answer: No. Unit per acre regulates density on a numerical yield, while F.A.R. regulate floor area and building mass and bulk. The combined standard permits greater control and the ability to administer the Village Concept scheme. 4. Boundary changes on 5th Street... What should we do? Commercial or residential? Answer: It is recommended that the area south of Olive Ave. along 5th St. allow commercial uses on both sides of 5th Street. 33 JAN. 6, 1994 PAGE TWO 5. Should we delete incentives for full block consolidations? Answer: Yes. This allows remnant parcel development and a Village Concept scenario to be implemented. A. How about partial or half block consolidations? Answer: The current draft Specific Plan does not include such incentives. However, half block or less consolidations with incentives may be considered to allow and promote the inclusion of remnant parcels that may remain after development occurs. 6. Public open space/plaza's-should they remain given the reduced intensity? Answer: Yes. However, a prorated requirement may be substituted for smaller parcels based upon net lot size and frontage. Example: min. 100 ft. of frontage and min. 10,000 sq. ft. of net lot size, requires the code required min. 10% of open space. Less than 100 ft. of frontage and less than 10,000 sq. ft. of net lot size requires a min. of 5% of open space. 7. Sceening of parking lots; Is it needed? Answer: The Planning Commission believes that it is necessary to screen permanent surface parking lots for aesthetic purposes. This screening shall consist of bermed landscaping. 8. Concept of build to line versus setback, clarify? Answer: The definition of build to line(Page 70, sec.4.0.04) is as follows: A dimension that specifies where the structure must begin. For example, "build-to-5", where the structure must extend to five feet of the lot line. Setback(Page 72, sec. 4.0.04) is defined as follows: A stipulated area adjacent to the lot line which must be kept free of structures over 42 inches in height. One requires a structure to be "built" within so many feet of a lot line, while the other requires that the structure be "setback" so many feet of a lot line. This build to requirement provides a pedestrian atmosphere especially along Main Street by placing the structure closer to the street. JAN. 6, 1994 PAGE THREE 9. More precise definitions of: Floor Area Ratio, Gross Site, and Net Site. Answer: The following definitions are provided for your information as they exist in the Specific Plan(Pages 70-72, sec. 4.0.04). Floor Area Ratio (FAR): A number which indicates how many square feet of structure can be built on a site, expressed as a multiple of the gross building site area. For example, if a site is 5,000 square feet in area and the FAR is 2.0, the square footage of a building cannot exceed 10,000 gross square feet(2.0 x 5,000). Gross Site Area: The area within the lot lines of a parcel of land before public streets, alleys,easements or other area to be dedicated or reserved for public use have been deducted. Net Site Area: The total horizontal area within the property lines of a parcel of land exclusive of all rights-of-way or easements which physically prohibit the surface use of that portion of the property for other than vehicular ingress and egress. 10. Why is District 4 -35 dwelling units per net acre? Answer: The Planning Commission felt that a reduction from gross area to net area was adequate. A numerical(example, 35 to 25)reduction would be too great a hardship on the property owner. 11. Why was District 7 not addressed? Should it be scaled down? Answer: The District has been scaled down by going from gross to net site area when calculating density. 12. How realistic are the parking structure sites? Answer: Please refer to the December 22, 1993,paper. 13. Should alley widths be 24 feet or 28 feet? What is the minimum that is acceptable? Answer: The minimum acceptable alley width is 28 feet. JAN. 6, 1994 PAGE FOUR 14. Is live entertainment in District 6 a new use? Answer: No. Permitted by CUP. 15. What is the feasibility of a parking structure on the'ferry site? Answer: Please refer to the December 22, 1993, paper. The following additional questions were raised by Council person Winchell: 1. What is the actual (existing) number of parking spaces available in the Downtown today? Answer: 1,834 parking spaces(Exhibit 12, IBI Report). 2. What will be the actual (ultimate) number of parking spaces available at buildout (500,000 sq. ft.). Answer: 1,810 parking spaces(Exhibit 12, IBI Report). 3. What is the appropriate mix of uses for the Downtown, that will allow implementation of the Village Concept and the Parking Master Plan? Can incentives for uses be given to ensure that the overall plan works? Answer: The plan has identified a mix of uses that would allow the Downtown to move forward. No incentives for uses has been proposed at this time to ensure that the plan moves forward in accordance with the established mix and square footage caps. The plan has noted that restaurant uses should not exceed 100,000 sq. ft., and therefore incentives may be appropriate to encourage more retail and office uses. For example, this may be done by allowing parking credits(grandfathering) for certain retail and office uses or providing financial assistance. JAN. 6, 1994 PAGE FIVE 4. The IBI Report identified a parking demand of 3.9 parking spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. of floor area for the estimated Village Concept, Is this a valid parking demand ratio? Answer: Yes. The 3.9 per 1,000 number was generated by the IBI Report based upon the analysis of the Downtown Village Concept as it exists today, and the amount of square footage associated with the Village Concept(exhibits 19-24). The number is consistent with the standard for a shopping mall. This was verified by the survey conducted by the IBI Group of the Downtown patrons. The number also is reflective of the mix of uses as they exist in the Downtown today. The Report also warns that this number may increase if the mix of uses changes. This is especially true if the restaurant uses exceed their square footage cap. This number may also decrease if the restaurant uses remain constant and additional retail and office uses increase. The number will change depending upon the mix of uses. hf .3� Downtown Specific Plan City Council Sub-Committee December 22, 1993 4:30 PM The following is a list of parking issues that were raised at the December 14, 1993, Sub- Committee meeting: 1. How realistic are the five parking structure sites? Answer: From a planning point of view, four of the five sites would satisfy the recommendation of the Planning Commission. The site depicted as number five is not within the area depicted in the Alternative Parking Sites exhibit(Map#5) . From an economic point of view,three of the sites would require a major commitment from the City to finance the construction, acquisition, and relocation of residences/businesses to provide the parking at these sites. 2. What is the feasibility of a parking structure on the Terry site? Answer: A structure on the site is feasible,but the exact number of parking spaces and the design features of the structure are very preliminary. To determine the exact feasibility of the site will require the retention of a consultant and architectural/structural drawings that precisely depict a structure. 3. How many parking spaces are required on the Terry site from the Abdelmuti project? Answer: Temporary plan-75 spaces, Permanent plan-50 spaces 4. How many parking spaces would be lost if we closed the first two blocks of Main St.? Answer: Forty-eight spaces (source DTPMP) 5. Explain memo from HZ to MTU regarding square footage and parking calculations in more detail. Answer: See memo with background information and verbal explanation. 6. Provide a response letter from IBI Group indicating if they agree with the HZ to MTU memo. d Answer: See response letter. � v TO: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrator FROM: Howard Zelefsky, Planning Director DATE: November 17, 1993 SUBJECT: Downtown Master Plan Building Square Footage Analysis At the October 11, 1993, City Council workshop on the Downtown Specific Plan and Shared Parking Plan, discussion regarding the ultimate building square footage for the "Village Concept" became an issue. There seemed to be some confusion generated by an exhibit presented by the IBI Group. Specifically, the discussion centered around the Downtown Land Use Summary (Exhibit 3) of the IBI report and the uncertainty as to the total building square footage at build out. The exhibit in the IBI report led the Council to incorrectly believe that ultimate build out under a"Village Concept" would be 637,192 sf. This number was arrived by adding three categories together. The three categories are; 1) Existing/Under Construction, 2)Entitled, and 3) Anticipated. The following is a table of the three categories that led to the confusion. EXISTING/ UNDER CONSTRUCTION 439,290 ENTITLED 61,000 ANTICIPATED 136.902 INCORRECT TOTAL 637,192 The total building square footage derived by the addition of the three categories is misleading. The numbers cannot be analyzed as a cumulative total but as separate totals for analysis of peak parking impacts. As an example, some of the numbers when analyzed as a whole are double counted and therefor the totals are skewed upward and not reflective of the activity of the Downtown and the ultimate "Village Concept". Planning staff has reviewed these numbers and believes that ultimate build out will not exceed approximately 500,000 sf. The following chart illustrates how these numbers were arrived at. w DTPMP Page 2 The analysis done by staff is a review of the square footage numbers utilized as the basis for the "Village Concept" and Shared Parking Plan. The numbers are from attachment no.1 of the DTPMP presented to the City Council on August 30, 1993. In an effort to help understand the building square footage and how the totals are computed, staff has prepared a breakdown of these numbers for analysis. They are as follows: 1. EXISTING BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE A) Occupied 326,726 B) Vacant 56,213 C) Under Construction 64,000 TOTAL: 447,539 2. APPROVED BY ENTITLEMENT BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE A) New Building Area 82,000 ( Coultrup, 3rd block) B) Demo Building Area 51,963 TOTAL: 30,237 (net increase) 3. EXISTING & APPROVED TOTAL BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE A) Existing 447,539 B) Approved 30.237 TOTAL: 477,776 4. ANTICIPATED SITES FOR REHAB/NEW CONSTRUCTION A) Of the total 477,776 sf. , 109,000 sf. of existing building area(six sites) have the potential for rehab/new construction. B) We anticipate this building area to be replaced at a one to one ratio, thus, �,O the total downtown building area is not expected to exceed 500,000 sL DTPMP Page 3 As can be seen from the above analysis, the total cumulative building square footage for the Downtown core area is approximately 500,000 sf., not 637,192 sf. The analysis of these numbers and the anticipated activity of development in the Downtown is in line with the intent of the "Village Concept". If you need any further information or would like to discuss this matter in more detail, please call me or Herb Fauland, Associate Planner at ext.5438 HZ:hf xc: Ray Silver,Assistant City Administrator Mike Adams, Director of Special Projects Barbara Kaiser, Director of Economic Development Louis Sandoval, Director of Public Works Michael Dolder, Fire Chief Ronald Lowenberg, Police Chief Ronald Hagan, Director of Community Services Robert Franz, Deputy City Administrator Ron Hayden, Director of Library Services Gail Hutton, City Attorney Connie Brockway, City Clerk DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN OCTOBER, 1993 (Building Square Footage Analysis) GLOSSARY OF TERMS OCCUPIED: Existing buildings/suites which have tenants currently occupying floor area. VACANT: Existing buildings/suites which do not have tenants currently occupying floor area. ENTITLEMENT: City approved projects that have the potential to be built sometime in the future. ANTICIPATED: Staff analysis of sites which have development potential under the "Village Concept." UNDER CONSTRUCTION: New buildings that are presently being constructed and do not have occupied floor area. DEMOLISH: Existing buildings which will be demolished to allow new construction to occur. NET INCREASE: The difference in floor area between the new construction of entitlement projects and the resulting demolition of existing buildings to allow new construction. NEW CONSTRUCTION: New buildings that have been approved through the entitlement process, but have not been built. FLOOR AREA: Building/suites gross square footage. OCTOBER, 1993 IBI REPORT DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN (Building Square Footage Analysis) Existing/Under Construction RETAIL RESTAURANT OFFICE TOTAL BLOCK A* 45,003 6,548 34,299 85,850 BLOCK B 31,584 23,773 16,000 71,357 BLOCK C 37,365 29,785 22,175 89,325 BLOCK D 24,073 5,000 3,000 32,073 BLOCK E 16,163 0 7,000 23,163 BLOCK F* 15,000 0 12,825 27,825 BLOCK G* 21,000 0 6,000 27,000 BLOCK H 32,250 0 0 32,250 BLOCK I* 2,500 7,946 10,000 20,446 SUBTOTAL: 224,938 73,052 111,299 409,289 GRAND TOTAL: 409,289 (Excludes 30,000 theater) �1 + 439.289 .'1 IBI REPORT EXISTING/UNDER CONSTRUCTION *Staff Noted Areas of Concern *Block A: 1) 12,000 sf(retail) Terry Buick demolished included in retail square footage. 2) 2,500 sf(retail) omitted Block B: Okay Block C: Okay Block D: Okay Block E: Okay *Block F: 1) 8,250 sf(retail) demolished - included in retail square footage. *Block G: 1) Included 1,000 sf office as existing square footage - (demolished) 2) Included 2,200 sf as 2,500 sf office. Block H: Okay *Block I: 1) Included 10,575 sf as 10,000 sf. office. a� OCTOBER, 1993 IBI REPORT DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN (Building Square Footage Analysis) Entitlement RETAIL RESTAURANT OFFICE TOTAL BLOCK A 12,000 20,000 10,000 42,000 (Coultrup) BLOCK B - D -0- -0- -0- -0- BLOCK E* 19,000 0 0 19,000 (Third Block West) BLOCK F* - I -0- -0- -0- -0- SUBTOTAL: 31,000 20,000 10,000 61,000 GRAND TOTAL: ,000 *Staff Noted Areas of Concern: 1) Block E - 8,000 sf square footage office omitted. 2) Block F - 13,200 sf Trainer/Gym omitted. �5 OCTOBER, 1993 IBI REPORT DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN (Building Square Footage Analysis) Entitlement RETAIL RESTAURANT OFFICE TOTAL BLOCK A: 12,000 20,000 10,000 42,000 (Coultrup) BLOCK B: -0- -0- -0- -0- BLOCK C: -0- -0- -0- -0- BLOCK D: -0- -0- -0- -0- BLOCK E: 19,000 -0- 8,000 27,000 (Third Block West) BLOCK F: 13,200 -0- -0- 13,200 (Trainer) - BLOCK G: -0= -b= _ _ -0- -0- BLOCK H: -0- -0- _ -o-- -0- BLOCK I:* -0- -0- -0- -0- SUBTOTAL: 44,200 20,000 18,000 82,200 GRAND TOTAL: Ulm Of *10,575 Art Center included in miscellaneous category. OCTOBER, 1993 IBI REPORT DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN (Building Square Footage Analysis) Y , Existing Square Footage to be Demolished as Part of New Construction (Entitlement) Block A: 26,800 Block E: 25,163 Total: 51,963 Entitlement: 82,200 Demolished: 51,963 Net Increase: 30,237 OCTOBER, 1993 IBI REPORT DOWNTOWN MASTER. PLAN (Building Square Footage Analysis) Anticipated RETAIL RESTAURANT OFFICE TOTAL BLOCK A 5,000 6,414 0 11,414 BLOCK B 13,375 8,000 0 21,375 BLOCK C 0 13,738 0 13,738 BLOCK D 0 3,600 0 3,600 BLOCK E 0 0 0 0 BLOCK F 24,200 4,000 13,000 41,200 BLOCK G 15,000 0 0 15,000 BLOCK H 2O,000 0 0 20,000 BLOCK I 0 0 0 0 SUBTOTAL: 77,575 35,752 13,000 126,327 GRAND TOTAL: 126,327 (Excludes 10,575 sf Art Center) + 10.575 136,902 K� OCTOBER, 1993 IBI REPORT DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN (Building Square Footage Analysis) Existing/Occupied RETAIL RESTAURANT OFFICE TOTAL BLOCK A: 16,550 3,750 -0- 20,300 BLOCK B: 49,258 17,793 11,000 781051 BLOCK C: 37,365 30,785 22,175 90,325 BLOCK D: 24,073 5,000 2,431 31,504 BLOCK E: 7,625 -0- 4,500 12,125 BLOCK F: 15,000 -0- 12,825 27,825 BLOCK G: 13,700 -0- 5,700 19,400 BLOCK H: 24,500 -0- 2,250 26,750 BLOCK I: 2,500 7,946 10,000 20,446 SUBTOTAL: 190,571 65,274 70,881 326,726 GRAND TOTAL: 326.726 SF 0 OCTOBER, 1993 IRI REPORT DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN (Building Square Footage Analysis) Existing/Vacant* RETAIL RESTAURANT OFFICE TOTAL BLOCK A: 2,500 -0- 4,000 6,500 BLOCK B: 12,326 5,980 5,000 23,306 BLOCK C: -0- -0- -0- -0- BLOCK D: -0- -0- 569 569 BLOCK E: 8,538 -0- 4,500 13,038 BLOCK F: -0- -0- -0- -0- BLOCK G: 7,300 -0- -0- 7,300 BLOCK H: 5,500 -0- -0- 5,500 BLOCK I: -0- -0- -0- -0- SUBTOTAL: 36,164 5,980 14,069 56,213 GRAND TOTAL: 56.213 *Excludes vacant square footage under construction OCTOBER, 1993 IBI REPORT DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN (Building Square Footage Analysis) Under Construction RETAIL RESTAURANT OFFICE TOTAL BLOCK A: 13,953 2,798 30,299 47,050 (Abdelmuti) BLOCK B: -0- -0- -0- -0- BLOCK C: 4,250 9,100 4,200 17,550 (Mulligan) BLOCK D: -0- -0- -0- -0- BLOCK E: -0- -0- -0- -0- BLOCK F: -0- -0- -0- -0- BLOCK G: -0- -0- -0� -0- BLOCK H: -0- -0- -0- -0- BLOCK I: -0- -0- -0- -0- SUBTOTAL: 18,203 11,898 34,499 64,600 GRAND TOTAL: 64,600 OCTOBER, 1993 IBI REPORT DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN (Building Square Footage Analysis) Entitlement RETAIL RESTAURANT OFFICE TOTAL BLOCK A: 12,000 20,000 10,000 42,000 (Coultrup) BLOCK B: -0- -0- -0- -0- BLOCK C: -0- -0- -0- -0- BLOCK D: -0- -0- -0- -0- BLOCK E: 19,000 -0- 8,000 27,000 (Third Block West) BLOCK F: 13,200 -0- -0- 13,200 (Trainer) BLOCK G: -0- -0- -0- -0- BLOCK H: -0- -0- -0- -0- BLOCK I:* -0- -0- -0- -0- SUBTOTAL: 44,200 20,000 18,000 82,200 GRAND TOTAL: 82" �� *10,575 Art Center included in miscellaneous category. OCTOBER, 1993 IBI REPORT DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN (Building Square Footage Analysis) Anticipated EXISTING PROPOSED DIFFERENCE BLOCK A: 3,500 5,000 1,500 (+) BLOCK B: 17,125 15,500 1,625 (-) BLOCK C: -0- -0- -0- BLOCK D: -0- -0- -0- BLOCK E: -0- -0- -0- BLOCK F: 19,575 19,700 8,425 (+) BLOCK G: 15,700 19,700 4,000 (+) BLOCK H: 32,250 20,000 12,250 (-) BLOCK I: 21,021 21,021 -0- TOTAL: 109,171 109,221 50 OCTOBER, 1993 IBI REPORT DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN . (Building Square Footage Analysis) Anticipated EXISTING PROPOSED DIFFERENCE BLOCK A: 127 Main L5-QQ 5.000 1.500 (+) BLOCK B: 116 Main Street 2,500 2,500 0 118 Main Street 2,500 2,500 0 120 Main Street 2,875 2,500 375 (-) 122 Main Street 1,250 2,500 1,250 124 Main Street 2,125 2,500 375 126 Main Street 5,875 3,000 2,875 (-) BLOCK C: -0- - -0- -0- BLOCK D: -0- -0- -0- BLOCK E: -0- -0- -0- BLOCK F: 316 Olive 3,575 5,000 1,425 (+) 318 - 328 Main Street 11,000 18,000 7,000 (+) 315 Third 2,500 2,500 -0- I 305 Orange 2,500 2,500 -0- OCTOBER, 1993 IBI REPORT DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN (Building Square Footage Analysis) Anticipated EXISTING PROPOSED DIFFERENCE BLOCK G: 401 Main Street 7,700 7,700 -0- 405 Main Street N/A 4,000 4,000 (+) 411 Main Street 3,300 3,300 -0- 417 Main Street 2,500 2,500 -0- 419 Main Street 2,200 2,200 -0- BLOCK H: 410 - 440 Main Street 32,250 20,000 12,250 (-) 504 Main Street BLOCK I: 520 Main Street 5,280 5,280 -0- 522 Main Street 2,666 2,666 -0- 526 Main Street 2,500 2,500 -0- 538 Main Street 10,575 10,575 -0- '�h Downtown Specific flan City Council Sub-Committee December 14, 1993 4:30 FM The following is a list of issues which were raised at the December 6, 1993 City Council meeting: 1. 5hould we reduce our minimum parcel pize in all dit5trict5? 2. to 2,500 square foot minimum lot Size and Single family dwellings acceptable in District 2? 3. 5hould we abandon units per acre measure to determine density and substitute F.A.R.? 4. Boundary changes on 5th Street... What 5hould we do commercial or residential? 5. Should we delete incentives for block consolidatione? a. How about partial block consolidations? 6. Public Open Space/Plaza'o - should they remain given the reduced intensity? 7 5creening of parking lots, is it needed. 8. Concept of build to line versus Setback, clarify. 9. More precise definitions of a. Floor Area Ratio (F.A.R.). b. Gro55 Site. c. Net Site. 10. Why is District 4 - 35 DU/net acre? 11. District 7 not addressed, 5hould it be Scaled down? 12. How realistic are the p arkino Structure sites? 13. Alley widths, Should they be 24 feet or 28 feet? What is the minimum that is acceptable? 14. Live entertainment in District 6, is this a new use? 15. What is the feasibility of a parking structure on the Terry site? HZ:kjl 7� 01/25/94 2 (k1031) 1. Why do we need this specific plan now? The downtown is done basically-all the big properties with opportunities for consolidation are built. 2. What would happen if we didn"t get this plan approved? 3. What are all the ramifications of the Redevelopment Area for the downtown expiring in 1994? 4. Why is the downtown being separated above apd below Orange? 5. Why as of the October 25, 1993 City Council meeting did staff recommend that every property above Orange be fully parked onsite? 6. 350" from the parking structure is a figure referred to in the specific plan as well as 4501 . Wheredid these numbers come from? Could the City adopt any numbers? 7. Where the buildout number come from? 8. If the revised shared parking plan is not passed is the City going to need to build a parking structure to accomodate the development you have already approved? 9. Where are each of Abdelmutti's spaces for parking in his permanent and temporary. plan. Isn't his permanent parking required to be in place prior occupancy permits are granted? Is his permanent parking in place for the square footage he now has open? 10. Is the code being permanently changed to reflect the changes in the shared parking plan? .� J DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN (SHARED PARKING) The Duwntown is almust completed. All the large cuninlerciel parcels have projects tl;Iat have either been built or approved. All that is left are small commercial parcels with little or no opportunity for consolidation. The City needs to design a plan that wil I encourage these small property owners to develop their property in order to finally finish the redevelopment of Downtown Huntington Beach. Keeping in mind that council is dealing with individual small remaining parcels, we recommend the following: 1 . All exsisting commercial buildings and their uses shall be considered parked in the "PUBLIC PARK 1146 SUPPLY" with none of the private parking, that may be located on the site, taken into consideration. In the event a property owner tears down his/her exsisting building and rebuilds a ne'vy building of the same square footage and use no new narking will tie required. [this is what the parking study says] 2. Any expansion of the square footage or the increase of intensity of any exsisting commercial building in districts 1 thru 6 must be parked to the new parking code as follows: A. The property owner shall recieve credit for any exsisting onsite private parking spaces. This credit shall apply to tree expansion and/or the increase of intensity of use. B. Any additionally required parking shall be paid through the in-lieu parking fee. [This gives the few remaining property owners the incentive to replace their old buildings with new buildings at no additional cost to the city] 3. The parking requirements shall be the same in districts 1 thru 6 both north and south of Orange Ave. [This will allow for better continuity of development and create a more equitable environment for commercial competition throughout the downtown] v- 4. Take the square footage lids off of the uses and let the downtown be market driven. Any use allowed in the Specific Plan may not be denied on the basis of parking or a synthetic limit on square footage . (This concept does not cost the city any money. It allows a variety of uses to come into the Downtown and will allow more tax revenue to be generated into the City] The numbers that have been used as a basis for limiting the uses are only guesses at bast.] [ City Government cannot dictate what uses in what numbers will constitute a sucessful downtown. Only private enterprise can do this over a period of years and through trial and error. What is sucessful today may not be sucessful tommorrow]. (Let the private entrepeneur, willing to invest his own money and take all the risk , decide what uses, allowed by the specific plan, should be built] 5. The reduction in the parking requirement shall become the new City Parking Coda required for all exsisting and future commercial development located in the Downtown and shall be incorporated into the Downtown Specific Plan and the Downtown Parking Master Plan within districts 1 thru 6. EXAMPLE As an example; if we are reducing from the code required 3,000 Public Parking spaces down to the exsisting 1 ,500 Public Parking spaces, which represents a 50% reduction in the code required parking , a new per use code, similar to the one below, should be written. USE CURRENT CODE NEW REDUCED CODE commercial 1 space per 200 ft 1 space per 400 ft restaurant i space per 100 ft 1 space per 200 ft office 1 space per 250 ft 1 space per 500 ft The above is the form in which the council and the property owners need to see the code written. The code needs to be developed from real and accurate information and presented in a manner that is easy to read and understand. Not one that is subject to interpretation. A percentage reduction based on inaccurate facts is what you have been asked to vote on thus far. I� It is imperative that the committee have the real numbers to wort: from in determining the actual percentage of reduction that the shared parking concept will give us. These numbers should not be tainted with parking spaces that are not real Public Parking Spaces, such as the 58 spaces, on block 105 that will be wiped out with the construction of a condo project, or the 12 spaces that are identified on the second block of third street that are located on private property and surrounded by a chain link fence or the 25 spaces that are located on the third block of third street that are for the private use of the office building located there or the many other parking spaces that have been improperly counted. These numbers will determine the new parking code requirements for all remaining development.in downtown. Without an accurate number, the city cannot know what the real parking problem is. The City will not be able to establish a new parking code that is based on fact. The City may not be able to defend an inaccurate position at the Coastal Commission hearings. The city needs to get it right. We need the correct information in order to formulate the correct and accurate code that everybody in the future will be expected to build to. To accomplrsn this goal we suggest the committee direct a staff / citizens group: A. To furnish the committee with an updated, accurate count of the Public Parking Supply. B. To furnish the committe with and updated, accurate count of the exsisting,under construction, and approved amount of commercial square footage, and their uses, in the entire downtown area. [PUBLIC PARKING SPACES: shall be those spaces that are located in a Parking Strucure, or on a street or lot that is owned and/or operated and/or maintained and/or control led by the "CITY" and are available to the General Public) [ PRIVATE PARKING SPACES: shall be those spaces that are located on private property and are owned, operated, maintained and controlled by a private property owner] *With the exception of Pierside Pavilion. These reccomendations are an attempt to really solve the problems that exsist downtown. They were not made just to get us out of the current parking delema. They have been well thought out by property owners and business people in an attempt to make the entire downtown truly sueessful for everyone. IN LIEU FEES The CITY of HUNTINGTON BEACH is facing a parking dilemrna in the Downtown Redevelopment Area. By allowing development to occur over and over again in this area without the developer being required to provide (to some lashon) a minimal amount of parking, the City must initiate a number of creative maneuvers in order to relieve the situation 01 face the reality that the Downtown is finished. A few of the creative maneauvers are 1. the reduction (down 2,oninq) in building square footage to be allowed in future development, AKA, The NEW Downtown Specific Plan. ? The reduction in the required parking, AKA, The Downtown Parking Master Plan ( or .,hared parking concept). 3. The In-Lieu Parking Fee. 4. i'loratorium on all development It is the "In-Lieu Parking Fee" that we will be discussing here tonight. Before we start, it must De understood that the "In-lieu Parking Fee" and the "Downtown Parking Master Plan" go hand in hand and to split them up may spell disaster for the Downtown in the long run. The "In-Lieu Fee", in and of itself, does not solve nor does it relieve the public parking problem, unless the funds are used to provide additional parking. In addition when coupled with a reduction in the public parking requirement the "In-Lieu Fee" may serve to compound the problem. To understand the the effect of the "In-Lieu Fee" we must first understand the reasons for iniating such a drastic action. "The Downtown Area" based on " exsisting" or "under construction" commercial square footage is required by code to provide in excess of 3,000 parking spaces. As shown in the IBI Group Downtown Parking Master Plan Review, there are approximately only 1 ,700 Public Parking Spaces available in the Downtown area at the present time. This is a shortage of approximately 1 ,300 public parking spaces or a shortage of approximately 43% of the required amount. I would like to make an attempt, at this point, to differentiate between Public Parking and Private Parking, as it is quite important to the future of the "Downtown" to understand this all important point. Public Parking is that parking that is available, at all times, for use by the General Public to enjoy the many features Downtown Huntington Beach has to offer; such as shopping, attending the movies, dining, strolling along the beach front or on the pier or just enjoying the natural ambiance of this wonderful area . It is Parking that is controlled by the City of Huntington Beach with respect to use, cost, time, maintanance etc.. Private Parking, on the other hand, is that parking that is to be used for a specific purpose or tenant. It is controlled by the Individual property owner or tenant with respect to use, availability, cost, maintainance etc.. It is generally located on private property. It is parking that is not open to the General Public. Vy, a' ti The 43% shortage of Public Parking as previously mentioned is, at this time, only an estimate. The .exact number Public Parking spaces are still not available to the "Council" or to the Public. Nor is the Lace number of commercial square footage and use available. Without these numbers we are still shooting in the dark as to solutions to our parking problem. It is only with an exact count, of these numbers, that we can mak a reasonable adjustment in the coda required parking to facilitate the parking requirements of "The Downtown PARK1140 MASTER PLAN Without the exact count it is impossible to realize the real reduction that the city is making in the "PARKING CODE". IT IS THIS REDUCTION THAT WILL CONTROL THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF THE "DOWNTOWN". STEP ONE in finding of an answer to our parking problern would ssem to be to obtain air i xL count of the "PUBLIC PARKING SPACES", as defined above, on a blocs: by block basis that are available as real Public Parking. This should be an easy enough task for the Planning State and a number that could be had in just a few days. These numbers should not be tainted with parking spaces that are not real public narking spaces, such as the 58 spaces on block 105 that will be wiped out with the construction of a condo project, or the 12 spaces that are identified on third street that are located on private property and surrounded by a chain link fence or the 25 spaces that are located on the third block of third street that are for the private use of that office building or the many other parking spaces that have been counted erroneasly. We need a real count of the real public parking spaces so we may grasp the true magnitude of our problem. These numbers need to be readily available so we may find true solutions to correct the problem. STEP TWO would be to identify the exact number of commercial square footage and use on a block by block basis. The IN -LIEU FEE does not, in and of itself, solve the parking problem, unless it is used to provide real parking. Otherwise the In- Lieu Fee is only an onerous property tax. One that, improperly implemented, may restrict future business opportunities and/ or development in the downtown area. The In-Lieu Fee, if implemented, should be fair. Fair to the downtown merchants, fair to the property owners and fair to the city, In order to be effective "the In- Lieu Fee" should be used only in the development of new parking facilities. SOME OF THE IMPLEMENTING FEATURES MAY INCLUDE: 1 . The fee,that is to be charged to the property owner or merchant, shall not exceed $2,000.00 per required space. This would seem to be a fair taxation. One that would not unduly restrict the future of the Downtown. This is an amount above which has already been established by the city. *SEE ATTACHMENT A 2. If the implementation of the IN-Lieu Fee was due to simply a change of use. ( ie) commercial to restaurant. The fee would become immediately due and payable either in cash or in some type of payment form negotiated with the city. 3. If the implementation of the In-Lieu Fee was due to new construction the In-Lieu Fee would be paid entirely through the tax increment due to the city. This would not put any undue burden on the City and would help to encourage the development of new buildings within the Downtown Area. In addition it would not put any undue burden on the property owner who wishes to develop his/her property. 4. L/KEK/NU business to business transfers located on the same parcel and/or suite shall be permitted. *SEE ATTACHMENT B S. The In-Lieu Parking fee applies go-nly to private property development not to pub iciy owned land, unless developed for private and/or profitah/e gain. * SEE ATTACHE LENT C 6. In the event a new public parking facility is not constructed, that meets the parameters of the 'Downtown Specific Plan / Downtown Parking Master Plan, within 5 years from the implementation of such fee all funds may be returned to the property owner with interest. Any tax increment money will return to the city. 7. Credit for any and all IN-LIEU payments made by a property owner shall run with 'the property' and be transferred to any subsequent purchaser of 'the property. 8. All fees shall be used for the development of new parking facilities. 9. The fee shall be based upon the reduced parking requirements that are indicated by the shared parking concept. d IP� . � IN CONCLUSION: The IN-LIEU FEE, as proposed, is nothing more than an unjust property tax and as such ony puts additional tax burden on the property owner. The city needs to realize that this fee, as proposed , is not in the best interest of the city as it will only inhibit growth. The best thing that could happen to the City is that the small property owners would develop their properties in order for the City to realize the additional income it would recieve from the TAX INCREMENT that would be generated over the next 30 years from such development. If the in-lieu fee is too high ,very few people, if any will use it. The in-lieu fee, if implemented, must only be used for the development of new parking facilities and not for maintenance of exsisting parking or for any other use. There are so many other factors that must be taken into consideration. A1 C01111ENTS ON CHANGES PAGE =9 1. Change Huntington Beach Ordinance Code to Downtown Parking Master Plan This change allows all of the Downtown Businesses to be governed by the same set of codes. 2. 4.2.04 Change from an overall height to a net height. This slight modification, which does not cause any significant change in the overall height, will allow the space in between floors to be used for items such as plumbing and sewer lines, heating and air conditioning ducts, wood and/or steel beams, electrical wireing, etc, without lowering the hieght of the rentable or livable space. it will also allow for some flexability in the event codes governing these and other items such as earthquake codes may be changed or modified. PAGE 0 12 1. 4.2. 13 Change from Huntington Beach Ordinance Code to Downtown Parking Master Plan This change allows all of the Downtown businesses to be governed by the same set of codes. PAGE -;11 14 1. COMMERCIAL a. Include district 02 There are some exsisting commercial uses in district -v2 that should be governed by the same parking parking rules as the rest of the Downtown. b. Change 350' to walking distance. This allows for greater flexability in the development of downtown Huntington Beach. c. Include the In-Lieu Fee as a method of providing parking for new or exsisting commercial developments. This makes sense due to the fact the City is going to pass an In-Lieu Fee program. d. Eliminate the need for screens on parking facilities that face only an alley. It makes no sense to screen a parking facility that only faces an alley —t — PAGE -v15 1. 4.2. 14 a Eliminate decorative masonary walls or berms etc. from parking lots that face only an alley. There is no reason to decorate a commercial parking lot that faces only an alley. PAGE u 16 1 . 4.2. 15 a Add that there must be a Public Hearing required to close Main Street. It only makes sense that the Downtown Business Owners and Property Owners would want to add some input if the City was going to close Main Street for any reason. 2. 4.2. 16 Change access Ways from 30' in the Commercial Districts to 20'. It has been proven over and over that a twenty (20) foot alley way is sufficient for the passage and operation of fire equiptment. More than that is over kill. Include that no one property owner shall required to provide more than one half ( 1 /2) of the total alley dedication from his/her side of the alley. It would be totally unfair if one property owner had to make the entire dedication to widen an alley. PAGE #26. 1 . 4.4.01 Include Single family residences in this district. This makes sense in this district as there is little ,if any, block consolidation that can occur in this district. 2. 4.4.03 Allow that a duplex may be built on a 25' lot if there is enough square footage. Some of the lots in this district are 163' deep and are capable of providing two units quite comfortably. This modification is consistant with allowing four (4) units to be built on fifty (50) feet of frontage. -- 2 PAGE #27 4.4.07 Allow for enclosed tandem parking in this district. The concept of tandom parking will ehance this district. By allowing enclosed tandom parking, development becomes less complicated more simplified and more effecient. Tandom parking has already been fe fectivly used in other areas of downtown development. 4.4.08 Eliminate the word additional and make clear who is to dedicate. Again, no one property owner shall be required to provide more than his/her fair share of the alley dedication. PAGE 'v41 . 4.7.01 EXPAND PERMITTED USES TO ALLOW FOR MORE CONSISTANT USES IN EACH DISTRICT ( STILL SUBJECT TO A C.U.P.) This minor modification is more consistant in trying to provide a downtown that is visitor and resident serving. It still leaves the controls with the City while eliminating a bunch of unecessary red tape. PAGE -v43 4.7.01 (d) Eliminate continuation from first floor. If we are to have a commercial district uses that are allowed on the first floor should be allowed on the second floor as well. if they will not work there I am sure that no one will want to put it there in the first place. r PAGE -v45 4.7.08 CHANGE ALLEY WIDTH FROM 30' TO 20' AND MAKE CLEAR WHO IS TO DEDICATE. All we really need is a twenty (20') foot alley width and again no one person should be required to provide more than his/her fair share of the alley dedication. 4.7. 10 CHANGE PARCELS HAVING 100' TO 'INTERIOR PARCELS HAVING MORE THAN ONE HUNDRED FIFTY ( 150) FEET. It does not make any sense for the small property owner in the middle of the block to be forced to provide 10% of their small property for public open space. the buildings that will be built will be built in order to provide service to visitors and or residents. This requirement is ok for a large development but places an undue hardship on the small property owner. i 4A A r-Jb,'C r� 4 "\ t TO : Huntington Beach City Council FROM : Bob and Connie Mandic RE : Downtown Specific Plan - District #6 The following are changes we believe should be incorporated into the Downtown Specific Plan for District #6. We have reviewed the document carefully and also employed an architect and construction engineer to ctitique it. We have also reviewed our proposed changes with other property owners in District #6 and they are in agreement. FOREMOST, when considering these changes, please keep in mind that they apply to remainder parcels that will not have block consolidation. The amount of development remaining in District #6 will have a small impact on the overall downtown but a large impact on individual small property owners. Below are explanations of each change we recommend. We have provided you a copy of the Specific Plan pages that provide specific wording for recommended changes. 1. Pg. 14 Commercial (a) In District #6 noone above Orange can meet the 350' walking distance to a parking structure requirement that is currently in the Specific Plan. Therefore, it should be modified to read just "walking distance". This requirement was passed when the city anticipated building additional parking structures downtown. Above Orange property owners should be given the same right to pay an in lieu fee as those property owners below Orange. If only property above Orange is required to provide all parking onsite, there is no way any of us will ever be able to build new and compete with property below Orange that was given parking in the structure, grandfathered or allowed to pay in lieu fees. 2. Pg. 16 4.2.16 Existing curb cuts along Main Street should be allowed to be used for new development. This is very important to merchants in our district. Since District #6 is supposed to be resident serving we intend to put some con- venience parking on site for commercial uses along Main Street. People are not likely to go around back to an alley to hunt for a parking place behind a building. Also, the uses farther up Main Street need all the help they can get to be successful. We need the right to retain existing curb cuts along Main Street to give access to some convgnience parking. The access onto Main has not been a problem throughout the years and should not be in the future. There are no existing curb cuts in the first blocks. The third block only has one curb cut at the U.S. Post Office, which is used by employees and trucks. Above Orange has a curb cut at Townsquare that serves residents of the townhomes and all residential and commercial under- ground parking. The Art Center is on the fifth block and has a curb cut into the brand new parking lot the city just redid and did not eliminate in favor of alley access. The precident is already set and we feel necessary for the future success of the upper areas of Main Street. Q 3. Pg. 48 and 49 We recommend you remove some of the restrictions off uses allowed since they are all subject to a CUP anyway. Many of the uses in District #6 have been eliminated that we believe are resident serving such as: appliance store auto accessory/repair existing bakeries savings and loans barber, beauty and manicure shops 2 existing, 1 Townsquare catering Suzanne's coin, stamp & art dealers department store dry goods and notions fruit & vegetable store furniture store gift & party shop hobby supply ice cream parlor jewelry store exists Townsquare meat or fish market market millinery newspaper or magazine store office supply photographic studio photographic sales shoe store stationery store tailor shop travel agency undertaker exists dance studio dog & cat grooming exists Many uses in areas seem in appropriate such as Hardware Store, Drug Store, Savings & Loan and Dry Cleaning being uses identified in District #1 at PCH and Main when they seem more appropriate in District #6. Beach Co. property in District #7 has basically unrestricted uses. All uses permitted should include New Construction, Establishment or Change of use and not differentiate between categories. 4. Pg. 50 The Floor Area Ratio for less than block should be 1.5. The way it is currently written at 1.25 for less than z block unfairly "targets" the small . _:.-, prop.owners who own over 100' but far less than hZ block. The change from gross to net and 6 stories to 3 stories has already restricted development. But to further reduce FAR severely devalues property. 1.25 is the lowest density downtown and was written when you were trying to encourage small property owners to consolidate. Now, there is no incentive for block con- solidation. These are small parcels and eliminating l .or 3 units makes a big difference to a small owner trying to make a project pencil out with no government subsidy. 5. Pg. 9A & 50 4.8.04 Maximum Building Height Building professionals have told us that due to new codes on earthquake, air ducting, fire sprinklering, heat and air conditioning etc. the height requi- rement needs to be measured between floors to allow flexibility to provide for the room it takes to accomodate these things between floors. Builders have indicated that current code is too tight and the proposed code is worse. The city loses by sacrificing quality features in a building. With our rec- ommendation, the tallest building allowed would be 4 stories on a full block but there would just be some flexibility for necessary inclusions between floors. This is not an attempt to get a taller building, but to get the code correct . 6. pg. 51 4.8.08 Setback Rear Yard Need to add "Structures may be cantilevered to rear property line". This is something allowed in other districts and may be an oversight here. 7. Pg. 50 4.8.08 The alley width should be 201 . The existing alley is 15' and has functioned well thruoghout the years. We have been told by fire professionals that no fire dept. would ever put fire apparatus in an alley where buildings are tall enough to fall on the apparatus. Therefore even a 30' alley would not be used by fire trucks in a serious fire. Also the adopted State Fire Code states that 20' is the required width for an alley. Additional footage unreasonably penalizes small property owners. 30' alley width downtown is unrealistic in District #6. The Art Center andthe Edison buildings and several other buildings are not moving and you will never get alley dedication. 20' is wider than you have now and is reasonable. 8. Pg.51 4.8.09 Setback Upper Story This is a very large setback. You didn't get this setback on big buildings where it should have been required. But this is now being imposed on small remainder parcels. We recommend 10' from the 2nd story facade. This conforms to other districts like #5 downtown that are similar to ours and require the front of the buildings to be within 5' of the property line. 9. Pg. 55 Open Space Parcels having more than 150' should provide open space. 10% of a small parcell is too much. In District #6 the idea is to get the buildings up to the street to continue the commercial street scene. This is contrary to that goal. The 150' number will encompass all the small interior lots while still providing opportunities for plazas on the corners. l� TPl be l P, elA& 100% HAND WASH a o ANUARY 30 , 1994 HOWARD ZELEFSKY DIRECTOR OF PLANNING CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 200 MAIN STREET HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 ` DEAR HOWARD, IT HAS COME TO MY ATTENTION THAT THE CITY COUNCIL IS CONSIDERING DOWN ZONING AREA 2 . I BECAME KNOWLEDGEABLE OF THIS BY ACCIDENT, WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY INFORMATION REGARDING THIS MATTER AND WE OWN SEVERAL PROPERTIES THAT WOULD BE SERIOUSLY AFFECTED BY THIS ORDINANCE. PLEASE PASS THIS INFORMATION ON TO THE COMMITTEE AND TO MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL. WHY HAVEN'T I BEEN NOTIFIED OF THIS? IF I DID RECEIVE INFORMATION, IT APPARENTLY DID NOT EXPLAIN IN ENOUGH DETAIL WHAT THE EFFECT WOULD BE. I AM SURE THAT EVERYONE ELSE WHO OWNS 10 OR MORE UNITS DOESN'T QUITE UNDERSTAND THE EFFECT OF THIS ORDINANCE, JUST BY THE MERE FACT THAT NO ONE HAS SHOWN UP FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING. LET ME EXPLAIN IN DETAIL WHAT THIS DOES TO ONE OF MY PROPERTIES. I OWN A 15 UNIT APARTMENT AT 124 - 8TH STREET, SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 8TH AND WALNUT. THE 15 UNIT SITS ON 5 LOTS. 8TH 25 X 115 W A L N U 1 2 3 . 4 6 T l i IN A' MEETING WITH HERB FAULAND, HE CALCULATED THAT IF I HAD TO REBUILD UNDER THIS NEW ORDINANCE, I WOULD ONLY BE ALLOWED 11 UNITS. 125 X 115 = 14 , 375 SQUARE FEET 43 , 560 35 = 1 , 244 . 5 SQUARE FEET 14 , 375 1 , 244 . 5 = 11 . 