The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPublic Hear - Appeal of Conditional Use Permit 98-37/Coastal J. CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 1 2000 MAIN STREET CALIFORNIA 92648 OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK Correction to Previous Notice Dated March 3, 2000 April 7, 2000 California Coastal Commission South Coast Area Office 2000 Oceangate, 10th Floor Long Beach, California 90801-4302 Attention: Lily Mahmoud NOTICE OF ACTION COASTAL DEVELOPMENT 98-12 Applicant: Jeff Bergsma. Appellant: Councilmember Dave Sullivan Request: Conditional Use Permit and Coastal Development Permit to allow the following:-117 Main Street: (1) Exterior and interior remodel of the 1st and 2nd floor; (2) Establish a restaurant-banquet facility with outdoor patio dining and alcohol service on the 2"d floor. 119 Main Street: (1) Exterior and interior remodel of the 1st floor; (2) Construct a new 2"d floor for retail or office use; (3) Abandonment of three (3) feet of alley on the west side. 121 Main Street: (1) Exterior and interior remodel of the 1st floor; (2) Construct a new 2"d floor for office use 123 Main Street: (1) Demolish the existing building and construct a new two-story building with retail on the 1st floor and office on the 2"d floor. Special permits to allow the 2"d floor balcony of all four(4) buildings at a setback of two (2) feet in lieu of the five (5) feet build-to-line required along Main Street and to allow a seven (7) feet build-to-line in lieu of the required five (5) feet for the 1 stand 2"d stories of all four(4) buildings along Main Street (staff recommendation). Location: 117, 119, 121, and 123 Main Street (west side between Pacific Coast Highway and Walnut Ave). i (Telephone:714-536-5227) Page 29—Council-Agency Minutes— February'22, 2000 5. Incorporation of landscape and other elements such as planted beds,planters, and window boxes that visually distinguish the site and structure; 6. Incorporation of arcades, courtyards, and other recesses along the street elevation to provide visual relief and interest; 7. Use of roofline and height variation to break up the massing and provide visual interest; 8. Visual differentiation of upper and lower floors; 9. Distinct treatment of building entrances;and 10.Use of pedestrian-oriented signage. f. Oblective ED 2.6:Expand and enhance the existing visitor serving uses. g. Policy ED 3.2.3: Attract visitor-serving uses near the beach in order to create better linkages-between the beach and visitor supporting retail uses. h. Policy S: Protect, encoura.ae,and where feasible provide visitor-serving facilities in the coastal zone which are varied in type and price. i. Policy 7: Improve the appearance of visually degraded areas. The project is an extension of other similar uses found in the downtown with visitor servicing commercial uses located on the 1'-floor,and office or other commercial uses located on the 2 d floor. The project as modified by the conditions of approval will provide a pedestrian oriented design and conform to the Downtown Design Guidelines. SUGGESTED FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL-COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 98-12: 1. Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12 for the development project,as proposed or as modified by - conditions of approval,conforms with the General Plan,including the Local Coastal Program. The project is consistent with thv General Plan Land Use Element designation of Mixed-Use Vertical. The project will comply with the Downtown Specific Plan—District 3 (Visitor Serving Commercial) because the proposed uses,particularly on the first floor will add to the variety of Visitor Serving Commercial uses and will further the pedestrian oriented objective for the downtown. 2. The project is consistent with the requirements of the CZ Overlay District,the base zoning district,as well as other applicable provisions of the Municipal Code. The project,as modified by conditions, will conform to all development standards including setbacks,height,and parking. 3. At the time of occupancy the proposed development can be provided with infrastructure in a manner that is consistent with the Local Coastal Program. All infrastructure currently exist on the subject site and will be modified as needed to conform to the City's current standards. 4. The development conforms to the public access and public recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the California Coastal Act. The development will not impact any public access and recreation Opportunities. Page 30—Counif gency Minutes February 22, 20000 SUGGESTED FINWIt1'GS FOR APPROVAL—SPECIAL PER.'MIT NO. 99-1: (7 feet setback for and 2`stor-v) 1. The requested special permit to allow a seven(7) feet build-to-line in lieu of the required five(5) feet along Main Street promotes a better living environment. There are significantly greater benefits to be provided from the project than would occur if all the minimum requirements were met. The special permit allows for greater setbacks to be consistent v ith that approved on the adjacent Oceanlliew Promenade Development at the northwest corner of PCH and Main. This provides a more consistent "building wall"and allows for a wider sidewalk for improved pedestrian circulation and outdoor dining opportunities. 2. The special permit provides better land planning techniques with maximum use of aesihetica`lly pleasing types of architecture,landscaping,site layout, and design. The special permit will allow for a site layout consistent with other new construction in the area. 3. The special permit wilt 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 because it will allow for a wider pedestrian passageway consistent with the adjacent development which furthers the goal of pedestrian-oriented development in the downtown. 