5 UNITS THIS MEANS I CANNOT SELL MY PROPERTY NOR CAN I REFINANCE IT, BECAUSE THE BANKS WOULD ONLY FUND A VALUE OF 11 UNITS. THE ABOVE SCENERIO HOLDS TRUE WITH ALL OTHER UNITS OF 10 OR MORE IN ZONE 2 THAT IS BEING CONSIDERED FOR THIS ORDINANCE. OTHER CITIES HAVE TRIED THIS WITHOUT GIVING THE EXISTING PROPERTIES THE ABILITY TO REBUILD AS-IS, AND HAVE CREATED SLUMS IN THOSE AREAS. THE REASON FOR SLUMS IS THAT PROPERTY OWNERS FACED WITH THIS PROBLEM DO NOT, I REPEAT DO NOT TAKE CARE OF THEIR PROPERTY AND LET THE PROPERTIES RUN DOWN BECAUSE THEY ARE IN A LOSE-LOSE SITUATION. "I ASK YOU WHAT WOULD YOU DO FACING THIS UNBELIEVABLE SITUATION?" IF YOU MUST DOWN ZONE THIS AREA, PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE GRANDFATHER US AND ALLOW US TO REBUILD AS-IS. THE REASON I FOUND OUT ABOUT THIS IS I REQUESTED A $300 ,000 LOAN ON MY 124 8TH STREET BUILDING TO DO EXTENSIVE REMODELING TO ENHANCE THIS BUILDING AND MY LENDER BROUGHT THIS TO MY ATTENTION TELLING ME I COULD NOT GET THE LOAN. I AM SURE THAT THE INTENT OF COUNCIL IS NOT TO CREATE SLUMS BUT TO ENHANCE OUR CITY. IF THIS ORDINANCE GOES THROUGH, OBVIOUSLY I WOULDN'T GET THE LOAN BUT I WOULD ALSO BE CRAZY TO PUT ANY MONEY INTO ANY OF MY PROPERTIES. PLEASE CONSIDER THE ABOVE BEFORE YOU ACT. A VERY CCERNED CITIZEN AND LOCAL BUSINESSMAN, A. URSINO ARU/clw I ALL: CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS / CITY ADMINISTRATOR CITY CLERK 1 RECEiVEG Ulf CLERK HUNTINGT(lk ' FFEB 25 TO:City Council Members FROM: Michael Tater SUBJECT: DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN CODE AMENDMENT #92-5 DATE : January 31 , 1994 Dear City Council Members i am writing to inform you of some items I brought up at the Subcommittee meeting dated January 27 , 1994. 1 spoke in regards to my disagreement with the proposed Dist 5 boundary change, as I have stated in my letters to you dated September 27 , 1993 and December 4, 1993. Grace Winchell asked me specifically what I had against the boundary change moving me from Dist . 5 to Dist 4. 1 responded my site coverage would go from no maximum site coverage to only 50% site coverage. My front yard setback would go from 5 feet to 15 feet . My side yard setback would go from 0 feet to 5 feet . My 3rd story setback would go from 10 feet to 25 feet . My allowable height would go from 40 feet to 35 feet. My allowable zoning would go from mixed-use commercial /office/residential to mixed-use office/residential thereby denying my commercial usage. With all those new setbacks , by forcing me in a new district without commercial , I would only be left with a chopped up small project to build . It would be worth only a small fraction of what it is worth as currently in Dist . 5 . At this meeting Roy Richardson (planning commissioner) said that one private citizen was the only driving force to change my blocks boundaries to Dist . 4 from Dist. 5 . Roy Richardson, Grace Winchell , and Ralph Bauer all agreed that my block should not be changed to Dist. 4 , and the boundaries for Dist . 5 in the Spec . Plan dated Nov . 1983 should remain intact. At this meeting I also brought up my concern that my property was not included in the IBI Report for the downtown parking plan . Si Water ra 14 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION Date February 22,1994 Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members Submitted by: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrator Prepared by: Melanie Fallon, Community Development Director *454 Subject: CODE AMENDMENT NO. 92-5/DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN REWRITE "VILLAGE CONCEPT" AND PARKING MASTER PLAN C or✓T o)EN Consistent with Council Policy? [X] Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception To 312 y Statement of Issue,Recommendation,Analysis,Funding Source,Alternative Actions, Atta� s: STATEMENT OF ISSUE: Transmitted for City Council consideration is Code Amendment No. 92-5 the Downtown Specific Plan rewrite commonly referred to as the "Village Concept" and Parking Master Plan. The City Council has held three meetings(August 30, 1993, October 11, 1993 and December 6, 1993)to discuss the details of the plan. RECOMMENDATION: Motion to: " Continue Code Amendment No. 92-5, the Downtown Specific Plan rewrite and Downtown Parking Master Plan to the City Council Meeting of March 7, 1994." ANALYSIS: At the December 6, 1993 meeting, the City Council opened the public hearing, took public testimony, and formed the Downtown Specific Plan Subcommittee which consists of Council Members Grace Winchell, Ralph Bauer, Dave Sullivan, and City staff. The City Council continued the public hearing to the meeting of February 22, 1994. A T TA C H M CIV 'r o F® ` RCA 2/22/94 PAGE TWO The Committee has met on seven occasions to discuss the details of the Specific Plan/Parking Plan and allow public participation. The Committee has not reached a consensus on all the issues of the Specific Plan/Parking Plan and has agreed to hold one final meeting to receive comments. FUNDING SOURCE: Not applicable. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: Take public testimony on Code Amendment No. 92-5 and continue to the City Council meeting of March 7, 1994. ATTACHMENTS: 1. RCA dated December 6, 1994 MTU:MF:HZ:44(</ REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION Date: December 6, 1993 Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members Submitted by: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrator Prepared by: Ray Silver, Assistant City Administrator \PA Howard Zeiefsky, Planning Director Subject: CODE AMENDMENT NO. 92-5/DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN REWRITE "VILLAGE CONCEPT" AND PARKING MASTER PLAN Consistent with Council Policy? [X] Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception Statement of Issue, Recommendation, Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attachments: STATEMENT OF ISSUE: Transmitted for City Council consideration is Code Amendment No. 92-5 the Downtown Specific Plan rewrite commonly referred to as the "Village Concept" and Parking Master Plan. The City Council has held two meetings (August 30, 1993, and October 11, 1993) to discuss the details of the plan. RECOMMENDATION: Motion to: "Approve Code Amendment No. 92-5, the Downtown Specific Plan rewrite and Downtown Parking master Plan as recommended by the Planning Commission." ANALYSIS: AttAched for City Council review is a newly formatted version of the Downtown Specific Plan. The Council requested, at a previous study session, that the staff develop a more readable copy of the document. Also attached is a building area analysis that can be used to supplement the Downtown Parking Master Plan. At the previous Council workshops, binders were distributed which included: downtown history, Downtown Specific Plan RCA, annotated changes, Downtown Parking Plan, letters from the public and Design Guidelines. The purpose of this public hearing is to receive public input, review the staffs presentation on the significant changes proposed in the Downtown Specific Plan. Two amendments to the Downtown Specific Plan need to be highlighted for the City Council's information. The first is in reference to revisions clarifying the requirement for commercial activities on the ground floor of all buildings fronting Main Street and Pacific Coast Highway in District 3. Specifically, Section 4.5.01 (a), Permitted Uses, *Note, and Section 4.5.01 (c) are being revised (page 31 of the reformatted document). The Coultrup Development Group has indicated that these revisions will result in an inconsistency between the Downtown Specific Plan and their approved project at the corner of Pacific Coast Highway and Main Street. The second item is that the revised document does not reference in-lieu parking fees (Section 4.2.13[f] on page 14 of the reformatted document). On October 25, 1993, the City Council approved Resolution No. 6522, which established an in-lieu parking fee for uses within the Downtown Specific Plan area. The fee is $400/Space, to be paid on an annual basis for up to fifteen years ($6,000 total). The City Council directed staff to prepare an ordinance to implement the in-lieu parking fee program. The ordinance will be brought back to the Council as an amendment to the Downtown Specific Plan after Planning Commission action and the public hearing process. Tentative public hearing dates are early 1994. FUNDING SOURCE: Not applicable. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: Continue action on Code Amendment No. 92-5 to the December 20, 1993, City Council meeting. ATTACHMENTS: 1. RCA dated September 7, 1993 2. Reformatted Downtown Specific Plan 3. Downtown Parking Master Plan Building Area Analysis MTU:HZ:kjl (k1024) RCA - I P 15,'93 2 (k1025) REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION Date: December 6, 1993 Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members Submitted by: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrato Prepared by: Ray Silver, Assistant City Administratora(L��� Howard Zelefsky, Planning Director h Subject: CODE AMENDMENT NO. 92-5/1)OWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN REWRITE "VILLAGE CONCEPT" AND PARKING MASTER PLAN Consistent with Council Policy? [X] Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception Statement of Issue, Recommendation, Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attachments: STATEMENT OF ISSUE: Transmitted for City Council consideration Is Code Amendment No. 92-5 the Downtown Specific Plan rewrite commonly referred to as the "Village Concept" and Parking Master Plan. The City Council has held two meetings (August 30, 1993, and October 11, 1993) to discuss the details of the plan. a i RECOMMENDATION: `_ Motion to: � T z o "Approve Code Amendment No. 92-5, the Downtown Specific Plan rewrite and C Downtown Parking master Plan as recommended by the Planning Commission." CA ANALYSIS: Attached for City Council review is a newly formatted version of the Downtown Specific Plan. The Council requested, at a previous study session, that the staff develop a more readable copy of the document. Also attached is a building area analysis that can be used to supplement the Downtown Parking Master Plan. At the previous Council workshops, binders were distributed which included: downtown history, Downtown Specific Plan RCA, annotated changes, Downtown Parking Plan, letters from the public and Design Guidelines. The purpose of this public hearing is to receive public input, review the staffs presentation on the significant changes proposed in the Downtown Specific Plan. Two amendments to the Downtown Specific Plan need to be highlighted for the City Council's information. The first is in reference to revisions clarifying the requirement for commercial activities on the ground floor of all buildings fronting Main Street and Pacific Coast Highway in District 3. Specifically, Section 4.5.01 (a), Permitted Uses, *Note, and Section 4.5.01 (c) are being revised (page 31 of the reformatted document). The Coultrup Development Group has indicated that these revisions will result in an inconsistency between the Downtown Specific Plan and their approved project at the corner of Pacific Coast Highway and Main Street. The second item is that the revised document does not reference in-lieu parking fees (Section 4.2.13[f] on page 14 of the reformatted document). On October 25, 1993, the City Council approved Resolution No. 6522, which established an in-lieu parking fee for uses within the Downtown Specific Plan area. The fee is $400/Space, to be paid on an annual basis for up to fifteen years ($6,000 total). The City Council directed staff to prepare an ordinance to implement the in-lieu parking fee program. The ordinance will be brought back to the Council as an amendment to the Downtown Specific Plan after Planning Commission action and the public hearing process. Tentative public hearing dates are early 1994. FUNDING SOURCE: Not applicable. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: Continue action on Code Amendment No. 92-5 to the December 20, 1993, City Council meeting. ATTACHMENTS: 1. RCA dated September 7, 1993 2. Reformatted Downtown Specific Plan 3. Downtown Parking Master Plan Building Area Analysis MTU:HZ:kil (k1024) RCA - 11/15/93 2 (k1025) REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION Date SeptAmhPr 7 . 1993 .omitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members Submitted by: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrator Prepared by: Michael Adams, Director of Community Development Subject: CODE AMENDMENT NO. 92-5/DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN REWRITE "VILLAGE CONCEPT" AND PARKING CONCEPT Consistent with Council Policy? Nff Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception Statement of Issue, Recommendation,Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attachments: STATEMENT OF ISSUE: Transmitted for City Council consideration is Code Amendment No. 92-5 the Downtown Specific Plan rewrite commonly referred to as the "Village Concept" and Parking Master Plan. On July 7, 1993 the Planning Commission approved Code Amendment No. 92-5 with the Parking Master Plan and recommended its adoption to the City Council RECOMMENDATION: Motion to: "Approve Code Amendment No. 92-5 the Downtown Specific Plan rewrite and the Downtown Parking Master Plan as recommended by the Planning Commission. " ANALYSIS• History In February, 1991, the Department of Community Development submitted a Downtown Master Plan concept paper to the City Council for discussion. A series of study sessions were then held with the Planning Commission and City Council to solicit input and receive direction on the potential changes to the Downtown Specific Plan. On May 20, 1991, the City council directed staff to prepare a code amendment that would implement the changes that would result in the "Village Concept" . In the period just prior to these meetings, the Main Pier Phase II project (Abdelmuti) transitioned from the discussion stage to the negotiation stage ' (December, 1990) . It became evident at that point that on-site parking would not be accommodated in the Abdelmuti phase of Main Pier Phase II . This discussion became the genesis for the Downtown Parking Master Plan which is the subject of another report . In September , 1992 , the Planning Commission conducted their first hearing on the Downtown Specific Plan. In the course of the next ten (10) months the Planning Commission held eleven ( 11) public hearings, sponsored two (2) public workshops at the art center and received feedback from three (3) chamber of commerce meetings attended by staff . Due to the extensive public review process, the Downtown Specific Plan update has been significantly modified from its original presentation. on October 24 , 1992 , the staff presented the Downtown Specific Plan to an Urban Land Institute Plan Analysis session at their national conference . A team composed of economists, developers, architects, city planners, and market research experts from around the country evaluated the City of Huntington Beach draft Downtown Specific Plan. The Committee did not reach a consensus as to the specifics of our plan but did agree we were headed in the right direction. They believed that a mixed use concept that is pedestrian oriented and supported by residential development could be successful . However, the Urban Land Institute strongly recommended that the Redevelopment Agency should first acquire all the property necessary before commencing with a project . The Village Concept The Downtown Master Plan emphasizes the ocean, ocean activities, forms, shapes and colors . The Downtown Master design concept must concentrate on the City pier, realizing that all other areas within the Downtown are linked either directly or indirectly to the pier . The level of energy and excitement generated at the pier-head area needs to be capitalized upon and spread throughout the Downtown core. The pier area has the potential to accommodate a great deal of activity by offering a variety of uses and services . However, developments at the pier should also be scaled to a pedestrian level with passive activities given equal consideration with more vigorous activities . Pedestrian boardwalks on various levels and the pier itself will offer views of the ocean and ocean activities . The overall form and shape of all development in Downtown Huntington Beach should allow people to see the ocean from as many places as possible. The pier area will continue to serve as the major attraction in the City and should become the major activity node for the Downtown area. The Master Plan identifies the pier-head and the area immediately - across Pacific Coast Highway from the pier as the focus for the greatest intensity of future activity and development. The interdependence of public and private development activities can create this major activity node at the pier-head. RCA - 9/7/93 -2- (7320d) Principle No. 6 - Create Functional Linkages People must be able to walk between activity centers . Pedestrian connections should link the Downtown' s major anchors and should connect the core area with adjacent neighborhoods . Principle No. 7 - Build a Positive Identity Retailing, culture, entertainment, recreation and special events programming, create an identity for a downtown. The question which is raised after examining these principles is how do they translate into practical development standards which accurately reflect a village concept for Huntington Beach. The seven principles above apply to almost any successful downtown. The key to a village concept is to achieve them in a less intense, less urban atmosphere, with a greater sense of pedestrian scale. Within these parameters we recognized the need to find a balance between competing forces which influence the type of development proposed. The intent in recommending the changes has always been protecting and serving residential neighborhoods, while still allowing for the expansion of visitor/tourist activities. We also recognized the need to develop both a nighttime and, daytime population that thrives during all seasons of the year. Significant Changes During the course of the ten (10) month public hearing process, the Planning Commission approved key changes to the Downtown Specific Plan. The majority of these changes are endorsed by staff. However, there are some changes that we believe need to be re-examined by the City Council before final approval of the code amendment. The areas where we disagree with the Planning Commission will be discussed later in this report. The following is a summary of the most significant changes proposed: CURRENT DOWNTOWN PROPOSED CHANGES APPROVED SPECIFIC PLAN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION Density Calculations Based on Gross Site Area Net Site Area *Alley Widths 30 feet 24 feet r RCA - 9/7/93 -4- (7320d) It is important to emphasize the development of this node and encourage this activity to extend up Main Street inland from the ocean and to encourage pedestrian movement along the street . By expanding this activity from the pier, the commercial core along Main Street can become a lively shopping thoroughfare oriented to pedestrians and offering opportunities to shop, dine or browse in an ocean-related atmosphere. There has been some confusion as to how the village concept is defined. The definitions that are available in the literature are abundant and diverse. The Urban Land Institute (ULI) has identified seven principles which help to create a village. Principle No. 1 - Promote Diversity of Use The basic objective in revitalizing the downtown economy is to attract more people more frequently and hold them as long as possible by creating a variety of reasons to come and to stay. Principle No. 2 - Emphasize Compactness The downtown should be compact and walkable, with a tight physical structure and an efficient spacing arrangement. Principle No. 3 - Foster Intensity a Development densities should establish downtown as the community' s central place. But care is required to ensure that new large scale projects do not overwhelm Downtown' s existing character or market potential. Principle No. 4 - Ensure Balance Day and evening as well as weekday and weekend activity generators should be interspersed to capitalize on the full economic development potential of a multi-use approach. Principle No. 5 - Provide Accessibility A clear emphasis on pedestrian use must be established in the downtown core if walking and street activity are to be encouraged. A positive balance between vehicular and pedestrian use of the street must be established. RCA - 9/7/93 -3- (7320d) CURRENT DOWNTOWN PROPOSED. CHANGES APPROVED SPECIFIC PLAN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION Height Max. 8 stories 4 stories in certain districts Min. Parcel Size 5,000 - 10,000 sf 2, 500 sf in all districts depending on district Floor Area Ratios Max. 3 . 5 in certain 3 . 0 max. districts Boundary Changes District l - between 6th-9th Streets will allow commercial activity. This boundary change requires a Coastal Element Amendment. District 4 - Amended to include Walnut to Orange between 5th Street and Alley now becomes part of District 5 . District 6 - Residential permitted on 3rd and Lake Streets. *Landscaping Requires greater number of trees that are smaller in size. Lot Consolidation Provides density and Minimizes incentives for height bonus for larger lot consolidation parcels New Provisions - Incentives for Affordable Housing - Recognition of historic properties - School mitigation impact provision *This denotes an area of disagreement with the Planning Commission RCA - 9/7/93 -5- (7320d) As discussed previously, there are minor areas of disagreement between the Planning Commission action and staff ' s recommendation. The first issue relates to alley width. Staff believes that a minimum of 28 feet is needed for a commercial alley to ensure adequate clearance for emergency vehicles (see Attachment No. 1) . The second area of disagreement involves the new landscaping provisions (4 . 2 . 14) which requires a greater number of trees that are smaller in size. The Department of Public Works has prepared a comprehensive response to this proposed revision which is included as Attachment No . 2 . Conclusion The downtown area has long served as an area of mixed uses and activities . This area contains the City' s initial commercial core and the original residential neighborhoods; along with the recreational and oil production resources which have contributed to the City' s identity. The downtown is comprised of a number of very distinct areas. The transitional area surrounding the downtown core should ensure a gradual coordinated change in terms of heights, scale and uses, between Main Street and the adjacent residential areas . Main Street should continue to serve as a commercial core with an emphasis on retail activities, however, an option for office, residential or additional retail activities above the first floor can be allowed. This multi-use aspect is intended to create a lively place to be day or night for both visitors and residents . Main Street and Pacific Coast Highway should maintain a pedestrian-oriented shopping street character . Commercial uses should be required on the ground floor with building fronts close to the sidewalk to establish a more intimate scale. In order to afford the visual, climatic and recreation amenities of this unique area to a greater number of people, medium residential densities should be provided. Offices should be encouraged to locate in this district in order to help establish the desired downtown atmosphere. The commercial emphasis on Main Street can be achieved with varying intensities, providing the commercial link between Orange Avenue and pier along Main Street is not broken at the pedestrian level . This district should encourage rehabilitation as well as new development . the larger scale new development should not detract from smaller infill projects, rehabilitation and new development should be scaled and designed with this intent. RCA - 9/7/93 -6- (7320d) The Downtown Master Plan proposes to continue this combination of uses and activities with designations which provide for mixed-use activities . The mixed-use designation is intended to encourage but control a variety of uses . FUNDING SOURCE: Not applicable. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: Continue action on Code Amendment No. 92-5 and the Downtown Parking Master Plan until October 4, 1993. ATTACHMENTS: 1 . Diagram of Alley Widths 2. Public Works Comprehensive response to the proposed revision on landscaping provision S.4 .2. 14 MTU:MA:HZ :kjl RCA 9/7/93 -7- (7320d) 4.0 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS 4.0.01 Intent and Purpose The purpose of this document is to provide for orderly development and improvement Within the Downtown Specific Plan. The plan is established to guide the development of the area which is characterized by its unique location, geographic features, land uses and ownership patterns, and should not be regulated by zoning district standards applicable throughout the city. This specific plan will replace the existing zoning with policies, development standards and descriptive maps specifically designed for the downtown area. The specific plan provides for creativity at the individual project level, and at the same time ensures that developments will ultimately combine to create a cohesive community. Only paragraph 4.0 et seq., "Development Standards", shall be certified as part of the Local Coastal Program. 4.0.02 Downtown Specific Plan Boundary The property described herein is included in the Downtown Specific Plan and shall be subject to policies and development standards set forth in this article. Precisely, the Downtown Specific Plan includes the real property described as follows: 10 AFFAUHOIENT NO. . l Downtown Master Plan Revised 10/93 Beginning at the most northerly corner of Lot 22, Block 122 of the Huntington Beach Seventeenth Street Section Tract, as recorded in Book 4, page 10 of Miscellaneous Maps, records of Orange County, State of California; thence northerly 50 feet approximately to a point, said point being the intersection of the centerlines of Goldenwest Street and Walnut Avenue; said point also being the true point of beginning; thence southwesterly along the centerline of Goldenwest Street and its prolongation to a point on the high tide line of the Pacific Ocean; thence southeasterly along said high tide line to a line parallel with and 72.50 feet northwesterly, measured at right angles, from the southwesterly along said high tide line to a line parallel with and 72.50 feet northwesterly, measured at right angles, from the southwesterly prolongation of the centerline of Main Street; thence southwesterly along said line 1,470 feet approximately to a line parallel with heretofore said high tide line; thence southeasterly along said line 145 feet approximately to a line parallel with and 72.50 feet southeasterly, measured at right angles, from said southwesterly prolongation of the centerline of Main Street; thence northeasterly along said line to the heretofore said high tide line to the prolonged survey centerline of Beach Boulevard; thence northerly along said survey centerline of Beach Boulevard 2800 feet approximately to the south line of Tract 9580, as shown on a map recorded in Book 444, page 31, records of Orange County, State of California; thence westerly along said line 1995 feet approximately to the centerline of Huntington Street; thence northerly along said centerline 1320 feet approximately to the centerline of Atlanta Avenue; thence westerly along said centerline 857 feet approximately to the centerline of Lake Street; thence northerly along said centerline 2352 feet approximately to the centerline of Palm Avenue; thence westerly along said centerline 332 feet approximately to the centerline of Sixth Street; thence southwesterly to the centerline of Walnut Avenue; thence northwesterly along said centerline 5547 feet approximately to the true point of beginning. 4.0.03 Organization This section details the development standards for projects in the Specific Plan area. The section includes 1) regulations affecting administration and permitting, 2) general requirements for all projects of a certain size or type, 3) particular requirements for projects within the different Districts and 4) overlays which permit special uses in select areas. 4.0.04 Definitions The following definitions shall apple to the Downtown Specific Plan. Terms not described under this section shall be subject to the definitions contained in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. Bolsa Chica State Beach: The area seaward of Pacific Coast Highway extending from the Huntington Beach City Pier northwest to Warner Avenue. The portion of this beach from the pier to Goldenwest Street is within the boundary of the Downtown Specific Plan. Build-to-line: A dimension which specifies where the structure must begin. For example, "build-to-5"', where the structure must extend to five feet of the lot line. Do«zitown Master Plan 2 Revised 10/93 Common open space: Any part of a lot or parcel unobstructed from the ground upward, excepting architectural features extending no more than thirty (30) inches from the structure and excluding any area of the site devoted to driveways and other parking areas. Director: The Director of the Department of Community Development. FNLfs' Development: The division of land, the construction, reconstruction, conversion, structure alteration, relocation or enlargement of any structure. .VL{f' Demolition: The deliberate removal or destruction of the frame or foundation of any portion of a building or structure for the purpose of preparing the site for new construction or other use. Facade: The main face of front of a building. Feasible: Capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, social and technological factors. Floor Area Ratio (FAR): A number which indicates how many square feet of structure can be built on a site, expressed as a multiple of the gross building site area. For example, if a site is 5,000 square feet in area and the FAR is 2.0, the square footage of a building cannot exceed 10,000 gross square feet(2 X 5,000). Fronting: Any lot or portion of a lot which abuts an arterial shall be considered to front on that arterial and shall comply with the required front yard setbacks, whether or not the development on that lot actually takes access from the arterial. Full : A parcel of property bounded on all sides by public streets. Gross site area: The area within the lot lines of a parcel of land before public streets, alleys, easements or other areas to be dedicated or reserved for public use have been deducted. Half block: A parcel of property bounded on all sides by public streets and/or alleys containing at least one-half(1/2) the net area of the full block. DC/CfC Ue: l,t. The yeFtieal distance above the highest adjacent street level _measur-ed to tl,e aver-age height of the highest . abie of a pitehed or- r- hipped e ' NLti Height: See Section 4.2.04. Hotel: A building designed for or occupied as a temporary abiding place which contain guest room units. 3 Downtown Master Plan Revised 10/93 Net site area: The total horizontal area within the property lines of a parcel of land exclusive of all rights-of-way or easements which physically prohibit the surface use of that portion of the property for other than vehicular ingress and egress. Private open space: The area adjacent to a dwelling unit which has direct access in the form of a patio or balcony. Public open space: Public open space may include one of the following: open air commercial (open to the street on the first floor, or on at least one side, above the first floor, or open to the sky), patios, plazas, balconies, gardens or view areas accessible to the public. The open space requirement can be met anywhere in the development; however, open space provided above the second floor will receive only fifty (50) percent credit toward this requirement. This requirement cannot be met by open areas Delete which are physically inaccessible to the public. New Recreational Vehicle: A travel Trailer, pick-up camper or motorized home with or without a mode of power and designed for temporary human habitation for travel or recreational purposes. Residual parcel: A legal lot which does not meet the requirements for a building site within the District in which it is located, and where the abutting sites are already developed. Right-of-way (ROW): That portion of property which is dedicated or over which an easement is granted for public streets or alleys. Semi-subterranean parkin: Parking structure which is partially recessed into the development site, and which may or may not support additional structures above (e.g. dwelling units, tennis courts, or parking structures). Setback: A stipulated area adjacent to the lot lines which must be kept free of structures over forty-two (42) inches high. Street level: The elevation measured at the centerline of the public street adjacent to the front setback at a point midway between the two side property lines. Suite Hotel: A building designed for or occupied as a temporary abiding place which contain guest rooms and may contain kitchenettes and a separate living room for each unit. Townlot: The area and parcels bounded by Pacific Coast Highway on the southwest, Goldenwest Street on the northwest, Palm Avenue on the north and northeast, and Sixth Street on the east and southeast. Wetland: means lands within the coastal zone which may be covered periodically or permanently with shallow water and include saltwater marshes, freewater marshes, open or closed brackish water marshes. swamps, mudflats and fens. Ultimate right-of-way: The most lateral edge of the area dedicated for street or alley purposes. Downtown Master Plan 4 Revised 10/93 4.1 ADMINISTRATION 4.1.01 Approvals Required All development within the Downtown Specific Plan shall be subject to one or more of the following, as identified in each district: a Conditional Use Permit , and/or the Design Review Board provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. All physical development shall be required to be reviewed by the Design Review Board prior to processing additional entitlements if required. The Historical Resources Board shall provide recommendations for structures considered to be historically significant. In addition, a Conditional Use Permit shall be required for any residential cooperative subdivision, mixed-use development, or any project which requires a special permit (Section 4.1.02). The Design Review Board, Planning Commission or the City Council shall also consider the following before approving a project: (a) Projects shall be in conformance with the adopted Design Guidelines for the area. (h) Architectural features and general appearance of the proposed development shall enhance the orderly and harmonious development of the area or the community as a whole. (c) Architectural features and complimentary colors shall be incorporated into the design of all exterior surfaces of the buildings in order to create an aesthetically pleasing project. (d) Particular attention shall be given to incorporating signs, including their colors, into the overall design of the entire development in order to achieve uniformity. (e) Vehicular accessways shall be designed with landscaping and building variation to eliminate an alley-like appearance. 4.1.02 Special Permit The Downtown Specific Plan development standards are designed to encourage developments creating an aesthetically pleasing appearance, enhancing the living environment, and facilitating innovative architectural design and adaptation of the development to the unique surrounding environment. 5 Downtown Master Plan Revised 10/93 Deviations from the development regulations of this Specific Plan, may be granted at the time of project approval for unique architectural siting or features, including but not limited to parcel size, building height, site coverage, setbacks, open space and landscaping. A special permit may not be granted for deviations from maximum density or parking requirements or deviation for building heights in Districts 1, 2, 4, 10 and 11 or from requirements of the Conservation Overlay. Such deviations shall only be allowed when, in the opinion of the Planning Commission, significantly greater benefits from the project can be provided than would occur if all the minimum requirements were met. Some additional benefits which may make a project eligible for exemptions include: greater open space, greater setbacks, unique or irkpovative designs, public parking, public open space, and the use of energy conservation or solar technology. The developer may request a Special Permit at the same time as the filing of an application for a Conditional Use Permit and shall be heard concurrently. The Planning Commission may approve the Special Permit in whole or in part upon a finding that the proposed development, in addition to providing greater benefits as required above, will also: (a) Promote better living environments; (b) Provide better land planning techniques with maximum use of aesthetically pleasing types of architecture, landscaping, site layout and design; (c) Not be detrimental to the general health, welfare, safety and convenience of the neighborhood or City in general, nor detrimental or injurious to the value of property or improvements of the neighborhood or of the City in general; and (d) Be consistent with objectives of the Downtown Specific Plan in achieving a development adapted to the terrain and compatible with the surrounding environment. (e) Be consistent with the policies of the Coastal Element of the City's General Plan and the California Coastal Act. (f) Comply with State and Federal law. 4.1.03 Coastal Permit Developments within the Downtown Specific Plan area will be subject to the requirements pertaining to Coastal Development Permits (CDP), in addition to the other provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. Downtown Master Plan 6 n,..,:--A 1 AIM 4.1.04 Severability If any section, subsection, sentence,clause, phrase,or portion of this title, or any future amendments or additions hereto, is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this title, or any future'amendments or additions hereto. The Council hereby declares that it would have adopted these titles and each sentence, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase,or portion or any future amendments or additions thereto, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, clauses, phrases, portions or any future amendments or additions thereto may be declared invalid or unconstitutional. 4.1.05 Appeals Decisions by the Director on non-zoning matters may be appealed to the City Administrator; decisions on zoning matters may be appealed to the Planning Commission and City Council. .l� 7 Downtown Master Plan Revised 10/93 4.2 GENERAL PROVISIONS The general provisions of this article shall apply to all developments within the Downtown Specific Plan area wherever the size or type of development proposed would make such provisions applicable. All development shall comply with all existing standard plans and specifications and all applicable provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance and Municipal Codes. 4.2.01 Permitted Uses. Permitted uses shall be established in each District and shall_be required to meet all applicable provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. In addition, the following shall apply: (a) All structures incidental and accessory to a permitted principal use or structure may be erected on any parcel containing a main building provided that such structure(s) not exceed fifteen (15) feet in height nor to be closer than ten (10) feet to any other structure on the same parcel and shall conform with all setback requirements of the District. Exception: Parking structures are excluded from this provision. (b) Parcels which, prior to the effective date of this ordinance, had an oil suffix (0,01) and are identified in Figure 4.14. shall retain such suffix in combination with the new zoning designation "Downtown Specific Plan" (see Section 4.14). (c) Parcels which, prior to the effective date of this ordinance, had a Mobile home District (MH). shall retain such designation in combination with the new zoning designations in the "Downtown Specific Plan" serving as an overlay, for the effected Districts (see Section 4.16). (d) All non conforming uses or structures, or uses which have been abandoned for A'ew more than six (6) months, shall be required to meet all applicable provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code in each of the following: Any expansion of floor area greater than ten (10) percent; increase in height; or an increase in the permitted density shall require a conditional use permit and shall be required to comply with all applicable provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. Deviations to development standards (except parking and density) shall be subject to special permits. Downtown Master Plan 8 RFvicPrl 10/91 •j Exception: Any building alteration, rehabilitation or facade improvement which does not exceed ten (10) percent expansion of the existing floor area; does not increase the height; or result in an increase in permitted •. density. The Design Review Board shall review and approve any proposed exterior modifications: Any change of use, expansion of use, or change-In occupant to a use which would require additional off street parking shall provide the required off street parking according to the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. 4.2.02 Minimum Parcel Size. A minimum parcel size shall be established in each District. A waiver of this requirement may be granted by the Director for residual parcels. In addition, the following minimum floor areas shall apply to all residential dwelling units, except affordable units (see Section 4.2.29): Minimum Floor Unit Type Are (SQ. FL) Bachelor and single 450 One (1) bedroom 650 Two (2) bedrooms 900 Three (3) bedrooms 1100 Four (4) bedrooms 1300 4.2.03 Maximum Density/Intensity. The maximum allowable density and/or intensity (Floor Area Ratio) shall be established in each District. 4.2.04 Maximum Building Heieht. The maximum allowable building height shall be established in each District. In addition, the following shall apply: ..FD—ele-Wel (a) An additional ten (10) feet in height will be alle%Vd fer-Feef NfW tFeatfaeRf, maximumdeviees. 1R ne ease may the air-spaee granted feF these par-pEoses abev height limit be used as a habitable F.,e ffi Uele�e (b) An addit:, nal f,,,-tee„ (1 n) feet in height may be allowed for-ele.'MeF equ:....,..e.,t All fne,.t,anieal deyiees emeept for-selaF panels,.she-llbset t aek and s ..ed so that they eannet be seen f+em publie Fight ef way.&-. ��,.. (a) Commercial structures shall have a maximum of fifteen (15) feet for the first story and ten (10) feet for each additional story. Residential structures shall have a maximum of ten (10) feet for each story and subject to the following provisions. (b) An additional ten (10) feet in height will be allowed for roof line treatment, architectural features such as chimneys, solar energy equipment and mechanical devices. In no case may the air space granted for these purposes above the maximum height limit be used as a habitable room. f (c) An additional fourteen (14) feet in height may be allowed for elevator equipment. All mechanical devices, except for solar panels, shall be set back and screened so that they cannot be seen from public right-of-ways. m 9 Aowntown Master Plan Revised 10/93 4.2.05 Maximum Site Coverage. The maximum allowable site coverage shall be established in each District. Any part of the site covered by a roof, including covered walkways, patios and carports, shall be included in coverage. Exception: Subterranean or semi-subterranean parking less than forty-two (42) inches in height above the adjacent grade shall be subject to the provisions of Section 4.2.411{e3 New .13(b). 4.2.06 Setback(Front Yard). The minimum front yard setback shall be established in each District. In addition, the following shall apply: (a) No structure or portion of any structure shall project into or over the public ROW. New (b) The minimum front yard setback for parking lots and all parking structures above grade shall be ten (10) feet. Structures below 42 inches in height are not subject to this provision. (c) The minimum front yard setback for subterranean and semi-subterranean parking structures shall be subject to the approval of the Director and the Department of Public Works. The depth of the front yard setback shall be a minimum of five (5) feet. 4.2.07 Setback Side Yard). The minimum side yard setback shall be established in each District. In addition, the following shall apply: The minimum exterior side yard setback for parking lots and above grade parking structures shall be ten (10) feet. 4.2.08 Setback (Rear Yard). The minimum rear yard.setback shall be established in each District. 4.2.09 Setback (Upper Story). An upper story setback shall be established in each District. 4.2.10 Building Separation. No building shall be closer than ten (10) feet to any other detached building on the same site. 4.2.11 OpenSpace. A minimum public open space provision will be established in each District. In addition, the following open space requirements shall apply to all residential developments: (a) Common Open Space: All multi-family residential developments shall provide a minimum common open space equal to twenty-five (25) percent of the floor area of each unit with a minimum dimension of twenty (20) feet. Common open space shall be designed so that it enhances the appearance of the project to passers-by. In multiple unit subdivision developments, common areas shall be guaranteed by a restrictive covenant describing the common space and its maintenance and improvement, running with the land for the benefit of residents of the development. The developer shall file with the Department of Community Development for recordation with the final subdivision map, legal documents which will provide for restricting the use of common spaces for the designated purpose, as approved on the final development plan. All lands to be conveyed to the homeowner's association shall be subject to the right of the grantee or grantees to enforce maintenance and improvements of the common space. Downtown Master Plan 10 Revised 10/93 i 11 Downtown Master Plan Revised 10/93 (b) Private Open Space: All multi-family residential developments shall provide the following all ground floor units shall be provided with a patio area as set forth below. Minimum Area Min. Dim. Unit Tyne (Sq.Ft.) Bachelor, single or one (1) bedroom 200 10 Two (2)bedrooms 250 10 Three (3) bedrooms 300 10 Four(4) bedrooms 400 10 Units constructed above ground level shall be provided with balconies or sun decks as follows: Minimum Area Min. Dim. Unit Typg (Sa Ft.) ff-L) Bachelor, single or one 60 6 (1) bedroom Two (2), three (3), or 120 6 four (4) bedrooms Note: Private open space shall be contiguous to the unit and for the exclusive use of the occupants. Private open space shall not be accessible to any dwelling unit except the unit it serves. Private open space shall be physically separated from common areas by a wall or hedge at least forty-two (42) inches in height. The private open space requirement may be satisfied in whole or in part by areas used for outdoor activities which need not be open to the sky but must be open on at least one (1) side. 4.2.12 Multi-block Consolidations. Where consolidations span two (2) or more Districts, the requirements of each District shall apply to that portion of the development. Divisions between Districts shall be the center line of the vacated street. In addition, the following shall apply: (a) Visitor-serving commercial uses must be provided within that portion of the development designated as a visitor-serving District. (b) Commercial uses must be provided on the ground floor along Main Street. 4.2.13 Parking. All developments (except as provided in Section 4.2.29) will be required to Dclele meet the minimum off-street parking standards of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. in addition to the pafk. .. in the Huntington Beaeb Or-dinanee Code the fellewing shall app�y­ (a) PaFkiag fer multi family residential deN,elepments shall be pfevided at the Dwelling units fiet emeeeding ene (1) bedr-eem shall be pr-evided with en-e and o half(1 1 ) o site par- spaeeskinga of•.,1 ish shall beeeveF e.l and-enelesed: . z Downtown Master Plan 12 Revised 10/93 leleteDwelling units with twe (2) er mefe bedrpems shall be pfavided with twe (2) en site par-king spaces ene of whieh shall be 6evered and eneiese4, Guest nnr-L;ng shall he nreyided at a Fatie of one half(1/2) spare f.. eae unit Sueh par4ing may he , ..-dessed aind . wed All required padEing a nt guest «..-Ling shell he l.-.e ted within t. . hundred (' 09) feet of the dwelling unit ;t it designed to e ve_7K, Exception: Affordable housing projects may reduce the required on-site guest parking. The guest parking may be provided on-street or in a public parking facility within 350 feet of the affordable housing project, subject to a conditional use permit. Dcletc , 10 .,d 11 shall pr-ev;de one hundred (I GO)n nt of the requiFed pafking on site. Padeing fee n eewmeFeial deyele ffe.,t n eets „,;thin Dis4iets 3 and C shall par-king shall hen ,;ded ; a „hlie pafLin., facility :within walking dist..nee...mot issu..nee of., Gef4ifie to of ll......n..ney for-the new development. ser-eened en a her-izent_i F 1 d seFeening shall be at least five (5) feet high as Fneasur-ed f4em the j eA suFf$ a SeFeening shall a ist ..f appFeved by ;he DiFeetar-. " 1811 00% 1 8t1, 2411 - 1.77V 2411.66 362 2004 42"a d abe e 1 nnoi C r4in. . , n;thin the setbael•s shall he ehibited a' r- L eept fa _setba s along PC-14 inDStFiets 1 and 7 and ale f aiie CtF et in Distr-iet 6 indk4dual reside„t;el dFiveways will alse be exempt. 1i 13 Downtown Master Plan Revised 10/93 t by Delete e t gf'n., "in l;v„W' fee fee n :.ling pafki in a par-king fee:l:t., Said fen may be paid in two lments. The first installment : a festablished by •, aniroaiijc- City G '1 D el„tien fee eaek narking rnaee shall be paid p r_1g the issuanee of building pefmitsvref a-Eel`ifieate-ef-e6eupaney, whieheyer-eefRes first. The paFking spaee shall be paid at the time City an&er-a par-king autheAty er-Distrio eenstmepar-king stmeter-e in the De;,;,%teA% afea. n the seeend instal!Fneat-shall be filed with the City at the timee ible fik:-4.installment is ) if n t:., side eF efl Street parkin eu -�t shall be area and within walking distanee ef!he existing site. Replac-ement par4ifig shall be assuFed ., r to the issuanee of the eastnl d ' (h) WheFeveF a } of alley o Fi iraate driveway intefseets YAth a ,bl r: nto fight of ,r' the shall be a tr In afea elan.•of visual h f:em f C 1, tr:ang„lar hall have rl'relg�6f-f6fty-t•��'8-(4�)-iFkC�es-te-s e1�ei�-(�-fecz—yiicrrcrr�rgcr:sa-u=csa-aratsrrnct'c sides hi 1, .r ad a fninimum of twenty five (25) feats ,+ the beek of sidewalk aleng all publie streets and ten (IQ) feet aleng alleys er.pfivate dr-iveways-. 1 Commercial: (a) Parking for all commercial projects shall be consistent with the Downtown Parking Master Plan. Districts 1, 7, 9 shall provide one-hundred (100) percent of the required parking on-site. Parking in Districts 3, 4, 5, 6, and 10 shall be provided on-site to the maximum extent feasible or as modified in the Parking Master Plan: The balance of any required parking shall be provided in facilities within walking distance, not to exceed 350 feet. These off-site parking spaces shall be in place prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for any development. (b) All off-street uncovered surface parking spaces shall be screened. Screening shall be a maximum of thirty-two (32) inches high as measured from the adjacent parking surface. Screening shall consist of landscaping or landscaping combined with opaque materials, and must be approved by the director. 4.2.14 Landscaping. In addition to City standard landscape plans and specifications, the following shall apply: (a) All setback areas fronting on or visible from an adjacent public street, and all recreation, leisure and open space areas shall be landscaped and permanently maintained in an attractive manner and shall be consistent with the adopted Design Guidelines. �.3 Downtown Master Plan 14 (b) Permanent automatic electric irrigation facilities shall be provided in all landscaped areas. Delete trees shall be pr-e ided in all deyelopmentc_asfellews; eyrie (1) ;hil y . (36) ineh box tree fer- eaeh residential unk Ar fer eaeh 1,500 squafe feet of liet (36) ifieh box trees may he r ided.- FA'e- (c) On-site trees shall be provided in all developments as follows: One (1) thirty- six (36) inch box tree for each residential unit or for each 2,500 square feet of gross site area for commercial or office space. Alternatively, the following equivalent of thirty-six (36) inch box trees may be provided where feasible (except when palm trees are required). Seventy-five (75) percent of the total requirement shall be thirty-six (36) inch box trees and the remaining twenty-five(25) percent of such requirement may be provided at a ratio of one(1) inch for one (1) inch through the use of twenty-four (24) inch box trees. Additional trees and shrubs shall also be planted to provide a well-balanced landscape environment. Exception: Structures fronting on Main Street, Fifth Street and Third Street, with a required five (5) foot setback shall be exempt from this requirement. (d) A landscape and irrigation plan in conformance with the adopted Design Guidelines shall be subject to approval by the Director and the Department of Public Works prior to the issuance of building permits. (e) All parking lots shall provide a decorative masonry wall or landscaped berm installed in the setback area, all landscaping shall be installed within the parking lot area, in accordance with the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. Parking structures must all screen street-level parking areas from the public ROW. Such screening must be approved by the Director. The setback area shall be landscaped in accordance with the following guidelines and a landscape plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Director: ne�e/e r Dlert: ,ter: ,l shell inel„de at e minimum e ne (1) fifteen (15) .,Iles, e tree er l three (3) Five (5) galle n size s bs for ear.h seventy fi.,e (75-) ce uaFe feet e f landscaped aFea and at least `. a (1) th:rt.. six(36) ineh he-.x t e f r e eh e e hundred and fifty y (1 50) s o feet of landseape e Planting material shall include at a minimum three (3) five (5) gallon size shrubs for each seventy-five (75) square feet of landscaped area and at least one (1) thirty-six (36) inch box tree or palm for each one hundred and fifty (150) square feet of landscaped area where feasible (except when palm trees are required). 07A 15 Downtown Master Plan Revised 10/93 • f The setback area shall be planted with suitable ground cover. The landscaped area shall be provided with an irrigation system which conforms to the standards specified for landscaped medid-is by the Department of Public Works. All landscaping shall be maintained in a neat and attractive manner. 4.2.15 Street Vacations. The following conditions will apply to City vacation of streets and alleys for consolidation of parcels greater than one block in size. (a) Streets shall be vacated only after the City has analyzed the impacts on circulation patterns and determined that the vacation will not b%- detrimental. (b) Where streets are to be vacated, the cost of relocating all utilities shall be borne by the developer; the City Council may waive this requirement. (c) Any public parking lost by street vacations must be replaced either on or off site or through in lieu fees. Such parking shall be in addition to required parking for the proposed use. (d) Consolidations that require vacation of a portion of Main Street north of Orange Avenue shall provide a public plaza space that will enhance the Main Street corridor to the pier. The type of facility and its design shall be approved by the City. (e) At the discretion of the City, all or portions of Main Street may be used for a pedestrian mall. (f) Any development proposing the vacation of streets intersecting PCH in District 2 and District 3 shall provide a view corridor not less than the width of the former street between Walnut Avenue and PCH. No structures greater than five (5) feet in height shall be allowed within such view corridor. A pedestrian easement ten (10) feet wide shall be provided through the development generally parallel to the vacated street. 4.2.16 Access Way5.. The following standards shall apply to all vehicular access ways: (a) Developments abutting Pacific Coast Highway (PCH) and Main Street shall dedicate sufficient additional land along the alleys parallel to these rights-of-way so that the alleys have an ultimate width of thirty (30) feet in the case of commercial or mixed use developments, or twenty (20) feet in the case of residential only developments. Access to development shall be permitted from these alleys. Access to development shall not be taken directly from PCH or Main Street; new automobile curb cuts on these rights-of-way are prohibited. Exception: Larger than full block consolidations in District 1 are exempt from this provision. Downtown Master Plan 16 uP„c�P,� i ni4z (b) Private access ways shall have a minimum paved width of not less than twenty- eight (28) feet. An additional twelve (12) foot wide travel lane may be required in each direction of traffic flow into the development for a distance of one hundred (100) feet, where an access way intersects a local or arterial public street. (c) Private access ways exceeding one hundred fifty (150) feet in length but less than three hundred (300) feet in length, shall be provided with a turn-around having a minimum radius of thirty-one (31) feet. For those access ways exceeding three hundred (300) feet but less than six hundred (600) feet, there shall be provided a turn-around having a minimum radius of forty (40) feet or an inter tying loop circulation system. For those access ways exceeding six hundred (600) feet, there shall be provided an inter tying loop circulation system. 4.2.17 Liehfing. For developments of more than two(2) units, the developer shall install an on-site lighting system on all vehicular access ways and along major walkways. Such lighting shall be directed onto driveways and walkways within the development and away from adjacent properties. Lighting shall also be installed within all covered and enclosed parking areas. A lighting plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Director. 4.2.18 Outside Storage Space. Where a proposed residential development does not include a separate attached garage for each dwelling unit, a minimum of one hundred(100) cubic feet of outside storage space shall be provided for each such unit. 4.2.19 Sewer and Water Systems. Sewer and water systems shall be designed to City standards and shall be located underneath streets, alleys or drives. In no case shall individual sewer lines or sewer mains for a dwelling unit be permitted to extend undemeath any other dwelling unit. 4.2.20 iSi=. All signs in the development shall conform to the provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. Commercial signs in mixed developments shall not be intrusive to residential development or other uses and shall be consistent with the adopted Design Guidelines. (a) The placement of address numbers shall be at a uniform location throughout the development and shall be approved by the Director. (b) When appropriate, the developer shall install on-site street name signs at the intersections of access ways, as approved by the City Engineer. Street name signs shall also be approved by the Director for design and type and shall be consistent with the adopted Design Guidelines. All signs required by this section shall be installed at the approved locations prior to the time the first dwelling unit is occupied. 4.2.21 Refuse Collection Areas. In residential development, refuse collection areas shall be provided within two hundred (200) feet of the units they are to serve. In all developments, trash areas shall be enclosed or screened with a masonry wall, and shall be situated in order to minimize noise and visual intrusion on adjacent property as well as to eliminate fire hazard to adjacent structures. Residents shall be provided with collection areas that are separate.and distinct from the collection area of offices and other commercial activities. 17 Downtown Master Plan Revised 10/93 New 4.2.22 Vehicular Storage. Storage of boats, trailers, recreational vehicles (as defined herein) and other similar vehicles shall be prohibited unless specifically designated areas for the storage of such vehicles are set aside on the final development plan and, in the case of condominium developments, provided for in the association's covenants, conditions, and restrictions. Where such areas are provided, they shall be enclosed and screened from view on a horizontal plane from adjacent areas by a combination of a six (6) foot high masonry wall and permanently maintained landscaping. 4.2.23 Antennas. All roof top antennas are prohibited. 4.2.24 Utility Lines, All utility lines shall be undergrounded where possible. 4.2.25 Bus Turnouts. In commercial developments of one half block or more, dedication shall be made for bus turnouts as recommended by O.C.T.D. Any bus turnout so recommended shall be incorporated as part of the development plan. 4.2.26 Orange County Transit District Center. A transit center shall be located within proximity of the downtown area which will provide pedestrians access to the beach and retail services. 4.2.27 Homeowners' or Community Association. All multiple unit subdivision developments shall be approved subject to submission of a legal instrument or instruments setting forth a plan or manner of permanent care and maintenance of open spaces, recreational areas, and communal facilities. No such instrument shall be acceptable until approved by the City Attorney as to legal form and effect, and by the Department of Community Development as to suitability for the proposed use of the open areas. If the common open spaces are to be conveyed to the homeowners' association, the developer shall file a declaration of covenants, to be submitted with the application for approval, that will govern the association. The provisions shall include, but not be limited to,the following: (a) The homeowners' association shall be established prior to the initial sale of the last dwelling units. (b) Membership shall be mandatory for each buyer and any successive buyer. (c) The open space restrictions shall be permanent. 4.2.28 Compliance with certain requirements of the Coastal Zone (CZ) Suffix: . Projects shall comply with the following sections of the Coastal Zone Suffix: "Community Facilities"; "Diking, Dredging and Filling"; "Hazards"; "Buffer Requirements"; "Energy"; and "Signs" as identified in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. .y� Downtown Master Plan 18 Reviceri i n/9i NeK 4.2.29 Affordable Housing Residential projects that offer 50% of the units to persons and households earning between 80-100% of the Orange County Median Income as defined by HUD for a period of 30 years may be eligible for a reduction in the following development standards. Guest Parking- If determined by the Planning Commission that adequate excess public parking is available the Planning Commission may grant a maximum 100% waiver depending on size and location of project. Common Open Space - Maximum 70% reduction if replaced by private open space. (Roof decks may be used to satisfy a portion of this requirement.) Site Coverage- Maximum 75%. Height- Maximum four(4) stories in any district. Density - The Floor Area Ratio formula may be substituted for units per acre in each district. A maximum 1.0 Floor Area Ratio will apply to affordable projects. Minimum Unit Size - Studio 300 square feet 1 bedroom 450 square feet 2 bedroom 800 square feet It is the intent of these provisions to provide maximum design flexibility while still maintaining high quality design standards in exchange for affordable housing. Neµ 4.2.30 School Facilities: A school facilities impact mitigation and reimbursement agreement shall be a condition of approval for any subdivision, tentative tract, or parcel map within the Specific Plan. The agreement shall provide for the adequate mitigation of impacts on the elementary and/or high school district providing adequate funding of school facilities necessary to serve the student population generated by the proposed development. This condition may be waived by the Huntington Beach Planning Commission and will not apply to affordable housing projects as defined in the Specific Plan. 4.231 Historic Properties: The Historic Resources board shall provide recommendations for structures considered to be historically significant as identified in the City's 1989 Historic Survey to the Design Review Board and Planning Commission. y� 19 Downtown Master Plan Revised 10/93 L llu UU S� ACACIA 1111 11H U H LIU HU HU H UH llu I[ILI[ll`�� � � �f1Clfl []Il [P� O� [J� �1�7 �[IIJ�I �J�I �]�7C� �� 0� �]� � IIIIII_IC_��� � [�IJHtr� 1�=L"tgl JL-Jt;UL-jq-j" ,"" "UtV.4U"tt 11" Ll" "I I [ It ] Hull[ IIJI I �� 0[-1' �li�t4 �[�L[��[��7C�01��[��7C�Cl���`�II 9 IJ��� [�I�� 0UI t4U H �l� l�[�[l��Jl� f��] moo 00ouI io000000DoonSrio00000Lil � HUI ou J1 �I ' PACIFIC COASI HWY.'--m4K7j NEW MWOR SERVING COMMERCIAL NODEK PACIFIC OCEANtl mil" 0macce HUNTINGTON BEACH CALIFORNIA PLANNING DEPARTMENT DISTRICT 1 DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN 4.3 DISTRICT#1: VISITOR-SERVING COMMERCIAL Pose. This District is limited to three nodes fronting on Pacific Coast Highway (PCH) which are adjacent to medium and high density residential Districts. These nodes provide sites for commercial facilities to serve visitors to the City and State Beaches. The area between Goldenwest and 6th Streets will be primarily medium to high density residential. Residential uses will also be permitted in this District, as long as the necessary visitor-serving uses are included in the development. Boundaries. District#1 includes three nodes: The two blocks from Goldenwest to 21 st Streets, between PCH and the midline of the alley; the two blocks from 18th to 16th New Streets, between PCH and the midline of the alley; and the block from 9th to&h 6th between PCH and the midline of the alley. 3D Downtown Master Plan 20 Revised 10/93 4.3.01 Permitted Uses. 1Vew (a) New construction and establishment of the following uses in District#1 shal4 may be peEmitted allowed subject to the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. Change of use shall be subject to the approval of the Director. For Example: DeletcA-. Antique StOFes Aigallei-y $... Bakeries (tie more than seven (7) e . levees) Banks and savings and loans branch offices (no drive-up windows; not to exceed five thousand (5,000) square feet) Bicycle sales, rental and repair at and Fnaf ine supplies Bookstores Boutique E: Clothing stores Gain, stamp and w4 dealeFs Genf etio D: Delicatessens Drug stores Dry Cleaning 1-: Florists Fnair and getable stet-es G-. Game stores Gifts and paf4y shops Groceries (convenience) Hardware stores 1 1✓ Laundromats, Laundries 14- Marine Meat er- fish ..,aAets N-. Newspaper- and magazine ster-es Newsstands Neve l ties 9: Office 1z phetegFaphie studies :yeti Public Facilities Restaurants . 3t 21 Downtown Master Plan Revised 10/93 & Shoe stores Sporting goods F—e-w7_1 Service station minimum 14,000 square feet, no repair permitted no service bays Delete , TFe el ageney ,New Other related uses Delete , peF....:-red i Dist-iet 41 subject to a eyal of !`.,:-..Henan Use Do....... . A. A_ ede A„+.,.~...,bile . ee st.,tien M. ..Metels and He+el m P. De...na e.,t parking lets and parking st ietums Restaurants Res.dential Detail sale utdee. Vely (b) A change to the following uses in District#1 may be allowed subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit: Health and sports clubs Liquor Stores Live entertainment Permanent parking lots and parking structures Residential uses Restaurants Service station (c) Visitor-serving commercial uses must be a part of all development proposed in this District, with the following minimum requirements; for projects with less than a half-block of frontage, the entire street level must be devoted to visitor- serving uses; for projects with a half-block or more of frontage, either the entire street level, or at least one-third (1/3) of the total floor area must be devoted to visitor-serving commercial uses. �Z Downtown Master Plan 22 Rnv;CO-A I0/01 (d) Residential uses are allowed only in conjunction with visitor-serving commercial uses. The required visitor-serving commercial portion of any initial construction shall be provided prior to or at the same time as any residential portion. No residential unit shall be occupied until the required commercial portion is completed. Projects which are proposed to be phased must proportionately develop the commercial and residential concurrently. 4.3.02 Minimum Parcel Size. The minimum parcel size for development shall be 10,000 sq. ft. of net site area and one hundred (100) feet of frontage on PCH. Delete 4.3.03 Maximum De.,s:ty4ate.,s:t„ Them m allaw hle „„mbar of residential dwelling, units (du) shall inefease as par-eel size eases aeeerding to the f ll.,wing• Let Size Fre.+tn e\ N4ax:m„m d11s,,,,ahle Residential !l' up to but less 1 dWI700 sq. A of et lot areathan a half blesk halms f Week p to but 1 .a„ 350 sq. A. effiet lot area less than a full bleat,* ll hle� # 30 :..,its r,er Rr+SS affe * Alete Ge selidat: ofhleeks „Lists ,l s Distr:st_heundar:es shall her e to :ale site se.n,ing uses on the parief the emir, Distr st #1 l�'ew 4.3.03 Maximum Densij):/Tritc-naity. The maximum allowable number of residential dNvelling units (du) shall be twenty-five(25) per net acre. Floor Area Ratio 1.0. Delete 4.3.04 Maximum Building Height. The maximum building height shall be thif4y five (35) feet aiid-no more than three (3) stories. DeleteExeeption. The mwEiEnum building height feF fiall bleek pafeels §hall be fifty (50) fee4 and n mere than fe„r (4) ste 4.3.05 Maximum Site Coveraee. The maximum site coverage shall be fifty (50) percent of the net site area. 4.3.06 Setback Front Yard). The minimum front yard setback for all structures exceeding forty-two (42) inches in height shall be twenty-five (25) feet from Pacific Coast Highway right-of-way. This setback may be reduced to twenty (20) feet on up to fifty (50) percent of the frontage, provided that the average setback for total site frontage is not less than twenty-five (25) feet. The setback area shall be limited to landscaping only and shall be designed to be compatible with the Bluff Top Landscaping area located across Pacific Coast Highway. 33 23 Downtown Master Plan Revised 10/93 413.07 Setback (Side Yard). The minimum aggregate side yard requirements shall be as follows: (a) Interior side yard setback shall be twenty (20) percent of lot frontage total with not less than seven (7) feet on a side. (b) Exterior side yard setback shall be twenty (20) percent of lot frontage total with not less than fifteen (15) feet, from any public ROW. 4.3.08 Setback (Rear Yard). The minimum rear yard setback shall be three (3) feet from the alley. Structures may be cantilevered to the rear property line. Note: An additional right-of-way dedication will be required to widen the alley to lvew twenty-four(24) feet for mixed use and commercial projects. 4.3.09 Setback (Upper Storv). The covered portion of all stories above the second shall be set Delete back an average of an additional ten(10) feet from the second story facade. That ..-tied of stmetuFes whieh a ee.l thiAy five (35) feet in height shallbe setback Exeeptien- PFejeets adjaeent te Walnut Avenue shall r-equiFe upper-stei�, a . of seventy five (75) feet f em the ..��ppei4y line 4.3.10 OpenSpace. A public open space and pedestrian access amenity, subject to approval of the Director, may be required for development projects one full block or greater in size; in order to assure a predominantly visitor-serving orientation. Downtown Master Plan 24 R pvkf-d 1 n/91 LL , ,�_J a L_ IJIJ LIIJ < _rlll I�� �I l �I J o0 0� o0 0� o� rJ[I ��I o� oo �a o� �� �� CIA i�w iu�i i.� LIU HI Hu Hu [1[11 PECAN A" F -L -Li Hil I-J" LJu LJLJ ULJ LIL) JLJ ][I .����u� u� �i� oou� �i�� ��»� r�oi �� � � Dui a ri F7 F7771 f7l M PACIFIC COASI I —-—------- REMOVED FROM DISTRICT 2 PACIFIC OCEAN "Mme u R HUNTINGTON BEACH CALIFORNIA PLANNING DEPARTMENT DISTRICT 2 DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN 4.4 DISTRICT#2: RESIDENTIAL 'Delete , lafger-sized-pafeels. he density-iner-e^ eel-siee iner-eases;' g-greate While allewing higheF densities, the Distr-iet employs graduated height pr-e..ef4iefia1 nt1 aekFequir-emenis to Lonp the scale Mfnev;'i-evelepments pa4ible with the existing r-esideatial neighber-heed. ,e'ew Purpose. This District allows residential development exclusively. While allowing higher densities, the District employs graduated height limits and proportional setback requirements to keep the scale of new developments compatible with the existing residential neighborhood. Boundaries. District#2 includes the first block along PCH to Walnut Avenue between Goldenwest Street and 6th Streets except for the area included in District#1. 25 Downtown Master Plan Revised 10/93 n'c►► 4.4.01 Permitted Uses. The following residential uses shA may be peed allowed in .District #2: multi-family housing, apartments, condominiums and stock-cooperatives subject to the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. Exception: Single Family Detached Dwellings which comply with the development standards of District 2 shall be subject to approval of the Design Review Board. r�'c►t Note: Reference Resolution No. 5760 4.4.02 Minimum Parcel Size. The minimum parcel size for development shall be fifty (50) lvew twenty-five (25) feet of frontage and BABA 2,500 square foot net size area. 4.4.03 Maximum Density/Intensity. The maximum allowable number of residential dwelling units (du) shall increase as the parcel size increases according to the following: Delete less than 50' 1 d„ c 1, „p to 1 nn, 1 du/ nnn c^ _f e f tiet let afe� 10 , p to but less tha 1 dull,1 cn sq. 4+ of net let .,men a half blAr-k half bleek then-f'Y full bleek fullllbleek 35 units per-grass gNeepti6ir.Residual pafeels w-itt h-a fninimum 4^ tage of cy (59) feed shall be allowed a maximufn density equal to but net to e)(eeed the density ef existiHg aE�aeeftt develepmepAs Lot Size (Frontage) Maximum Allowable Density less than 50' 1 du 50, 4 du 51' up to 100' 30 units per net acre 101' - full block 35 units net acre No floor area ratio will apply to this district. ncle�c 4.4.04 Maximum Building Height: The maximum building height shall be thif4y five (35` f of a-lid-no more than three (3) stories. five (4 5) feet and no more than feuF (4) stefies Delclegxeepiien; The maximum bui�ding height for- full Week or-laFger-par-eels shall be fb� . 37 Downtown Master Plan 26 o,,..:,_A 1 n/Q2 4.4.05 Maximum Site Coverage. The maximum site coverage shall be fifty (50) percent of the net site area. 4.4.06 Setback (Front Yard). The minimum front yard setback for all structures exceeding forty-two (42) inches in height shall be as follows: (a) Parcels fronting on PCH, require a minimum setback of twenty-five (25) feet. This setback shall be limited to landscaping only and shall be designed to be compatible with the Bluff Top landscaping located across Pacific Coast Highway. Note: This setback may be reduced by five (5) feet on up to fifty (50) percent of the frontage, provided that the average setback for the total site frontage is not less than twenty-five (25) feet. (b) Parcels fronting all other streets except PCH, require fifteen (15) feet. This setback may be reduced to eight(8) feet on up to fifty (50) percent of the frontage provided that the average setback for the total site frontage is not less than fifteen (15) feet. 4.4.07 Setback (Side Yard). The minimum aggregate side yard requirements shall be as follows: (a) Parcels with one hundred(100) feet or less of frontage require twenty (20)percent of the lot frontage, with not less than three (3) feet on a side. Exterior yards require not less than five (5) feet from a public ROW. Exception: Garages located on a single twenty-five (25) foot wide lot*, will be allowed an exterior yard reduction to not less than three (3) feet from a public ROW. * Note: Twenty-five (25) foot wide lots may have a zero interior side yard setback on one side if: 1) adjacent property is under same ownership and developed at the same time; 2) at least five (5) feet is provided on the opposite side yard of both properties; 3) no portion of a building at a zero lot line is closer than six (6) feet to an adjacent building, if the buildings are not abutting. (b) Parcels with greater than one hundred (100) feet but less than a half block of frontage require twenty (20) percent of the frontage, with not less than seven (7) feet on any interior yard, and not less than fifteen (15) feet for an exterior yard, from a public ROW. (c) Parcels with greater than a half block of frontage require not less than seven (7) feet on any interior yard and not less than fifteen (15) feet for an exterior yard, from a public ROW. 4.4.08 Setback (Rear Yard). The minimum rear yard setback shall be as follows: (a) Parcels fronting on PCH require not less than three (3) feet. Note: An additional right-of-way dedication will be required to widen the alley to twenty (20) feet. a!� 27 Downtown Master Plan Revised 10/93 (b) Parcels fronting all other streets, except PCH, require not less than seven and one- half(7.5) feet. Structures may be cantilevered into this setback, however, not closer than two and one-half(2.5) feet from the rear property line. 4.4.09 Setback (Unner Story). The covered portion of all structures above the second story shall be set back an average of an additional ten(10) feet from the second story facade. FDelet-el That pei4ien of stfuetufes whieh e-meeed thifty five (3 5) feet in height,shall be set b minimum f f Fty fi ,e (n 5) feet from the exterior-pr-epeFt�, l:.,e E ,mot; Dr ets adj nt to Walnut Avenue shall require .ppe Fsteni r tb el of seventy fi.,e (oc) feet f em that p „ei4y line. 4.4.10 Open Space: (a) Projects which maintain the twenty-five (25) foot front setback along Pacific Coast Highway shall be allowed to use the front setback area towards common open space. Any encroachments into the twenty-five (25) foot front setback area shall require common open space to be located behind the front setback. (b) No public open space shall be required in this District. 4.4.11 Resource Production Overlay. A portion of District#2 is designated with an Oil Suffix F (O, 01). Within this area, all the requirements of the resource production overlay shall apply (see Section 4.14). 3 � Dovmtown Master Plan 28 -I 1 I , I � PECAN ORANGE IIJ L LJ -Ji I I U U _ OLIVEZn WALNUT cn I =1U I I W IU I H N `J N Z ZZ W O Z Cn ► Wg N ... -F7771 PACIFIC COAST HWY. I PAcwc CCEM 1 SAD" D"C= DISTRICT 3 R DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN ,`� HUNTINGION BEACH PLANNING DMSION 4.5 DISTRICT#3: VISITOR-SERVING COMMERCIAL Phu-pose. This District is limited to the five blocks fronting on Pacific Coast Highway across from the City pier. The visitor-serving category is broad enough to include many commercial activities which will also serve the needs of the surrounding community, providing an off-season clientele for the District. The plan also allows residential and office uses in this District so long as the required visitor-serving commercial is provided.. Large amounts of ground level open space are encouraged in this District to further promote the feeling of openness and to provide additional view opportunities. Boundaries. District #3 includes the area between PCH and Walnut, from 6th to Lake Streets.1st Street. 29 Downtown Master Plan R Pv;v-d 1 n/9'A 4.5.01 Permitted Uses. �e�ele (a) New tmetio a establishment ent of the following uses Dist-iet 43 h 11 l+ ��—r�c►� weir$rrcrccrvn�-cvsavri�rurrczrrorarczvrry n-irrs-av�irr-m�nZvr-rr���r�tr-vc ,New (a) New construction and establishment of a commercial core which serves as the transition between visitor-serving and year round commercial.uses in District #3 may be allowed subject to the approval of a Condition Use Permit. For Example: A-. Antique stores Art gallery 1-: Bakeries (no more than seven(7) employees) Bai4Es and savings and leans bfaaeh effiees (ne dr-ive up Windows; net to ,.ova five the,,sand is nnm s e feet) Beach, swimming and surfing equipment Bicycle sales, rental and repair Beat and mafiae supplies Bookstores C- Clothing stores Coin, stafap and af4 dealers Genfeetioners Cur-iesheps & Dekeatesseas DFug stores F: Rer-ists F-mit and vegetable steFes G: Beres Gifts Ice cream parlors N4- M e insuFaaee Newsstands N ies 1-- Phetegraphie studies Phetegr-aphie equipment sales Photographic processing $- Shoet,res Speng geed- Tourist related public and semi-public buildings, services and facilities T- el ageney -Y Y-ael.t bFeke-s (ne stefage) Other related uses Downtown Master Plan 30 Revised 10/93 �, Delete A change to the following uses in District #3 may be.permitted subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit: Arcades edit r Cabarets Gen ,e.,tieR f eilities* P. Danee halls and discos Dancing and/or live entertainment as a primary or accessory use 14. Wealth and s errs el„hr n Hotels and motels New Hotel and licensed bed and breakfast designed as a commercial establishment 1T Liquor stores M. Museums u 1?: Permanent Parking lots and parking structures Restaurants Residential uses Retail sales, outdoor T. Tavem Theaters *Note: This use is prohibited on the ground floor or street level fronting on Main Street veN and Pacific Coast Highway. Note: The ground floor or street level of all buildings in this District shall be devoted to visitor-serving commercial activities. :Vew (c) The ground floor or street level of all buildings in this District fronting Main Street and Pacific Coast Highway shall be devoted to visitor-serving commercial activities. (d) Visitor-serving commercial uses must be a part of all development proposed in this District with a minimum requirement that the entire street level, or at least one-third (1/3) of the total floor area be devoted to visitor-serving commercial uses. Delete (d) Residential e shall ,-my he „ fTnitted noi4hwest .,4'Main Street, unless the area; > units He r-esidential shall he le te.l within ., e h. ndFed an4 twenty five (125) feet .,4'Main Street. neN (e) Residential uses shall only be permitted if the development includes consolidation of a one block or greater area. `elete i 1 t one th d (1 ! ) f the floor- fpfe.eets el .,ller th., F..11 ire., . .en .,.,�.. m �.., �, a Week may be deveted to Fesidential uses-; pfejeets en full bleek Or !aFgeF Up tE) f one half(1 ) Ftl fleeFafea n�ayhe de eted to residential 31 Downtown Master Plan 43 Revised 10/93 , New Note: Residential uses are allowed only in conjunction with visitor-serving commercial uses. Up to one-half(1/2) of the floor area of projects may be devoted to residential uses. Delete (e) Residential uses are allowed e�15, in eenjunetion with visiter- seFying eemmer- complete. New I (t) The required visitor-serving commercial portion of any project shall be provided prior to or at the same time as any residential portion. No residential unit shall be occupied until the required commercial portion is complete. (g) In the event of a consolidation of a minimum one block area, non-priority A'ew (residential) uses may be located in separate structures or on separate portions of the parcel in the context of a planned development, provided no less than etle- New third-one-half of the total floor area permitted is devoted to visitor-serving uses, and provided that substantial public open space and pedestrian access amenities are provided to maintain a predominantly visitor-serving orientation. 4.5.02 Minimum Parcel Size. The minimum parcel size for development shall be ten thousand n'ew 2,500 square feet-of net site area and one hundred (1 nm feet. twenty-five (25) feet of frontage. 4.5.03 Maximum Density/Intensity. The maximum intensity of development shall be calculated by floor area ratios (FAR) for this District. The floor area ratio shall apply to `yew the entire project area. Floor area ratios shall be calculated on net acreage. erg-guess Delete aer-eage, exEep that .he esulting flee f a may not emeeedvl'-y FAer-cthan fifteen (I✓) pefeente (a) The maximum floor area for developments in this District shall be calculated with the following multiples: Delete Let size >\,ra.,:.,,.,.., >~ny liens-th•,nazn half ble k 2,0 half bleek up to but less than a full bleek ry vr . full h vl,�.l, 25 rr „lam beef, 3.5 dew Lot Size Maximum FAR less than half block 2.0 one-half block-full block 2.5 full block or greater 3.0 Downtown Master Plan 32 Revised 10/93 FDelefej (b) The maximum allowable numbeF of residential dwelling units (du) shall ifier-ease Lot Size (FFentaee) Maximum Allowable Densio� 100' up te but less than a half 1 duA,709 sq. ft. of net let afe-a -Meek half b,.L up to but loss 1 duA 350 sq. ft. of not lot till bleak full Meek - 35 units nor-gr-ess aer-e Yew (b) The maximum allowable number of residential dwelling units (du) shall be 35 units per net acre. 4.5.04 Maximum Building Height. The maximum building height shall be as follows: Deletc Lelnsizl.- less than half bled-k 3- cries half up (e but less than a full bleek __ 4 StOFieS multi Week (nef4hwest ef Main St.) multi Vleele (southeast- f Main v+ ) �c+r.rioc \'ex' Lot Size Heigh less than full block 3 stories full block or greater 4 stories Delete _] 4.5.05 Maximum Site Geyer-agg. The maximufn site eever-age shall be fifty (50) percent of t Exeeptien. Pai:eels fronting en Main Street shall m-aximum site eever-age e sixty (69) per-eent of the net site aFea, 4.5.05 Maximum Site Coverage. No maximum site coverage required. 4.5.06 Setback Front Yard). The minimum front yard setback for all structures exceeding forty-two (42) inches in height shall be fifteen (15) feet. Exception: Parcels fronting on Fifth and Third Streets may be reduced to five (5) feet. Parcels fronting on Main Street must develop to a build-to-line* five (5) feet from the property line. 33 Downtown Master Plan Revised 10/93 Y *Note: The build-to requirement can be satisfied by extending any of the following to five (5) feet of the property line: 1)the facade of the ground floor level; 2) a plaza or patio used for open-air commercial activity; 3) a low-wall or fence (not exceeding forty-two (42) inches in height), planters or other architectural features, which extend along at least fifty (50) percent of the frontage along the lot line; 4) two (2) side walls and second story facade. �eK Note: The following may be permitted in the front yard setback on 5th Street, 3rd Street, Main Street, First Street and PCH: benches, bicycle racks, transparent wind screens and open-air commercial facilities. �eW Note: An additional ROW dedication will be required for parcels fronting on PCH of five (5) feet, for additional parkway and sidewalk; and4en-(I8)two and one-half(2- 1/2) feet for parcels fronting on Sixth Street. 4.5.07 Setback (Side Yard). The minimum aggregate side yard requirements shall be as follows: (a) Parcels fronting on Sixth, Second and Lake Streets require twenty (20) percent of lot frontage, with not less than seven (7) feet for an interior yard and not less than fifteen (15) feet for an exterior yard, from a public ROW. (b) Parcels fronting on Fifth, Main and Third Streets and Pacific Coast Highway require zero for an interior yard. Exterior side yard requirements shall equal the front yard setback for the respective street. 4.5.08 Setback Rear Yard). The minimum rear yard setback shall be three (3) feet from the alley. Structures may be cantilevered to the rear property line. Note: An additional ROW dedication will be required to widen the alley to thirty (30) feet. 4.5.09 Setback WppgLSjM4. Upper story setbacks for this District shall be as follows: VeK (a) Parcels fronting PCH, 6th, 2nd and L44 First Streets require all stories above the second to be set back an average of twenty-five (25) feet from the ultimate street ROW. Up to fifty (50) percent of the building frontage may be set back fifteen (15) feet from the ROW, providing that the average setback on upper stories is no less than twenty-five (25) feet. Delele (b) Par-eels 4814i A., 5th aild 2r,1 Street require that any pai4 .file building fareade gf:eater than twenty five (25) feet :,, height to be set hank at least fifteen (1 5) feet (b) Parcels fronting on 5th and 3rd Street require that any part of the building facade above the second story shall be set back ten (10) feet from the first story facade. Downtown Master Plan 34 Revised 10/93 Delele (e) Par-eels f entire an Main Street Fe quire that no buildinn _f a building height,e)(eeed twenty five (25) feet in 1-ktte l�'ew (c) Parcels fronting on Main Street require that no building or portion of a building above the second story shall be within ten (10) feet of the build-to line. (d) That portion of structures exceeding thirty-five (35) feet in height shall be set back a minimum of ten (10) feet from the interior side yard property line. Delete E)f ne 1,,,ndre,1 and twenty five (1 25) foot fem the „lti fn to street R0341 4.5.10 Open Space. All development projects within this District shall provide a public open space amenity. A minimum of ten (10) percent of the net site area must be provided for such a purpose. Delete (a) All stmetures taller-than f�af (4) stories shall pr-evide an additienal two and one half(2.5) n nt of the net site area far-public epen spaee fo. eaeh addifien.,1 (a) Full block developments on Main Street require public plazas at the corner of PCH and Main Street. These street level public plazas shall be incorporated into the design of the development and approved by the Director. Such plazas shall have the following characteristics: • Location: street level corner; one side must face Main Street. n'eK • Area: not less than one thousand(1,000) square feet excluding public right-of-way. • Landscaping: not less than.thirty (30) percent of the plaza area should be planted. • Paving: all paved areas shall be textured. Visual Feature: plazas must include a sculpture, fountain, information kiosk, pond, display, or similar visual amenity. • Public Seating shall be provided. • Open Air Commercial: not more than fifty (50) percent of the plaza area may be used for open air commercial uses. Dcicic .-. designPistr-iet. The City may waive this F A i if the City detefmines that ever-passe are unneeessaf�, eF imp re-ensidering the type and developments. 35 Downtown Master Plan Revised 10/93 O ADDED TO DISTRICT 4 PECAN H III ORANGE JI i ; ..... I Hi 1 I I OLIVE � i ! ��� � li � I i• �� I I N 1 I I I I N N J N t~ WALNUT Ln i :,c Lill X II z O N [I, I z w N 2 z O J _ N PACIFIC COAST HWY. PACIFIC OCEAN ® DISTRICT 4 DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN HUNTINGION BEACH PLANNING DMSION 4.6 DISTRICT #4: MIXED-USE: OFFICE RESIDENTIAL Purpose. This District flanks the Downtown core area, separating the area along Main Street from the outlying areas which are primarily residential. The purpose of this District is to provide a transition zone between-the existing residential areas to the commercial Main Street corridor. `Consequently, mixes of office and residential uses are permitted. T eundar-ies Dist-iet CIA lades the half ble the .-tl west side ,-f the Main DeICle ar�crrer�i i--iii�rats�-crrCit��z�-irvrarm C`t..eet F nm Ath Street to the alley betwee.. 6t1, and Ctl, St..eets. and ffefifli tl.e Walnut and Or-aage .kvenues. Boundaries. District#4 includes the blocks on the northwest side of the Main Street core area from 6th Street to 5th Street and from 3rd Street to First Street, between Walnut and Orange Avenues. Downtown Master Plan 36 D—'—eel 1 fl/Q'2 4.6.01 Permitted Uses. The following principal uses and structures shall be peffliitted in may dew be allowed District #4 subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit: Deere (a) Residential Use - all r-esidential uses inel.., ing single family and multi-family housing, apartments, condominiums and stock cooperatives. standaFds in Distr-iet 44 shall be sublieet to the appr-eval of the Design Review Bear- DelefeNote. Single Family Detaehed Dwellings whieh eemply with the deyelopmen (b) Office Use - professional, general business and non-profit offices. (c) Mixed-Use - Mixed Residential/Office Use developments shall be permitted provided that residential uses: • Be segregated to separate structure or restricted to the second story or above; • Not occupy any portion of the same story with non-residential uses, unless they are provided with adequate physical and acoustical separation; • Be on contiguous floors within a single structure; • Be provided with separate pedestrian ingress and egress; • Be provided with secured, designated parking. (d) Commercial Use - Commercial uses which are integrated within and clearly incidental to an office use, shall be permitted provided that it cumulatively does Deere not exceed ten (10) percent of total gross floor areas of the development. -he fellewing uses shall be pemit4ed.- Pr-eser-iptien Ph • vest.,..,..,..Weeff e st eps (on sale eensumptien „faleehelie bee-..,15o0 PaFking lots and str-uetur-es. �e►+ 4.6.02' Minimum Parcel Size. The minimum parcel size for development shall be twenty-five hundred (2500) square feet and twenty (25) feet of frontage. However, existing lots twenty-five (25) feet in width or greater shall not be subdivided to create smaller parcels. 37 Downtown Master Plan Revised 10/93 4.6.03 Maximum Density/Intensity. The maximum allowable number of residential dwelling Delete ; as h --1 size ------a nGQ��i.g to the fell.,.,.:„,.. units (du) shall be: _ r... __o __o. Lot Size /L'_,_.,*fte\ Maximum Allowable less tzhnnr S ' 1 da s0, 1 du inn sq. f4. of net lot area- 5 1 up to 1 nn' 1 du. 1 400 fr of net iet aFea ., half bl.,e half bleekup to but less 1 &1900 sq. fl. of net let area- than ., full 1,leek New Lot Size (Frontage) Maximum Allowable Density Less than 50' 1 du 51' - 100, 30 units net acre 101' - full block 35 units net acre De/ere 4.6.04 Maximum Building Height. The maximum building height shall be a*d no more than three (3) stories. �7 )-.` building height f.full bleek p i. 1s. hall be fifty (50) fear I -jtC� ��Jriuia w axrcT�.�v� 4.6.05 Maximum Site Coverage. The maximum site coverage shall be fifty (50) percent of the net site area. 4.6.06 Setback (Front Yard). The minimum front yard setback for all structures exceeding forty-two (42) inches in height, shall be fifteen (15) feet. Note: An additional ROW dedication will be required for parcels fronting on Sixth new Street, of ten (10) �e* of two and one-half(2-1/2). 4.6.07 Setback (Side Yard). The minimum aggregate side yard requirements shall be as follows: (a) Parcels with one hundred (100) feet or less of frontage require twenty (20) percent of the lot frontage, with not less than three (3) feet on a side. Exterior yards require not less than five (5) feet from a public ROW. Exception: Garages located on a single twenty-five (25) foot wide lot., will be allowed an exterior yard reduction to not less than three (3) feet from a public ROW. S Downtown Master Plan 38 T)-.,.,-A 10i01 * Note: Twenty-five (25) foot wide lots may have a zero interior side yard setback on one side if. 1) adjacent property is under same ownership and developed at the same time; 2) at least five (5) feet is provided on the opposite side yard of both properties; 3) no portion of a building at a zero lot line is closer than six (6) feet to an adjacent building, if the buildings are not abutting. (b) Parcels with greater than one hundred (100) feet but less than a half block of frontage require twenty (20) percent of the frontage, with not less than seven (7) feet on any interior yard, and not less than fifteen(15) feet for an exterior yard, from a public ROW. (c) Parcels with greater than a half block of frontage require not less than seven (7) feet on any interior yard and not less than fifteen(i5) feet for an exterior yard, from a public ROW. 4.6.08 Setback (Rear Yard). The minimum rear yard setback shall be three (3) feet from the alley. Structures may be cantilevered to the rear property line. Note: An additional ROW dedication may be required to widen the alley to thirty{-30) New feet twenty-four(24) feet). 4.6.09 Setback (Upper Story). The covered portion of all stories above the second shall be set back an average of twenty-five(25) feet from the ultimate ROW. Up to fifty (50) percent of the building frontage may be set back fifteen(15) feet from the ROW, providing that the average setback on upper stories is no less than twenty-five (25) feet. That portion of structures which exceed thirty-five (35)feet in height shall be set back a minimum of forty-five (45) feet from the exterior property lines. 4.6.10 Qpen Space. No public open space shall be required in this District. 39 Downtown Master Plan Revised 10/93 REMOVED FROM DISTRICT 5 PECAN _ I L'Ll ORANGE I , Li Lu +. OLIVE Lu N N F=� L___ �_� to 1-- WALNUT ►= j _ N 2 2 i i = _ I N ►� ►- �i I ZLl I 5E Z Ln Ii I Q C9LLJ h N ►- i Z I � I Z W J LL N L _ Z O LLJ LL PACIFIC COAST HWY. I PACOIc ocLkN i I DISTRICT 5 DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN , 3 HUNTINGiON BEACH PLANNING DMSION '� 4.7 DISTRICT 45: MIXED-USE; COMMERCIAL/OFFICEIRESIDENTIAL Pose. This District includes the blocks on either side of and including Main Street, and constitutes the oldest commercial area in the City. The purpose of this District is to re-establish the area as the Downtown for the City by creating a more urban atmosphere, encouraging relatively higher iniensity development with viable commercial office and residential uses. View corridors along with height and orientation restrictions in the development requirements of this District are intended to focus development on the Main Street corridor. The Main Street-pier axis is intended to be an active, vital and interesting pedestrian way, intersecting with and complementing the visitor-serving commercial area on PCH and the pier area. The District promotes mixed uses of commercial, office and residential developments. Delete the alley het..ree.. 2rd and 2nd Streets and the rake Stfeet f e tage (en the.,eAhwest side) ffem Walnut to Orange AN,enues. New Boundaries. District#5 includes the area from 5th Street to 3rd Street between Walnut and Orange Avenues. Downtown Master Plan 40 Re%-ised 10/93 4.7.01 Permitted Uses. Delete (a) N „stFaction and establishment of the falle. ing uses in Distr-iet 45 shall be NeK (a) New construction and establishment of a commercial core which serves as the transition between visitor-serving and year round commercial uses in District 45 may be allowed subject to the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. For Example: A- Antique stores Art gallery B Bakeries (not more tha., seven [7] empleyees) Banks and savings and loans branch offices (no dr-ive up windews) Barber, beauty, manicure shops Beach, swimming and surfing equipment Bicycle sales, rental and repair Boat and marine supplies Bookstores Boutiques C, Clothing stores [ ein stamp and a.t dealers 7 r enf, et: CH she cus-r�vps D-. Delicatessens Drug stores Dry cleaning (no plants) Florists Fi:uit and vegetable ster-es - Groceries n'eK General retail H-. Hardware stores Hobby supplies Ice cream parlors Jewelry stores L- Laundromats M-- MaFine insur-anee Meat E)F Fish RiaFlietS M:l NewspapeF and magazines-roes ste Fes Newsstands Novelties 9: Office Supplies \'eK Offices 41 Downtown Master Plan Reviser) 10/9l P. PaFks Photographic. studie-s PhetegFaphie equipment sales- Photographic processing 8: Shoe repair Shoe stores Sporting goods Stativixci5, stores Tailor shops Travel agency Y. vaeht br kef:s (fie stet-age) 1ve"' Other related uses Delete (b) New eenstm tie establishment,eat e'`''� A change to the following uses in District#5 may be pe»itted allowed subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit: Ar-e-ades Q Eeba£ets D-. Dane Daneing a e-!iN,e e,+teA meat as- Deg and eat gr-eeffling F-. F„ :t., a st„ PI-. Health and sports clubs L: Liquor stores Live entertainment N4 Museums lz Pet-shep s Permanent parking lots and parking structures Plazas men spaee R-. aed,,,ing Salo Restaurants Residential uses Detail sales, „tdeer- T-. Theaters Do"mtown Master Plan 42 Revised 10/93 FDelefe] Note- The gr-ound Poor-aFea er stFeet level of ali buildings f4enting Main Street in t (c) The ground floor area or street level of all buildings fronting Main Street in this District shall be devoted to commercial activities. (i) Commercial or residential may be permitted on the ground floor between Olive and Orange Avenue fronting 5th Street and 3rd Street. (d) The following uses may be permitted above the first floor: (i) Commercial Use - all commercial uses allowed on the first floor if the uses are a continuation from the first floor use. (ii) Office Use - professional, general business and non-profit offices provided that: • No sales either wholesale or retail which involve delivery of any goods or material to or from the premises occur. • No inventory is kept on the premise other than samples. • No processing, manufacturing, storage or repair of merchandise of any kind occurs. (iii) Residential Use - Residential uses are allowed only in conjunction with commercial uses in this District. Up to one-third (1/3) of the floor area of projects on parcels smaller than a full block may be devoted to residential uses; projects on full block or larger parcels, up to one-half(1/2) of the floor area may be devoted to residential uses provided that residential uses in addition to the following: • Be segregated to a separate structure or restricted to the second story or above; • Not occupy any portion of the same story with non-residential uses, unless they are provided with adequate physical and acoustical separation; • Be on contiguous floors within a single structure; • Be provided with separate pedestrian ingress and egress; • Be provided with secured, designated parking. DeleteNote- All uses eenditienally pefr stef�, areas. if the), are a eantinuatien of first fleef uses. Gthef Uses shall be per-FAia . ly if f and to be . p title with of ee and residential uses eafbi, or-within the d use st.., et. 43 Downtown Master Plan Revised 10/93 4.7.02 Minimum Parcel Size. The minimum parcel size for development shall be twenty-five hundred (2500) square feet and twenty-five (25) feet of frontage. 4.7.03 . Maximum Density/Intensity. The maximum intensity of development shall be calculated by floor area ratio (FAR) for this District. The floor area ratio shall apply to FDele-t—el the entire project area. FleeF area ratios shall be ealeulated On gross aer-eage, exeept that the r-esialting fleeF area may not exeeeo by Ener-e than fifteen (15) per-eent the New Floor area ratios shall be 2.0 calculated on net acreage. lYew (a) The maximum allowable number of residential dwelling units (du) shall be 1 du/1,742 square feet of net lot area or 25 du net per acre. Delete the f lle. ing m ltipk-s• Let Size Maximum less than half Week l G half bleek up te but less than a full 1.1e& fail bleek (b) The maximum ell.. able number- of residential dwelling units (du) shall ineFease as par-eel C s aeeeFding to the fel_lei...+ - S th;lg 1nn' 1 l„!-lnnn s„ A. .,f.,et p to but less than a 1 dibI1'790 sq. A. of„et lot ama half bleeL half bleek up to but less 1 dull 3 5 9 sq._ R of net lot afe.i than a full bleel. ,11 1,1,.,.1• 35 units per-gFess 4.7.04 Maximum Building Height. The maximum building height shall be as follows: Lot Size (Frontage) Height less than a full block 3 stories Delete full ble L 6 stories Vew full block 4 stories 7 Downtown Master Plan 44 Revised 10/93 4.7.05 Maximum Site Coveraee. No maximum site coverage shall be required in this District. 4.7.06 Setback (Front Yard). The minimum front yard 'setback for all structures exceeding forty-two (42) inches in height shall be fifteen (15) feet. Exception: Parcels fronting on Fifth and Third Streets may be reduced to five (5) feet and parcels fronting on Main Street must develop to a build to lifiet within five (5) feet €rem of the property line. *Note: The build-to requirement can be satisfied by extending any of the following to five (5) feet of the property line: 1) the facade of the ground floor level; 2) a plaza or patio used for open-air commercial activity; 3) a low-wall or fence (not exceeding forty-two (42) inches in height), planters or other architectural features, which extend along at least fifty (50) percent of the frontage along the lot line; 4) two (2) side walls and second story facade. Note: The following may be permitted in the front yard setback on Fifth Street, Third Delete Street, and Main Street awn: benches, bicycle racks, transparent wind screens and open-air commercial facilities. 4.7.07 Setback Side Yard). The minimum side yard requirements shall be as follows: (a) Interior yard requirements shall be zero. (b) Exterior yards require five (5) feet from a public ROW. 4.7.08 Setback dear Yard). The minimum rear yard setback shall be three (3) feet from the alley. Structures may be cantilevered to the rear property line. Note: An additional ROW dedication will be required to widen the alley to thirty (30) feet. 4.7.09 Setback Upper Story). The covered portion of all stories above the second shall be set back an average of an additional ten (10) feet from the second story facade. -PaFeels Delete4enting Main Street fequiFe all stpactufes above twenty five (25) feet in height to set aver-ageback an 4.7.10 Open Space. Parcels having one hundred (100) feet or more of street frontage, �'vithin this District shall provide a public open space amenity. A minimum of ten (10) percent of the net site area must be provided for such a purpose, in all non-residential development. Exception: Mixed use developments which include residential units, may reduce the public open space to five (5) percent of the net site area. 45 Downtown Master Plan , Revised 10/93 Full block developments on Main Street require public plazas. These street level public plazas shall be incorporated into the design of the development and approved by the Director. Such plazas shall have the following characteristics: • Location: street level corner; one side'must face Main Street. • Area: not less than one thousand(1,000) square feet. • Landscaping: not less than thirty(30) percent of the plaza area should be planted. • Paving: all paved areas shall be textured. • Visual Feature: plaza must include a sculpture, fountain, information kiosk, pond, display, or similar visual amenity. • Public Seating shall be provided. D—e I e-t e-I 0 Op Ce}mer- al. net m a than fi f4 y itm per-.ent e f the .,t,,.,., afe., may-be used feF open air-eemmeFeial uses. I n'ew • Open Air Commercial: not more than fifty (50) percent of the privately owned publicly used plaza area may be used for open air commercial uses. This provision will be subject to the standards outlined in the Carts and Kiosks Ordinance. Downtown Master Plan 46 Revised 10/93 PALM ...........;:..:'.:.:... ACACIA i _---,— ': ',:::. ..:.�:;.. PECAN F1 ............. ..... ............. ... ........................ I IH HH .... ... .... ............ n f i I Ll L � . .. .... ORANGE _ �I I � I 1 � i • i i � j� nip i� �!� � � ► N I'I i Li Ll WALNUT ti Z ; I� Z_ ' it = t � Z �, t;zr j; IrZ � 1 IZ \ iN i �" j II Zi li C9i li Ijl li N 10 U ' I I ' I IdJ U (n lJ I I W cn L� PACIFIC COAST HWY. I _ 1 ' DISTRICT 6 DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN 1 HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING DIVISION v 4.8 DISTRICT#6: MIXED USE?COMMERCIAL/OFFICE/RESIDENTIAL. Pose. This District encompasses the area north of the Downtown core and includes the public library. It is intended to provide a location for neighborhood commercial enterprises to serve surrounding residents, as well as office space, public facilities and residential uses. This mixed use node will anchor the inland end of the Main/Pier corridor. Boundaries. District#6 consists of the blocks located between Sixth Street and Lake Street from Orange Avenue to Palm Avenue. 47 Downtown Master Plan • Revised 10/93 L 4.8.01 Permitted Uses. ( .-) New eefist ..ntien and establishf lent of the fellra.l.;..g uses in PistFiet 46 shall�le Delele pen:nraed subjeet-to the i itiR-r-rv-cT Change of use �e shall be subjeet to the appr-eval of the Dir-eeter-. New (a)_ New construction and establishment of new commercial and/or mixed use projects which cater to year round residents in District #6 may be allowed subject to the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. For Example: A Antique stores Applianee stores Amory A ute aeeesse f.4fe sll..r.c. Banks and savings and leans bFaneh eff ees f.ilitll dr-iye_up tlnr.dAyio f Bicycle sales, rental and repair Beat and Fflafine supplies Bookstores "b establishments Clothing stores cent et; ..er-n C-or-ie shops D Delicatessens Drug stores Dry cleaning(mil ) F- Florists FFait and vegetable ..ste.e FuRiitur-e ste G- Gifts and pai4y shops Glass shops Groceries Hardware stores f Ice House to _1... Mores L: Laundromats, laundries lam- Mar-ine insur-anee Nledieal and dental labOffiter-ies Adeptor- fish mar-Bets �3 Do\N-ntovtim Master Plan 48 N- Newspaper-and magazine steFes Newsstands Nevelties 9: Offices O ffiee suppimies 1, irks PhetePhetegr-aphie studies aphie equipment sales phete ph; g ( fner-e than. ,o_(1) deyeleping_m aehi e) lamas Public facilities Restaurants 9: Shoe repair Shee Sporting goods -T- Tai l�hogs b eney U Undei4a s dew Other related uses Existing auto uses may remain (b) New eenstFuetien, establishment, eF a A-change to the following uses in District Delete #6 may be allowed subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit: wades D Deg and eat gFeeming H: Health and sports clubs L-: Liquor stores dew Live entertainment N, Newspaper-publishing 1z Permanent parking lots and parking structures Pei-shaps Publ ie Publie and semi publie buildings Residential Uses Restaurants Retail sales, eutdoe -T- Theatef5 Tr i t f, :4 (c) Residential uses are allowed in conjunction with commercial uses and/or separate from commercial uses in this district subject to conditional use permit. Single family dwellings are not subject to the conditional use permit process. (d) The frontage on 3rd and Lake Streets between Orange and Palm Avenues may be residential. 49 Downtown Master Plan Revised 10/93 DC�CIC' 4.8.02 Minimum Ewe! Size. The minimum pafeel size fee development shallbe tor. tl,(.....a ,�'e►+ 4.8.02 Minimum Parcel Size. The minimum parcel size for development shall be two thousand five hundred (2,500) square feet and twenty-five(25) feet of frontage. Existing parcels greater than twenty-five (25) feet in width shall not be subdivided to create 2,500 square foot lots. 4.8.03 Maximum Density/Intensity. The maximum intensity of development shall be calculated by floor area ratio(FAR) for this District. The floor area ratio shall apply to lvew the entire project area. Floor area ratios shall be calculated on gross net acreage. Delete pef mated fle r area ealel-116s.-P-4 6.. .,et site area. - (a) The maximum floor- aFea fer-developments in this PistFiet shall be ealeulmed Delete bet siz. (FEe.,tng) Max FAT? less than 100' 1.25 n' up to but less than a half Meek i 5 half r than a Aill bleek 2..0 full Week 2.25 Ale— (a) The maximum allowable number of residential dwelling units shall be 1 du/1,742 square feet net lot area or hventy-five (25) units per net acre. (b) Lot Size Maximum FAR Less than half-block 1.25 Half-block or greater 2.0 4.8.04 Maximum Building Height. The maximum building height shall be as follows: Lot.Size (Frontage) Height Delete less than 100' 2 stories -30 feet 100' up to but less than 3 stories -35 fiaE4 a full block full block 4 stories -50 €get Downtown Master Plan 50 4.8.05 Maximum Site Coverage. No maximum site coverage shall be required in this District. 4.8.06 Setback (Front Yard). The minimum front yard setback for all structures exceeding forty-two (42) inches in height shall be fifteen(15) feet; lvew Exception: Parcels fronting on Fifth and Third Streets may be reduced to five (5) feet and parcels fronting on Main Street must develop within (5) feet of the property line. *Note: The build-to requirement can be satisfied by extending any of the following to within five (5) feet of the Property line: 1) the facade of the ground floor level; 2) a plaza or patio used for open-air commercial activity; 3) a low-wall or fence (not exceeding forty-two 1421 inches in height), planters or other architectural features,which extend along at least fifty (50) percent of the frontage along the lot line; 4) two (2) side walls and second story facade. Note: The following may be permitted in the front yard setback on Fifth Street, Third Street and Main Street: benches, bicycle racks, transparent wind screens and open-air commercial facilities. 4.8.07 Setback Side Yard). The minimum side yard requirements shall be as follows: (a) Interior yard requirements, for residential development, shall be ten(10) feet; non residential may be reduced to zero. (b) Exterior yards require not less than fifteen (15) feet, from a public ROW. 4.8.08 Setback (Rear Yard). The minimum rear yard setback shall be three (3) feet from the alley. Note: An additional ROW dedication will be required to widen the alley to t#h4y-(30) twenty-four(24) feet. 4.8.09 Setback (Upper Story). The covered portions of all stories above the second shall be set back twenty-five (25) feet from the ultimate ROW. 4.8.10 Open Space. Parcels having one hundred (100) feet or more of street frontage, within this District shall provide a public open space amenity. A minimum of ten (10) percent of the net site area must be provided for such a purpose, in all non-residential development. Exception: Mixed use developments which include residential units, may reduce the public open space to five (5) percent of the net site area. Full block developments on Main Street require public plazas. These street level public plazas shall be incorporated into the design of the development and approved by the Director. 51 Downtown Master Plan Revised 10/93 4.9 DISTRICT 47• VISITOR-SERVING COMMERCIAL Purnose. This District extends southeast of the Downtown core adjacent to Pacific Coast Highway. The principal purpose of this District is to provide commercial facilities to serve seasonal visitors to the beaches as well as to serve local residents on a year round basis. This District also provides a continuous commercial link between the Downtown and the visitor-commercial/recreation District near Beach Boulevard. vew Boundaries. District #7 extends from Ike First Street to Huntington Avenue between PCH and the proposed Walnut Avenue extension. DE E Li Lj WI Downtown Master Plan 52 , ^ ---] l nrn,) 4.9.01 Permitted Uses. (a) New construction and establishment of the following uses in District#7 shall be New peed may be allowed subject to the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. Change of use shall be subject to the approval of the Director. New • Antique stores Fonnnl • Art gallery • Bakeries (No more than seven (7) employees) • Banks and savings and loans branch offices (not to exceed five-thousand (5,000) square feet) • Barber, beauty, manicure shops • Beach, swimming and surfing equipment • Bicycle sales, rental and repair O Boat and marine supplies • Bookstores • Botanical Gardens • Boutiques • Clothing stores • Coin, stamp and art dealers • Confectioners • Curio shops • Delicatessens • Florists • Fruit and vegetable stores • Game Stores • Gifts and party shops • Groceries (convenience) • Ice cream parlors v Jewelry stores • Laundromats • Marine insurance • Meat or fish markets • Newspaper and magazine stores • Newsstands • Novelties • Photographic studios • Photographic equipment sales • Photographic processing (no more than one(1) developing machine) • Professional Office (not to exceed fifty [501 percent of total floor area) • Shoe stores • Sporting goods C Tourist related public and semi-public buildings, services And facilities • Travel agency • Yacht sales (display only) Note: Visitor-serving commercial uses must be a part of all development proposals in this District, with a minimum requirement that the entire street level be devoted to Visitor-Serving Commercial Uses. 53 Downtown Master Plan Revised 10/93 New (b) New construction, establishment, or a change to the following uses in District #7 may be pelfni#ed allowed subject to the approval of a Conditional Use Permit: New0 Arcades Formal • Automobile service stations • Cabarets • Dance halls and discos • Dancing and/or live entertainment as a primary or accessory use • Health and sports clubs • Hotels and motels • Liquor stores • Permanent parking lots and parking structures • Reducing salon • Restaurants • Retail sales, outdoor • Taverns 4.9.02 Minimum Parcel Size. No minimum parcel size shall be required for this District. However, prior to the approval of any development, a master site plan for the entire District shall be approved by the Planning Commission. Development which is in conformance with the site plan may then be permitted. 4.9.03 Maximum Density/lntensity. ealeulated-by fleef are^ ratio (FA D\ FB• +rinrsz�nie—A. The nwr—area r-acie shall apply to the entire pr-ejeet area. FleeF area r-aties shall be ealealated en gr-ess aer-eage, exeep that the resulting Peer-afea may eta ed b mer-e than fifteen (15) per-ee„t the pefTA44ed floor- area ealeulated by net site afea, (a) The maximum floor area for developments in this District shall be calculated with a multiple of 3.0. 4.9.04 Maximum Building Height. The maximum building height shall be eight (8) stories. 4.9.05 Maximum Site Coverage. The maximum site coverage shall be fifty (50) percent of the net site area. 4.9.06 Setback (Front Yard). The minimum front yard setback for all structures exceeding forty-two (42) inches in height shall be fifty (50) feet from PCH. 4.9.07 Setback (Side Yard). The minimum exterior side yard requirement shall be twenty (20) feet. 4.9.08 Setback (Rear Yard). The minimum rear yard setback shall be twenty (20) feet from the proposed Walnut Avenue extension. Note: An additional ROW dedication will be required to provide for the Walnut Avenue extension. Downtown Master Plan 54 4.9.09 Setback (Upper StoU). No upper story setback shall be required in this District. 4.9.10 Open Space. A public open space and/or pedestrian access amenity, subject to approval of the Director, may be required for development projects in order to assure a predominantly visitor-serving orientation. 4.9.11 Corridor Dedication. Development in District#7 shall require the dedication of a twenty (20) foot corridor between Atlanta Avenue and PCH for public access between the southern end of the Pacific Electric ROW and PCH. This requirement may be waived if an alternative public amenity is provided or if the corridor is deemed unnecessary by the City. Any proposal for an alternative public amenity must be approved by the Planning Commission. 4.9.12 Mobile home District. A portion of District#7 is zoned for mobile home use. Within this mobile home area, the provisions of the Mobile home District of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code shall apply (See Section 4.16). The Mobile home Overlay may only be removed as set forth in the Specific Plan subject to compliance with the provisions of the Mobile home Overlay Zones/Removal/Rezoning/Change of Use Article of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. I it SS Downtown Master Plan Revised 10/93 4.10 DISTRICT#8: - HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL Purpose. This District is intended to allow high density residential uses. New residential development will provide a population base to help support the commercial and office uses in the Downtown area. Boundaries. District#8 includes two consolidated parcels; one parcel is bounded on the north by Atlanta Avenue, on the east by Huntington Street, on the south by the proposed Walnut Extension and on the west by Lake Street. The second includes the area north of the proposed Walnut Avenue extension between Huntington Street and Beach Boulevard. -71 IF L 1 '{ i' ` ' if ,I if •I- if " — 'j •I ��• � ._ �4_- y.i:�a'`e:'.�,:e •• ` 1` 1owntown Master Plan 56 , 4.10.01 ,Permitted Uses. The following uses shall be permitted in District 48 subject to the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. These uses shall be limited to permanently attached residential uses; including multi-family housing, condominiums, stock- cooperatives or apartments. 4.10.02 Minimum Parcel Size. No minimum parcel size shall be required in this District. However, prior to approval of any development, a conceptual plan for Sub-area a or Sub-area b shalI be approved by the Planning Commission. Development which is in conformance with the site plan may then be permitted. Ncw 4.10.03 Maximum Density/Intensity. The maximum allowable number of residential dwelling units shall be thirty-five (35) units per gFess net acre. ,veK 4.10.04 Maximum Building eight. The maximum building height shall be fifty «^` g e4 four (4) stories. 4.10.05 Maximum Site Coverage. The maximum site coverage shall be fifty (50) percent of net site area. 4.10.06 Setback (Front Yard). The minimum front yard setback for all structures exceeding forty-two (42) inches in height shall be twenty (20) feet. Note: An additional ROW dedication will be required to provide for the Walnut Avenue extension. 4.10.07 Setback (}Side Yard). The minimum exterior side yard requirement shall be twenty(20) feet. Exception: The minimum exterior yard requirement from Beach Boulevard shall be twenty-five (25) feet. 4.10.09 Setback (Rear Yard). The minimum rear yard setback shall be twenty (20) feet. 4.10.09 Setback (Upper Story). That portion of structures which exceed thirty-five (35) feet in height shall be set back a minimum of one hundred (100) feet from the northern exterior property line. 4.10.10 Open Space. No public open space shall be required in this District. 4.10.11 Corridor Dedication. Development in District 48 shall require the dedication of a twenty (20) foot corridor between Atlanta Avenue and PCH for public access between the southern end of the Pacific Electric ROW and PCH. This requirement may be waived if an alternative public amenity is provided or if the corridor is deemed unnecessary by the City. Any proposal for an alternative public amenity must be approved by the Planning Commission. 4.10.12 Resource Production Overlay. A portion of District#8 is designated with an oil suffix (0,01). Within this area all the requirements of the Resource Production Overlay shall apply (see Section 4.14). 4.10.13 Conservation Overlay. A portion of District#8 has been designated with a conservation overlay. Within this area all requirements of the Conservation Overlay shall apply (see Section 4.15). 57 Downtown Master Plan Revised 10/93 4.10.14 Mobile home District. A portion of District#8 is zoned for mobile home use. Within this mobile home zoning area, the provisions of the Mobile home District of the. Huntington Beach Ordinance Code shall apply (see Section 4.16). .1� Downtown Master Plan 58 4.11 DISTRICT#9: COMMERCIAURECREATION Purpose. The purpose of this District is to encourage large, coordinated development that is beach-oriented and open Ito the public for both commercial and recreational purposes. Boundaries. District#9 is bounded by PCH on the south, Beach Boulevard on the east, Huntington Street on the west, and on the north by the proposed Walnut Avenue extension. iL ii - I LJ Lt J L I J J (' Li L�T . .\\ 59 Downtown Master Plan Revised 10/93 New- 4.11.01 Permitted Uses. The following uses and structures shall be peffl}itted may be allwvved in District 49 are subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit. These commercial uses include hotels, motels, restaurants and recreational facilities. 4.11.02 Minimum Parcel Size. No minimum parcel size shall be required for this District. However, prior to approval of a Conditional Use Permit by the Planning Commission for any development, a master site plan for the entire District shall be approved by the Planning Commission. Development which is in conformance with the site plan may then be permitted. 4.11.03 Maximum Density ntensity. The maximum intensity of development shall be calculated by floor area ratio (FAR) for this District. The floor area ratio shall apply to New the entire project area. Floor area ratios shall be calculated on gFess net acreage. fleer- aFea may not exeeed by more than fifteen (15) per-cent D elele � eept that the e peFmit4ed fleer-area ealeulated by net site area.- (a) The maximum floor area for developments in this District shall be calculated with a multiple of 3.5. 4.11.04 Maximum Building Height. No maximum building height shall be required. 4.11.05 Maximum Site Coverage. The maximum site coverage shall be thirty-five (35) percent of the net site area. Note: A maximum of twenty-five (25) percent of the net site area can be used for parking and vehicular accessways. 4.11.06 Setback (Front Yard). The minimum front yard setback for all structures exceeding forty-two (42) inches in height shall be fifty (50) feet, from PCH and Beach Boulevard. 4.11.07 Setback (,Side Yard). The minimum exterior side yard requirement shall be twenty (20) feet. Exception: The minimum exterior yard requirement from Beach Boulevard shall be fifty (50) feet. 4.11.08 Setback (Rear Yard). The minimum rear yard setback shall be twenty (20) feet. Note: An additional ROW dedication will be required to provide for the Walnut Avenue extension. 4.11.09 Setback dipper Stor& No upper story setback shall be required. 4.11.10 Open Space. Development projects within this District shall provide a public open space amenity. A minimum of twenty-five (25) percent of the net site area must be provided for such a purpose. This area should be available for public or semi-public uses for recreational purposes. Open space must have minimum dimensions of twenty- five (25) feet in each direction . Paved areas devoted to streets, driveways and parking areas may not be counted toward this requirement. A maximum of fifteen (15) percent of the required twenty-five (25) percent may be enclosed recreation space such as gyms, handball courts, health clubs, interpretive centers pr similar facilities. A fee may be imposed for the use of such facilities. / nl ixmtnwn MactPr Plan 60 4.11.11 Pedestrian Overpass. A pedestrian overpass may be required to connect the development in this District to the City Beach, as a condition of approval for any new development on, or further subdivision of, parcels within the District. The City may waive this requirement if the City determines that overpasses are unnecessary or impractical considering the type and design of new developments. 4.11.12 Mobile home District. A portion of District#9 is zoned for mobile home use. Within this mobile home area, the provisions of the Mobile home District of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code shall apply (see Section 4.16). V 61 Downtown Master Plan Revised 10/93 4.12 DISTRICT#10: PIER-RELATED COMMERCIAL Purpose. This District is intended to provide for commercial uses on and alongside the pier which will enhance and expand the public's use and enjoyment of this area. Uses are encouraged which capitalize on the views available from the pier and the unique recreational or educational opportunities it affords. At the same time, care must be exercised to insure that the major portion of the pier will remain accessible to the public at no charge, for strolling, fishing or observation. thi. nn;4hu, ene hundred and twenty five (125) feet on the seutheast side of Delete the existing p A is .,,hided in the District : a strip of land f em_PCH to the sand-, extending southeast of the pief:te hake StFeet and nef4hwest of the pief to Seventh Street. Boundaries. Shall be consistent with the Coastal Element of the General Plan. r-TI��• ter-�. /<• (- ; W L_J L�El-j_J LJ'L_J L...J L J L .�I_.J,L.11 1I \ '. ._ILL,1_ W uJ L':L•.:::J Li!J lJ L_.L_;!J lLi LJ L__i C J l-__J_Lys FL_� r �� :I�its pr��.R �_I 1 i Downtown Master Plan 62 I �eK 4.12.01 Permitted Uses. The following uses may be meted allowed in District #10 subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit. New Aquariums Format • Bait and tackle shops Beach rentals • Commercial uses or public recreation facilities (beach-related) • Museums • Parking lots that will not result in the loss of recreational sand area. Tiered parking is permitted within the Downtown Specific Plan area on existing lots seaward of Pacific Coast Highway provided the parking is designed so that the top of the structures including walls, etc., are located a minimum of one foot below the maximum height of the adjacent bluff. • Restaurants (including fast food with take out windows) • Retail sales (beach-related) Note: Only parking uses are permitted in this District northwest of Sixth Street. 4.12.02 Minimum Parcel Size. No minimum parcel size shall be required in this District. 4.12.03 Maximum Density/Intensity. No maximum density or intensity requirement shall be applied in this District. 4.12.04 Maximum Height. The maximum building heights shall be twenty-five (25) feet and no more than two (2) stories above the pier level. Exception: The maximum building height on the pier(excluding the end of the pier cafe) and northwest of the pier shall be one (1) story. No maximum building height shall be required for lifeguard towers or other facilities necessary for public safety. No parking surface or structure shall exceed the adjacent elevation of PCH. 4.12.05 Maximum Site Coverage. No maximum site coverage shall be required. Exception: No more than twenty-five (25) percent of the pier shall be covered by any building or roofed structure. In addition, buildings or other roofed structures shall not be constructed along more than twenty-five (25) percent of the perimeter of the pier. 4.12.06 Setback (Front Yard). No minimum front yard setback shall be required. 4.12.07 Setback (Side Yard). No minimum side yard setback shall be required. 4.12.08 Setback (Rear Yard). No minimum rear yard setback shall be required. 4.12.09 Setback (Upper Story). No minimum upper story setback shall be required. 4.12.10 Open Space. Public open space and pedestrian access shall be major considerations of development in this District. All new development shall provide sufficient clear width along the length of the pier for public access, emergency and service vehicles. In addition, public walkways along the pier edge or around the perimeter of new development must be provided. l" 63 Downtown Master Plan Revised 10/93 4.1 3 DISTRICT #11: BEACH OPEN SPACE Purpose. This District is intended to preserve and protect the sandy beach area within the Downtown Specific Plan boundaries while allowing parking and auxiliary beach- related commercial and convenience uses. Approximately half of the beach frontage in the District is City beach; the remainder is owned by the State of California. Boundaries. District#11 is bounded by PCH on one side and the Pacific Ocean on the other. The District extends from Goldenwest Street to Beach Boulevard, except for the area which is part of District#10. f" iOWI 1.1 C�1C1 i�f =rJL. `•\ �\ \\ \\ I I / J 'Lu J:-J LEI L� .J-._LJ L.�LJ l�'lLJ1t\ 1, 1 Downtown Master Plan 64 N�w 4.13.01 Permitted Uses. New construction and establishment of the following uses in District #11 shall be pe peFmiRed may be allowed subject to approval of the Design Review Board. ,veW0 Access facilities Fo.mor Basketball Courts Beach concession stands* • Bicycle trails and support facilities Fire rings Paddle board courts • Parking lots that will not result in the loss of recreational sand area. Tiered parking is permitted within the Downtown Specific Plan area on existing lots seaward of Pacific Coast Highway provided the parking is designed so that the top of the structures including walls, etc., are located a minimum of one foot below the maximum height of the adjacent bluff. • Park offices+ playground equipment • Public restrooms • Public transit facilities and associated structures, dressing rooms or showers* • Shoreline construction that may alter natural shoreline process, such as groins, cliff retaining walls,pipelines, outfalls that are designed to eliminate adverse impacts on local shoreline sand supply • Trails (bicycle or jogging) and support facilities • Volleyball net supports *Note: Beach concession stands shall be limited to twenty-five hundred(2500) square feet and spaced at intervals no closer than one thousand (1,000) feet. Beach concession structures shall be located within or immediately adjacent to paved parking or access areas. **Note: Public transit facilities may only be constructed within the existing paved parking areas or in areas which are not part of the beach. 4.13.02 Minimum Parcel Size. No minimum parcel size shall be required . 4.13.03 Maximum Dens ity/lntg-, i . No maximum density or intensity requirement shall be applied in this District. 4.13.04 Maximum Building Height. The maximum building heights shall be limited to twenty (20) feet. Exceptions: No maximum building height shall be required for lifeguard towers or other facilities necessary for public safety. No parking surface or structure shall.exceed the adjacent elevation of PCH. 4.13.05 Maximum Site Coverage. No maximum site coverage shall be required. 4.13.06 Setback (Front Yard). No minimum front yard setback shall be required. v 65 Downtown Master Plan Revised 10/93 4.13.07 Setback (Side Yard). No minimum side yard setback shall be required. 4.13.08 Setback (Rear Yard). No minimum rear yard setback shall be required . 4.13.09 Setback (Upper Story). No minimum upper story setback shall be required. 4.13.10 Open Space. Public open space and pedestrian access shall be major considerations of development in this District. ' 4.13.11 Parking. No additional parking shall be required for new development in this District. Construction which proposes the removal of existing parking, shall provide.for the replacement of that parking on a one-for-one basis within the District. 4.13.12 Resource Production Overlay. A portion of District#11 is designated with an Oil. Suffix (0,01). Within this area, all the requirements of the Resource Production Overlay shall apply (see Section 4.14). QI .0 Downtown Master Plan 66 67 Downtown Master Plan Revised 10/93 1.11:IAT - Pit Suffixes -01 \ . ' r ,♦♦ ♦♦ - ♦ e \♦ C. (:, ., I.S c Ic, ,c, .c� c,` y7� _ r•+±. CF-R CI 4 ii� CF-. .. -. .i _ as■ - 1 Revised January 1989 IKIM HUNTINGTON BEACH CALIFORNIN Oil District Overlay sV €. ''LANNING DIVISION FT r2 F 4 . 1.4 4.14 RESOURCE PRODUCTION OVERLAY Purpose. The Downtown Specific Plan area overlies long-productive oil pools. Many facilities are still operating because of the extent of the remaining reserves, therefore oil production will continue to be permitted in parts of this area. The City provides for oil facilities by designating oil "suffix" zoning Districts in connection with an underlying base zone such as a commercial or residential District. Both oil facilities allowed by suffix and the other uses allowed by the base zone are permitted. Currently, the City has two oil suffixes the "0" which allows existing oil wells and attendant facilities but no new wells, and the "0V which allows the drilling of new wells in addition to all uses in the "0" District. These suffixes, with certain modifications, are also employed in this Specific Plan. In addition to.the oil suffixes three Resource Production Overlays have been identified. Existing and/or expanded oil production may continue in these areas provided that the additional conditions outlined in this subsection are met. 4.14.01 Oil Overlay "A" The regulations in this overlay District facilitate continued oil recovery, but require all new facilities to be concentrated into a screened, soundproofed and landscaped expansion of the existing oil site and encourage the expeditious removal of existing wells from oil overlay "B". Boundaries. Oil overlay "A" includes an existing oil island located in District #2, between 19th and 1 Sth streets from Pacific Coast Highway to the area is Walnut Avenue. Regulations. New wells and related facilities shall be permitted in accordance with the -01 suffix and related provisions in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code provided, however, that the following additional conditions are met: (a) Any new well must be part of a secondary or other enhanced oil recovery project of used as a replacement of an existing well. (b) A schedule for abandonment of all wells operated by the project proponent which are located within Bolsa Chica State Beach shall be submitted to and approved by the Director of Development Services prior to the drilling of any new well. This schedule may be amended at the discretion of the Director of Development Services. Downtown Master Plan 70 T)-.,:--A 1!l/0'2 (c) The project proponent shall agree to a memorandum of understanding with the City as a condition for approval, stating that no new wells shall be drilled by that company on Bolsa Chica State Beach (oil overlay "B") nor shall the existing wells be redrilled except, in such cases where: 1) the redrilled well will be produced by a "subsurface" or "down-hole" pump, only, or 2) the redrilled well will be produced by other new technology with fewer visual and environmental impacts than a conventional ball and plunger, pump, or 3) an intensified screening plan is approved the Director of Development Services which substantially improves the appearance of the area. (d) The operation site hall be screened by a wall, fence, or structure in keeping with the character of the area. The site shall also be landscaped so as to ensure visual compatibility with the surrounding area. A screening and landscaping plan must be submitted to and approved by the Director. All structures shall generally conform to the height limits and setback requirements of the base District. The Director may waive these restriction if it would result in better overall soundproofing, odor reduction and/or visual compatibility. 4.14.02 Oil Overlay "B" The regulations in this overlay facilitate continued oil recovery, wells may be redrilled if surface pumping units are replaced with a subsurface ones. Drilling of new wells may be permitted but only if the result is a significant reduction in the amount of space used for oil operations on the beach. Boundaries. Oil overlay "B" comprises a section of Bolsa Chica State Beach currently in oil production in District#11 between Goldenwest and 11 th streets. Regulations. Wells may be redrilled in accordance with the -0 suffix in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code provided, however, that the following additional conditions are met: (a) The operator submits a report to the Department of Development Services explaining why there is no other feasible, environmentally less damaging inland site (such a report must be approved by the Director); or agrees to a memorandum of understanding with the City stating that the redrilled well will be produced by a subsurface or down-hole pump or other new technology with fewer visual and environmental impacts than a conventional ball and plunger pump. (b) A schedule for abandonment of all wells operated by the project proponent which are located within Bolsa Chica State Beach shall be submitted to and approved by the Director of Development Services prior to the drilling of any new well. This schedule may be amended at the discretion of the Director of Development Services. (c) All redrilling operations shall be limited to a period from October 1 to May 31, except for emergencies for which the Fire Chief may waive these seasonal restrictions, but shall require soundproofing in accordance with Title 15 of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code. 71 Downtown Master Plan Revised 10/93 New wells may be penmitted if they are part of an overall consolidation plan which significantly reduces the area used for oil facilities or expedites the removal of existing oil facilities within the overlay area. A consolidation plan must be submitted to the Director of Development Services for approval before a permit for drilling any new well will be issued. All drilling operations must be conducted in accordance with the requirements of the 01 suffix in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. 4.14.03 Oil Overlay "C" The regulations in the overlay facilitate continued oil recovery and provides for future oil production needs. Boundaries. Oil overlay "C" is an irregularly shaped site in District #8A between Lake Street and Huntington Avenue and Atlanta Avenue. Regulations. Well drilling and redrilling shall be permitted in accordance with Title 15 of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code and with the 0 or 01 suffix and related provisions in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. A conceptual site plan for the entire overlay area must be submitted prior to permitting any project development or subdivision of land within the overlay. The plan shall include at least one (1) oil island of not less than two (2) acres in size for new oil well drilling and oil production. Such island(s) shall be incorporated into the overall development plan so that noise, odor and visual impacts on the residences are minimized, and safe access to the oil site(s) is provided. Findings that at least one such island so designed is incorporated into the plan shall be made by the Planning Commission before approving any development project. Downtown Master Plan 72 Revised 10/93 4.15 CONSERVATION OVERLAY Purpose. The conservation overlay is intended to regulate those areas which have been preliminary identified as wetlands. Upon determination by the California Department of Fish and Game that an area is classified as a wetland the conditions of this overlay shall apply Boundary. The State Department of Fish and Game has identified an area within District 8B as containing .8 acres of existing wetland and 1.4 acres of restorable wetland. The 2.2 acre area is immediately adjacent to Beach Boulevard(see Figure 4.14). Reeulations. Development shall be permitted only pursuant to an overall development plan for the entire overlay area and subject to the following: as a condition of any development on this parcel, topographic, vegetation, and soils information identifying the extent of any existing wetlands shall be submitted to the Director. The information shall be prepared by a qualified professional, and shall be subject to review by the California Department of Fish and Game. If any wetland is determined by the Department of Fish and Game to be severely degraded pursuant to Sections 30233 and 30411 of the California Coastal Act, or if it is less than one (1) acre in size, other restoration options may be undertaken, pursuant to the Coastal Commission's "Statewide Interpretive Guidelines for Wetlands and other Wet Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas." Conservation easements, dedications or other similar mechanisms shall be required over all wetland areas as a condition of development, to assure permanent protection. Public vehicular traffic shall be prohibited in wetland areas governed by a conservation easement. Specific drainage and erosion control requirements shall be incorporated into the project design to ensure that wetland areas are not adversely affected. No further subdivision of any parcel shall be permitted which would have the effect of dividing off environmentally sensitive habitat from other portions of such parcels for which urban uses are permitted in the City's Coastal Element until such time as the permanent protection of any wetland is assured. Within areas identified as wetlands in the coastal zone, the uses of the Coastal Conservation District shall supersede the uses of the FP and FP2 district. 1 �� Downtown Master Plan le N. 77 ion 00 A _i;' 1`:'i-.:�`''", r LEGM yr�l Degraded Wetlands Restorable Wetlands Specific Plan Boundary o _ 8b A r00 8 MAM am wo - q CF -R Revised January 1989 a� ~ SAM. HUNTINGTON BEACH C4LIFORNIA Conservation Overt,_--Y PLANNING DIVISION 46 FIGURE 4 . 15 7� 4.16 MOBILE HOME DISTRICT Purpose. The Downtown Specific Plan includes approximately 24 acres with a Mobile home District (MH) designation. The purpose of the Mobile home District is to permit present mobile home park uses to continue. These mobile home areas fall within Districts Seven, Eight and Nine of the Downtown Specific Plan. Boundaries. The Mobile home District encompasses parts of Districts 7, 8 and 9. The following describes the real property in two sections. Section One is approximately 6.2 acres in size located on the north side of Pacific Coast Highway between Huntington and Lake Streets. That portion of fractional Section 14, Township 6 South, Range 11 West in the Rancho Las Bolsas, City of Huntington Beach, County of Orange, State of California, as shown on a map recorded in Boot: 51, page 14 of Miscellaneous Maps in the office of the County Recorder of said county, described as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the centerline of Lake Street (formerly First Street) being parallel with and 37.50 feet southeasterly measured 147 feet right angles from the northwesterly line of Block 101 with the north right-of-way line of Pacific Coast Highway (formerly Ocean Avenue), also being the southeasterly extension of the southwesterly line of Block No. 101, all as shown on a map of Huntington Beach, recorded in Book 3, page 36 of Miscellaneous Maps in the office of the County Recorder of said county; thence south 41'38'18" west 53.00 feet along the centerline of Lake Street to the construction centerline of Pacific Coast Highway; thence along said construction centerline the following, south 4838'18" west 53.00 feet along the centerline of Lake Street to the construction centerline of Pacific Coast Highway; thence along said construction centerline the following, south 48°21'42" east 98.26 feet to a curve concave to the northeast having a radius of 1200 feet; thence southeasterly along said curve through a central angle of 4°55'28" an arc distance of 103.14 feet; thence south 53°1 T 11" east 108.26 feet to a curve concave to the northeast having a radius of 3328.60 feet: thence southeasterly along said curve through a central angle of 1'20'17" an arc distance of 77.72 feet; thence south 54°37'28" east 400.00 feet; thence leaving said construction centerline north 35022'32" east 52.00 feet to the true point of beginning; thence south 54°37'28" east 427.26 feet; thence south 59°15'30" east 263.04 feet to the southwesterly extension of the westerly line of Huntington Street; thence 37054'51" east 290.61 feet along said extension and said westerly line; thence north 54°05'09" west 520.00 feet; t;►ence south 5°54'51" west 120 feet; thence south 57032'32" west 55.85 feet; thence north 57°05'09" west 70.00 feet; thence north 12005'09" west 120.00 feet, thence north 35°54'51" east 130.00 feet; thence north 54°05'09" west 170.00 feet; thence south 35°54'51" west 80.00 feet; thence north 89°05'09" west 70.00 feet; thence south 00°54'51" west 170.00 feet; thence south 80°05'09" east 83.83 feet; thence south 35°22'32" west 157.67 feet to the true point of beginning. p .6_I Downtown Master Plan 76 Revised 10/93 ed - > 8b �\ c ,� ,� o •�� e y No PACK OCEAN �V Revised January 1989 Fu'1NTINGTON BEACH C4LIFORNIA (Mobile He- ,e Zonin4 ir p NNING DIVISION FIGUt(E 4 . 16 Section Two is approximately 18 acres in size located on the west side of Beach Boulevard north of Pacific Coast Highway. Beginning at the southeast corner of the northeast quarter of the northeast quarter of said Section 14; thence south 89°43'00" west 111.91 feet along the north line of the south half of the northeast quarter of said section to the true point of beginning; thence south 3°29'43" west 593.12 feet; thence south 25'32'14" west 386.94 feet; thence south 11°44'36" east 771.48 feet; thence south 80°00'00" west 82.75 feet; thence north 52°00'00" west 835.00 feet; thence north 38°00'00" east 300.00 feet; thence north 50°08'13" west 173.58 feet; thence north 45°00'00" east 84.85 feet to point "A" (to be used as a reference for the exception portion of this description); thence north 43°17'55" west 714.49 feet; thence due west 40.00 feet; thence south 49°45'49" west 170.29 feet; thence north 74°28'33" west 186.82 feet; thence north 51°45'58" west 420.51 feet; thence north 09 T36" east 59.76 feet to the north line of the south half of the northeast quarter of said section; thence north 89°43'00" east 1,844.00 feet along said north line to the true point of beginning. Excepting therefrom the following: beginning at said Point "A",thence north 45°00'00" east 190.00 feet to the true point of beginning; thence north 43°1T55" west 550.00 feet; thence(north 89°43'00" east 640.00 feet; thence south 3°29'43" west 254.03 feet; thence south 25°32'14" west 303.23 feet; thence north 43°17'55" west 170.00 feet to the true point of beginning. Regulations. The regulations of the Downtown Specific Plan will serve as overlays for those portions of Districts Seven, Eight and Nine which retain the (MH) zone, until such time that the Mobile home District designation is removed. All areas retaining the (MH) zone shall be subject to the provisions of the Mobile home District of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. In addition, these areas are subject to the provisions of the Mobile home Overlay Zones/Removal/Rezoning/Change of Use Article of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. Downtown Master Plan 78 DOWNTOWNMASTER PLAN OCTOBER, 1993 (Building Square Footage Analysis) 1. EXISTING BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE A) Occupied 326,726 B) Vacant 56,213 C) Under Construction 64.600 TOTAL: 447,539 z APPROVED B Y ENTITLEMENT BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE A) New Building Area 82,000 B) Demo Building Area -51.963 TOTAL: 30,237 (net increase) 3. EXISTING&APPROVED TOTAL BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE A) Existing 447,539 B) Approved 30.237 . TOTAL 477,776 4. ANTICIPATED SITES FOR REHAB/NEW CONSTRUCTION A) Of the total 477,776 s£, 109,000 sf. of existing building area(six sites) have the potential for rehab/new construction. B) We anticipate this building area to be replaced.at a one-to-one ratio, thus, the total downtown building area is not expected to exceed 500,000 sf. Q� ATTACHKNT NO. DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN OCTOBER, 1993 (Building Square Footage Analysis) GL OSSAR Y OF TERMS OCCUPIED: Existing buildings/suites which have tenants currently occupying floor area. VACANT: Existing buildings/suites which do not have tenants currently occupying floor area. ENTITLEMENT: City approved projects that have the potential to be built sometime in the future. ANTICIPATED: Staff analysis of sites which have development potential under the "Village Concept." UNDER CONSTRUCTION: New buildings that are presently being constructed and do not have occupied floor area. DEMOLISH: Existing buildings which will be demolished to allow new construction to occur. NET INCREASE: The difference in floor area between the new construction of entitlement projects and the resulting demolition of existing buildings to allow new construction. NEW CONSTRUCTION: New buildings that have been' approved through the entitlement process, but have not been built. FLOOR AREA: Building/suites gross square footage. a EXISTING BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE PGA' A) Occupied 326,726 ♦ �' B) Vacant 56,213 _ ♦ I ♦ C) Under Construction 64.600 i ♦ ♦ /=TOTAL: 447,539 PECAN / II i i I , ORANGE I n E OLIVE IIIMIIMI mm WALNUT ` - f _ = Z 0 Z Z w 0 i w DCf) W PACIFIC COAST HWY. ® DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN EXISTING BUILDING SQ. FT. R`� HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING DIVISION APPROVED BY ENTITLEMENT BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE A) New Building Area 82,000 /pGQ� B) Demo Building Area -51,963 _ I OTAL: 30,237(net increase) PECAN / H G I ! ORANGE — o I � E F HW OLIVE I I C D o WALNUT N _ —. "' Cn ~_ _ Cn r Z tz z n B 0 rn � PACIFIC COAST HWY. �s i��t-rissL. DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN M APPROVED BY ENTITLEMENT BLDG. SQ. FT. � q HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING DIVISION ,•�`a f�s� � . _ _ .�'.;. •'Y�•`.fir.. • i - r � t7 E1ftK� i ANTICIPATED SITES FOR REHAB/V£f:i<'CONSTRUCTION G�. Of the total 477,776 sf., 109,000 sf.of existing building area(six sites)halve PGp� the potential for rehab/new construction. We anticipate this building area to be replaced at a one-to-one ratio,thus,the total do;town building area is not expected to exceed 500,000 sf. PLC;AN ORANGE — -- 17 F I - E F I OLIVECn I, [� o � �- a w WALNUT z w III UL PACIFIC COAST HWY. DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN ANTICIPATED SITES FOR REHAB/NEW CONSTRUCTION HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING DMSION 1� ff I' CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH TO: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrator FROM: Howard Zelefsky, Planning Director DATE: November 17, 1993 1 SUBJECT: Downtown Master Plan Building Square Footage Analysis At the October 11, 1993, City Council workshop on the Downtown Specific Plan and Shared Parking Plan, discussion regarding the ultimate building square footage for the "Village Concept" became an issue. There seemed to be some confusion generated by an exhibit presented by the IBI Group. Specifically,the discussion centered around the Downtown Land Use Summary(Exhibit 3)of the IBI report and the uncertainty as to the total building square footage at build out. The exhibit in the IBI report led the Council to incorrectly believe that ultimate build out under a"Village Concept" would be 637,192 sf. This number was arrived by adding three categories together. The three categories are; 1) Existing/Under Construction, 2) Entitled, and 3)Anticipated. The following is a table of the three categories that led to the confusion. EXISTING/ UNDER CONSTRUCTION 439,290 ENTITLED 61,000 ANTICIPATED 136,902 INCORRECT TOTAL 637,192 The total building square footage derived by the addition of the three categories is misleading. The numbers cannot be ana�yzed as a cumulative total but as separate totals for analysis of peak parking impacts. As an example, some of the numbers when analyzed as a whole are double counted and therefor the totals are skewed upward and not reflective of the activity of the Downtown and the ultimate "Village Concept". Planning staff has reviewed these numbers and believes that ultimate build out will not exceed approximately 500,000 sf. The following chart illustrates how these numbers were arrived at. DTPMP Page 2 The analysis done by staff is a review of the square footage numbers utilized as the basis for the "Village Concept" and Shared Parking Plan. The numbers are from attachment no.l of the DTPMP presented to the City Council on August 30, 1993. In an effort to help understand the building square footage and how the totals are computed, staff has prepared a breakdown of these numbers for analysis. They are as follows: 1. EXISTING BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE A) Occupied 326,726 B) Vacant 56,213 C) Under Construction 64,000 TOTAL: 447,539 2. APPROVED BY ENTITLEMENT BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE A) New Building Area 82,000 ( Coultrup, 3rd block) B) Demo Building Area 5.1,963 TOTAL: 30,237 (net increase) 3. EXISTING & APPROVED TOTAL BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE A) Existing 447,539 B) Approved 30.237 TOTAL: 477,776 4. ANTICIPATED SITES FOR RERAB/NEW CONSTRUCTION A) Of the total 477,776 sf. , 109,000 sf. of existing building area(six sites) have the potential for rehab/new construction. B) We anticipate this building area to be replaced at a one to one ratio, thus, the total downtown building area is not expected to exceed 500,000 sf. i DTPMP Page 3 As can be seen from the above analysis, the total cumulative building square footage for the Downtown core area is approximately 500,000 sf.,not 637,192 sf. The analysis of these numbers and the anticipated activity of development in the Downtown is in line with the intent of the "Village Concept". If you need any further information or would like to discuss this matter in more detail, please call me or Herb Fauland, Associate Planner at ext.5438 HZ:hf xc: Ray Silver,Assistant City Administrator Mike Adams, Director of Special Projects Barbara Kaiser, Director of Economic Development Louis Sandoval, Director of Public Works Michael Dolder, Fire Chief Ronald Lowenberg, Police Chief Ronald Hagan, Director of Community Services Robert Franz, Deputy City Administrator Ron Hayden, Director of Library Services Gail Hutton, City Attorney Connie Brockway, City Clerk 1 [On CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH TO: MELANIE FALLON, Director of Community Development FROM: GAIL HUTTON, City Attorney DATE: March 3, 1994 SUBJECT: Request for City Council Motion re: Downtown Specific Plan RLS # 94- You have asked for a draft City Council motion which would allow the Main-Pier Phase 2 and 3d Block West projects to obtain building permits regardless of the status of the new Downtown Specific Plan. We recommend that the following: I MOVE THAT the ordinance adopting the Downtown Specific Plan include the following language: The provisions of this ordinance shall not apply to Conditional Use Permits or Tentative Tract Maps that have been approved prior to the effective date of this ordinance. Building Permits shall be issued for such previously approved entitlements if the applications for such building permits are consistent therewith. GAIL HUTTON City Attorney 2c% +m LO Lp 4\03/04/94 CA 94-1 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH COUNCIL - ADMINISTRATOR COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members SUBMITTED BY: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Adminis PREPARED BY: Melanie S. Fallon, Community Development Director SUBJECT: DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN/CODE AMENDMENT NO. 92-5 DATE: March 3, 1994 As part of the recommended action to approve the Downtown Specific Plan, a statement should be included in the Council's motion to approve, which states that projects that have approved entitlements (Main Pier Phase II and Third Block West) shall be permitted to obtain building permits and construct their projects pursuant to the codes in effect at the time of approval. The motion shall be for those projects which have valid(non-expired) entitlements. The City Attorney's Office will prepare the motion for the Council's recommended action. xc: Ray Silver, Assistant City Administrator Barbara Kaiser, Economic Development Director Howard Zelefsky, Planning Director Gail Hutton, City Attorney MSF:lp mflp0198 ' , AT !- / OW—O,W SPE0C NO - 1 0 g PAGE NO. CODE ISSUE: PLANN1N.G.., ...: :�: :COMMITTEE,... :,STAFF COMMISSION:SECTION. COMMENTS ,. ......- . ........ . RECOMNMNDATION: . ,.. ::ACTION DTSPIDTPMP No change None Add- Reference Agree with Committee "SILENT" when DTSP/DTPMP is silent that Division 9 is applicable Pg. 4 4.0.04 Public Open No change None Add- Language to Agree with Committee Definition Space Augment "Public Open Space" definition Pg. 4 4.04.4 Gross Floor No change None Add- Definition of Agree with Committee Definition Area Gross Floor Area to DTSP Pg. 36 4.6.01 Permitted No change Allow option for Agree with Public Agree with Committee Use commercial Comment Pg. 55 4.9.10 Open Space No change None Require Minimum Agree with Committee 10% Open Space H, lid 8S �l h uw Ali Alta Downtown Specific Plan 6 3A1333N hfca925-2 Subcommittee Review-(New) 'A Pr COD Y,N a WW & T 1941 ,VS 9 wl :PA STAFF . ..... GE NO. CODE:�.::.:.': ISSUE :PLANNING, :: : PUBLICCOMMENTS COMMITTEE.,,... . ..... SECTION — COMMISSION COMMENTS:: RECOMMENDATION: .. .... ACTION. Pg. 19 Parking Plan Bldg. Sq. Ft. No change Existing Sq. Ft. and Uses Agree with Public Agree with Committee and Uses are "parked" in public Comment parking supply; Demo and rebuild same sq. ft. -No additional parking required IN 1483 — Downtown Specific Plan 7 hfca925-2 Subcommittee Review-(New) �4"Je CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH TO: Ray Silver, Assistant City Administrator FROM: Barbara A. Kaiser, Deputy City Administrator/Economic evelopment SUBJECT: City Council Motion DATE: March 7, 1994 As requested by Councilman Sullivan, I have prepared the motion below to address the issue of future possible acquisition of downtown property using eminent domain to facilitate adoption of the Downtown Master Parking Plan. Motion: "That the Redevelopment Agency directs staff to prepare an amendment to the Main-Pier Redevelopment Plan to extend the eminent domain provision for an additional 12-year period, and other actions as required under the new legislation AB 1290." lu CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH COUNCIL - ADMINISTRATOR COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL VIA: MICHAEL T. UBERUAGA, CITY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: RAY SILVER,ASSISTANT CITY ADMINISTRATOR DATE: MARCH 7, 1994 SUBJECT: CORRECTIONS TO AGENDA ITEM D-1 MATRIX The matrix included in the Council Agenda packet for the March 7 meeting has been corrected for item D-1, Code Amendment No. 92-5 Downtown Specific Plan rewrite "Village Concept" and Parking Master Plan. The corrected matrix for D-1 is attached and is printed in yellow. The corrections to the matrix in the yellow copy are printed in bold print. Staff will go over these corrections during the Council Agenda review and when the item is presented to Council at the Public Hearing. RECEIVED AND MADE A PART OF THE RECORD AT MEETING ITEM NO. 1 OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK CONNIE BROCKWAY �3h13�3N "M WN" IN ECIF1 'rTE 41-9 �IRFK E "od A R, "s �5MQINNTO S P On OVAMENDMENTW92L W, x, 7 U "It V., -W MI PAGE:NO :; i"CODE :�:J.::�JSSUU��:� �P..UBLIC:,:CONMENTS:. :.::�;COMMITTEE.:: ::.:STAFF:::::: ................. N SECTION ..00MM1SSXON.:.': COMMENTS :RFCOMMF, DATION ........ ........... ................... .......... ....... ................ .. ....... ...... ...... !�ACTION''::' ... ....... Pg. 2 4-.0.04 Build to Line No change Clarify/delete No change No change Definition Pg. 3 4.0.04 Facade No change Clarify change - "of' to "or" Agree with Committee �R Definition Recommendation Pg. 4 4.0.04 FAR 'No change Clarify "building site" to Agree with Committee Definition gross floor area"; Recommendation add "net site area" Pg. 4 4.0.04 Public Open No change ' Clarify Add "general" to Agree with Committee Space public Recommendation Pg. 4 4.0.04 Setback No change Clarify No change No change Definition Pg. 8 4.2.01(d) Required No change change - H.B. Ordinance Add- "Or as Agree with Committee Exception Parking Code to Downtown Master required by the Recommendation (General Parking Plan Downtown Master Provision) Parking Plan" Pg. 8 4.2.0 1(d) Non- No change Inability to re-finance due Modify Div. 9 to Agree with Committee (General conforming to non-conforming status address issue Recommendation x. Provision) Pg.9 4.2.04(a) Maximum 15' First Story Add-"Interior Floor to Agree with Agree with Committee k (General Building 10" Second Story, Interior Ceiling" Planning and Planning Provision) Height etc. (Commercial) Commission action Commission Pg. 12 4.2.13 Parking Except as change - "All Add only - "Or as Agree with Committee (General provided in developments" to "All required by the Recommendation Provision) Section 4.2.29 existing or new Downtown Master. (Affordable Developments" and "H.B. Parking Plan" Housing) Ordinance Code to Downtown Master Parking Plan" NING PUBLIC.CONMENT& ...0..:W MITTEE STAFF TAGEN.0. CO ISSUE Pt . ............ ........................ SECTION COMMISS ION COMMENTS: RECOMMENDATION �:REC MMENDATION: 10 AC , N., Pg. 14 4.2.13(A) Parking Parking in Dist. 3, Add- Dist. 2 to Master Do not include Dist. Do not include Dist. 2 in (General (Commercial) 4, 5, 6 and 10, on- Parking Plan, Eliminate 2, eliminate 350' parking plan and modify Provision) site or as modified 350' walking distance limitation. Add - 350' to 500' limitation & by the Parking limitation "Or by payment of CE. Master Plan. an in-lieu parking Balance within fee walking distance not to exceed 350'. Pg. 14 4.2.13(b) Screening of Require lot to be Add - exception: For lots Agree with Planning Agree with Committee (General Parking Lot screened that abut alley side only Commission.action and Planning Commission Provision) action Pg. 14 4.2.14(E) Landscaping No change Add-exception for lots that Agree with Planning Agree with Committee (General (require screening) abut alley side only Commission action and Planning Commission Provision) action Pg. 16 4.2.15(E) Street No change change - City to City Agree to modify Agree with Public (General Vacation Council, Add - subject to Comment Provision) Public Hearing Pg. 16 4.2.15 (f) Street No change None change: "5 feet" to Agree with Committee (General Vacation max 42 inches" Recommendation Provision) Pg. 16 4.2.16(A) Access Ways Commercial/ Commercial/Mixed Use, 24' alley;modify to 28' alley (General Mixed Use, alley alley 20', allow existing allow curb cuts Provision) 24' curb cuts (Main Street) (Main) min.100' Pg. 16 4.2.16(A) Access Ways No change Add-Note: No more than Agree with Public Agree with Public 4. (General 1/2 of the total alley Comment Comment Provision) dedication shall be from one side Pg. 26 4.4.01 Permitted change - "Shall be Add - Single Family Add: Single Agree with Committee (Dist. 2) Uses permitted" to Residential Family; subject to "May be allowed" Eliminate - Subject to CUP DRB only approval Downtown Specific Plan 2 hfca925 Subcommittee Review . .... .... ....... -4. LIC.1 - V ENTS: T STAFF`ISSUE::::::;:;_ PLANNING BkXGENOCODf: . ........ ....... ................ - �: :::::: ::R.EC MMENDATION: SECTION COMMISSION* COMMENTS. :.;. .... ............ A: ........ .. . ......... .. ............ ............... . ................. .. ......... CTI0 N:-:* ..... .. . . ............ Pg. 26 4.4.03 Density, Lot Less than 50' - Less than 50' add: 11,500 Agree with Planning Agree with Committee (Dist. 2) size-frontage 1DU, 50' - 4DU, sq. ft. of net lot area. Not Commission action and Planning Commission 5 V up to 100'-3 0 to exceed 2 units per 25' of action units, 101' to full frontage block-35 units (all net acre) Pg. 27 4.4.07 Setback(side No change Add-Tandem parking may Agree with Planning Agree with Committee (Dist. 2) yard) be allowed Commission action and Planning Commission action Pg. 27 4.4.08 Setback(rear No change Add -Note: No more than Agree with Public Agree with Public (Dist. 2) yard) 1/2 of the total alley Comment Comment f. dedication shall be from one side Pg. 36 4.6 Boundary Boundary change: Do not change boundary Agree with Public Agree with Planning (Dist. 4) From Dist. 5 to Comment Commission action Dist. 4 (Portion of) Pg. 40 4.7 Boundary Boundary change: Do not change boundary Agree with Public Agree with Planning (Dist. 5) From Dist. 5 to Comment Commission action Dist. 4 (Portion of) Pg. 41 4.7.01(A) Permitted New construction change to - Permitted uses Permitted Uses Agree with Committee (Dist. 5) Uses and establishment shall include but not be require No CUP, (New format throughout of commercial limited to the following new construction document) uses may be subject to a CUP and change of allowed subject to certain uses require a CUP CUP Pg. 43 4.7.01(d) Commercial No change Allow all commercial uses Agree with Public Agree with Committee (Dist. 5) Uses on the first floor to be Comment and Public Comment allowed on the second Downtown Specific Plan 3 hfca925 Subcommittee Review c. '< : STAFF ; : :: : »COMMITTEESSUE.. E : .... . ... .. . . . `. . :COMMENTS : RECOMMENDATION .CO MISSION .; .. . ACTION '. " . P 45 4.7.08 Setback rear ROW- 24' Alle ROW- 20' Alle Width ROW-24' Alle ROW-28' Alle Width g• ( ( Y ( Y ) ( Y ( Y ) (Dist. 5) yard) Width) Width) 4: Pg. 45 4.7.10 Open Space No change Add- Interior parcels, 150' Agree with Planning Agree with Committee ; (Dist. 5) or more, 10% open space, Commission action, and Planning Commission z' i'. delete "amenity" delete "amenity" action Pg. 48 4.8.01(A) Permitted New construction change to: - Permitted uses Permitted Uses Agree with Committee G; (Dist. 6) Uses and establishment shall include but not be require No CUP, (New format throughout : of commercial limited to the following new construction document) uses may be subject to a CUP and change of ' allowed subject to certain uses require a CUP CUP Pg. 50 4.8.03 Density FAR 1.25 FAR 1.5 Agree with Public Agree with Committee r' (Dist. 6) (FAR) Comment and Planning Commission action Pg. 51 4.8.08 Setback(rear change ROW to Add - structures to be ROW 24';add Note ROW to 28' and add Note (Dist. 6) yard) 24" cantilevered to the rear only only : property line, and change - c. ROW to 20', note: 1/2 total s alley dedication from one ? side only S'- Pg. 51 4.8.09 Setback No change change - To 10' from Agree with Public Agree with Planning (Dist. 6) (Upper Story) second story facade Comment Commission action Pg. 51 4.8.10 Open Space No change Add - Interior parcels, 150' Agree with Planning Agree with Committee (Dist. 6) or more, 10% open space, Commission action, and Planning Commission delete "amenity" delete "amenity" action r Pg. 51 4.10.01 Permitted No change None Include - Public Agree with Committee , (Dist. 8) Uses Transportation Center Option i C Downtown Specific Plan 4 hfca925 Subcommittee Review t *'PxftkIN6"""#b "'I"'N' ""grl i'77 OW-1, MN", A- 8XV A", 101,""A M'H V, IMP, Ag 'F j, L I"App M, V '�f , "' V, ,--K V""I "'Rg §SURb A E W PAGE NO. CODE ISSUE PLANNING PUBLIC COMMENTS COMMITTEE STAFF SECTION COMMISSION COMMENTS RECOMMENDATION ACTION Pg. 6 Parking Plan Bldg. sq. ft. No change Take cap off, allow market No change Agree with Committee s. caps driven development and Planning Commission action Pg. 9 Parking Plan Public vs. No change Allow only public parking No change Agree with Committee private spaces to be used in the and Planning Commission parking plan action Pg. 18 Parking Plan Codify No change Codify Parking Agree with Public Agree with Committee Parking Reduction based upon Comment and Public Comment Reductions IBI report Pg. 19 Parking Plan Area 1 vs. No change Allow the plan to be No change Agree with Committee Area 2 (N/S governed under the area I and Planning Commission of Orange) scenario action Pg. 21 Parking Plan Alternative No change Identify future location Maintain option for Agree with Committee (Future) City to purchase Parking Sites property Pg. 22 Parking Plan In Lieu Fees No change Reduction in fee, require to No change Agree with Committee be used for new public and Planning Commission parking action c. t. tt Downtown Specific Plan 5 hfca925 Subcommittee Review x...m n,�� ..m .......�« ,sn^'%F.'w. :�.E" ... ; x -a925/D®OWNT®W N SPEC°IF,IC.PL.,«b.'s , � .�EI.00I''' .':::: .: PAGE E ISSUE.:::;:;: .. PLANNING:;,:.:.:;';;,;PUBLIG:.GOMMENTS:':':_ :COMMLTTEE .:: ;.:;:: STAF' ::: ; G 4, GQD. . _.:::::..:.. ...::. .. . . . . :. r. S TION . COMMISSION. COMM �NTS�;: RECOMMENDATION' .. :::::::..... t .'•:. ::'•':::::::::::::: ::::'•::::::::. .i'•::•:::':. .::•:.::•i:iii:::.: . A . .. : DTSP/DTPMP No change None Add - Reference Agree with Committee "SILENT" when DTSP/DTPMP is silent that Division 9 is applicable Pg. 4 4.0.04 Public Open No change None Add - Language to Agree with Committee Definition Space Augment "Public Open Space" definition " Pg. 4 4.04.4 Gross Floor No change None Add - Definition of Agree with Committee Definition Area Gross Floor.Area to DTSP Pg. 36 4.6.01(Dist.4) Permitted No change Allow option for Agree with Public Agree with Committee Use commercial Comment Pg. 55 4.9.10(Dist.7) Open Space No change None Require Minimum Agree with Committee 10% Open Space f 4 t i� 4 3 C k k E{ S t' frF, ' h 7 - r Downtown Specific Plan 6 hfca925-2 Subcommittee Review-(New) i S' F ON. g- 1W W'0k INS WIR Ids A 9 - -i GY-PLI "All 1,jxiij E I............I'M. C jg "TM M", 1,01 .01, .......... �i�:::Z CODK� PLANNING::":,.:::,:....... P.UBLIC:�COMMENTS:,��;:::,.� :COMMITTEIE::::::::.��:i :!:.STAFF ...:: . PAGE:NO .... .......... .......... ...... ......... COMMENTS COMMENDATION ................- X:... ...... XX ,X ........ ... ...... . CTION� : . .......... ............. .... . ..... ... ... .... . ............. ........ ...- . ..... ..... ........... .......... ... . .. ....... .......... ...... .............. ..... ....... . . ..... Pg. 19 Parking Plan Bldg. Sq. Ft. No change Existing Sq. Ft. and Uses Agree with Public Agree with Committee and Uses are "Parked" in public Comment parking supply; Demo and rebuild same sq. ft. -No additional parking required Downtown Specific Plan 7 hfca925-2 Subcommittee Review-(New) ADDED TO DISTRICT 4 PECAN ORANGE ti •:• ••• .•. OLIVE •,• .. .. �•� ••.61 i• I L L L L > q W F. V PACIFIC COAST HWY. PACIFIC OCEAN 3M4194 mn3 cm DISTRICT 4 1 DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN R HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING DIVISION REMOVED FROM DISTRICT 5 PECAN ORANGE :. •� • ••• ••• ••• •• •�• •• • •• ••• •• •'• ••• OLIVE TOM •�. .•. •• •• .•• :• • F. •• n! ••• ••• •�• •• •�• En NUT WAL Fy cn IzJL z—L z wI L I L PACIFIC COAST HWY. PACIFIC OCEAN YYpI DIS?-SB CDR m DISTRICT 5 1 DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING DIVISION IJ4 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH cak . INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH TO: Ray Silver, Assistant City Administrator FROM: Barbara A. Kaiser, Deputy City Administrator/Econ�micevelopment SUBJECT: City Council Motion DATE: March 7, 1994 As requested by Councilman Sullivan, I have prepared the motion below to address the issue of future possible acquisition of downtown property using eminent domain to facilitate adoption of the Downtown Master Parking Plan. Motion: "That the Redevelopment Agency directs staff to prepare an amendment to the Main-Pier Redevelopment Plan to extend the eminent domain provision for an additional 12-year period, and other actions as required under the new legislation AB 1290." CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH TO: MELANIE FALLON,Director of Community Development FROM: GAIL HUTTON, City Attorney DATE: March 3, 1994 SUBJECT: Request for City Council Motion re: Downtown Specific Plan RLS # 94- You have asked for a draft City Council motion which would allow the Main-Pier Phase 2 and 3d Block West projects to,obtain building permits regardless of the status of the new Downtown Specific Plan. We recommend that the following: I MOVE THAT the ordinance adopting the Downtown Specific Plan include the following language: The provisions of this ordinance shall not apply to Conditional Use Permits or Tentative Tract Maps that have been approved prior to the effective date of this ordinance. Building Permits shall be issued for such previously approved entitlements if the applications for such building permits are consistent therewith. 2A-- .f /J�� GAIL HUTTON City Attorney " r (9 ;. . rnm 4\03/04/94 • C:H y4-1 HN CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH COUNCIL - ADMINISTRATOR COMMUNICATION WNTINGTON BEACH TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members SUBMITTED BY: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administ r PREPARED BY: Melanie S. Fallon, Community Development Director r SUBJECT: DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN/CODE AMENDMENT NO. 92-5 DATE: March 3, 1994 As part of the recommended action to approve the Downtown Specific Plan, a statement should be included in the Council's motion to approve, which states that projects that have approved entitlements (Main Pier Phase II and Third Block West) shall be permitted to obtain building permits and construct their projects pursuant to the codes in effect at the time of approval. The motion shall be for those projects which have valid(non-expired)entitlements. The City Attorney's Office will prepare the motion for the Council's recommended action. xc: Ray Silver, Assistant City Administrator Barbara Kaiser, Economic Development Director Howard Zelefsky, Planning Director Gail Hutton, City Attorney MSF:lp mflp0198 0) C.,.,na s.,O 0 PAGE NO. CODE ISSUE PLANNING., PUBLIC COMMENTS, COMMITTEE. , :,STAFF SECTION . ;:�COMMENTS:.::,COMMISSION - RECOMMENDATION ACTION : DTSP/DTPMP No change None Add - Reference Agree with Committee "SILENT" when DTSP/DTPMP is silent that Division 9 is applicable Pg. 4 4.0.04 Public Open No change None Add-Language to Agree with Committee Definition Space Augment "Public Open Space" definition Pg. 4 4.04.4 Gross Floor No change None Add-Definition of Agree with Committee Definition Area Gross Floor Area to DTSP Pg. 36 4.6.01 Permitted No change Allow option for Agree with Public Agree with Committee Use commercial Comment Pg. 55 4.9.10 Open Space No change None Require Minimum Agree with Committee 10% Open Space Downtown Specific Plan 6 03A1333> hfca925-2 Subcommittee Review-(New) 4v NDMEN�Ti�,92��5/.D.0,WN�r,,,OW,,N,,'.Sa� ' EWPXRJC1Ni OIL K I , 11"("A '�,$STI"", CODE r '144fl, RC- JL4 W` fVIA -SUBCOMMITTEERE4 V 3,11994 IJ PAGE NO. CODE ISSUE ::PLANNINGI-. PUBLIC COMMENTS ' :, COMMITTEE STAFF, SECTION ...... . COMMENTS COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION ACTION Pg. 19 Parking Plan Bldg. Sq. Ft. No change Existing Sq. Ft. and Uses Agree with Public Agree with Committee and Uses are "parked" in public Comment parking supply; Demo and rebuild same sq. ft. -No additional parking required IN 4C AiI3 Downtown Sp Plan 7 hfca0'1'q-2 Subcornmittet aw-(New) REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION Date March 7, 1994rn Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members u-n r' rT1 Submitted by: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrato 1, . Prepared by: Melanie S. Fallon, Community Development Director�f S Subject: CODE AMENDMENT NO. 92-5/DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN REWRITE "VILLAGE CONCEPT" AND PARKING MASTER PLAN 3/7 44404- • ic-/�/g yL Consistent with Council Policy? [X] Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception Statement of Issue,Recommendation,Analysis,Funding Source,Alternative Actions,Attffnts: STATEMENT OF ISSUE: Transmitted for City Council consideration is Code Amendment No. 92-5 the Downtown Specific Plan rewrite commonly referred to as the "Village Concept" and Parking Master Plan. The City Council has held three meetings(August 30, 1993, October 11, 1993 and December 6, 1994) to discuss the details of the plan. RECOMMENDATION: Motion to: "Take public testimony on Code Amendment No. 92-5, the Downtown Specific Plan rewrite and Downtown Parking Master Plan, close the public hearing, make recommendations on the issues and request that staff return with an ordinance and revised legislative draft of the Downtown Specific Plan at the City Council meeting of May 2, 1994." ANALYSIS: At the City Council meeting of December 6, 1993, Council opened the public hearing, took public testimony, and formed the Downtown Specific Plan Subcommittee which consists of Council Members Grace Winchell, Ralph Bauer, Dave Sullivan, and City staff. The City Council continued the public hearing to the meeting of February 22, 1994. At the City Council meeting of February 22,1994, the City Council continued the item to the meeting of March 7, 1994. 1) .-11, The Committee has met on nine occasions to discuss the details of the Specific Plan/Parking Plan with public participation. In addition, staff has met with representatives of the Downtown to discuss their concerns. The Committee has reached a consensus on a majority of the issues discussed and has formed a recommendation. The highlights of the Committee's recommendations are discussed in the following analysis. Attached for City Council review is a summary table(Attachment No. 1) of the Subcommittee's issues and includes Public comments, Planning Commission's action, Subcommittee's recommendation, and staffs recommendation. Also attached are the Subcommittee's minutes in a question and answer format that are reflective of the discussions at each Subcommittee meeting. The staff has provided letters from the general public which outline their concerns which were discussed at the Subcommittee meetings. ANALYSIS: Downtown Subcommittee The Downtown Subcommittee met on a weekly basis to discuss the rewrite of the Downtown Specific Plan and allow public participation. The discussions centered around shared parking and the Village Concept. Specifically, the issues which were discussed are listed in the attached table along with the Committee's recommendation. The following is a brief overview of the major issues discussed at the Subcommittee's meetings. Parking Master Plan The shared parking discussions focused on: • public vs private parking, • building square footage, • limits on development based on available parking, • parking requirements north and south of Orange Avenue, • alternative parking sites, • codifying the parking reductions, • in-lieu of parking fees. The issues were discussed at length with a recommendation on each from the Committee and a recommendation from staff. Generally, the Committee and staff agreed on a majority of the issues. Downtown Specific Plan The Downtown Specific Plan discussions centered around the following: • clarifying definitions, • distinctions between the Master Parking Plan reference and the zoning code, • height, RCA-3/7/94 2 • density, • dedications, • alley widths, • district boundary changes between Districts Four and Five, • open space, • non-conforming residential units, • requirements for a conditional use permit, • the need for a Transportation Center in District Eight. The issues were discussed at length with a recommendation on each from the Committee and a recommendation from staff. Generally, the Committee and staff agreed on a majority of the issues Conclusion After two months of extensive meetings with staff and the public, the Downtown Subcommittee reached conclusions regarding the Downtown Parking Master Plan and Downtown Specific Plan. With respect to the former, the Subcommittee agreed with the basic tenants of the shared parking concepts. They also concluded that in order for the parking plan to be executed successfully, the control mechanisms designed into the plan need to remain. The Downtown Specific Plan generated a great deal of discussion with respect to the interpretations of certain sections of the code. As can be seen in the attached table, the staff and Subcommittee have agreed to make changes which clarify the intent of a particular provision. However, no major change to the Planning Commission's approval is being recommended by either staff or the Subcommittee. Based upon the aforementioned, staff requests that the Council take straw votes on the issues, direct staff to incorporate the Council's recommendations, prepare an ordinance, and prepare a revised legislative draft of the Downtown Specific Plan, and return to the City Council with a final document. FUNDING SOURCE: Not applicable. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: The Council may take one of the following actions: 1. Approve Code Amendment No. 92-5, as recommended by the Planning Commission and modified by the Downtown Subcommittee. or, 2. Direct the Downtown Subcommittee to hold additional meetings to finalize the outstanding issues, re advertise the public hearing, and return to a date certain. RCA-3/7/94 3 ATTACHMENTS: 1. Downtown Subcommittee Table of Issues 2 Downtown Subcommittee Minutes 3. Letters from the general public 4 RCA dated February 22, 1994 MTU:MF:HZ:hf RCA-3/7/94 4 CODE AMENDMENT #92-5/DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN SUBCOMMITTEE REVIEW- MARCH 7, 1994 PAGE NO. CODE ISSUE PLANNING PUBLIC COMMENTS COMMITTEE STAFF SECTION COMMISSION COMMENTS RECOMMENDATION ACTION Pg. 2 4.0.04 Build to Line No change Clarify/delete No change No change Definition Pg. 3 4.0.04 Facade No change Clarify change - "of' to "or" Agree with Committee Definition Recommendation Pg. 4 4.0.04 FAR No change Clarify Remove "building" Agree with Committee Definition from gross building Recommendation site area Pg. 4 4.0.04 Public Open No change Clarify Add "general" to Agree with Committee Space public Recommendation Pg. 4 4.0.04 Setback No change Clarify No change No change Definition Pg. 8 4.2.01(d) Required No change change - H.B. Ordinance Add - "Or as Agree with Committee Exception Parking Code to Downtown Master required by the Recommendation (General Parking Plan Downtown Master Provision) Parking Plan" Pg. 8 4.2.01(d) Non- No change Inability to re-finance due Modify Div. 9 to Agree with Committee (General conforming to non-conforming status address issue Recommendation Provision) Pg.9 4.2.04(a) Maximum 15' First Story Add - "Interior Floor to Agree to consider Add "finished floor to (General Building 10" Second Story, Interior Ceiling" modification finished ceiling". Add - Provision) Height etc. (Commercial) maximum height in feet with story limit Pg. 12 4.2.13 Parking Except as change - "All Add only - "Or as Agree with Committee (General provided in developments" to "All required by the Recommendation Provision) Section 4.2.29 existing or new Downtown Master (Affordable Developments" and "H.B. Parking Plan" Housing) Ordinance Code to Downtown Master Parking Plan" PAGE NO. CODE ISSUE PLANNING PUBLIC COMMENTS COMMITTEE STAFF SECTION COMMISSION COMMENTS RECOMMENDATION ACTION Pg. 14 4.2.13(A) Parking Parking in Dist. 3, Add- Dist. 2 to Master Do not include Dist. Do not include Dist. 2 in (General (Commercial) 4, 5, 6 and 10, on- Parking Plan, Eliminate 2, but modify 350' parking plan and modify Provision) site or as modified 350' walking distance limitaton. Add - "Or 350' to 500' limitation by the Parking limitation by payment of an in- Master Plan. lieu parking fee Balance within walking distance not to exceed 350'. Pg. 14 4.2.13(b) Screening of Require lot to be Add - exception: For lots Agree with Planning Agree with Committee (General Parking Lot screened that abut alley side only Commission action and Planning Commission Provision) action Pg. 14 4.2.14(E) Landscaping No change Add-exception for lots that Agree with Planning Agree with Committee (General (require screening) abut alley side only Commission action and Planning Commission Provision) action Pg. 16 4.2.15(E) Street No change change - City to City Agree to modify Agree with Public (General Vacation Council, Add- subject to Comment Provision) Public Hearing Pg. 16 4.2.15 (f) Street No change None change: "5 feet" to Agree with Committee (General Vacation "max 42 inches" Recommendation Provision) Pg. 16 4.2.16(A) Access Ways Commercial/ Commercial/Mixed Use, Undecided Agree with Planning (General Mixed Use, alley alley 20', allow existing Commission action Provision) 24' curb cuts (Main Street) Pg. 16 4.2.16(A) Access Ways No change Add -Note: No more than Agree with Public Agree with Public (General 1/2 of the total alley Comment Comment Provision) dedication shall be from one side Pg. 26 4.4.01 Permitted change - "Shall be Add - Single Family Add: Single Family Agree with Planning (Dist. 2) Uses permitted" to Residential subject to DRB only Commission action "May be allowed" Eliminate - Subject to CUP approval Downtown Specific Plan 2 hfca925 Subcommittee Review PAGE NO. CODE ISSUE PLANNING PUBLIC COMMENTS COMMITTEE STAFF SECTION COMMISSION COMMENTS RECOMMENDATION ACTION Pg. 26 4.4.03 Density, Lot Less than 50' - Less than 50' add: /1,500 Agree with Planning Agree with Committee (Dist. 2) size-frontage 1DU, 50' - 4DU, sq. ft. of net lot area. Not Commission action and Planning Commission 51' up to 100'-30 to exceed 2 units per 25' of action units, 101' to full frontage block-35 units (all net acre) Pg. 27 4.4.07 Setback(side No change Add-Tandem parking may Agree with Planning Agree with Committee (Dist. 2) yard) be allowed Commission action and Planning Commission action Pg. 27 4.4.08 Setback(rear No change Add -Note: No more than Agree with Public Agree with Public (Dist. 2) yard) 1/2 of the total alley Comment Comment dedication shall be from one side Pg. 36 4.6 Boundary Boundary change: Do not change boundary Undecided Agree with Planning (Dist. 4) From Dist. 5 to Commission action Dist. 4 (Portion of) Pg. 40 4.7 Boundary Boundary change: Do not change boundary Undecided Agree with Planning (Dist. 5) From Dist. 5 to Commission action Dist. 4 (Portion of) Pg. 41 4.7.01(A) Permitted New construction change to - Permitted uses Permitted Uses Agree with Committee (Dist. 5) Uses and establishment shall include but not be require No CUP, (New format throughout of commercial limited to the following new construction document) uses may be subject to a CUP and change of allowed subject to certain uses require a CUP CUP Pg. 43 4.7.01(d) Commercial No change Allow all commercial uses Agree with Public Agree with Committee (Dist. 5) Uses on the first floor to be Comment and Public Comment allowed on the second Downtown Specific Plan 3 hfca925 Subcommittee Review PAGE NO. CODE ISSUE PLANNING PUBLIC COMMENTS COMMITTEE STAFF SECTION COMMISSION COMMENTS RECOMMENDATIQN ACTION Pg. 45 4.7.08 Setback(rear ROW- 24' (Alley ROW- 20' (Alley Width) Undecided Agree with Planning (Dist. 5) yard) Width) Commission action Pg. 45 4.7.10 Open Space No change Add - Interior parcels, 150' Agree with Planning Agree with Committee (Dist. 5) or more, 10% open space, Commission action, and Planning Commission delete "amenity" delete "amenity" action Pg. 48 4.8.01(A) Permitted New construction change to: - Permitted uses Permitted Uses Agree with Committee (Dist. 6) Uses and establishment shall include but not be require No CUP, (New format throughout of commercial limited to the following new construciton document) uses may be subject to a CUP and change of allowed subject to certain uses require a CUP CUP Pg. 50 4.8.03 Density FAR 1.25 FAR 1.5 Agree with Planning Agree with Committee (Dist. 6) (FAR) Commission action and Planning Commission action Pg. 51 4.8.08 Setback(rear change ROW to Add - structures to be Undecided, add Note ROW to 28' and add Note (Dist. 6) yard) 24" cantilevered to the rear only only property line, and change - ROW to 20', note: 1/2 total alley dedication from one side only Pg. 51 4.8.09 Setback No change change - To 10' from Agree with Public Agree with Planning (Dist. 6) (Upper Story) second story facade Comment Commission action Pg. 51 4.8.10 Open Space No change Add - Interior parcels, 150' Agree with Planning Agree with Committee (Dist. 6) or more, 10% open space, Commission action, and Planning Commission delete "amenity" delete "amenity" action Pg. 51 4.10.01 Permitted No change None Include - Public Agree with Committee (Dist. 8) Uses Transportation Center Option Downtown Specific Plan 4 hfca925 Subcommittee Review DOWNTOWN MASTER PARKING PLAN SUBCOMMITTEE REVIEW PAGE NO. CODE ISSUE PLANNING PUBLIC COMMENTS COMMITTEE STAFF SECTION COMMISSION COMMENTS RECOMMENDATION ACTION Pg. 6 Parking Plan Bldg. sq. ft. No change Take cap off, allow market No change Agree with Committee caps driven development and Planning Commission action Pg. 9 Parking Plan Public vs. No change Allow only public parking No change Agree with Committee private spaces to be used in the and Planning Commission parking plan action Pg. 18 Parking Plan Codify No change Codify Parking Reduction Agree with Public Agree with Committee Parking (i.e. 50% or 3.9/1000) into Comment and Public Comment Reductions a code requirement Pg. 19 Parking Plan Area 1 vs. No change Allow the plan to be No change Agree with Committee Area 2 (N/S governed under the area 1 and Planning Commission of Orange) scenario action Pg. 21 Parking Plan Alternative No change Identify future location Maintain option for Agree with Committee (Future) City to purchase and Planning Commission Parking Sites property action Pg. 22 Parking Plan In Lieu Fees No change Reduction in fee, require to No change Agree with Committee be used for new public and Planning Commission parking action Downtown Specific Plan 5 hfca925 Subcommittee Review CA 94-1 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH COUNCIL - ADMINISTRATOR COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members SUBMITTED BY: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administ r PREPARED BY: Melanie S. Fallon, Community Development Director SUBJECT: DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN/CODE AMENDMENT NO. 92-5 DATE: March 3, 1994 As part of the recommended action to approve the Downtown Specific Plan, a statement should be included in the Council's motion to approve, which states that projects that have approved entitlements (Main Pier Phase II and Third Block West) shall be permitted to obtain building permits and construct their projects pursuant to the codes in effect at the time of approval. The motion shall be for those projects which have valid (non-expired) entitlements. The City Attorney's Office will prepare the motion for the Council's recommended action. xc: Ray Silver, Assistant City Administrator Barbara Kaiser, Economic Development Director Howard Zelefsky, Planning Director Gail Hutton, City Attorney MSF:lp mflp0198 . ., 'R �, CODE AMENDMENT#925/DOWNTOWN.SPECIFIC PLAN : ; „ 33' ti y� SUBCOMMITTEE REVIEW.- MACH 7,, 1994 PAGE NO. CODE ISSUE PLANNING PUBLIC COMMENTS COMMITTEE STAFF SECTION COMMISSION COMMENTS RECOMMENDATION ACTION DTSP/DTPMP No change None Add - Reference Agree with Committee "SILENT" when DTSP/DTPMP is silent that Division 9 is applicable Pg. 4 4.0.04 Public Open No change None Add - Language to Agree with Committee Definition Space Augment "Public Open Space" definition Pg. 4 4.04.4 Gross Floor No change None Add- Definition of Agree with Committee Definition Area Gross Floor Area to DTSP Pg. 36 4.6.01 Permitted No change Allow option for Agree with Public Agree with Committee Use commercial Comment Pg. 55 4.9.10 Open Space No change None Require Minimum Agree with Committee 10% Open Space 6� 11W " III h NVN Downtown Specific Plan 6 03A1333N hfca925-2 Subcommittee Review-(New) ll .WN,MASTERPABKING PLAN 1A - -CODR"AM I N0 An'I" a IJBq E114 PA COM C NO. CODE : ISSUE PLANNING:::: ::PUBLICOMMENTS MITTEE. STAFF D SECTION-, COMMISSION COMMENTS RECOMMEN ATION .... ... ... ....... AC .... ........ .......... ...... Pg. 19 Parking Plan Bldg. Sq. Ft. No change Existing Sq. Ft. and Uses Agree with Public Agree with Committee and Uses are "parked" in public Comment parking supply; Demo and rebuild same sq. ft. -No additional parking required GS 71 t 'N Downtown Specific Plan 7 hfca925-2 Subcommittee Review-(New) r Lim CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH icall INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH TO: Ray Silver, Assistant City Administrator FROM: Barbara A. Kaiser, Deputy City Administrator/Economic evelopment SUBJECT: City Council Motion DATE: March 7, 1994 As requested by Councilman Sullivan, I have prepared the motion below to address the issue of future possible acquisition of downtown property using eminent domain to facilitate adoption of the Downtown Master Parking Plan. Motion: "That the Redevelopment Agency directs staff to prepare an amendment to the Main-Pier Redevelopment Plan to extend the eminent domain provision for an additional 12-year period, and other actions as required under the new legislation AB 1290." f .rr� Downtown Specific Plan City;Council Subcommittee f s: r February 24, 1994 4:00 PM Room B-8 The following is a list of issues raised at the February 17, 1994, Subcommittee meeting: 1. The Committee took public testimony on the issue of density in District Two and the concern regarding non-conforming, the ability to re-build, and the inability to re-finance. Answer: The Committee stated that the entire area within the Downtown Specific Plan is being down-zoned"in an attempt to implement a Village Concept. The non-conforming provisions of the.code were discussed and the ability to rebuild s�through the conditional use permit process were also discussed. The in-ability to re-finance with the provision of"may be rebuilt through the CUP process" is not satisfactory to lending institutions. Staff stated that they would look into the issue and work on satisfactory language. 2. The Committee took public testimony on the addendum which discussed the changes to District Four and Five. Answer: The Committee recommended approval of the addendum. 3. The Committee took public testimony on the density issue in District Four. Answer: The Committee indicated that they concur with the Planning Commission's recommendation on this issue. 4. The Committee requested an update on staff s meeting with the Downtown property owner's to review their concerns and recommended changes. Answer: Staff met with the property owner's for two hours on Tuesday, February 15, 1994, to discuss their concerns. Staff will prepare a table which will outline the code section, issue, Planning Commission's recommendation, Committee's recommendation, public's recommendation, and staff s recommendation. The table will be presented at the last Committee meeting on February 24, 1994. The table will also be an attachment to the Request for City Council Action (RCA) on March 7, 1994. DTSP 2/17/94 PAGE TWO 5. The Committee took public testimony on the issue of parking and the in-lieu fee. Answer: The Committee took the public testimony and will forward their recommendation to the full City Council. hf Downtown Specific Plan City Council Subcommittee February 17, 1994 4:00 PM Room B-8 The following is a list of issues raised at the February 2, 1994, Subcommittee meeting: 1. The Committee requested that the discussion regarding District Four and Five be included as an addendum to the January 27, 1994 synopsis of discussion items. Answer: The following is the information that the Committee requested: The Committee discussed the recommended changes to District Four and Five. Answer: The Committee discussed the recommended changes to the boundary between the two Districts and it was stated that the change was as a result of public input. Staff tried to explain the change from a planning point of view. The change removes the commercial activity from an area (District 5)that has existing residential uses and therefore the potential for conflicts will be reduced and or eliminated. The change provides for more compatible land uses and a greater transition zone from the commercial core. This change will provide greater compatibility with the existing, approved and proposed development along Fifth and Third Streets. y The Committee also discussed the development standards between the two District's. Answer: It was noted that the standards in District Four are more restrictive than those in District Five. Staff explained that District Four's standards are more restrictive because the area (transition zone) is supposed to be less intense from a land use perspective (residential/office) and development standards perspective (density/height) than those allowed in District Five. DTSP 2/17/94 PAGE TWO The Committee Discussed the relationship between the boundary changes between District Four/Five and the Downtown Parking Master Plan. Answer: The Downtown Parking Master Plan area does not include the area west of the center line of Fifth St. (District Four) or the area east of the center line of Third St. (District Four). The Parking Plan addresses only the "core area" along Main St. which is the predominant commercial area of the Downtown. The core area therefore utilizes the shared parking concept and the area outside the core boundary provides 100% of the residential/office parking on site without a reduction in the number of required parking spaces. The properties throughout the Specific Plan may, however, participate in the in-lieu fee parking program. 2. The Committee requested that staff meet with the Downtown property owner's to review their concerns and recommended changes. Answer: Staff met with the property o«ner's for two hours on Tuesday, February 15, 1994, to discuss their concerns. Staff will prepare a table which will outline the code section, issue, Planning Commission's recommendation, Committee's recommendation, public's recommendation, and staffs recommendation. The table will be presented at the last Committee meeting on February 24, 1994. The table will also be an attachment to the Request for City Council Action (RCA) on March 7, 1994. 3. The Committee also requested additional information on the cost per space breakdown of the analysis for the alternative parking sites. Answer: Attached please find a memo from Economic Development with the analysis. hf ��"IM CITY OF FiUNTINGTON BEACH INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HONTINGTON BEACH TO: Herb Fauland, Planning FROM: Keith B. Bohr, Economic Development,.; ; DATE: February 7, 1994 1 .L L. SUBJECT: Downtown Parking Alternatives Herb, as you requested, I have revised the cost breakdowns for the five downtown parking scenarios to include itemized costs on a per space basis. (note: all new pages are marked Revised 2/94) On site 5, you will notice, I also revised the land acquisition cost based on the asking price received from Pacific Coast Homes. Since the time I originally prepared these analyses last November, I have received new information as it relates to the land acquisition cost for site 5. Therefore, I have completely revised the costs for site 5. Further Ray Silver's memo dated December 1, 1993, should be amended accordingly (page 2, paragraph 7). xc: Ray Silver, Assistant City Administrator Barbara Kaiser, Deputy City Administrator/Economic Development Revised 2/94 SITE 1: 100 5TH Street (Terry Buick Lot) Area - 100' x 225' = 22,500 SF Previous Acquisition Cost - $1,800,000 Options: 1) Surface Lot - 45 Construction Cost - $135,700 Per Space - $3,015 With Land Per Space - $43,015 2) 2 Levels - 90 spaces Construction Cost - $601,290 Per Space - $6,681 With Land Per Space - $26,681 3) 3 Levels - 135 spaces Construction Cost - $1,087,940 Construction Cost Per Space $8,059 With Land Per Space - $21,392 4) 3 Levels - 135 spaces (1 subterranean) Construction Cost - $1,431,510 Per Space - $10,604 With Land Per Space - $23,937 5) 4 Levels - 182 spaces Construction Cost - $1,986,340 Per Space - $10,914 With Land Per Space - $20,804 775j/2 Revised 2/94 SITE 2 (300 Main Street) SQUARE PARKING FOOTAGE SPACES LAND COST BLOCK 304 AP#024-143-1-25 87,500 SF 200 Spaces $2,500,000 (Subterranean) Per Space - $12,500 SITE 3 (400 Main Street) SQUARE PARKING FOOTAGE SPACES LAND COST BLOCK 403 AP# 024-134- Parcels 1,2,3,9,10 & 11 35,250 SF 130 Spaces $75 SF/$2,640,000 (Surface Lot) Construction Cost - $270,790 Per Space - $2,083 With Land Per Space - $22,390 SITE 4 (500 Lake Street) SQUARE PARKING FOOTAGE SPACES LAND COST AP# 024-143-1-5 38,238 SF 108 Spaces $80 SF/$3,059,000 Parcels (Surface Lot) Construction Cost - $224,964 Per Space - $2,083 1-5 With Land Per Space - $30,407 963j Revised 2/94 SITE 5: 600 Main (at Palm & Lake) Area "A" - 235' x 375' = 88,125 Area "B" - 61' x 117.5' = 7,167.5 - 95,292.5 SF Estimated Acquisition Cost - @ $36 per SF = $3,430,000 Options: 1) Surface Lot - 240 spaces Construction Cost - $500,000 Per Space - $2,083 With Land Per Space - $16,375 2) 2 Levels - 425 spaces Construction Cost - $2,135,000 Per Space - $5,024 With Land Per Space - $13,094 3) 3 Levels - 660 spaces Construction Cost - $4,040,000 Per Space - $6,121 With Land Per Space - $11,318 4) 3 Levels - 650 spaces (1 subterranean) Construction Cost - $4,980,000 Per Space - $7,662 With Land Per Space - $12,938 5) 4 Levels - 890 spaces (1 subterranean) Construction Cost - $6,980,000 Per Space - $7,843 With Land Per Space - $11,697 775j/1 J / f?A / 794.79' 6O V 12 PROJECT 937-/5-449-5/2 LOT / N L J. /32 AC. .°r /Vo. 13017 BLK. \ 73q 73' L A KE .54. co 1 25 . ,. ZS' ISO. So' So ISo' 6 ISo- 2S' •. .. OI - J I I I I I I I I I zs I I I I I I ry I I i vQ �s 11 10II zs•I I I 20 231 rN- h•r� F�`,' "Un�Z.SS�III II Lz•I�II 2 112 III.42 21 2"1 3 I �5 1 /9 /7 I I 37 3 FOR GRANGE 5333/ 29 27 25 2 2/ /5 /3 37 3,5 3/ ,e l�� 16 II . PURPOSE 262P 24 � 41 ' 3 3G 34's 1 uINO GUARANTEE ASTO �' 20 /f1I A, 3Z OI�SUw1ES ANY LIABILITY I S. 0-/kG1 TO BE REPRODUCED. 115I iERvED. 12 1�7 - - I RANGE COUNTY ASSESSOR 1990 I I - I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I /00 2C'r:,v SO' S� 7i• fin' Sp' GI• Go• /fo I S I MAIN MAIN sr s� 09 I: ti QP�`r �PG\P sT _.J Downtown Specific Plan City Council Subcommittee February, 2 1994 4:00 PAI Room B-7 (ADDENDUM) 10. The Committee discussed the recommended changes to District Four and Five. Answer: The Committee discussed the recommended changes to the boundary between the two Districts and it was stated that the change was as a result of public input. Staff tried to explain the change from a planning point of view. The change removes the commercial activity from an area (District 5) that has existing residential uses and therefore the potential for conflicts will be reduced and or eliminated. The change provides for more compatible land uses and a greater transition zone from the commercial core. This change will provide greater compatibility with the existing, approved and proposed development along Fifth and Third Streets. 11. The Committee also discussed the development standards beh`•een the hvo Districts. Answer: It was noted that the standards in District Four are more restrictive than those in District Five. Staff explained that District Four's standards are more restrictive because the area (transition zone) is supposed to be less intense from a land use perspective (residential/office) and development standards perspective (density/height) than those allowed in District Five. 12. The Committee Discussed the relationship between the boundary changes behveen District Four/Five and the Downtown Parking Master.Plan. Answer: The Downtown Parking Master Plan area does not include the area west of the center line of Fifth St. (District Four) or the area east of the center line of Third St. (District Four). The Parking Plan addresses only the "core area" along Main St. which is the predominant commercial area of the Downtown. DTSP 2/2/94 PAGE TWO ADDENDUM The core area therefore utilizes the shared parking concept and the area outside the core boundary provides 100% of the residential/office parking on site without a reduction in the number of required parking spaces. The properties throughout the Specific Plan may however, participate in the in-lieu fee parking program. hf Downtown Specific Plan City Council Subcommittee February 2, 1994 4:00 PM Room B-8 The following is a list of issues raised at the January 27, 1994, Subcommittee meeting: 1. The Subcommittee members requested that the RCA for the February 22 City Council meeting include discussions regarding the Planning Commission's recommendations, Staff s recommendations, Staff s comments on the Committee's recommendations, and a discussion on the public's comments and input. Answer: Staff will include a discussion on each of the above mentioned items in the RCA for Council action on February 22, 1994. 2. The Committee discussed alley width and consistency within the document regarding alley width. Answer: The Planning Commission's recommendation of 24 feet remains, along with Staff s recommendation of 28 feet. Staff also indicated that the document would be checked for consistent language. 3. The Committee discussed District Four's development standards and the recommendations of the Planning Commission. Answer: The discussion is noted by staff. 4. The Committee discussed "build to line" and "setback" and their requirement in the Specific Plan. Answer: Staff explained the concept and the requirement for the build to line. The definition of build to line (Page 70, sec.4.0.04) is as follows: A dimension that specifies where the structure must begin. For example, "build-to-5",«-here the structure must extend to five feet of the lot line. DTSP 2/2/94 PAGE TWO Setback (Page 72, sec. 4.0.04) is defined as follows: A stipulated area adjacent to the lot line which must be kept free of structures over 42 inches in height. One requires a structure to be "built" within so many feet of a lot line, while the other requires that the structure be "setback" so many feet of a lot line. This build to requirement provides a pedestrian atmosphere especially along Main Street by placing the structure closer to the street. 5. More precise definitions of: Floor Area Ratio, Gross Site, and Net Site. Answer: The following definitions are provided for your information as they exist in the Specific Plan(Pages 70-72, sec. 4.0.04). Floor Area Ratio (FAR): A number which indicates how many square feet of structure can be built on a site, expressed as a multiple of the gross building site area. For example, if a site is 5,000 square feet in area and the FAR is 2.0, the square footage of a building cannot exceed 10,000 gross square feet(2.0 x 5,000). Gross Site Area: The area within the lot lines of a parcel of land before public streets, alleys,easements or other area to be dedicated or reserved for public use have been deducted. Net Site Area: The total horizontal area within the property lines of a parcel of land exclusive of all rights-of-way or easements which physically prohibit the surface use of that portion of the property for other than vehicular ingress and egress. 6. The definition of structure«•as requested. Answer: Section 908 of the Zoning Ordinance defines a structure as follows: A mobile home or anything constructed or erected, an edifice, or building of any kind , or any piece of work artificially built up or composed of parts joined together in some definitive manner which requires location on or in the ground, except swimming pools, patios, walks, tennis courts, and similar paved areas. �J DTSP 2/2/94 PAGE THREE 7. A discussion regarding building height occurred. Answer: No new information or changes are required. 8. A discussion regarding District Six took place. Answer: No new information or changes are required. 9. Open space, amenity, second floor open space, and the 10% public open space requirement were discussed. Answer: The definition of open space was read to the group as is defined in the Downtown Specific Plan. Public amenity was discussed. A prorated open space requirement was discussed. The credit for second floor open space was discussed. No consensus regarding open space Nvas reached. hf Downtown Specific Plan City Council Subcommittee January 27, 1994 4:00 PM Room B-8 The following is a list of issues raised at the January 20, 1994, Subcommittee Meeting: 1. The Subcommittee members asked staff to provide them with copies of all the information provided to them from past meetings. Answer: Staff will provide the information to the Subcommittee members along with copies for the public who attend the meetings. 2. The Subcommittee members also requested a copy of the beach cities parking standards comparison exhibit. Answer: Staff will provide a copy of the exhibit. 3. The Subcommittee members received a written correspondence from Bob Bolen which expresses concerns and makes recommendations regarding the Downtown Parking Master Plan. Answer: The correspondence is attached for the Subcommittee's reference and discussion. Staff has not been able to critique the concerns and recommendations as of this date. Staff will provide a written critique and response at the February 2 meeting. hf INTERNATIONAL PARKING DESIGN, INC. Municipal Parking Standards City Office Retail Restaurant Huntington Beach 1/250 SF:0-250,000 SF; 1/200 SF 1/60 SF single parcel 1/350 SF:250.000+ SF 1/100 SF integrated center Escondido 1/300 SF (min. 4) 1/250 SF 1/100 SF plus 1/100 SF over 4,000 SF Long Beach 1/250 SF 1/250 SF 1/100 SF plus 1/40 in bar and waiting area Manhattan Beach 1/300 SF 1/200 SF:0-5,000 SF; 1/500 SF 1/250 SF:5,000+ SF NevpWrt Beach 1/250 SF net 1/250 SF gross 1/40 SF net public area Laguna Beach 1/250 SF 1/225 SF 1/50 SF (min. 4) Oceanside 1/400 SF 1/300 SF:0-5,000 SF; 1/3 fixed seats 1/250 SF:5-20,000 SF or 1/45 SF Redondo Beach 1/300 SF 1/250 SF 1/4 fixed seats 1/50 SF of seating in area Santa Barbara 1/250 SF 1/250 SF 1/250 SF or 1/3 seats (greater of) plus bicycle parking Santa Monica 1/300 SF' 1/300 SF 1/25 SF (k1006) Downtown Specific Plan City Council Subcommittee January 20, 1994 4:00 PM Room B-8 The following is a list of questions submitted by Bob Bolen at the January 12, 1994, Subcommittee meeting: 1. "Why do we need this Specific Plan now? The document is done basically-all the big properties with opportunities for consolidation are built." Answer: State law requires the City to have zoning. The Downtown Specific Plan is the zoning for the Downtown. Development under the adopted Downtown Specific Plan is not entirely complete,however, to allow small lot development (min. 2,500 sq. ft.)to occur, and the Village Concept (down scale) to be implemented, the revisions to the adopted Specific Plan are warranted. With remnant parcels remaining in the Downtown,these revisions will allow current non-conforming parcels to develop, which would not receive the same consideration under the adopted plan. 2. "What would happen if«ve didn't get this plan approved?" Answer: All development would be reviewed under the adopted Downtown Specific Plan and.adopted parking ordinance. 3. "What are all the ramifications of the Redevelopment Plan for the Downtown expiring in 1994?" Answer: The Main-Pier Redevelopment Plan has a duration of 35 years from the date of adoption by the City Council or until all outstanding indebtedness of the Agency shall be retired, whichever is later(Section 1.5). The Plan was adopted on September 6, 1983. Under Section 2.4, Acquisition of Property, it states that the Agency shall commence eminent domain proceedings to acquire property within the Project Area within twelve (12) years after the adoption of the Plan. This is the part of the Plan that expires in September of this year. All the ramifications of this event are difficult to answer, however, a representative from the Agency will be present to answer the question. DTSP 1/20/94 PAGE TWO 4. "Why is the Downtown being separated above and below Orange?" Answer: The Downtown Specific Plan has two districts which are separated above and below Orange Ave. The area north of Orange Ave. is an area of neighborhood commercial (District No. 6) activities with residential uses and is a logical transition line from the commercial core (District No. 5) activities along Main St. which does not permit residential uses. The transition line was established because of the location of existing uses when the plan was first introduced. The Plan has been further defined since 1983, as the plan has been implemented. 5. "Why as of the October 25, 1993, City Council meeting did staff recommend that every property above Orange be fully parked on-site?" Answer: Staff s recommendation has not changed since the Downtown Parking Master Plan was approved by the Planning Commission on July 7, 1993. This plan is currently under consideration by the City Council. The Plan has never stated that all parking north of Orange Ave. be provided on-site. It stated that retail and office parking requirements be reduced by 50%; it did however, state that restaurant parking be given no reduction and all parking be provided on-site. The Plan went on to say that the mix of uses should receive careful consideration because of the limited area for parking opportunities. The Plan also recommended that short term (20 minute)parking be implemented and that the existing supply of parking should be sufficient for the anticipated uses. 6. "350' from the parking structure is a figure referred to in the Specific Plan as well as 450'. Where did these numbers come from? Could the City adopt any numbers?" Answer: The adopted Specific Plan discusses a range between 300 and 400 feet in Section 3.3.2, Parking (Page 45), of the Specific Plan Concept section, and then specifically states 350 feet in Section 4.2.13, Parking(Page 79), of the Development Standards section. These numbers (300', 400') are established numbers used in the parking study industry (ULI, APA) which identifies the maximum distance that people are willing to walk from a parking space or lot to an activity. The City could adopt any number that it desires, however, it is appropriate to provide information that is valid and can be substantiated through background studies, not information that has no basis or lacks validity. DTSP 1/20/94 PAGE THREE 7. "Where the build out number come from?" Answer: The maximum build out number is derived by; 1) analyzing the area that may develop under the Village Concept, 2) analyzing the potential for parking associated with the development and, 3) the potential mix of uses that will accommodate both and provide a viable Downtown. The plan has been reviewed at an American Planning Association conference and by the Urban Land Institute and has been given a positive recommendation. They noted that the Plan is moving the City in the right direction. The Plan has been further refined to address all concerns expressed at the Planning Commission hearings before being presented to the City Council. 8. "If the revised shared parking plan is not passed, is the City going to need to build a parking structure to accommodate the development you have already approved?" Answer: No. The projects that have been approved have; 1) provided their own on-site parking, 2) have submitted and have approved parking plans in conformance with the adopted Specific Plan and, 3) or have been granted parking variances. All of the approved projects fall under the proposed shared parking development scenario and therefore, it is not anticipated that additional public parking will be necessary. 9. "Where are each of Abdelmuti's spaces for parking in his permanent and temporary plan? Isn't his permanent parking required to be in place prior occupancy permits are granted? Is his permanent parking in place for the square footage he now has open?" Answer: A presentation of the Abdelmuti Parking Plan will be provided by staff. The condition of approval which addresses parking allows occupancy to be released as parking becomes available. The permanent parking plan is the ultimate parking solution for the project, when and if the Coultrup project moves forward. The square footage that he now has open is not being satisfied by the permanent parking plan, rather by the temporary plan. DTSP 1/20/94 PAGE FOUR 10. "Is the code being permanently changed to reflect the changes in the shared parking plan?" Answer: Yes. If the Downtown Parking Master Plan is approved, the plan will be incorporated into the Downtown Specific Plan and will be the parking code for the Downtown Specific Plan area. hf Downtown Specific Plan City Council Subcommittee January 12, 1994 4:00 PM Room B-8 The following is a list of issues raised at the January 6. 1994. Subcommittee meeting: I. Is the Specific Plan document before the City Council the same as the document reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission? Answer: Yes. The document reflects all the recommended amendments that the Planning Commission made to the Specific Plan. 2. How many additional parking spaces will the upper two levels of the Main Promenade parking structure yield if a valet or stack parking system is implemented? Answer: Approximately 202 additional spaces. This number reflects a valet or stacking plan only, not a restriping of the upper two levels. Additional research will be necessary to determine the exact number, if the upper two levels are re- striped for this purpose. 3. What is the actual number of public parking spaces available in the Downtown Parking Master Plan area? Answer: 1,020 off street and 402 on street for a total of 1,422 public parking spaces in the Downtown Parking Master Plan area. 4. How many square feet of outdoor dining area is there currently in the Downtown? Answer: 2,262 sq. ft. of area along Main St. and Pacific Coast Highway. 5. Can the Terry lot accommodate a multi-level parking structure? Answer: Yes. International Parking Design, Inc. has prepared some preliminary plans that show a multi-level parking structure(see attached). The preliminary plans indicate a yield of between 139 and 185 parking spaces. - A 8 J ..._— _� �h1 �( _Lnd LQv,Q - • i on L ool n q Ec? Inlernallonal Parking Design,Inc. Poakmp Comullonls .111Y4 Ak—y A.m U,O.Mn -Cautome 91616 17W1667-1730 (p CT n in Infernallonal Parking Design, Inc. Pcy*#V Comullonts lwtfkJ 31W AW�A—."—.CIA11-40V2616 11%41662-2230 _M N n Low �� in Egsf International Parking Design,Inc. Pcrkinp CO1IHIIIiY1/f t.oibM -Cci1laria V1626 (7te)667.22J0 ►O - - �13 Downtown Specific Plan City Council Subcommittee January 6, 1994 4:00 PM Room B-8 The following is a list of issues raised at the December 22, 1993, Subcommittee meeting: 1. Should we reduce our minimum parcel size in all districts? Answer: Yes. In an effort to down scale(Village Concept) the type of development in the area, and permit the remnant parcels to develop, it is necessary to reduce the minimum parcel size. This will allow parcels that are non-conforming to today's minimum parcel size standard an opportunity to develop. 2. Is 2,500 square foot minimum parcel size and single family dwellings acceptable in District two. Answer: Yes. In response from property owners along PCH that have remnant parcels and have no opportunity to consolidate, the reduction in size is proposed. The development standards for this district are the standards for Oldtown/Townlot for single family dwellings(Resolution No.5760 adopted 3-2-87). 3. Should we abandon units per acre measure to determine density and substitute F.A.R.? Answer: No. Unit per acre regulates density on a numerical yield, while F.A.R. regulate floor area and building mass and bulk. The combined standard permits greater control and the ability to administer the Village Concept scheme. 4. Boundary changes on 5th Street... What should we do? Commercial or residential? Answer: It is recommended that the area south of Olive Ave. along 5th St. allow commercial uses on both sides of 5th Street. JAN. 6, 1994 PAGE TWO 5. Should we delete incentives for full block consolidations? Answer: Yes. This allows remnant parcel development and a Village Concept scenario to be implemented. A. How about partial or half block consolidations? Answer: The current draft Specific Plan does not include such incentives. However, half block or less consolidations with incentives may be considered to allow and promote the inclusion of remnant parcels that may remain after development occurs. 6. Public open space/plaza's-should they remain given the reduced intensity? Answer: Yes. However, a prorated requirement may be substituted for smaller parcels based upon net lot size and frontage. Example: min. 100 ft. of frontage and min. 10,000 sq. ft. of net lot size, requires the code required min. 10% of open space. Less than 100 ft. of frontage and less than 10,000 sq. ft. of net lot size requires a min. of 5% of open space. 7. Sceening of parking lots; Is it needed? Answer: The Planning Commission believes that it is necessary to screen permanent surface parking lots for aesthetic purposes. This screening shall consist of bermed landscaping. 8. Concept of build to line versus setback, clarify? Answer: The definition of build to line(Page 70, sec.4.0.04) is as follows: A dimension that specifies where the structure must begin. For example, "build-to-5", where the structure must extend to five feet of the lot line. Setback(Page 72, sec. 4.0.04) is defined as follows: A stipulated area adjacent to the lot line which must be kept free of structures over 42 inches in height. One requires a structure to be "built" within so many feet of a lot line, while the other requires that the structure be "setback" so many feet of a lot line. This build to requirement provides a pedestrian atmosphere especially along Main Street by placing the structure closer to the street. JAN. 6, 1994 PAGE THREE 9. More precise definitions of. Floor Area Ratio, Gross Site, and Net Site. Answer: The following definitions are provided for your information as they exist in the Specific Plan(Pages 70-72, sec. 4.0.04). Floor Area Ratio (FAR): A number which indicates how many square feet of structure can be built on a site, expressed as a multiple of the gross building site area. For example, if a site is 5,000 square feet in area and the FAR is 2.0, the square footage of a building cannot exceed 10,000 gross square feet(2.0 x 5,000). Gross Site Area: The area within the lot lines of a parcel of land before public streets, alleys,easements or other area to be dedicated or reserved for public use have been deducted. Net Site Area: The total horizontal area within the property lines of a parcel of land exclusive of all rights-of-way or easements which physically prohibit the surface use of that portion of the property for other than vehicular ingress and egress. 10. Why is District 4 -35 dwelling units per net acre? Answer: The Planning Commission felt that a reduction from gross area to net area was adequate. A numerical(example, 35 to 25) reduction would be too great a hardship on the property owner. IL Why was District 7 not addressed? Should it be scaled down? Answer: The District has been scaled down by going from gross to net site area when calculating density. 12. How realistic are the parking structure sites? Answer: Please refer to the December 22, 1993, paper. 13. Should alley widths be 24 feet or 28 feet? What is the minimum that is acceptable? Answer: The minimum acceptable alley width is 28 feet. JAN. 6, 1994 PAGE FOUR 14. Is live entertainment in District 6 a new use? Answer: No. Permitted by CUP. 15. What is the feasibility of a parking structure on the Terry site? Answer: Please refer to the December 22, 1993, paper. The following additional questions were raised by Council person Winchell: 1. What is the actual (existing) number of parking spaces available in the Downtown today? Answer: 1,834 parking spaces(Exhibit 12, IBI Report). 2. What will be the actual (ultimate) number of parking spaces available at buildout (500,000 sq. ft.). Answer: 1,810 parking spaces(Exhibit 12, IBI Report). 3. What is the appropriate mix of uses for the Downtown, that will allow implementation of the Village Concept and the Parking Master Plan? Can incentives for uses be given to ensure that the overall plan works? Answer: The plan has identified a mix of uses that would allow the Downtown to move forward. No incentives for uses has been proposed at this time to ensure that the plan moves forward in accordance with the established mix and square footage caps. The plan has noted that restaurant uses should not exceed 100,000 sq. ft., and therefore incentives may be appropriate to encourage more retail and office uses. -For example, this may be done by allowing parking credits(grandfathering) for certain retail and office uses or providing financial assistance. JAN. 6, 1994 PAGE FIVE 4. The IBI Report identified a parking demand of 3.9 parking spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. of floor area for the estimated Village Concept, Is this a valid parking demand ratio? Answer: Yes. The 3.9 per 1,000 number was generated by the IBI Report based upon the analysis of the Downtown Village Concept as it exists today, and the amount of square footage associated with the Village Concept(exhibits 19-24). The number is consistent with the standard for a shopping mall. This was verified by the survey conducted by the IBI Group of the Downtown patrons. The number also is reflective of the mix of uses as they exist in the Downtown today. The Report also warns that this number may increase if the mix of uses changes. This is especially true if the restaurant uses exceed their square footage cap. This number may also decrease if the restaurant uses remain constant and additional retail and office uses increase. The number will change depending upon the mix of uses. hf Downtown Specific Plan City Council Sub-Committee December 22, 1993 4:30 PM The following is a list of parking issues that were raised at the December 14, 1993, Sub- Committee meeting: 1. How realistic are the five parking structure sites? Answer: From a planning point of view, four of the five sites would satisfy the recommendation of the Planning Commission. The site depicted as number five is not within the area depicted in the Alternative Parking Sites exhibit (Map 45) . From an economic point of view, three of the sites would require a major commitment from the City to finance the construction, acquisition, and relocation of residences/businesses to provide the parking at these sites. 2. What is the feasibility of a parking structure on the Terry site? Answer: A structure on the site is feasible, but the exact number of parking spaces and the design features of the structure are very preliminary. To determine the exact feasibility of the site will require the retention of a consultant and architectural/structural drawings that precisely depict a structure. 3. How many parking spaces are required on the Terry site from the Abdelmuti project? Answer: Temporary plan-75 spaces, Permanent plan-50 spaces 4. How many parking spaces would be lost if we closed the first two blocks of Main St.? Answer: Forty-eight spaces (source DTPMP) 5. Explain memo from HZ to MTU regarding square footage and parking calculations in more detail. Answer: See memo with background information and verbal explanation. 6. Provide a response letter from IBI Group indicating if they agree with the HZ to MTU memo. Answer: See response letter. TO: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrator FROM: Howard Zelefsky, Planning Director DATE: November 17, 1993 SUBJECT: Downtown Master Plan Building Square Footage Analysis At the October 11, 1993, City Council workshop on the Downtown Specific Plan and Shared Parking Plan, discussion regarding the ultimate building square footage for the "Village Concept" became an issue. There seemed to be some confusion generated by an exhibit presented by the IBI Group. Specifically, the discussion centered around the Downtown Land Use Summary (Exhibit 3) of the IBI report and the uncertainty as to the total building square footage at build out. The exhibit in the IBI report led the Council to incorrectly believe that ultimate build out under a "Village Concept" would be 637,192 sf. This number was arrived by adding three categories together. The three categories are; 1) Existing/Under Construction, 2) Entitled, and 3) Anticipated. The following is a table of the three categories that led to the confusion. EXISTING/ UNDER CONSTRUCTION 439,290 ENTITLED 61,000 ANTICIPATED 136,902 INCORRECT TOTAL 637,192 The total building square footage derived by the addition of the three categories is misleading. The numbers cannot be analyzed as a cumulative total but as separate totals for analysis of peak parking impacts. As an example, some of the numbers when - analyzed as a whole are double counted and therefor the totals are skewed upward and not reflective of the activity of the Downtown and the ultimate "Village Concept". Planning staff has reviewed these numbers and believes that ultimate build out will not exceed approximately 500,000 sf. The following chart illustrates how these numbers were arrived at. DTPMP Page 2 The analysis done by staff is a review of the square footage numbers utilized as the basis for the "Village Concept" and Shared Parking Plan. The numbers are from attachment no.1 of the DTPMP presented to the City Council on August 30, 1993. In an effort to help understand the building square footage and how the totals are computed, staff has prepared a breakdown of these numbers for analysis. They are as follows: 1. EXISTING BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE A) Occupied 326,726 B) Vacant 56,213 C) Under Construction 64.000 TOTAL: 447,539 2. APPROVED BY ENTITLEMENT BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE A) New Building Area 82,000 ( Coultrup, 3rd block) B) Demo Building Area 51.963 TOTAL: 30,237 (net increase) 3. EXISTING & APPROVED TOTAL BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE A) Existing 447,539 B) Approved 30,237 TOTAL: 477,776 4. ANTICIPATED SITES FOR REHAB/NEW CONSTRUCTION A) Of the total 477,776 sf. , 109,000 sf. of existing building area(six sites) have the potential for rehab/new construction. B) We anticipate this building area to be replaced at a one to one ratio,thus, the total downtown building area is not expected to exceed 500,000 sL DTPMP Page 3 As can be seen from the above analysis, the total cumulative building square footage for the Downtown core area is approximately 500,000 s£, not 637,192 sf. The analysis of these numbers and the anticipated activity of development in the Downtown is in line with the intent of the "Village Concept". If you need any further information or would like to discuss this matter in more detail, please call me or Herb Fauland, Associate Planner at ext.5438 HZ:hf xc: Ray Silver, Assistant City Administrator Mike Adams, Director of Special Projects Barbara Kaiser, Director of Economic Development Louis Sandoval, Director of Public Works Michael Dolder, Fire Chief Ronald Lowenberg, Police Chief Ronald Hagan, Director of Community Services Robert Franz, Deputy City Administrator Ron Hayden, Director of Library Services Gail Hutton, City Attorney Connie Brockway, City Clerk a DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN OCTOBER, 1993 (Building Square Footage Analysis) GLOSSARY OF TERMS OCCUPIED: Existing buildings/suites which have tenants currently occupying floor area. VACANT: Existing buildings/suites which do not have tenants currently occupying floor area. ENTITLEMENT: City approved projects that have the potential to be built sometime in the future. ANTICIPATED: Staff analysis of sites which have development potential under the "Village Concept." UNDER CONSTRUCTION: New buildings that are presently being constructed and do not have occupied floor area. DEMOLISH: Existing buildings which will be demolished to allow new construction to occur. NET INCREASE: The difference in floor area between the new construction of entitlement projects and the resulting demolition of existing buildings to allow new construction. NEW CONSTRUCTION: New buildings that have been approved through the entitlement process, but have not been built. FLOOR AREA: Building/suites gross square footage. OCTOBER, 1993 IBI REPORT DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN (Building Square Footage Analysis) Existing/Under Construction RETAIL . RESTAURANT OFFICE TOTAL BLOCK A* 45,003 6,548 34,299 85,850 BLOCK B 31,584 23,773 16,000 71,357 BLOCK C 37,365 29,785 22,175 89,325 BLOCK D 24,073 5,000 3,000 32,073 BLOCK E 16,163 0 7,000 23,163 BLOCK F* 15,000 0 12,825 27,825 BLOCK G* 21,000 0 6,000 27,000 BLOCK H 32,250 0 0 32,250 BLOCK I* 2,500 7,946 10,000 20,446 SUBTOTAL: 224,938 73,052 111,299 409,289 GRAND TOTAL: 409,289 (Excludes 30,000 theater) + 30,000 439,289 IBI REPORT EXISTING/UNDER CONSTRUCTION *Staff Noted Areas of Concern *Block A: 1) 12,000 sf(retail) Terry Buick demolished included in retail square footage. 2) 2,500 sf (retail) omitted Block B: Okay Block C: Okay Block D: Okay Block E: Okay *Block F: 1) 8,250 sf(retail) demolished - included in retail square footage. *Block G: 1) Included 1,000 sf office as existing square footage - (demolished) 2) Included 2,200 sf as 2,500 sf office. Block H: Okay *Block I: 1) Included 10,575 sf as 10,000 sf. office. OCTOBER, 1993 IBI REPORT DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN (Building Square Footage Analysis) Entitlement RETAIL RESTAURANT OFFICE TOTAL BLOCK A 12,000 20,000 10,000 42,000 (Coultrup) BLOCK B - D -0- -0- -0- -0- BLOCK E* 19,000 0 0 19,000 (Third Block West) BLOCK F* - I -0- -0- -0- -0- SUBTOTAL: 31,000 20,000 10,000 61,000 GRAND TOTAL: 61,000 *Staff Noted Areas of Concern: 1) Block E - 8,000 sf square footage office omitted. 2) Block F - 13,200 sf Trainer/Gym omitted. �•3 OCTOBER, 1993 IBI REPORT DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN (Building Square Footage Analysis) Entitlement RETAIL RESTAURANT OFFICE TOTAL BLOCK A: 12,000 20,000 10,000 42,000 (Coultrup) _ BLOCK B: -0- -0- -0- -0- BLOCK C: -0- -0- _ -0- -0- BLOCK D: -0- -0- -0- -0- BLOCK E: 19,000 -0- 89-000 27,000 (Third Block West) BLOCK F: 13,200 -0- -0- 13,200 (Trainer) BLOCK G: -0- -0= _ _ -0- -0- BLOCK H: -0- -0- _ -0=- -0- BLOCK I:* -0- -0- -0- . -0- SUBTOTAL: 44,200 20,000 18,000 82,200 GRAND TOTAL: $2.200 *10,575 Art Center included in miscellaneous category. OCTOBER, 1993 IBI REPORT DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN (Building Square Footage Analysis) Existing Square Footage to be Demolished as Part of New Construction (Entitlement) Block A: 26,800 Block E: 25,163 Total: 51,963 Entitlement: 82,200 Demolished: 51,963 Net Increase: 30,237 OCTOBER, 1993 IBI REPORT DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN (Building Square Footage Analysis) Anticipated RETAIL RESTAURANT OFFICE TOTAL BLOCK A 5,000 6,414 0 11,414 BLOCK B 13,375 8,000 0 21,375 BLOCK C 0 13,738 0 13,738 BLOCK D 0 3,600 0 3,600 BLOCK E 0 0 0 0 BLOCK F 24,200 4,000 13,000 41,200 BLOCK G 15,000 0 0 15,000 BLOCK H 2O,000 0 0 20,000 BLOCK I 0 0 0 0 SUBTOTAL: 77,575 35,752 13,000 12.6,327 GRAND TOTAL: 126.327 (Excludes 10,575 sf Art Center) + 10.575 136,902 OCTOBER, 1993 IBI REPORT DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN (Building Square Footage Analysis) Existing/Occupied RETAIL RESTAURANT OFFICE TOTAL BLOCK A: 16,550 3,750 -0- 20,300 BLOCK B: 49,258 17,793 11,000 78,051 BLOCK C: 37,365 30,785 22,175 90,325 BLOCK D: 24,073 5,000 2,431 31,504 BLOCK E: 7,625 -0- 4,500 12,125 BLOCK F: 15,000 -0- 12,825 27,825 BLOCK G: 13,700 -0- 5,700 19,400 BLOCK H: 24,500 -0- 2,250 26,750 BLOCK-I: 2,500 7,946 10,000 20,446 SUBTOTAL: 190,571 65,274 70,881 326,726 GRAND TOTAL: 326,726 SF OCTOBER, 1993 IBI REPORT DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN (Building Square Footage Analysis) Existing/Vacant* RETAIL RESTAURANT OFFICE TOTAL BLOCK A: 2,500 -0- 4,000 6,500 BLOCK B: 12,326 5,980 5,000 23,306 BLOCK C: -0- -0- -0- -0- BLOCK D: -0- -0- 569 569 BLOCK E: 8,538 -0- 4,500 13,038 BLOCK F: -0- -0- -0- -0- BLOCK G: 7,300 -0- -0- 7,300 BLOCK H: 5,500 -0- -0- 5,500 BLOCK I: -0- -0- -0- -0- SUBTOTAL: 36,164 5,980 14,069 56,213 GRAND TOTAL: 56,213 *Excludes vacant square footage under construction OCTOBER, 1993 IBI REPOR T DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN (Building Square Footage Analysis) Under Construction RETAIL RESTAURANT OFFICE TOTAL BLOCK A: 13,953 2,798 30,299 47,050 (Abdelmuti) BLOCK B: -0- -0- -0- -0- BLOCK C: 4,250 9.100 4,200 17,550 (Mulligan) BLOCK D: -0- -0- -0- -0- BLOCK E: -0- -0- -0- -0- BLOCK F: -0- -0- -0- -0- BLOCK G: -0- -0- -0- -0- BLOCK H: -0- -0- -0- -0- BLOCK I: -0- -0- -0- -0- SUBTOTAL: 18,203 11,898 34,499 64,600 GRAND TOTAL: 64.6Q0 OCTOBER, 1993 IBI REPORT DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN (Building Square Footage Analysis) Entitlement RETAIL RESTAURANT OFFICE TOTAL BLOCK A: 12,000 20,000 10,000 42,000 (Coultrup) BLOCK B: -0- -0- -0- -0- BLOCK C: -0- -0- -0- -0- BLOCK D: -0- -0- -0- -0- BLOCK E: 19,000 -0- 8,000 27,000 (Third Block West) BLOCK F: 13,200 -0- -0- 13,200 (Trainer) BLOCK G: -0- -0- -0- -0- BLOCK H: -0- -0- -0- -0- BLOCK I:* -0- -0- -0 -0- SUBTOTAL: 44,200 20,000 18,000 82,200 GRAND TOTAL: aZ,2QQ *10,575 Art Center included in miscellaneous category. OCTOBER, 1993 IBI REPORT DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN (Building Square Footage Analysis) Anticipated EXISTING PROPOSED DIFFERENCE BLOCK A: 3,500 5,000 1,500 (+) BLOCK B: 17,125 15,500 1,625 (-) BLOCK C: -0- -0- -0- BLOCK D: -0- -0- -0- BLOCK E: -0- -0- -0- BLOCK F: 19,575 19,700 8,425 (+) BLOCK G: 15,700 19,700 4,000 (+) BLOCK H: 32,250 20,000 12,250 (-) BLOCK I: 21,021 21,021 -0- TOTAL: 109,171 109,221 50 OCTOBER, 1993 IBI REPORT DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN (Building Square Footage Analysis) Anticipated EXISTING PROPOSED DIFFERENCE BLOCK A: 127 Main 500 5.000 1.500 (+) BLOCK B: 116 Main Street 2,500 2,500 0 118 Main Street 2,500 2,500 0 120 Main Street 2,875 2,500 375 (-) 122 Main Street 1,250 2,500 1,250 124 Main Street 2,125 2,500 375 126 Main Street 5,875 3,000 2,875 (-) BLOCK C: -0- - -0- -0- BLOCK D: -0- -0 -0- BLOCK E: -0- -0- -0- BLOCK F: 316 Olive 3,575 5,000 1,425 (+) 318 - 328 Main Street 11,000 18,000 7,000 (+) 315 Third 2,500 2,500 -0- 305 Orange 2,500 2,500 -0- OCTOBER, 1993 IBI REPOR T DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN (Building Square Footage Analysis) Anticipated EXISTING PROPOSED DIFFERENCE BLOCK G: 401 Main Street 7,700 7,700 -0- 405 Main Street N/A 4,000 4,000 (+) 411 Main Street 3,300 3,300 -0- 417 Main Street 2,500 2,500 -0- 419 Main Street 2,200 2,200 -0- BLOCK H: 410 - 440 Main Street 32,250 20,000 12,250 (-) 504 Main Street BLOCK I: 520 Main Street 5,280 5,280 -0- 522 Main Street 2,666 2,666 -0- 526 Main Street 2,500 2,500 -0- 538 Main Street 10,575 10,575 -0- Downtown Specific Plan City Council Sub-Committee December 14, 1993 4:30 PM The following i5 a list of i55ue5 which were raised at the December 6, 1993 City Council meeting: 1. 5hould we reduce our minimum parcel oize in all di5trict5? 2. 15 2,500 square foot minimum lot Size and Single family dwellings acceptable in District 2? 3. 5hould we abandon units per acre measure to determine density and 5ub5titute F.A.R.? 4. Boundary changes on 5th Street... What 5hould we do commercial or residential? 5. 5hould we delete incentives for block consolidationo? a. How about partial block consolidations? 6. Public Open Space/f laza'S - !5hould they remain given the reduced intensity? 7. Screening of parking lots, i5 it needed. 8. Concept of build to line ver5u5 Setback, clarify. 9. More precise def inition5 of a. Floor Area Ratio (F.A.R.). b. Gross Site. G. Net Site. 10. Why is District 4 - 35 DU/net acre? 11. District 7 not addressed, 5hould it be scaled down? 12. How realistic are the parking structure Sites? 13. Alley widths, Should they be 24 feet or 28 feet? What io the minimum that i5 acceptable? 14. Live entertainment in District 6, io this a new use? 15. What io the feasibility of a parking structure on the Terry Site? HZ:kjl 01/25/94 2 (k1031) 1. Why do we need this specific plan now? The downtown is done basically-all the big properties with opportunities for consolidation are built. 2. What would happen if we didn"t get this plan approved? 3. What are all the ramifications of the Redevelopment Area for the downtown expiring in 1994? 4. Why is the downtown being separated above and below Orange? 5. Why as of the October 25, 1993 City Council meeting did staff recommend that every property above Orange be fully parked onsite? 6. 350" from the parking structure is a figure referred to in the specific plan as well as 450' . Wheredid these numbers come from? Could the City adopt any numbers? 7. Where the buildout number come from? 8. If the revised shared parking plan is not passed is the City going to need to build a parking structure to accomodate the development you have already approved? 9. Where are each of Abdelmutti's spaces for parking in his permanent and temporary. plan. Isn't his permanent parking required to be in place prior occupancy permits are granted? Is his permanent parking in place for the square footage he now has open? 10. Is the code being permanently changed to reflect the changes in the shared parking plan? eg ` q DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN (SHARED PARKING) The Downtown is alinust completed. All the large cornrrier viol parcels have projects tlIdt Have either been built or approved. All that is left are small commercial parcels with little or no opportunity for consolidation. The City needs to design a plan that wil I encourage these small property owners to develop their property in order to finally finish the redevelopment of Downtown Huntington Beach. Keeping in mind that council is dealing with individual small remaining parcel_,, we recommend the following: 1 . All exsisting commercial buildings and their uses shall be considered parked in the "PUBLIC PARKING SUPPLY" with none of the private parking, that may be located on the site, taken into consideration. In the event a property owner tears down his/her exsisting building and rebuilds a riew building of the same square footage and use no new oarl:ing will be required. (this is what the parking study saysl 2. P,ny expansion of the square footage or the increase of intensity of any exsisting cornmercical building in distr icts 1 thru 6 must be parked to the new park ing code as follows: A. The property owner shall recieve credit for any exsisting onsite private parking spaces. This credit snail apply to the expansion and/or the increase of intensity of use. B. Any additionally required parking shall be paid through the in-lieu parking fee. [This gives the few remaining property owners the incentive to replace their old buildings with new buildings at no additional cost to the city) 3. The parking requirements shall be the same in districts 1 thru 6 both north and south of Orange Ave. (This will allow for better continuity of development and create a more equitable environment for commercial competition throughout the downtown] a 4. Take the square footage lids off of the uses and let the downtown be market driven Any use allowed in the Specific Plan may not be denied on the basis of parking or a synthetic limit on square footage . [This concept does not cost the city any money. It allows a variety of uses to eoirne into the Downtown and will allow more tax revenue to be generated into the City) [The numbers that have been used as a basis for limiting the uses are only guesses of best.) [ City Government cannot dictate what uses in what numbers will constitute a sucessrul downtown. Only private enterprise can do this over a period of years and through trial and error What is sucessful today may not be sucessful tommorrow). [Let the private entrepeneur, willing to invest his own money and take all the risk , decide what uses, allowed by the specific plan, should be built) S. The reduction in the parking requirement shall become the new City Parking Code required for all exsisting and future commercial development located in the Downtown and shall be incorporated into the Downtown Specific Plan and the Downtown Parking Master Plan within districts 1 thru 6. EXAMPLE As an example, if we are reducing from the code required 3,000 Public Parking spaces down to the exsisting 1 ,500 Public Parking spaces, which represents a 50Z reduction in the code required parking , a new per use code, similar to the one below, should be written. USE CURRENT CODE NEW REDUCED CODE commercial 1 space per 200 ft 1 space per 400 ft restaurant 1 space per 100 ft 1 space per 200 ft office 1 space per 250 ft 1 space per SOO ft The above is the form in which the council and the property owners need to see the code written. The code needs to be developed from real and accurate information and presented in a manner that is easy to read and understand. Not one that is subject to interpretation. A percuntoge reduction based on inaccurate facts is what you have been asked to vote on thus far. l l� � K It is imperative that the committee have the real numbers to work from in determining the actual percentage of reduction that the shared parking concept will give us. These numbers should not be tainted with parking spaces that are not real Public Parking Spaces, such as the 58 spaces, on block 105 that will be wiped out with the construction of a condo project, or the 12 spaces that are identified on the second block of third street that are located on private property and surrounded by a chain link fence or the 25 spaces that dre located on the third block of third street that are for the private use of the office building located there or the many other parking spaces that have been improperly counted. These numbers will determine the new parking code requirements for all remaining development in downtown. Without an accurate number, the city cannot know what the real parking problem is. The City will not be able to establish a new parking code that is based on fact. The City may not be able to defend an inaccurate position at the Coastal Commission hearings. The city needs to get it right. We need the correct information in order to formulate the correct and accurate code that everybody in the future will be expected to build to. To accompirsn this goal we suggest the committee direct a stafT / CIT12ens group: A. To furnish the committee with an updated, accurate count of the Public Parking Supply. B. To furnish the committe with and updated, accurate count of the exsisting,under construction , and approved amount of commercial square footage, and their uses, in the entire downtown area. [PUBLIC PARKING SPACES: shall be those spaces that are located in a Parking Strucure, or on a street or lot that is owned and/or operated and/or maintained and/or control led by the "CITY" and are available to the General Public] [ PRIVATE PARKING SPACES: shall be those spaces that are located on private property and are owned, operated, maintained and controlled by a private property owner] *With the exception of Pierside Pavilion. These reccomendations are an attempt to really solve the problems that exsist downtown. They were not made just to get us out of the current parking delema. They have been well thought out by property owners and business people in an attempt to make the entire downtown.truly sueessful for everyone. ,1 P)A IN- LIEU FEES The CITY of HUNTINGTON BEACH is facing a parking dilemrna in the Downtown R.edeveloprnent Area. By allowing development to occur over and over again in this area without the developer being required to provide ( in some lashon) a minimal amount of parking, the City must initiate a number of creative maneuvers in order to relieve the situation or face the reality that the Downtown is finished. A few of the creative maneauvers are 1 . the reduction (down Zoning) in building square footage to be allowed in future development, AKA, The NEW Downtown Specific Plan. 2) The reduction in the required parking, AKA, The Downtown Parking Master Plan ( or shared parking concept). 3. The In-Lieu Parking Fee. 4. r1oratorium on all development It is the "In-Lieu Parking Fee" that we will be discussing here tonight. Before we start, it must be understood that the "In-lieu Narking Fee" and the "Downtown Narking Master Plan" go hand in hand and to split them up may spell disaster for the Downtown in the long run. The "In-Lieu Fee", in and of itself, does not solve nor does it relieve the public parking problem, unless the funds are used to provide additional parking. In addition when coupled with a reduction in the public parking requirement the "In-Lieu Fee" may serve to compound thc: problern. To understand the the effect of the "In-Lieu Fee" we must first understand the reasons Tor iniating such a drastic action. "The Downtown Area" based on " exsisting" or "under construction" commercial square footage is required by code to provide in excess of 3,000 parking spaces. As shown in the IBI Group Downtown Parking Master Plan Review, there are approximately only 1 ,700 Public Parking Spaces available in the Downtown area at the present time. This is a shortage of approximately 1 ,300 up blic parking spaces or a shortage of approximately 432 of the required amount. I would like to make an attempt, at this point, to differentiate between Public Parking and Private Parking, as it is quite important to the future of the "Downtown" to understand this all important point. Public Parking is that parking that is available, at all times, for use by the General Public to enjoy the many features Downtown Huntington Beach has to offer; such as shopping, attending the movies, dining, strolling along the beach front or on the pier or just enjoying the natural ambiance of this wonderful area . It is Parking that is controlled by the City of Huntington Beach with respect to use, cost, time, maintenance etc.. private Parking, on the other hand, is that parking that is to be used for a specific purpose or tenant. It is controlled by the Individual property owner or tenant with respect to use, availability, cost, maintainance etc.. It is generally located on private property. It is parking that is not open to the General Public. vy� 1' � The 43% shortage of Public Parking as previously mentioned is, at this time, only an estimate. The exact number Public Parking spaces are still not available to the "Council" or to the Public. Nor is the exact number of commercial square footage and use available. Without these numbers we are still shooting in the dark as to solutions to our parking problem. It is only with an exact count, of these numr,ers, that we can mak a reasonable aolustment in the code required parking to facilitate the parking requirements of "The Downtown PARKIIJG MASTER PLAN Without the exact count it is impassible to realize the real reduction that the city is making in the "PARKING CODE". IT IS THIS REDUCTION THAT WILL CONTROL THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF THE "DO11VNT0WtJ". STEP ONE in finding of an answer to our parking problem would s,em to be to ulitoin all xo:t count of the "PUBLIC PARKING SPACES", as defined above, on 3 block by block b3-is that are available as real Public Parking. This should be an easy enough task for the Planning QtalT and a number that could be had in just a few days. These numbers should not be tainted with parking spaces that are not real public parking spaces, such as the 58 spaces on block 105 that will be wiped out with the construction of a condo project, or the 12 spaces that are identified on third street that are located on private property and surrounded by a chain link fence or the 25 spaces that are located on the third block of third street that are for the private use of that office building or the many other parking spaces that have been counted erroneasly. We need a real count of the real public parking spaces so we may grasp the true magnitude of our problem. These numbers need to be readily available so we may find true solutions to correct the problem. STEP TWO would be to identify the exact number of commercial square footage and use on a block by block basis. The IN -LIEU FEE does not, in and of itself, solve the parking problem, unless it is used to provide real parking. Otherwise the In- Lieu Fee is only an onerous property tax. One that, i� improperly implemented, may restrict future business opportunities and/ or development in the downtown area. The In-Lieu Fee, if implemented, should be fair. Fair to the downtown merchants, fair to the property owners and fair to the city. In order to be effective "the in- Lieu Fee" should be used only in the development of new parking facilities. .�1 SOME OF THE IMPLEMENTING FEATURES rIAY INCLUDE: 1 . The fee,that is to be charged to the property owner or merchant , shall not exceed $2,000.00 per required space. This would seem to be a lair taxation. One that would not unduly restrict the future of the Downtown This is an amount above which has already been established by the city. *SEE ATTACHMENT A 2. if the implementation of the IN—Lieu Fee was due to simply a change of use. ( ie) commercial to restaurant. The fee would become immediately due and payable either in cash or in some type of payment form negotiated with the city. 3. If the implementation of the in—Lieu Fee was due to new construction the In—Lieu Fee would be paid entirely through the tax increment due to the city. This would not put any undue burden on the City and would help to encourage the development of new buildings within the Downtown Area. In addition it would not put any undue burden on the property owner who wishes to develop his/her property. 4. L/KEK/NU business to business transfers located on the same parcel and/or suite shall be permitted. *SEE ATTACHMENT B S. The In—Lieu Parking fee applies only to private property development not to publicly owned land, unless developed for private and/or orotilah/egain. * SEE ATTACHMENT C 6. In the event a pgw public parking facility is not constructed, that meets the parameters of the 'Downtown Specific Plan / Downtown Parking Master Plan, within S years from the implenentation of such fee all funds may be returned to the property owner with interest. Any tax increment money will return to the city. 7. Credit for any and all IN—LIEU payments made by a property owner shall run with 'the property' and be transferred to any subsequent purchaser of 'the property. 8. All fees shall be used for the development of new parking facilities. 9. The fee shall be based upon the reduced parking requirements that are indicated by the shared parking concept. b IN CONCLUSION: The IN-LIEU FEE, as proposed, is nothing more than an unjust property tax and as such ony puts additional tax burden on the property owner. The city needs to realize that this fee, as proposed , is not in the best interest of the city as it will only inhibit growth. The best thing that could happen to the City is that the small property owners would develop their properties in order for the City to realize the additional income it would recieve from the TAX INCREMENT that would be generated over the next 30 years from such development. If the in-lieu fee is too high ,very few people, if any will use it. The in-lieu fee, if implemented, must only be used for the development of new parking facilities and not for maintenance of exsisting parking or for any other use. There are so many other factors that must be taken into consideration. �1 f-O[=11 TENTS ON CHI,N6E` PAGE a 1 . Change Huntington Beach Ordinance Code to Downtown Parking Master Plan This change allows all of the Downtown Businesses to be governed by the same set of codes. 2. 4.2.04 Change from an overall height to a net height. This slight modification, which does not cause any significant change in the overall height, will allow the space in between floors to be used for items such as plumbing and sewer lines, heating and air conditioning ducts, wood and/or steel beams, electrical wireing, etc, without lowering the hieght of the rentable or livable space. It will also allow for some flexability in the event codes governing these and other items such as earthquake codes may be changed or modified. PAGE -;!t 12 1 , 4,2. 13 Change from Huntington Beach Ordinance Code to Downtown Parking Master Plan This change allows all of the Downtown businesses to be governed by the same set of codes. PAGE -11� 14 1 . COMMERCIAL a. Include district -t-2 There are some exsisting commercial uses in district =2 that should be governed by the same parking parking rules as the rest of the Downtown. b. Change 350' to walking distance. This allows for greater flexability in the development of downtown Huntington Beach. c, Include the In-Lieu Fee as a method of providing parking for new or exsisting commercial developments, This makes sense due to the fact the City is going to pass an In-Lieu Fee program, d, Eliminate the need for screens on parking facilities that face only an alley. It makes no sense to screen a parking facility that only fakes an alley. PAGE = 15 1 . 4.2. 14 a Eliminate decorative masonary walls or berms etc. from parking lots that face only an alley. There is no reason to decorate a commercial parking lot that faces only an alley. PAGE 4t 16 1 . 4.2. 15 a Add that there must be a Public Hearing required to close Main Street, It only makes sense that the Downtown Business Owners and Property Owners would want to add some input if the City was going to close Main Street for any reason 2._ 4.2. 16 Change access Ways from 30' in the Commercial Districts to 20'. It has been proven over and over that a twenty (20) foot alley way is sufficient for the passage and operation of fire equiptment. More than that is over kill. Include that no one property owner shall required to provide more than one half ( 1 /2) of the total alley dedication from his/her side of the alley. It would be totally unfair if one property owner had to make the entire dedication to widen an alley. PAGE #26. 1 . 4.4.01 Include Single family residences in this district. This makes sense in this district as there is little ,if any, block consolidation that can occur in this district. 2. 4.4.03 Allow that a duplex may be built on a 25' lot if there is enough square footage, Some of the lots in this district are 163' deep and are capable of providing two units quite comfortably. This modification is consistant with allowing four ( 4) units to be built on fifty (50) feet of frontage. PAGE #27 4.4.07 Allow for enclosed tandem parking in this district. The concept of tandom parking will ehance this district. By allowing enclosed tandom parking, development becomes less complicated more simplified and more effecient, Tandom parking has already been effectivly used in other areas of downtown development. 4.4.08 Eliminate the word additional and make clear who is to dedicate. Again, no one property owner shall be required to provide more than his/her fair share of the alley dedication. PAGE #41 , 4.7.01 EXPAND PERMITTED USES TO ALLOW FOR MORE CONSISTANT USES IN EACH DISTRICT ( STILL SUBJECT TO A C.U.P.) This minor modification is more consistant in trying to provide a downtown that is visitor and resident serving. It still leaves the controls with the City while eliminating a bunch of unecessary red tape. PAGE V43 4.7.01 (d) Eliminate continuation from first floor. If we are to have a commercial district uses that are allowed on the first floor should be allowed on the second floor as well. If they will not work there I am sure that no one will want to put it there in the first place. C ��►� 3 � PAGE -v45 4.7.08 CHANGE ALLEY WIDTH FROM 30' TO 20' AND MAKE CLEAR WHO IS TO DEDICATE. All we really need is a twenty (20') foot alley width and again no one person should be required to provide more than his/her fair share of the alley dedication. 4.7. 10 CHANGE PARCELS HAVING 100' TO 'INTERIOR PARCELS HAVING MORE THAN ONE HUNDRED FIFTY ( 150) FEET. It does not make any sense for the small property owner in the middle of the block to be forced to provide 10% of their small property for public open space. the buildings that will be built will be built in order to provide service to visitors and or residents. This requirement is ok for a large development but places an undue hardship on the small property owner. TO : Huntington Beach City Council FROM : Bob and Connie Mandic RE : Downtown Specific Plan - District #6 The following are changes we believe should be incorporated into the Downtown Specific Plan for District #6. We have reviewed the document carefully and also employed an architect and construction engineer to ctitique it. We have also reviewed our proposed changes with other property owners in District #6 and they are in agreement. FOREMOST, when considering these changes, please keep in mind that they apply to remainder parcels that will not have block consolidation. The amount of development remaining in District #6 will have a small impact on the overall downtown but a large impact on individual small property owners. Below are explanations of each change we recommend. We have provided you a copy of the Specific Plan pages that provide specific wording for recommended changes. - 1. Pg. 14 Commercial (a) In District #6 noone above Orange can meet the 350' walking distance to a parking structure requirement that is currently in the Specific Plan. Therefore, it should be modified to read just "walking distance" . This requirement was passed when the city anticipated building additional parking structures downtown. Above Orange property owners should be given the same right to pay an in lieu fee as those property owners below Orange. If only property above Orange is required to provide all parking onsite, there is no way any of us will ever be able to build new and compete with property below Orange that was given parking in the structure, grandfathered or allowed to pay in lieu fees. 2. Pg. 16 4.2.16 Existing curb cuts along Main Street should be allowed to be used for new development. This is very important to merchants in our district. Since District #6 is supposed to be resident serving we intend to put some con- venience parking on site for commercial uses along Main Street. People are not likely to go around back to an alley to hunt for a parking place behind a building. Also, the uses farther up Main Street need all the help they can get .to be successful. We need the right to retain existing curb cuts along Main Street to give access to some convenience parking. The access onto Main has not been a problem throughout the years and should not be in the future. There are no existing curb cuts in the first blocks. The third block only has one curb cut at the U.S. Post Office, which is used by employees and trucks. Above Orange has a curb cut at Townsquare that serves residents of the townhomes and all residential and- commercial under- ground parking. The Art Center is on the fifth block and has a curb cut into the brand new parking lot the city just redid and did not eliminate in favor of alley access. The precident is already set and we feel necessary for the future success of the upper areas of Main Street. 3. Pg. 48 and 49 We recommend you remove some of the restrictions off uses allowed since they are all subject to a CUP anyway. Many of the uses in District #6 have been eliminated that we believe are resident serving such as: appliance store auto accessory/repair existing bakeries savings and loans barber, beauty and manicure shops 2 existing, 1 Townsquare catering Suzanne's coin, stamp & art dealers department store dry goods and notions fruit & vegetable store furniture store gift & party shop hobby supply ice cream parlor jewelry store exists Townsquare meat or fish market market millinery newspaper or magazine store office supply photographic studio photographic sales shoe store stationery store tailor shop travel agency undertaker exists dance studio dog & cat grooming exists Many uses in areas seem in appropriate such as Hardware Store, Drug Store, Savings & Loan and Dry Cleaning being uses identified in District #1 at PCH and Main when they seem more appropriate in District #6. Beach Co. property in District #7 has basically unrestricted uses. All uses permitted should include New Construction, Establishment or Change of use and not differentiate between categories. 4. Pg. 50 The Floor Area Ratio for less than z block should be 1.5. The way it is currently written at 1.25 for less than z block unfairly "targets" the small . _:. : prop.owners who own over 100' but far less than z block. The change from gross to net and 6 stories to 3 stories has already restricted development. But to further reduce FAR severely devalues property. 1.25 is the lowest density downtown and was written when you were trying to encourage small property owners to consolidate. Now, there is no incentive for block con- solidation. These are small parcels and eliminating 1 or 3 units makes a big difference to a small owner trying to make a project pencil out with no government subsidy. T>�- 2. 5. Pg. 9A & 50 4.8.04 Maximum Building Height Building professionals have told us that due to new codes on earthquake, air ducting, fire sprinklering, heat and air conditioning etc. the height requi- rement needs to be measured between floors to allow flexibility to provide for the room it takes to accomodate these things between floors. Builders have indicated that current code is too tight and the proposed code is worse. The city loses by sacrificing quality features in a building. With our rec- ommendation, the tallest building allowed would be 4 stories on a full block but there would just be some flexibility for necessary inclusions between floors. This is not an attempt to get a taller building, but to get the code correct . 6. pg. 51 4.8.08 Setback Rear Yard Need to add "Structures may be cantilevered to rear property line". This is something allowed in other districts and may be an oversight here. 7. Pg. 50 4.8.08 The alley width should be 20' . The existing alley is 15' and has functioned well thrucghout the years. We have been told by fire professionals that no fire dept. would ever put fire apparatus in an alley where buildings are tall enough to fall on the apparatus. Therefore even a 30' alley would not be used by fire trucks in a serious fire. Also the adopted State Fire Code states that 20' is the required width for an alley. Additional footage unreasonably penalizes small property owners. 30' alley width downtown is unrealistic in District #6. The Art Center andthe Edison buildings and several other buildings are not moving and you will never get alley dedication. 20' is wider than you have now and is reasonable. 8. Pg.51 4.8.09 Setback Upper Story This is a very large setback. You didn't get this setback on big buildings where it should have been required. But this is now being imposed on small remainder parcels. We recommend 10' from the 2nd story facade. This conforms to other districts like #5 downtown that are similar to ours and require the front of the buildings to be within 5' of the property line. 9. Pg. 55 Open Space Parcels having more than 150' should provide open space. 100 of a small parcell is too much. In District #6 the idea is to get the buildings up to the street to continue the commercial street scene. This is contrary to that goal. The 150' number will encompass all the small interior lots while still providing opportunities for plazas on the corners. RECENEO ;!T, HUHTINGTi11h •.z_F Ct{,":kOF. fEB i L Aid 194 TO:City Council Members FROM: Michael Tater SUBJECT: DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN CODE AMENDMENT #92-5 DATE: January 31 , 1994 Dear City Council Members I am writing to inform you of some items I brought up at the Subcommittee meeting dated January 27 , 1994 . 1 spoke in regards to my disagreement with the proposed Dist 5 boundary change, as I have stated in my letters to you dated September 27 , 1993 and December 4 , 1993. Grace Winchell asked me specifically what I had against the boundary change moving me from Dist . 5 to Dist 4 . 1 responded my site coverage would go from no maximum site coverage to only 50% site coverage . My front yard setback would go from 5 feet to 15 feet. My side yard setback would go from 0 feet to 5 feet . My 3rd story setback would go from 10 feet to 25 feet . My allowable height would go from 40 feet to 35 feet . My allowable zoning would go from mixed-use commercial /office/residential to mixed-use office/residential thereby denying my commercial usage. With all those new setbacks , by forcing me in a new district without commercial , I would only be left with a chopped up small project to build. It would be worth only a small fraction of what it is worth as currently in Dist . 5 . At this meeting Roy Richardson (planning commissioner) said that one private citizen was the only driving force to change my blocks boundaries to Dist . 4 from Dist . 5 . Roy Richardson, Grace Winchell , and Ralph Bauer all agreed that my block should not be changed to Dist . 4, and the boundaries for Dist . 5 in the Spec . Plan dated Nov . 1983 should remain intact . At this meeting I also brought up my concern that my property was not included in the IBI Report for the downtown parking plan. S , Incis eater � 1 100% HAND WASFij-CLERK © ;,lTy OF HUN1'1?iG70N ;3 'Cfi,GAUF. FEB f 00 i JANUARY 30 , 1994 HOWARD ZELEFSKY DIRECTOR OF PLANNING CITY OF HUNTINGTON. BEACH 200 MAIN STREET HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 DEAR HOWARD, IT HAS COME TO MY 'ATTENTION THAT THE CITY COUNCIL IS CONSIDERING DOWN ZONING AREA 2. I BECAME KNOWLEDGEABLE OF THIS BY ACCIDENT, WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY INFORMATION REGARDING THIS MATTER AND WE OWN SEVERAL PROPERTIES THAT WOULD BE SERIOUSLY AFFECTED BY THIS ORDINANCE. PLEASE PASS THIS INFORMATION ON TO THE COMMITTEE AND TO MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL. WHY HAVEN'T I BEEN NOTIFIED OF THIS? IF I DID RECEIVE INFORMATION, IT APPARENTLY DID NOT EXPLAIN IN ENOUGH DETAIL WHAT THE EFFECT WOULD BE. I AM SURE THAT EVERYONE ELSE WHO OWNS 10 OR MORE UNITS DOESN'T QUITE UNDERSTAND THE EFFECT OF THIS ORDINANCE, JUST BY THE MERE FACT THAT NO ONE HAS SHOWN- UP FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING. LET ME EXPLAIN IN DETAIL WHAT THIS DOES TO ONE OF MY PROPERTIES. I OWN A 15 UNIT APARTMENT AT 124 - 8TH STREET, SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 8TH AND WALNUT. THE 15 UNIT SITS ON 5 LOTS. 8TH 25 X 115 W A L N U 1 2 3 4 5 T 6001 E. EDINGER AVE., HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92647 • (714) 890-1937 • FAX (714) 890-1201 IN A MEETING WITH HERB FAULAND, HE CALCULATED THAT IF I HAD TO REBUILD UNDER THIS NEW ORDINANCE, I WOULD ONLY BE ALLOWED 11 UNITS. 125 X 115 = 14 ,375 SQUARE FEET 43 ,560 = 35 = 1,244. 5 SQUARE FEET 14,375 1,244. 5 = 11. 5 UNITS THIS MEANS I CANNOT SELL MY PROPERTY NOR CAN I REFINANCE IT, BECAUSE THE BANKS WOULD ONLY FUND A VALUE OF 11 UNITS. THE ABOVE SCENERIO HOLDS TRUE WITH ALL OTHER UNITS OF 10 OR MORE IN ZONE 2 THAT IS BEING CONSIDERED FOR THIS ORDINANCE. OTHER CITIES HAVE TRIED THIS WITHOUT GIVING THE EXISTING PROPERTIES THE ABILITY TO REBUILD AS-IS, AND HAVE CREATED SLUMS IN THOSE AREAS. THE REASON FOR SLUMS IS THAT PROPERTY OWNERS FACED WITH THIS PROBLEM DO NOT, I REPEAT DO NOT TAKE CARE OF THEIR PROPERTY AND LET THE PROPERTIES RUN DOWN BECAUSE THEY ARE IN A LOSE-LOSE SITUATION. "I ASK YOU WHAT WOULD YOU DO FACING THIS UNBELIEVABLE SITUATION?" IF YOU MUST DOWN ZONE THIS AREA, PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE GRANDFATHER US AND ALLOW US TO REBUILD AS-IS. THE REASON I FOUND OUT ABOUT THIS IS I REQUESTED A $300,000 LOAN ON MY 124 8TH STREET BUILDING TO DO EXTENSIVE REMODELING TO ENHANCE THIS BUILDING AND MY LENDER BROUGHT THIS TO MY ATTENTION TELLING ME I COULD NOT GET THE LOAN. I AM SURE THAT THE INTENT OF COUNCIL IS NOT TO CREATE SLUMS BUT TO ENHANCE OUR CITY. IF THIS ORDINANCE GOES THROUGH, OBVIOUSLY I WOULDN'T GET THE LOAN BUT I WOULD ALSO BE CRAZY TO PUT ANY MONEY INTO ANY OF MY PROPERTIES. PLEASE CONSIDER THE ABOVE BEFORE YOU ACT. A VERY CICERNED CITIZEN AND LOCAL BUSINESSMAN, i r.,. ,�J%•_fin-.•-�� A. URSINO ARU/clw cc: ALL: CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS CITY ADMINISTRATOR CITY CLERK 0 0 + Faye Ogden 1211 Montego Street Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 February 27, 1994 The Honorable Linda Moulton Patterson , Mayor , and City Council for the ` City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street ' Huntington Beach , CA 92648 Dear Mayor Patterson and Council Members Due to a previous commitment , I will not be able to attend your March 7 meeting. Nonetheless, I thank you for the opportunity to submit these written comments regarding the City 's downtown redevelopment plans. I was a resident of Huntington Beach for twenty-five years until a recent move up north. I continue to own property in the downtown area and , in fact , intend to move back to Huntington Beach sometime in the next few years. The parcel of property J own is located at the corner of Third and Orange. I invested in this property - in the mid- 1970s, so I have watched with keen interest as the City 's various downtown redevelopment plans have taken shape over the years. What I am now seeking is merely fair and equal treatment. Quite simply, the new parking and density restrictions under consideration are completely arbitrary and unacceptable. Because my property happens to be located on the northern side of Orange Street , in the fourth block, or "Area 6" , it would carry with it stricter parking requirements and low*rr- density allowances than the property across the street ! � The new parking requirement would treat properties above Orange differently from those below Orange. This woulco '`'T r- -_ greatly devalue my property and others north of Orange Street ,�, ``�u�CI:V ^= � since it would make it impossible for us to rebuild and ' compete with anyone developing property in the first three �~ �c blocks of downtown. ~ �� ' ` ^ To make matters worse, under the proposal before the Council , ` density limits are also being lowered in Area 6 unfairly and unreasonably. We have already gone from net to gross acreage, which has the effect of lowering density and accomplishes the City 's goals of meeting the Village Concept. To go even further and lower our floor area ratio as well is in effect a double hit , and would severely affect small t like who l� t likely l build property owners e me o could most e y only u a few units anyway. In short , and to repeat , all I want is fair and equal treatment. I love the City of Huntington Beach and I want to be part of the new downtown. I have met with the other property owners in Area 6 and agree with all the recommendations they have presented. I appreciate your consideration of my comments and I urge you to vote yes. on their recommendations. Sincerely Faye Ogden - ' ` CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH TO: Honorable Mayor and City-Councilmembers FROM: Connie Brockway,City Clerk SUBJECT: LATE COMMUNICATION REGARDING AGENDA ITEMS-3/7/94 CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING DATE: March 7, 1994 Attached is material regarding the agenda: ' D-1. mun catio from obert mchel untie on Beac .Tomb rro6 w President Communication from Byron T. Schenn,President,Apartment Association of Orange County Petition from Michael Tater D-2. Omitted page in packet-Page 29 1/2 cc/cbmeml r MAR 07 '94 02:20PM APT ASSN OF O.C. P.2 0 CORANGE 12822 Garden Grave Boulevard, Sulte D, Garden Grove, California 92643 (714) 638-5550 FAX (714) 638-3784 March 7, 1994 Honorable Linda Moulton-Patterson, Mayor Members of the City Council 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Dear Mayor Moulton-Patterson and Members of the City Council; We are writing to formally request a two-week continuance for the consideration of Code Amendment 92-5, the Downtown Specific Plan. Although we realize this plan has been under consideration for several months, last week was the first time we were notified of the impact the proposal, as currently written, would have on the rental housing industry. In that light, we are in the process of developing alternative language which we believe is a reasonable alternative to the current portions dealing with "downzoning." It is for that reason we are requesting a continuance. Thank you for your careful consideration of this request. If you have any question in this regard, please contact Brett R. Barbre, Assistant Director of Public Affairs, at (714) 741-9475. Sincerely, ron T. Schenn avi a ord President Vice Presi nt Legisla ' e Council cc: Michael T. Uberauga, City Administrator A nonprofit organization for the advancement of the rental housing industry � I RECEIVED CITY CLERK !TY OF HUHYINGTON 'b=ACii, OWF. N.a 7 359 Fib '34 PETITION ---------------------------------------------------------------- WE , THE UNDERSIGNED FIFTH STREET BUSINESS OWNERS AND FIFTH STREET PROPERTY OWNERS RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT FIFTH STREET STAY IN DISTRICT FIVE AS IT IS CURRENTLY IN THE DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN DATED NOVEMBER 1983. WE DON 'T WANT TO HAVE THE BOUNDARIES CHANGED TO FORCE US INTO DISTRICT FOUR, WE WANT TO STAY IN THE SAME DISTRICT AS THE MAIN STREET CORE AREA WITH THE SAME PERMITTED USES AND DENSITIES AND SITE COVERAGES AS WE HAVE ALWAYS HAVE BEEN. ---------------------------------- ------------------------------ NAME (signature) ADDRESS ---------------------------------- ------------------------------ 451Z T7� _ Ij or moo a 13 ks A18 PUBLIC NOTICES PUBLIC NOTICES PUBLIC NOTICES PUBLIC NOTICE ERROL STILLMAN, Code Amendment No.93-7 Authorized Signature APPLICANT: City of Hun- . cpp207061 Address: 16633 Ven- tington Beach TTD No.: 18943-02 LOCATION:City-Wide Loan No.: 943-02 9 tura Blvd., Suite 1000, ZONE:City-Wide NOTICE OF Encino, California REQUEST: To amend TRUSTEE'S SALE 91436 Chapter 17.24 of the Hun- YOU ARE IN DEFAULT Phone (818) 986- tington Beach Municipal 8966 Code by deleting the maxi- t UNDER A DEED OF mum segment length of a TRUST DATED 7/31/ Published Huntington sun deck that projects over c 90 UNLESS YOU TAKE Beach-Fountain Valley In- the bulkhead on water front f dependent February 10,17, lots. ACTION TO PROTECT 24 1994 ENVIRONMENTAL STA- r YOUR PROPERTY, IT 022-678 TUS: Categorically exempt � MAY BE SOLD AT PUB- pursuant to Section 15320, LIC SALE. IF YOU PUBLIC NOTICE Class 20 of the Califomia a NEED AN EXPLANA- Environmental Quality Act, TION OF THE NATURE NOTICE OF as included in City Council ` PROCEEDING PUBLIC HEARING Resolution No.4501. c AGAINST YOU, YOU This public hearing COASTAL STATUS: Not f SHOULD CONTACT A was originally applicable LAWYER- continued open ON FILE: A copy of the t On 3/4/94 at 9:45 AM. from December 6, Proposed request is on file in the Community TITLE TRUST DEED SER- 1993 to February merit Departmentt,, 20 20000 . VICE COMPANY, A CAU- 22, 1994. Main Street, Huntington FORNIA CORPORATION, The City Council Beach, California 92648, as duly appointed Trustee at its February 7, for inspection by the pub- under and pursuant to 1994 meeting lic. A copy of the staff re- Deed of Trust recorded 8/ instructed staff port will be available to in- 7/90, as Instrument No. 90 terested parties at City Hall 418311,in book, ,of to reschedule this page or the Main City Library Official Records in the of- public hearing for (7111 Talbert Avenue) after fice of the County Recorder March 7, 1994 February 18,1994. of ORANGE County, State CODEAMENDMENT ALL INTERESTED PER- of California. Executed by NO.92-5/DOWNTOWN SONS are invited to attend MARIA E. SANDOVAL, A SPECIFIC PLAN said hearing and express SINGLE WOMAN; ZIOLA CODE AMENDMENT/ opinions or submit evi- dence to the City Clerk foi WOMAN "VILLAGE CONCEPT' or against the applicatior WILL SELL AT PUBLIC AND DOWNTOWN as outlined above. If you AUCTION TO HIGHEST PARKING MASTER challenge the City Coun BIDDER FOR CASH (pay- PLAN(CONTINUED cil's action in court, yoL able at time of sale in law- FROM DECEMBER 6, may be limited to raisinc ful money of the United 1993 CITY COUNCIL only those issues you o States) at AT THE MAIN someone else raised at thf NORTH ENTRANCE TO MEETING) THE COUNTY COURT- NOTICE IS HEREBY public hearing described ii HOUSE, 700 CIVIC CEN- GIVEN that the Huntington this notice, or in writtel TER DRIVE WEST, SANTA Beach City Council will correspondence delrveret ANA,CALIFORNIA. hold a public hearing in the to the City at, or prior to (NOTE: CASHIERS Council Chambers at the the public hearing. If then CHECKS MUST BE MADE Huntington Beach Civic are any further questions ( ) Center, 2000 Main Street, please call Susan Pierce PAYABLE TO TITLE TRUST Associate Planner, at 536 DEED SERVICE CO.) all Huntington Beach, Califor- 5271 right, title and interest con- nia, on the date and at the veyed to and now held by time indicated below to re- Connie Brockway, it under said Deed of Trust ceve and consider the City Clerk, City of Hun. in the property situated in statements of all persons tington Beach, 2000 said County and State de- who wish to be heard rela- Main Street, Hun. scribed as: LOT 118 OF tive to the application de- tington Beach, CA TRACT NO. 4416, IN THE scribed below. 92648(714)536-5227 CITY OF HUNTINGTON DATE/TIME: Monday, t BEACH, COUNTY OF OR- March 7,1994,7:00 PM on Beach-Fountain Published Lain Valley Huntington In. ANGE, STATE OF CALI- APPLICATION NUMBER: Y FORNIA, AS PER MAP RE- Code Amendment No. 92- dependent February 10, CORDED IN BOOK 175, 5/Downtown Specific Plan 1994. PAGES 48 TO 50 INCLU- Code Amendment/ "Village 022-681 SIVE, MISCELLANEOUS Concept" And Downtown MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF Parking Master Plan PUBLIC NOTICE THE COUNTY RECORDER APPLICANT: City of Hun- OF SAID COUNTY. APN tington Beach LOCATION: NOTICE OF #153 414 20 An area bounded by Gold- PUBLIC HEARING The street address and enwest Street, Pacific CODE AMENDMENT other common designation, Coast Highway, Beach NO.93-5 A if any, of the real property Boulevard, and Sixth ENVIRONMENTAL described above is pur- Street. ASSESSMENT 93-20 ported to be: 19776 INV. ZONE: Downtown Specific (Standards for ERNESS LANE, HUNTING- Plan TON BEACH,CA.92646 REQUEST: To Amend the Outdoor Dining) The undersigned Trustee Downtown Specific Plan for NOTICE IS HEREBY disclaims any liabilit for the purpose of scaling GIVEN that the Huntington down development stand- Beach CityCouncil will any incorrectness, o the P street ,address and other ards, creating three (3) hold a public hearing in the common designation, if planning nodes, affordable Council Chamber at the any,shown herein. housing standards and a Huntington Beach Civic Said sale will be made, comprehensive parking Center, 2000 Main Street, but without covenant or management plan. Huntington Beach, Califor- warranty, expressed or im- ENVIRONMENTAL STA- nia, on the date and at the plied, regarding title, pos- TUS: Covered by Down- time indicated below to re- session, or encumbrances, town Specific Plan Environ- ceive and consider the to pay the remaining rsn_ mental Impact Report statements of all persons ciple sum of the note(s�se- COASTAL STATUS: Local who wish to be heard rela- cured by said Deed of Coastal Plan Amendment tive to the application de- Trust,with interest thereon, ON FILE: A copy of the scribed below. as provided in said note(s), proposed request is on file DATE/TIME: Tuesday, advances, if any under the in the City Clerk's Office, February 22,1994,7:00 PM terms of said Deed of 2000 Main Street, Hun- APPLICATION NUMBER Trust, fees, charges and tington Beach, California Code Amendment No.93 expenses of the Trustee 92648, for inspection by A/Environmental Assess and of the trusts created the public. A copy of the ment No.93-20 by said Deed of Trust. staff report will be available APPLICANT: Departmer The total amount of the to interested parties in the of Community Services unpaid balance of the obli- City Clerk's office after City of Huntington Beach gation secured by the February 4,1994. LOCATION:City-Wide property to be sold and ALL INTERESTED PER- ZONE:City-Wide reasonable estimated SONS are invited to attend REQUEST: To establisl costs, expenses and ad- said hearing and express provisions in the Hunting vances at the time of the opinions or submit to the ton Beach Ordinance Code initial publication of the No- City Clerk,written evidence to permit and regulate out. _ tice of Sale is$138,703.64 for or against the applica- door dining. The beneficiary under tion as outlined above. If ENVIRONMENTAL STA- said Deed of Trust hereto- You challenge the City TUS: Covered by Environ• fore executed and deliv- Council's action in court, mental Assessment No.93• ered to the undersigned a You may be limited to rais- 20 also to be considered written Declaration of De- sng only those issues you by Council. fault and Demand for Sale, or someone else raised at COASTAL STATUS: Not and written Notice of De- the public hearing 'de- applicable fault and Election to Sell to scribed in this notice, or in ON FILE: A copy of the be recorded in the county written correspondence de- proposed request is on file where the real property is livered to the City at, or in the Community Develop- located. prior to,the public hearing. ment Department, 200C Date: February 01 If there are any further Main Street, Huntingtor ry , questions please call Herb Beach, California 92648 1994 Fauland, Associate Plan- for inspection by the pub TITLE TRUST DEED ner,at 536-5271. lic. A copy of the staff re SERVICE COMPANY, A Connie Brockway, port will,be available to in CALIFORNIA CORPO- City Clerk, City of Hun- terested parties at City Hal RATION,AS TRUSTEE tington Beach, 2000 (7 the Main City ) aft) Main Street, Hun- February Talbert Avenue) afte February 18,1994. tington Beach, CA ALL INTERESTED PEF 92648(714)536-5227 SONS are invited to after Published Huntington said hearing and expre: .MIj Beach-Fountain Valley In- opinions or submit e' dependent February 10, dence to the City Clerk 1994 or against the applicat as outlined above. If t HARBOR LAWN- 022-673 challenge the City Cc' MOUNT OLIVE PUBLIC NOTICE cil's action in court, Cemetery*Mortuary may be limit-4 — iai Chapel premat+,... - - i CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH TO: MELANIE FALLON, Director of Community Development FROM: GAIL HUTTON, City Attorney DATE: March 3, 1994 SUBJECT: Request for City Council Motion re: Downtown Specific Plan RLS # 94- You have asked for a draft City Council motion which would allow the Main-Pier Phase 2 and 3d Block West projects to obtain building permits regardless of the status of the new Downtown Specific Plan. We recommend that the following: I MOVE THAT the ordinance adopting the Downtown Specific Plan include the following language: The provisions of this ordinance shall not apply to Conditional Use Permits or Tentative Tract Maps that have been approved prior to the effective date of this ordinance. Building Permits shall be issued for such previously approved entitlements if the applications for such building permits are consistent therewith. 2"a_-4 4a�7�-- GAIL HUTTON City Attorney X c,-i r-J -c c m U1mrrn "C7 ' A r .G 4\03/04/94 itECOVEO CITY OF HUNTINGTON cv� CH INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUI NICWTIOWC'4,CALIF. HUNTINGTON BEACH d:R S 45 REVISED RECOMMENDATION FROM CITY ATTORNEY AGENDA ITEM D-1 TO: MELANIE FALLON,Director of Community Development FROM: GALL HUTTON, City Attorney DATE: March 7, 1994 SUBJECT: Request for City Council Motion re: Downtown Specific Plan Revised Language RLS ## 94-1-25 After further review, including discussions with the Planning Director, we recommend that the draft City Council motion regarding the Downtown Specific Plan, previously discussed in our memorandum dated March 3, 1994, be revised as follows: I MOVE THAT the ordinance adopting the Downtown Specific Plan include the following language: The provisions of this ordinance shall not apply to Conditional Use Permits processed with Tentative Tract Maps that have been approved prior to the effective date of this ordinance. Building permits shall be issued for such previously approved entitlements if the applications for such building permits are consistent therewith.* C`4� ,�.n�s-�' 0 RECEIVED AID MADE A F;;RT OF HE RECORD AT GAIL HUTTON 3 ' I' 1 MEETING City Attorney ITEM NO..- OFFICE OF THE CITY CLE,;;,��� * New language underlined CONNIE BROCKWAY` 4\03/07/94 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION Date February 22,1994 Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members Submitted by: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrator VTO Prepared by: Melanie Fallon, Community Development Director Ar4 Subject: CODE AMENDMENT NO. 92-5/DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN REWRITE "VILLAGE CONCEPT" AND PARKING MASTER PLAN d/.zCv� te n. 3/7/9SC Consistent with Council Policy? [X] Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception Statement of Issue,Recommendation,Analysis,Funding Source,Alternative Actions, Attacr STATEMENT OF ISSUE: Transmitted for City Council consideration is Code Amendment No. 92-5 the Downtown Specific Plan rewrite commonly referred to as the "Village Concept" and Parking Master Plan. The City Council has held three meetings(August 30, 1993, October 11, 1993 and December 6, 1993)to discuss the details of the plan. RECOMMENDATION: Motion to: " Continue Code Amendment No. 92-5, the Downtown Specific Plan rewrite and Downtown Parking Master Plan to the City Council Meeting of March 7, 1994." ANALYSIS: At the December 6, 1993 meeting,the City Council opened the public hearing, took public testimony, and formed the Downtown Specific Plan Subcommittee which consists of Council Members Grace Winchell, Ralph Bauer, Dave Sullivan, and City staff. The City Council continued the public hearing to the meeting of February 22, 1994. RCA 2/22/94 PAGE TWO The Committee has met on seven occasions to discuss the details of the Specific Plan/Parking Plan and allow public participation. The Committee has not reached a consensus on all the issues of the Specific Plan/Parking Plan and has agreed to hold one final meeting to receive comments. FUNDING SOURCE: Not applicable. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: Take public testimony on Code Amendment No. 92-5 and continue to the City Council meeting of March 7, 1994. ATTACHMENTS: 1. RCA dated December 6, 1994 MTU:MF:HZ:h*/ REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION Date: December 6, 1993 Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members Submitted by: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrator Prepared by: Ray Silver, Assistant City Administrator Howard Zelefsky, Planning Director Subject: CODE AMENDMENT NO. 92-5/DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN REWRITE "VILLAGE CONCEPT" AND PARKING MASTER PLAN Consistent with Council Policy? . [X] Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception Statement of Issue, Recommendation, Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attachments: STATEMENT OF ISSUE: Transmitted for City Council consideration is Code Amendment No. 92-5 the Downtown Specific Plan rewrite commonly referred to as the "Village Concept" and Parking Master Plan. The City Council has held two meetings (August 30, 1993, and October 11, 1993) to discuss the details of the plan. RECOMMENDATION: Motion to: "Approve Code Amendment No. 92-5, -the Downtown Specific Plan rewrite and Downtown Parking master Plan as recommended by the Planning Commission." ANALYSIS: Attached for City Council review is a newly formatted version of the Downtown Specific Plan. The Council requested, at a previous study session, that the staff develop a more readable copy of the document. Also attached is a building area analysis that can be used to supplement the Downtown Parking Master Plan. At the previous Council workshops, binders were distributed which included: downtown history, Downtown Specific Plan RCA, annotated changes, Downtown Parking Plan, letters from the public and Design Guidelines. The purpose of this public hearing is to receive public input, review the staffs presentation on the significant changes proposed in the Downtown Specific Plan. Two amendments to the Downtown Specific Plan need to be highlighted for the City Council's information. The first is in reference to revisions clarifying the requirement for commercial activities on the ground floor of all buildings fronting Main Street and Pacific Coast Highway in District 3. Specifically, Section 4.5.01 (a), Permitted Uses, *Note, and Section 4.5.01 (c) are being revised (page 31 of the reformatted document). The Coultrup Development Group has indicated that these revisions will result in an inconsistency between the Downtown Specific Plan and their approved project at the corner of Pacific Coast Highway and Main Street. The second item is that the revised document does not reference in-lieu parking fees (Section 4.2. 13[f] on page 14 of the reformatted document). On October 25, 1993, the City Council approved Resolution No. 6522, which established an in-lieu parking fee -for uses within the Downtown Specific Plan area. The fee is $400/Space, to be paid on an annual basis for up to fifteen years ($6,000 total). The City Council directed-staff to prepare an ordinance to implement the in-lieu parking fee program. The ordinance will be brought back to the Council as an amendment to the Downtown Specific Plan after Planning Commission action and the public hearing process. Tentative public hearing dates are early 1994. FUNDING SOURCE: Not applicable. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: Continue action on Code Amendment No. 92-5 to the December 20, 1993, City Council meeting. ATTACHMENTS: 1 . RCA dated September 7, 1993 2. Reformatted Downtown Specific Plan 3.. Downtown Parking Master Plan Building Area Analysis MTU:HZ:kjl (k1024) RC.A - 11/15/93 2 (k1025) r PROOF OF PUBLICATION STATE OF CALIFORNIA) SS. County of Orange ) PUBLIC NOTICE —ZONE: Downtown Specific NOTICE OF. Plan I REQUEST: To Amend the PUBLIC HEARING Downtown Specific Plan for am a Citizen of the United States and a resident of the County aforesaid; I am This public hearing j the, purpose of scaling . was originally down development stand- over the age of eighteen years, and not a continued open ards, creating three (3) Z7 from December 6, planning nodes, affordable party to or interested in the below 19934oFebruary housing standards and a 22, 1994. comprehensive parking ' management plan. entitled matter. I am a principal clerk of The City Council ENVIRONMENTAL STA- at its February 7, TUS: Covered by Down- the HUNTINGTON BEACH INDEPENDENT, a 1994meeting town Specific Plan Environ- instructed staff I mental Impact Report. newspaper of general circulation printed to reschedule this COASTAL STATUS: Local Coastal Plan Amendment public hearing for ON FILE: A copy of the and published in the City of Huntington ! March 7, 1994 proposed request is on file CODE AMENDMENT in the City Clerk's Office, Beach, County of Orange, State of NO.92-5/DOWNTOWNI 2000 Main Street, Hun- SPECIFIC PLAN tington Beach, California California, and that attached Notice is a CODE AMENDMENT/ 1 92648, for inspection by "VILLAGE CONCEPT'1 the public. A copy of the true and complete copy as was printed "AND DOWNTOWN 1 staff report will be available to interested parties in the a PARKING MASTER City Clerk's office after and published in the Huntington Beach PLAN(CONTINUED I February 4,1994. and Fountain Valle issues of said FROM DECEMBER 6, ALL INTERESTED PER- y 1993 CITY COUNCIL SONS are invited to attend newspaper to wit the issue(s) of: MEETING) said hearing and express NOTICE IS HEREBY, opinions or submit to the. GIVEN that the Huntington City Clerk,written evidence Beach City Council will for or against the applica- hold a public hearing in the tion as outlined above. If Council Chambers at the you challenge the •City Huntington Beach Civic Council's action in court, Center, 2000 Main Street you may be limited to rais- Huntington Beach, Califor-' or only those issues you nia, on the date and at the, or someone else raised at February10 1994 time indicated below to re the public hearing de- r ceive and consider the, scribed in this notice, or in statements of all persons written correspondence de who wish to be heard rela-; livered to the City at, or tive to the application de- prior to,the public hearing. scribed below. If there are any further, I declare under, penalty of perjury, that DATEYTIME: Monday, I questions please call Herb � Fauland, Associate Plan- March 7,1994,7:00 PM ner,at 536-5271. the foregoing is true and correct. APPLICATION N NUMBER: No.R l Connie Brockway, Code 5/Downtown Specific Plan City Clerk, City of Hun- Code Amendment/ "Village tington Beach, 2000 Concept" And Downtown Main Street,4 199 Hun- Executed on February 1() Parking Master Plan ' tington Beach, CA , I J7 APPLICANT: City of.Hun- 92648(714).536-5227 tington Beach LOCATION: Published Huntington at Costa Mesa, California. An area bounded by Gold- Beach-Fountain Valley In- enwest Street, Pacific de en ent February 10,. Coast ;Highway, Beach p o ry Boule�ard, and 'Sixth 1994• Street. i, 022-673 1� G Signature NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING This public hearing was originally continued open from December 6, 1993 to February 22, 1994. The City Council at its FebruaU 7. 1994 meeting instructed staff to reschedule this public hearing for March 7, 1994. CODE AMENDMENT NO. 92-5/ DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN CODE AMENDMENT/ "VILLAGE CONCEPT" AND DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN (CONTINUED FROM DECEMBER 6, 1993 CITY COUNCIL MEETING) NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Huntington Beach City Council will hold a public hearing in the Council Chambers at the Huntington Beach Civic Center, 2000 Main Street,Huntington Beach, California, on the date and at the time indicated below to receive and consider the statements of all persons who wish to be heard relative to the application described below. DATE/TIME: Monday,March 7, 1994, 7:00 PM APPLICATION NUMBER: Code Amendment No. 92-5/Downtown Specific Plan Code Amendment/ "Village Concept"And Downtown Parking Master Plan APPLICANT: City of Huntington Beach LOCATION: An area bounded by Goldenwest Street,Pacific Coast Highway, Beach Boulevard and Sixth Street. ZONE: Downtown Specific Plan REQUEST: To amend the Downtown Specific Plan for the purpose of scaling down development standards,creating three(3)planning nodes,affordable housing standards and a comprehensive parking management plan. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Covered by Downtown Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report. COASTAL STATUS: Local Coastal Plan Amendment ON FILE: A copy of the proposed request is on file in the City Clerk's Office, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California 92648, for inspection by the public. A copy of the staff report will be available to interested parties in the City Clerk's office after February 4, 1994. ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to attend said hearing and express opinions or submit to the City Clerk,written evidence for or against the application as outlined above. If you challenge the City Council's action in court,you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City at,or prior to,the public hearing. If there are any further questions please call Herb Fauland,Associate Planner, at 536-5271. Connie Brockway City Clerk City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach,CA 92648 (714) 536-5227 (hflp 172) NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING This public hearing was originally continued open from December 6, 1993 to February 22, 1994. The City Council at its February 7. 1994 meeting instructed staff to reschedule this public hearing for March 7, 1994. CODE AMENDMENT NO. 92-5/ DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN CODE AMENDMENT/ "VILLAGE CONCEPT"AND DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN (CONTINUED FROM DECEMBER 6, 1993 CITY COUNCIL MEETING) NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Huntington Beach City Council will hold a public hearing in the Council Chambers at the Huntington Beach Civic Center, 2000 Main Street,Huntington Beach, California, on the date and at the time indicated below to receive and consider the statements of all persons who wish to be heard relative to the application described below. DATE/TIME: Monday, March 7, 1994, 7:00 PM APPLICATION NUMBER: Code Amendment No. 92-5/Downtown Specific Plan Code Amendment/ "Village Concept"And Downtown Parking Master Plan APPLICANT: City of Huntington Beach LOCATION: An area bounded by Goldenwest Street,Pacific Coast Highway,Beach Boulevard and Sixth Street. ZONE: Downtown Specific Plan RE UEST: To amend the Downtown Specific Plan for the purpose of scaling down development standards, creating three(3)planning nodes, affordable housing standards and a comprehensive parking management plan. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Covered by Downtown Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report. COASTAL STATUS: Local Coastal Plan Amendment ON FILE: A copy of the proposed request is on file in the City Clerk's Office, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California 92648, for inspection by the public. A copy of the staff report will be available to interested parties in the City Clerk's office after February 4, 1994. ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to attend said hearing and express opinions or submit to the City Clerk,written evidence for or against the application as outlined above. If you challenge the City Council's action in court,you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City at, or prior to,the public hearing. If there are any further questions please call Herb Fauland,Associate Planner, at 536-5271. Connie Brockway City Clerk City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 (714) 536-5227 (hflp 172) C 44 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING �c CODE AMENDMENT NO. 92-5/ DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN CODE AMENDMENT/ "VILLAGE CONCEPT" AND DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN (CONTINUED FROM DECEMBER 6, 1993 CITY COUNCIL MEETING) NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Huntington Beach City Council will hold a public hearing in the Council Chambers at the Huntington Beach Civic Center,2000 Main Street,Huntington Beach, California, on the date and at the time indicated below to receive and consider the statements of all persons who wish to be heard relative to the application described below. *la-)� M� /7 DATE/TIME: nesdttp Frbruary-2-2, 1994, 7:00 PM APPLICATION NUMBER: Code Amendment No. 92-5/Downtown Specific Plan Code Amendment/ "Village Concept"And Downtown Parking Master Plan APPLICANT: City of Huntington Beach LOCATION: An area bounded by Goldenwest Street,Pacific Coast Highway,Beach Boulevard and Sixth Street. ZONE: Downtown Specific Plan REQUEST: To amend the Downtown Specific Plan for the purpose of scaling down development standards, creating three(3)planning nodes, affordable housing standards and a comprehensive parking management plan. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Covered by Downtown Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report. COASTAL STATUS: Local Coastal Plan Amendment ON FILE: A copy of the proposed request is on file in the City Clerk's Office, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California 92648, for inspection by the public. A copy of the staff report will be available to interested parties in the City Clerk's office after February 4, 1994. ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to attend said hearing and express opinions or submit to the City Clerk,written evidence for or against the application as outlined above. If you challenge the City Council's action in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City at, or prior to,the public hearing. If there are any further questions please call Herb Fauland,Associate Planner, at 536-5271. Connie Brockway City Clerk City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach,CA 92648 (714) 536-5227 (hflp 172) Approved by City Administration COVER SHEET FOR CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARINGS N/A YES NO ( ) ( ) Was City Council or Planning Commission public hearing notice typed on Wang? ( ) ( ) If appeal, are appellant and applicant shown on legal notice? ( ) ( ) If housing is involved, is "legal challenge paragraph" included? ( ) ( ) If Coastal Development Permit, are the RESIDENT labels attached and is the Coastal Commission Office on the labels? ( ) Is Title Company verification letter attached? ( ) ( ) Were the latest Assessor's Parcel Rolls used? ( ) ( ) Is the appellant's name and address part of the labels? ( ) Is day of public hearing correct - Monday/Tuesday? ( ) Has the City Administrator's Office authorized the public hearing to be set? ( ) ( ) Is there an Environmental Status to be approved by Council. ( ) ( ) Are the appellant/applicant's names and addresses on mailing labels? "ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to attend said hearing and express opinions or submit to the City Clerk written evidence for or against the application as outlined above. If there are any further questions please, call (insert name of Planner) at 536-5227." For Public Hearings at the City Council level please insert the above paragrEph of the public hearing notice: CONNIE BROCKWAY, CITY CLERK CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 2000 MAIN STREET - 2ND FLOOR HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92648 (714) 536-5227 ' 1350K - 9/93 + Vj PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION CHECKLIST MAILING LABELS (1211D) 3/2/93 President William D. Holman Planning Director H.B. Chamber of Commerce Pacific Coast Homes City of Westminster 2210 Main Street, Suite 200 23 Corporate Plaza, Suite 250 8200 Westminster Blvd. Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Newport Beach CA 92660-7912 Westminster, CA 92683 Judy Legan Pres., H.B. Hist. Society Planning Director H.B./F.V. Board of Realtors C/O Newland House Museum City of Seal Beach 8101 Slater Ave. 19820 Beach Blvd. 211 Eight St. Huntington Beach, CA 92647 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Seal Beach, CA 90740 President Chairperson CA Coastal Commission Amigos De Bolsa Chica Historical Resources Bd. Theresa Henry P. 0. Box 3748 Comm. Services Dept. 245 W. Broadway, Ste 380 Huntington Beach, CA 92605 2000 Main St. Long Bch, CA 90802 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Charles Grant Robert Joseph Friends of the HB Wetlands Council on Aging Caltrans District 12 21902 Kiowa Lane 1706 Orange Ave. 2501 Pullman St. Huntington Beach, CA 92646 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Santa Ana, CA 92705 Edna Littlebury Director Golden St. Mob. Hm. Owners Leag. Local Solid Waste Enf. Agy. 11021 Magnolia Blvd. O.C. Health Care Agency Garden Grove, CA 92642 P.O. Box 355 Santa Ana, CA 92702 President County of Orange/EMA Dominick Tomaino Huntington Beach Tomorrow Michael M. Ruane, Dir. Seacliff Homeowners Assoc. 411 6th St. P.O. Box 4048 6812 Scenic Bay Lane Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Santa Ana, CA 92702-4048 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Julie Vandermost BIA—OC County of Orange/EMA Huntington Harbor HOA 9 Executive Circle #100 Thomas Mathews, Dir, Planning P. 0. Box 791 Irvine Ca 92714-6734 P. 0. Box 4048 Sunset Beach, CA 90742 Santa Ana, CA 92702-4048 i Richard Spicer SCAG County of Orange/EMA Bill Lilly 818 West 7th, 12th Floor Bob Fisher, Dir. HHHOA ARC Los Angeles, CA 90017 P.O. Box 4048 16835 Algonquin St. #119 Santa Ana, CA 92702-4048 Huntington Beach, CA 92649 E.T.I. Corral 100 Planning Dir. New Growth Coordinator Mary Bell City of Costa Mesa Huntington Beach Post Office 20292 Eastwood Cir. P. 0. Box 1200 6771 Warner Ave. Huntington Beach, CA 92646 Costa Mesa, CA 92628-1200 Huntington Beach, CA 92647 PUBLIC HEARING 'NGTIFICATION CHECKLIST Pg. 2 (1211D) Norm Smith, Environmental Planning Dir. Mr. Tom Zanic Board Chairman City of Fountain Valley Seacliff Partners 4053 Aladdin Drive 10200 Slater Ave. 520 Broadway Ste. 100 Huntington Beach, CA 92649 Fountain Valley, CA 92708 Santa Monica, CA Pacific Coast Archaeological Planning Department OC County Harbors, Beach Society, Inc. Orange County EMA and Parks Dept. P.O. Box 10926 P. 0. Box 4048 P. 0. Box 4048 Costa Mesa, CA 92627 Santa Ana, CA 92702-4048 Santa Ana, CA 92702-4048 Attn: Jane Gothold JERRY BUCHANAN California Coastal Commission HB CITY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT South District Office P. 0. Box 71 245 W. Broadway No. 380 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Long Beach, CA 92802-4458 964-8888 GARY BURGNER HB UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISRICT 10251 Yorktown Avenue Huntington Beach, CA 92646 964-3339 MARC ECKER FOUNTAIN VALLEY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT 17210 OAK STREET FOUNTAIN VALLEY CA 92708 i JAMES JONES OCEAN VIEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT 17200 PINEHURST LANE HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92647 RON FRAZIER WESTMINSTER SCHOOL DISTRICT 14121 CEDARWOOD AVENUE WESTMINSTER CA 92683 CSA 730 E1 Camino Way #200 Tustin, CA 9680 SCHOOL DISTRICTS (1211D) i i Dr. Duane Dishno HB CITY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT P. 0. Box 71 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 964-8888 DAVID HAGEN HB UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISRICT 10251 Yorktown Avenue Huntington Beach, CA 92646 964-3339 CSA 730 E1 Camino Way #200 Tustin, CA 9680 i Yolanda Zanchi 16601 Nalu Cr. Huntington Beach, CA 92649 Mark Sutter 17609 Ventura Blvd. Suite 212 Encino, CA 91316 Broadmoor Huntington Harbour MSC 2112 E. Fourth #200 Santa Ana, CA 92705 Christiana Bay Homeowners C/O 16458 Harbour Huntington Beach, CA 92649 Seagate Westchester Bay P. 0. Box 1863 Huntington Beach, CA 92647 Seaharbor 16911 Blue Water Lane Huntington Beach, CA 92649 i Hunt. Harbour Prop. Owners Assoc. C/O 3565 Windspun Huntington Beach, CA 92649 i Weatherly Bay Prop. Owners Assoc. MR Property Management 20062 Lawson Huntington Beach, CA 92646 Seacape Prop. Owner Assoc. MR Property Management 20062 Lawson Huntington Beach, CA 92649 Ken Bourguignon 3692 Escapade Circle Huntington Beach, CA 92649 Trinidad Island Homeowners Assoc. 12607 Hiddencreek Way Ste. R Cerritos, CA 90701-2146 Connie Mandic Lorretta Wolfe Mike Roberts 1112 Main Street 411 Main Street P. O. Box 536 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Huntington Beach,CA 92 i Michael Tater Bob Bolen James Lane 16136 Twinkle Circle 522 Main Street 637 Frankfort Ave. Huntington Beach, CA 92649 Huntington Beach,CA 92648 Huntington Beach, CA 92 Mark Porter Doug Langevin Joe Hartge 19561 Topeka Lane 8196 Pawtucket Drive 20051 Mural Circle Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Huntington Beach, CA 92646 Huntington Beach, CA 92 Dick Harlow Anthony Ursino 211 Main Street 6001 E.Edinger Ave. Huntington Beach,CA 92648 Huntington Beach,CA 92647 labels I PUBLIC HEARING CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE APPROVAL SUBJECT: COUNCIL MEETING DATE: cal 7 A�,// NUMBER OF HEARINGS ALREADY SCHEDULED: APPROVED: C� Ray Silver, sistant City Administrator P, v NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING This public hearing was originally continued open from December 6, 1993 to February 22, 1994. The City Council at its February 7, 1994 meeting instructed staff to reschedule this public hearing for March 7, 1994, CODE AMENDMENT NO. 92-5/ DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN CODE AMENDMENT/ "VILLAGE CONCEPT" AND DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN (CONTINUED FROM DECEMBER 6, 1993 CITY COUNCIL MEETING) NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Huntington Beach City Council will hold a public hearing in the Council Chambers at the Huntington Beach Civic Center,2000 Main Street,Huntington Beach, California, on the date and at the time indicated below to receive and consider the statements of all persons who wish to be heard relative to the application described below. DATE/TIME: Monday,March 7, 1994, 7:00 PM APPLICATION NUMBER: Code Amendment No. 92-5/Downtown Specific Plan Code Amendment/ "Village Concept"And Downtown Parking Master Plan APPLICANT: City of Huntington Beach LOCATION: An area bounded by Goldenwest Street, Pacific Coast Highway, Beach Boulevard and Sixth Street. ZONE: Downtown Specific Plan REQUEST: To amend the Downtown Specific Plan for the purpose of scaling down development standards, creating three(3)planning nodes, affordable housing standards and a comprehensive parking management plan. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Covered by Downtown Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report. COASTAL STATUS: Local Coastal Plan Amendment ON FILE: A copy of the proposed request is on file in the City Clerk's Office, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California 92648, for inspection by the public. A copy of the staff report will be available to interested parties in the City Clerk's office after February 4, 1994. ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to attend said hearing and express opinions or submit to the City Clerk,written evidence for or against the application as outlined above. If you challenge the City Council's action in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City at, or prior to, the public hearing. If there are any further questions please call Herb Fauland, Associate Planner, at 536-5271. Connie Brockway City Clerk City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 (714) 536-5227 (hflp172) Connie Brockway,City Clerk City of Huntington Beach ,�� �� rEc-r•t; n�..�-..a �� .Y R.,..,r ���a� Office of the City Clerk F t - - - - - - '�� A •! t •-'S- 1 {T ��-ct ��• t �•r..jJ .. :•:•f1*�'_ !S-R..�---._.'. .•........ 4. P.O. Box 190 �F� [ - S _-' _. .. . . :�= s — - - ='�':{ :rt' � ..r � �` �'��:.�-�- �,v �_��.1:1 tom: ,..� ! `�Huntington Beach, CA 92648 NOl'`� I`1 t �/j/ a` `f @ C1 _ E} @ ',. 9 C f ._ l l'_V—,'r \� ington Harbour MSC 2 urt h 20 . _- INGTp Ana, CA 92705 -�NCOfl POfl4 TFQ` FA� - i -7 - ppUN T Y Cps LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION Date: December 6, 1993 Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members Submitted by: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrato Prepared by: Ray Silver, Assistant City Administrator0 Howard Zelefsky., Planning DirectorL Subject: CODE AMENDMENT NO. 92-5/DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN REWRITE "VILLAGE CONCEPT" AND PARKING MASTER PLAN r Consistent with Council Policy? [X] Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception Statement of Asue, Recommendation, Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Acti ns, Attachments: STATEMENT OF ISSUE: Transmitted for City Council consideration is Code Amendment No. 92-5 the Downtown Specific Plan rewrite commonly referred to as the "Village Concept" and Parking Master Plan. The City Council has held two meetings (August 30, 1993, and October 11, 1993) to discuss the details of the plan. RECOMMENDATION: c' Motion to: n un "Approve Code Amendment No. 92-5, the Downtown Specific Plan rewrite and Downtown Parking master Plan as recommended by the Planning Commission." � ANALYSIS: Attached for City Council review is a newly formatted version of the Downtown Specific Plan. The Council requested, at a previous study session, that the staff develop a more readable copy of the document. Also attached is a building area analysis that can be used to supplement the Downtown Parking Master Plan. At the previous Council workshops, binders were distributed which included: downtown history, Downtown Specific Plan RCA, annotated changes, Downtown Parking Plan, letters from the public and Design Guidelines. The purpose of this public hearing is to receive public input, review the staffs presentation on the significant changes proposed in the Downtown Specific Plan. Two amendments to the Downtown Specific Plan need to be highlighted for the City Council's information. The first is in reference to revisions clarifying the requirement for commercial activities on the ground floor of all buildings fronting Main Street and Pacific Coast Highway in District 3. Specifically, Section 4.5.01 (a), Permitted Uses, *Note, and Section 4.5.01 (c) are being revised (page 31 of the reformatted document). The Coultrup Development Group has indicated that these revisions will result in an inconsistency between the Downtown Specific Plan and their approved project at the corner of Pacific Coast Highway and Main Street. The second item is that the revised document does not reference in-lieu parking fees (Section 4.2.13[f] on page 14 of the reformatted document). On October 25, 1993, the City Council approved Resolution No. 6522, which established an in-lieu parking fee for uses within the Downtown Specific Plan area. The fee is $400/Space, to be paid on an annual basis for up to fifteen years ($6,000 total). The City Council directed staff to prepare an ordinance to implement the in-lieu parking fee program. The ordinance will be brought back to the Council as an amendment to the Downtown Specific Plan after Planning Commission action and the public hearing process. Tentative public hearing dates are early 1994. FUNDING SOURCE: Not applicable. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: Continue action on Code Amendment No. 92-5 to the December 20, 1993, City Council meeting. ATTACHMENTS: 1. RCA dated September 7, 1993 2. Reformatted Downtown Specific Plan 3. Downtown Parking Master Plan Building Area Analysis MTU:HZ:kjl (k1024) RCA- 11/15/93 2 (k1025) REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION Date September 7. 1993 Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members Submitted by: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrator Prepared by: Michael Adams, Director of Community Development Subject: CODE AMENDMENT NO. 92-5/DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN REWRITE "VILLAGE CONCEPT" AND PARKING CONCEPT Consistent with Council Policy? ) Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception Statement of Issue, Recommendation,Analysis, Funding Source,Alternative Actions,Attachments: STATEMENT OF ISSUE: Transmitted for City Council consideration is Code Amendment No. 92-5 the Downtown Specific Plan rewrite commonly referred to as the "Village Concept" and Parking Master Plan. On July 7, 1993 the Planning Commission approved Code Amendment No . 92-5 with the.- Parking Master Plan and recommended its adoption to the City Council RECOMMENDATION• Motion to: "Approve Code Amendment No. 92-5 the Downtown Specific Plan rewrite and the Downtown Parking Master Plan as recommended by the Planning Commission. " ANALYSIS• History In February, 1991, the Department of Community Development submitted a Downtown Master Plan concept paper to the City, Council for discussion. A series of study sessions were then held with the Planning Commission and City Council to solicit input and receive direction on the potential changes to the Downtown Specific Plan. On May 20, 1991, the City council directed staff to prepare a code amendment that would implement the changes that would result in the "Village Concept" . In the period just prior to these meetings, the Main Pier Phase II project (Abdelmuti) transitioned from the discussion stage to the negotiation stage (December, 1990) . It became evident at that point that on-site parking would not be accommodated in the Abdelmuti phase of Main Pier Phase II . This discussion became the genesis for the Downtown Parking Master Plan which is the subject of another report . D�e iss°k Pin R/R� In September, 1992, the Planning Commission conducted their first hearing on the Downtown Specific Plan. In the -course of the next ten (10) months the Planning Commission held eleven (11) public hearings, sponsored two (2) public workshops at the art center and received feedback from three (3) chamber of commerce meetings attended by staff . Due to the extensive public review process, the Downtown Specific Plan update has been significantly modified from its original presentation. On October 24, 1992, the staff presented the Downtown Specific Plan to an Urban Land Institute Plan Analysis session at their national conference. A team composed of economists, developers, architects, city planners, and market research experts from around the country evaluated the City of Huntington Beach draft Downtown Specific Plan. The Committee did not reach a consensus as to the specifics of our plan but did agree we were headed in the right direction. They believed that a mixed use concept that is pedestrian oriented and supported by residential development could be successful . However, the Urban Land Institute strongly recommended that the Redevelopment Agency should first acquire all the property necessary before commencing with a project. The Village Concept The Downtown Master Plan emphasizes the ocean, ocean activities, forms, shapes and colors . The Downtown Master design concept must concentrate on the City pier, realizing that all other areas within the Downtown are linked either directly or indirectly to the pier. The level of energy and excitement generated at the pier-head area needs to be capitalized upon and spread throughout the Downtown core. The pier area has the potential to accommodate a great deal of activity by offering a variety of uses and services . However, developments at the pier should also be scaled to a pedestrian level with passive activities given equal consideration with more vigorous activities . Pedestrian boardwalks on various levels and the pier itself will offer views of the ocean and ocean activities . The overall form and shape of all development in Downtown Huntington Beach should allow people to see the ocean from as many places as possible. The pier area will continue to serve as the major attraction in the City and should become the major activity node for the Downtown area. The Master Plan identifies the pier-head and the area immediately across Pacific Coast Highway from the pier as the focus for the greatest intensity of future activity and development. The interdependence of public and private development activities can create this major activity node at the pier-head. RCA - 9/7/93 -2- (7320d) It is important to emphasize the development of this node and encourage this activity to extend up Main Street inland from the ocean and to encourage pedestrian movement .along the street. By expanding this activity from the pier, the commercial core along Main Street can become a lively shopping thoroughfare oriented to pedestrians and offering opportunities to shop, dine or browse in an ocean-related atmosphere. There has been some confusion as to how the village concept is defined. The definitions that are available in the literature are abundant and diverse. The Urban Land Institute (ULI) has identified seven principles which help to create a village. Principle No. 1 - Promote Diversity of Use The basic objective in revitalizing the downtown economy is to attract more people more frequently and hold them as long as possible by creating a variety of reasons to come and to stay. Principle No. 2 - Emphasize Compactness The downtown should be compact and walkable, with a tight physical structure and an efficient spacing arrangement . Principle No. 3 - Foster Intensity Development densities should establish downtown as the community' s central place. But care is required to ensure that new large scale projects do not overwhelm Downtown' s existing character or market potential . Principle No. 4 - Ensure Balance Day and evening as well as weekday and weekend activity generators should be interspersed to capitalize on the full economic development potential of a multi-use approach. Principle No. 5 - Provide Accessibility A clear emphasis on pedestrian use must be established in the downtown core if walking and street activity are to be encouraged. A positive balance between vehicular and pedestrian use of the street must be established. RCA - 9/7/93 -3- (7320d) Principle No . 6 - Create Functional Linkages People must be able to walk between activity centers . Pedestrian connections should link the Downtown' s major anchors and should connect the core area with adjacent neighborhoods . Principle No. 7 - Build a Positive Identity Retaili%ng, culture, entertainment, recreation and special events programming, create an identity for a downtown. The question which is raised after examining these principles is how do they translate into practical development standards which accurately reflect a village concept for Huntington Beach. The seven principles above apply to almost any successful downtown. The key to a village concept is to achieve them in a less intense, less urban atmosphere, with a greater sense of pedestrian scale. Within these parameters we recognized the need to find a balance between competing forces which influence the type of development proposed. The intent in recommending the changes has always been protecting and serving residential neighborhoods, while still allowing for the expansion of visitor/tourist activities . We also recognized the need to develop both a nighttime and daytime population that thrives during all seasons of the year. Significant Changes During the course of the ten (10) month public hearing process, the Planning Commission approved key changes to the Downtown Specific Plan. The majority of these changes are endorsed by staff . However, there are some changes that we believe need to be re-examined by the City Council before final approval of the code amendment. The areas where we disagree with the Planning Commission will be discussed later in this report . The following is a summary of the most significant changes proposed: CURRENT DOWNTOWN PROPOSED CHANGES APPROVED SPECIFIC PLAN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION Density Calculations Based on Gross Site Area Net Site Area *Alley Widths 30 feet 24 feet RCA - 9/7/93 -4- (7320d) CURRENT DOWNTOWN PROPOSED CHANGES APPROVED SPECIFIC PLAN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION Height Max. 8 stories 4 stories in certain districts Min. Parcel Size 5, 000 - 10, 000 sf 2, 500 sf in all districts depending on district Floor Area Ratios Max. 3 . 5 in certain 3 . 0 max. districts Boundary Changes District 1 - between 6th-9th Streets will allow commercial activity. - This boundary change requires a Coastal Element Amendment. District 4 - Amended to include Walnut to Orange between 5th Street and Alley now becomes part of District 5 . District 6 - Residential permitted on 3rd and Lake Streets . *Landscaping Requires greater number of trees that are smaller in size. Lot Consolidation Provides density and Minimizes incentives for height bonus for larger lot consolidation parcels New Provisions - Incentives for Affordable Housing - Recognition of historic properties - School mitigation impact provision *This denotes an area of disagreement with the Planning Commission D� �1 RCA - 9/7/93 -5- (7320d) As discussed previously, there 'are minor areas of disagreement between the Planning Commission action and staff ' s recommendation. The first issue relates to alley width. Staff believes that a minimum of 28 feet is needed for a commercial alley to ensure adequate clearance for emergency vehicles (see Attachment No. 1) . The second area of disagreement involves the new landscaping provisions (4 .2 . 14) which requires a greater number of trees that are sma.l;ler in size. The Department of Public Works has prepared a comprehensive response to this proposed revision which is included . as Attachment No. 2 . Conclusion The downtown area has - long served as an area of mixed uses and activities . This area contains the City' s initial commercial core and the original residential neighborhoods; along with the recreational and oil production resources which have contributed to the City' s identity. The downtown is comprised of a number of very distinct areas . The transitional area surrounding the downtown core should ensure a gradual coordinated change in terms of heights, scale and uses, between Main Street and the adjacent residential areas . Main Street should continue to serve as a commercial core with an emphasis on retail activities, however, an option for office, residential or additional retail activities above the first floor can be allowed. This multi-use aspect is intended to create a lively place to be day or night for both visitors and residents . Main Street and Pacific Coast Highway should maintain a pedestrian-oriented shopping street character. Commercial uses should-.'be required on the ground floor with building fronts close to the sidewalk to establish a more intimate scale. In order to afford the visual, climatic and recreation amenities of this unique area to a greater number of people, medium residential densities should be provided. Offices should be encouraged to locate in this district in order to help establish the desired downtown atmosphere. The commercial emphasis on Main Street can be achieved with varying intensities, providing the commercial link between Orange Avenue and pier along .Main Street is not broken at the pedestrian level . This district should encourage rehabilitation as well as new development . the larger scale new development should not detract from smaller infill projects, rehabilitation and new development should be scaled and designed with this intent . RCA - 9/7/93 -6- (7320d) The Downtown Master Plan proposes to continue this combination of uses and. activities with designations which provide for mixed-use activities . The mixed-use designation is intended to encourage but control a variety of uses . FUNDING SOURCE: Not applicable. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: Continue action on Code Amendment No. .92-5 and the Downtown Parking Master Plan until October 4, 1993 . ATTACHMENTS 1. Diagram of Alley Widths 2 . Public Works Comprehensive response to the proposed revision on landscaping provision S.4 .2 . 14 MTU:MA:HZ :kjl RCA - 9/7/93 -7- (7320d) �4"ie CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members VIA: Michael T. Uberuaga, City AdministratA� L,& — FROM: Ray Silver, Assistant City Administrator 012" RE: DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN DATE: December 1, 1993 On July 7, 1993, the Planning Commission approved the Downtown Parking Master Plan in conjunction with a revised Downtown Specific Plan. Within the Parking Master Plan are recommendations for the most efficient and effective use of parking facilities located within the downtown area. Pages 21 and 22 are attached and list in detail those recommendations. Two of the recommendations are requirements made of the City/Redevelopment Agency as follows: #3. "Prior to the Downtown Parking Master Plan becoming operational, the Redevelopment Agency/City must identify and acquire two (2) sites, one in Area 1 and one in Area 2 for future parking opportunities." #4. "Designate two (2) additional parking facility locations: a. Include an option for an additional parking structure in the Main-Pier Phase II project area, Block 104. b. Include a surface parking facility at the north end, between Sixth Street and Pecan Avenue, adjacent to Lake Street." These recommendations as adopted by the Planning Commission require that the City/Agency own two sites to develop parking facilities and that if the City/Agency does not own the land then the land be purchased prior to the Master Plan becoming effective. Area 1 is that area located south of Orange Avenue. The Agency currently owns the former Terry Buick parking lot at Fifth and Walnut. This site can be developed in the future with a parking structure if necessary. Therefore this requirement can be easily met. ti Mayor and City Council Members December 1, 1993 Page two In Area 2, located north of Orange Avenue, the Agency owns the building at 438 Main Street. The City owns the Main Street Library Branch and the Arts Center. The requirement for the Agency/City to acquire additional land in Area 2 has been analyzed by staff for the availability of land, costs involved and the potential need for eminent domain to assemble property. Five locations were analyzed including the Terry Buick lot and the Third Block West sites in Area 1. A report is attached of each location indicating site location, lot size, number of parcels to be consolidated, potential for parking spaces and land cost. In summary, these include the following. Site 1 is the Terry Buick lot which is already owned by the Agency and scheduled to be used for a parking lot with approximately 70 spaces. This property is located in Area 1. Additional parking spaces can be provided as indicated in the attached detailed scenario for Site 1. Site 2, the Third Block West project, has an agreement with developers Newcomb/Tillotson with the Agency's option to add 200 parking spaces at a cost of $2.5 million. This site is located in Area 1 and not Area 2. Site 3 at 400 Main Street can be developed with 133 spaces at an estimated cost of$2.7 million. Use of eminent domain is anticipated with relocation costs to be added. Site 4 (as recommended by the Planning Commission) may be purchased for $3 million and yield 108 spaces. Eminent domain may be required with extensive business and residential relocation and clearance costs. Site 5 at 600 Main Street would cost approximately $4.9 million with costs between $500,000 and $7 million to develop with 240 to 890 parking spaces. Eminent domain may be required. The property is currently used as a parking lot. Within Area 2, the Art Center, Central Library and Town Square blocks are for the most part, completely developed. The :.7emaining block, 400 block of Main Street on the east side, contains businesses such as a laundry, Mandic Motors, Electric Chair and some residential on the Lake Street sid;. No development plans have been proposed or submitted for this block by the property owners. Under the guidelines of the Downtown Specific Plan, development could occur with adequate parking onsite. Any future residential development must be parked to code on site. No residential projects downtown have been allowed to place parking offsite. Potential commercial � a D Mayor and City Council Members December 1, 1993 Page three development would be limited to 20,000 square feet. This is the square footage of development that must be parked. Based upon the costs associated with providing parking on these five sites, staff supports the Parking Master Plan as recommended by the Planning Commission as it relates to Area 2 that all development be parked on site. Staff recommends to the City Council that the Planning Commission recommendations as indicated above be modified as follows since the City/Agency agrees with and can comply with the Planning Commission recommendation for Area 1: a. Prior to the Downtown Parking Master Plan becoming operational, the City/Redevelopment Agency must identify and acquire one (1) site in Area 1 for future parking opportunities. b. The City/Redevelopment Agency must designate one (1) additional parking facility location: include an option for an additional parking structure in the Main Pier Phase II project area, Block 104. c. Parking for new development in Area 2 be located on site. An alternative action for the Council/Agency is to identify one of the sites (either 2-3- 4) contained in this report and direct staff to purchase it for a future parking lot or to direct staff to include parking on site 5 when development occurs. The staff recommendation as outlined above is based on the following. 1. Parking is needed for 20,000 square feet and can adequately be provided on site for commercial uses in the 400 block of Main Street. Residential parking should be located on site. 2. The costs for assembling land is expensive and neither the Agency nor the City have adequate funds to acquire sites as this time. 3. There is a high probability that eminent domain will be needed to acquire sites. The Redevelopment Agency authority for the Main Pier area expires in September 1994 and a decision would be needed now to proceed with acquisition of sites. 4. Extensive relocation costs would be incurred in acquiring businesses and residences on some of the sites indicated and replacing these with public parking lots to meet the code requirements of future businesses yet to be developed. These businesses and residences would be eliminated now in hopes that new businesses would be developed at some time in the future on the 400 block of Main Street. a:dprkg a � ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS In order to assure the most efficient and effective use of the City' s parking facilities, the following recommendations should be implemented: City Initiated: Immediate Implementation: 1. Increase the parking meter fee from $. 25 per hour to $1. 00 per hour for all downtown meters with a two (2) hour maximum stay. 2 . Maximize the amount of on-street parking spaces to diagonal and reduce the number of parallel spaces. 3 . Prior to the Downtown Parking Master Plan becoming operational, the Redevelopment Agency/City must identify and acquire two (2) sites, one (1) in Area 1 and one (1) in Area 2 for future parking opportunities . 4 . Designate two (2) additional parking facility locations : a. Include an option for an additional parking structure in the Main-Pier Phase II project area, Block 104 . b. Include a surface parking facility at the north end, between Sixth Street and Pecan Avenue, adjacent to Lake Street. 5 . Eliminate all free public parking locations in the downtown. 6 . Improve the signage for parking facilities. Short Term (within 1 year) : 1. Require residential parking passes for the non-commercial districts in the downtown area. 2. Require the mandatory purchase of annual parking passes for all employees at the time of business license renewal-. 3 . Require designated employee parking areas in the remote portions of all parking facilities . 4 . Conduct -.annual parking analysis to forecast when actual number of spaces available requires new parking resources . 5 . Investigate use of shared beach parking to accommodate after 6: 00 p.m. peak hour uses, e.g. restaurant, theaters, and/or -employee. Parking Master Plan -21- (1915D) Based on Entitlements : 1. Require on-site parking for all projects one-half (1/2) block or greater in size. 2 . Require that any parking in-lieu fees be full cost recovery based on the parking requirement for specific uses . However, allow that these fees be paid over an amortization period. 3 . Require valet parking once the maximum buildout of restaurant activity has been obtained. 4 . Commercial projects greater than 10, 000 square feet in size shall be required to submit a parking management plan consistent with the Downtown Parking Master Plan. 5. Require valet and/or remote parking for special events and activities . Parking Master Plan -22- (1915D) Po e ti �P 1 a' �y �, •�° ono cs ems, gd � JP 00 Lu �ol� PALM AVE. ACACIA AVE. `0 P W Q a PECAN AVE. Q ' ORANGE AVE. OLIVE AVE. H H N N h V V H Q H Z Z O Ix W � H • N Yf >:p WALNUT AVE. LH nO IN IS" ......... ................... ......... PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY W a ...... :.: .:... .............................. .,.:........................................... ............................................:....... .::::::::::::. ........................ ................... ............... . `N� PACIFIC N!IC OCEAN ® SITE 1: 100 5TH Street (Terry Buick Lot) Area - 100-' x 225' = 22,500 SF Previous Acquisition Cost - $1,800,000 Options: 1) Surface Lot - 45/75 spaces Cost - $137,700/$50,000 2) 2 Levels - 90 spaces Cost - $601,290 3) 3 Levels - 135 spaces Cost - $1,087,940 4) 3 Levels - 135 spaces (1 suberranean) Cost - $1,431,510 5) 4 Levels - 182 spaces Cost - $1,986,340 d � SITE 2 (300 Main Street) SQUARE PARKING FOOTAGE SPACES LAND COST BLOCK 304 AP#024-143-1-25 87,500 SF 200 spaces $12,500/$2,500,000 SITE 3 (400 Main Street) SQUARE PARKING FOOTAGE SPACES LAND COST BLOCK 403 AP # 024-134- Parcels 1,2,3,9,10 & 11 35,250 SF 130 spaces $75SF/2,640,000 SITE 4 (500 Lake Street) SQUARE PARKING FOOTAGE SPACES LAND COST AP # 024-173-1-5 38,238 SF 108 spaces $80 SF/$3,059,000 Parcels 1-5 e®0 . SITE 5: 600 Main (at Palm & Lake) Area - 230' x 355' = 81,650 SF Estimated Acquisition Cost - @ $60 per SF = $4.9 million Options: 1) Surface Lot - 240 spaces Cost - $50000 2) 2 Levels - 425 spaces Cost - $2,135,000 3) 3 Levels - 660 spaces Cost - $4,04000 4) 3 Levels - 650 spaces (1 subterranean) Cost - $4,98000 5) 4 Levels - 890 spaces (1 subterranean) Cost - $6,980,000 4 o SEE SPECIAL P E 24—f59 FOR FEE TITLE ASSESSMENT BELOW SURFACE L WALNUT 14 AVENUE F- -24-15 J]' n e n J]. nJ�• ro S' eo' n 7]' 11 I 28 7- ——— 28 27 9 _ 17 x 2 xo.r 16— —�--- _ 26 25 --. 1 26 23 - 26 TRACT _24 24 2J 23 5 _ _ RECEIVE -- —� 6 22 21-- -- — 2 21 17 m� 22 a W 20 7 LU — 20 19 6 — W -- 19 18 ne' W 3 20 AUG 1 3 1990 8 W --o-- 17-a - W _ _ __ }� f7 18 ------ k 18 17 7 18 DEPARTMENT OF -- T^fir Q i6 9 y 3 >6 IS A — COMMUNITY DEVELOPMEt Ls 8 is L o r 17 25 to ..so• ------ -- — _ �••� e 14 J -- —_��\J_ 74 IJ ----- A -� IJ I uJ.io• L160 AC. a '26 „• 20 12,JI ns R x n�] I? 11 1oJ�• 3 I 19 10 1 9 1 e l 7 6 s l 41 J I 2 1 1 a 10 1 9 1 8 I 7 I 6 5 1 4 J 2 e' ! J 1 81 7 61 S I 4 2 1 I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I eo' I Y3zl � I o„1 1J4 ~ I �I 8 I 27 I g ~ i' 1 1 to I I 11 12 ti I I 12 v tb ^ I I I I t i I to I l l i I I "0 n• Js v' zs• e' Izs• 15 Izs• � �tJi' Jasn• 2 COAST h#GHWA Y04 — Pu. 6-21 P.v. 8—J9 17 16 14100' 2.65 AC 6.49 AC O 6 28 \�.�• PIER lesa THIS MAP WAS PREPARED FOR ORANGE s J5- COUNTY ASSESSOR DEPT.PURPOSES ONLY R THE ASSESSOR MAKES NO GUARANTEE AS TO .• ITS ACCURACY NOR ASSUMES ANY LIAKITY FOR OTHER USES.NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. 5 CCOPYRIGHT ORANGE COUNTYASSESSOR 1990 NOTE - ASSESSORS BLOCK, d ASSESSORS MAP MARCH 1948 HUNTINGTON BEACH M.M. J—J6 PARCEL NUMBERS BOOK 24 PAGE 15 cIL� COUNTY SHOWN IN CIRCLES L7N� PACIFIC COUNTY OF ORANGE oc-k30q r, ECEI ED 13 II 24-14� 91 I�J � � I �J l�.�J �W.c!Cc Deve!e;cc^1 ^ ORANGE ^ A VENUE rs. — nl�o• n»°' »• urso• ,o»o _ ?9 77 » urso .17 A uzso' ,o _ .�—+,)�_16 17 _ ___ 26 " 27 1 \:J 16 5 — —_—^. ---�/ 26 25 �J — _ ^_2, 25 ---�_16, 15__tl _—�4 1J —— —2t 7J i0 __ 2., 1J < TJ — o '�9 ' a �. �/ z2°' ?i 9 ti 2 7? 21 21 _—— 11 11 — _—— —_—Q_'27 21 �f/�3--�'���.'//UN TON — w —— as V— n.a i 3 20 /9 22 70 19 '20 19 _ 10 \�L � lu (� � ^ 41 la 7 10 � R 4 8 7 ^ — �J-- 7 Z4 -- -- i —!6 7 „ re• �/ 16 1,��^ _-- _ .16 15 t2 '16 15 16 1�--_— a — — ^rt 1J a--�-- 14 1J 11 5 13 �2O_1s J' f R 1 -- ————— 14— m30• BLK.1 r1306 12 _ _ BLK.._� Ir J05 14 r �0 3°--:� _ _ ' 12 r1_' e• —————— 17 10>, 9 uvso• — 6 0 9 t8 — `,0 9 9 — —_ .K—I 9 15 @ 7 18 m mac 19 6 7 — -- B 7 ow 4 8 7 13 ^ b• 16 6 ,. 5 19 ro• � 20 6 5 7 —.. 6 5 —1 — — •-6 5 A -- ------- -- a < J 12 '_< J_ 12 -- -- 1 1--- — ----2 -- — — ------ 2 1 ——— nl so• m Q r �o>so u,oo• ^ nLea• OLIVE A VENUE . 'O p.20 nso• 1310 goo ,1,0 'o ,n,o v,o e 27 ^ ^26 7^ o � _ la __ ——————— ——————— " ^ 21 26 25 1Jm,o• ^ 1 1 ------- ^ __ _26 25 �o:,o� 26 25 10 26 25 m,o ------ ^ c 16 24- 23 32 24 7J' �_ ° ^ 3., 21" 2J 11 24 2J o a w�0 O 31 22� 1I 33iu• _�__22 11 36 p2 21 3 2�0 29 BL Kzoe19 19 --- --'`'Y— 7o 19 31 us./, 1' --- --20 19 << ---, 8 --W 27 la v 10n,.°o BLf� is 4 ;i BLK.;a 1720414 n,.°°• __BLK. � 17 _2_0_3_-- aa� ¢ct --- ••-=�Wm' z 26 16 4• 75 35 A 3 _ 16 _75 _M 15 15 i� -- 16 15______ 44vWm O 24 14.. r3 34 »• -- a -14 J = 1J— 3 ,1.,o' — ----- u_ 3—_ Wy2ho 0 28 12 . u a > i2 /2 11 5 33 12"• r; 25 22 12 e n 23 a�Y`o i --- -- -- — --- -- --- -- W YT wo 25 1 g 12 W�6 g < 5 o y 32 o.r c o,,, n �cn= 22 9 7 t3 m Y t0 .° .a , 7 30 _ .3i ° r a 7 q 2N"�•c hT} ~ 3 6 5 38 „>,n ^ °rrs��9t8 < J 37 ,nJ „ J — -- 9 < 26 bo ----- a J __BEACHo2o2 1 0. — — — u• ro 19 .36 evso, .. ,o 7 1 '�7 /. y tiv 1 ,or>o u°o .. a • ],' nreo' o• no°o. WALNUT A VENUE ,vO'E — .ASSESSOR'S BLOCK; G ASSESSOR'S MAP i MARCH 1948 HUN TING TON BEACH M.M. 3 .35 15 PARCEL NUMBERS BOOK 24 PAGE 14 SHOWN 1K.' CIPCL ES COUNTY OF OP..4NGE ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. ccr'�vu �U. '*'-rs -_s�YED. oc O ©COPYRIGHT ORANGE COUNTY ASSESSOR 1991 soR 1991 �M 17 - L . , 0 a BLK. 505 J2. a G m o Q 1�SO o. S79a. ZL/CL 1J O Q�G o TRA C T AV, 22-4 13 3 NO. 14 722 - U y =�_ 34 0 b1� TRACT °j e 21.a7'J0. r} i�_ �: '9._L / / i. ..� /.� V / — uC 10,2 BL K_ 7.50 .° 18 17 t6 1� 1� yro �''^ - ,, /� »;. 5 4 0,3n 30 }<_g. �,^` 6_.SJ - e = = .C�!'- l\ _ �Y — — /\ e,22 (��, ti d23]' t9.25•�-N.25' 9'07 _ c L/l. --'\ - /�— — — —��'J' —"— v1 9 7 50' %V o a F _ 60' J y - — - - - - -r6 a i8 '^ 5 �L nO 20 21 22 `� - n — - - -� I < < BEA CH _ W N0. �2900c - - - - - - - - - -- - z- - 2 Y rS 10tK y.3 L AUG 1319- /„_too' DEPARTMENT COMMUNITY DEYfrOT ENT j 0 0 794.79' p' P 12 �ABAND. 3 R.R. R/W) 6 0 %37-/5-4 49-5/2 !— HUNT/MGTON N I74 � 175 � . %T�ic 2 AC. Q NO. 13017 BL K. 503 y. 734 73' vi lbws Oct M•�.r Firc.. tJ„�.wi0h STREET `7 ISO' so' So' �So' 16i' ISO' 25' " �. 25, o Q , o' I 2 20 22 O °O ��J ;� 2 F29 � �� I ���/// 221 23 35` `\,s� 1 /9 /7 I 1 I I zs'I zs• 27 � 7 •- 33 3/ 29 27 25 23 2/ /5 /3 // 9�, 7 5 3/ 3T 35 33 / 25 2312/ �� // g 3 / 34132 30 28 261 24 221 I /61 /4 /2 /0 81 6 4 2 ~38 36 34 8 26 24 22 ALLEY M I I I I I /018 12 /8i I 1 ,. M\ I I N R S. f0-7( 32 01 I is 2 /4 ZS, 6 II 12 13 14 151 16 17 R 18 I i 12 I I 9 10 I 14 I " � I I m m Q I I I 1 I 1 V I 1 I I 1 y 1 hZsl 3L � I I 1 I I 1 n 11 -�o'I zc, ar' I o' ITo' 1 7S'1 I I 60, 1 1 I I 1 I I/d Y7 I R I So' so' ci' iso' ro' ZS' zsl 1zr' v Go' Ar+Cew tr - /N STREET Li6e r 09 13 low � V I1M 794.7 9 60 (A BA N0. 1 3 V 7 S o/ PRO✓EC LOT /- /5-449-5/2 N 175 f�UNrINGT I J O 174 w 2 o N J. /32 AC. 8 NO. 13017 BLk' S03 734.73' -�-r C, C-+ DSO' Vt' ISo' zs' LJA 9 I j 101 So 22 07 0� ( 9 ) N 2 4 I� Q I I r'I „ I �, g „ 1 ,. ]s'I 34' ¢ I 3 5 .oic 1 D71 �-- .zs' i 9 /7 1 I W I I J ysIzs 2927I l9� t /31 37 35 33 3/ 29 27 23 / /5 /3 /l 7 5 3 / Q 37 35 33 3/ 25 23 2/ 1 //1 r TALC 381 361 341 32 30 28 1 2 2 I /61 /4 121 61 6 412 361 36 341 8 261 24 22 / T� 75 :s'I I 12 3s'I /8 I I I ro I R S. 10-7i 32 01 I 2 /A n � " 10 II 12 13 14 16 h 17 R 18 ' I i 12 I i ( 9 ) 10 1990 � ' I i I I I I I I I I 1 I I z I/8 qO. ' o' ��' 60 /So so' 2S' zS' ys, N +�`L+ r MAIN 5 09 �� GPG sue, Q z� �• P Py� P� � c �C T OF HUN-i'INGTON BEACH TO: DEPARTMENT 11 DATE ❑ For your approval. ❑ Per your request. ❑ For your signature. ❑ For your information. ❑ Take appropriate action. ❑ Prepare reply for my signature. ❑ Return with more details. ❑ Answer. ❑ Investigate and report. ❑ Note and return to me. ❑ Note and see me about this ❑ Note and file. Please call: 1ELEPHONE Mr. Mrs. Miss TIME CALLED DATE CALLED TTELEPHONE NO. MESSAGE FROM: DEPT. TRANSMITTAL AND TELEPHONE SLIP 4 I