4. The special permit is consistent with the objectives of the Downtown Specific Plan in achieving a development adapted to the terrain and compatible with the surrounding environment. The modified project does not block views and provides setbacks consistent with new construction in District 3 of the Downtown Specific Plan. 5. The special permit is consistent with the policies of the Coastal Element of the City's General Plan and the California Coastal Act because it will not impact any public access or recreation opportunities and will provide better pedestrian circulation with a wider sidewalk. SUGGESTED FINDINGS FOR DENIAL—SPECIAL PERMIT NO 99-2• (2 feet setbacl;for 2nd sto • I. The requested special permit to allow the 2nd floor balcony for all four buildings at a setback of two(2) feet in lieu of the required five(5)feet build-to-line along Main Street does not promote a better living environment. There are no significantly greater benefits to be provided from the project than would occur if all the minimum requirements were met. The special permit will allow the 2nd floor balconies to encroach into the required five(5)feet build-to-line which will not be consistent with the setback approved on the adjacent Oceanview Promenade Development at the northwest comer of PCH and Main. It will not maintain the retail fagade,and visual and pedestrian corridor established and envisioned for District 3 of the Downtown Specific Plan. ` i 2. The special permit does not provide better land planning techniques with maximum use of aesthetically pleasing types of architecture,landscaping,site layout, and design. The special permit a Page 31— Council-Agency Minutes— February 22, 2000 will not provide for a site layout consistent Kith other new construction in the area which do not have balconies encroaching into the required build-to-line. It will not maintain view corridors to the ocea., which would have been achieved with a consistent setback along the first block of Main Street. 3. The special permit will be detrir�iental to the general health,welfare,safety and convenience of the neighborhood or City in general, and detrimental or injurious to the value of property or improvements of the neighborhood or of the City in general because it will not maintain a"building wall"that is consistent with the adjacent development. 4. The special permit is inconsistent with the objectives of the Downtown Specific Plan in achieving a development adapted to the terrain and compatible with the surrounding environment. The'niodified project will not include setbacks consistent with new construction in District 3 of the DoStint6v,n Specific Plan which would have provided an adequate visual and pedestrian corridor. SUGGESTED CO\'DITIONS OF APPROVAL—CO\'DITIO\'AL USE PERMIT NO.98-37, COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMMIT NO. 98-12,AND SPECIAL PEYUN11T NO. 99-2: 1. The site plan, floor plans and elevations received and dated November 29, 1999 shall be the conceptually approved layout with the follo«ing modifications (applicable to all four buildings) . subject to the review and approval of the Planning Department: a. Elevations shall depict colors and building materials as approved by the Design Review Board. b. The rear stairwells shall be visible from the alley to the approval of the Police Department. (PD) c. A minimum of one foot candle of light shall be provided along the rear of the buildings to the approval of the Police Department. (PD) d. Potted plants shall be added to the front and rear of the buildings. (DRB) e. The City shall implement consistency of similar handscape and landscape on both sides.of Main Street. (Mitigation Measure) f. Depict all utility apparatus,such as but not limited to back flow devices and Edison transformers on the site plan. Utility meters shall be screened from view from public rights-of-way. Electric transformers in a required front or street side yard shall be enclosed in subsurface vaults. Backflow prevention devices shall be prohibited in the front yard setback and shall be screened from view. (Code Requirement) g. All exterior mechanical equipment shall be screened from view on all sides. Rooftop mechanical equipment shall be setback 15 feet from the exterior edges of the building. Equipment to be screened includes,but is not limited to,heating,air conditioning,refrigeration equipment, plumbing lines,ductwork and transformers. Said screening shall be architecturally compatible with the building in terms of materials and colors. If screening is not designed specifically,into the Page 32 — Council ency Minutes February 22, 2000 building, a rooftop mechanical equipment plan showing screening must be submitted for review and approval with the application for building Perm,it(s). (Code Requirement) h. Depict all gas meters,water meters, electrical panels,air conditioning units,mailbox facilities and similar items on the site plan and elevations. If located on a building,they shall be architecturally designed into the building to appear as part of the building. They shall be architecturally compatible with the building and non-obtrusive,not interfere vtiith sidewalk areas and comply with required setbacks. i. A seven(7)feet build-to-line shall be provided along Main Street for all four properties on both the V and 2'floor. j. Historic plaques shall be incorporated and the materials from the existing buildings shall be incorporated to the greatest extent possible. k. The public open space requirement for the project shall be provided along Main Street in a central ' location on the ground floor. This open space must be designed such that the public can access it Without walking through any tenant space. I. The project shall be referred back to the Planning Director for final review in consultation .vith the, City's Urban Design Consultant for compliance with the Design Guidelines and the outlined recommendations. m. Include Design Guidelines recommendations for varied and offset rooflines,pedestrian orientation by including a plaza or courtyard, enhanced fagade treatments at the street level by including greater architectural detail for visual interest,window treatments such as multi-paned windows with tile borders,and accented entries that are omate and detailed. 2. Prior to issuance of demolition permits,.the following shall be completed: a. The applicant shall follow all procedural requirements and regulations of the South Coast Air Quality Management District(SCAQMD)and any other local,state,or federal law regarding the removal and disposal of any hazardous material including asbestos,lead,and PCBs. -These requirements include but are not limited to:survey,identification of removal methods, . containment measures,use and treatment of water,proper truck hauling,disposal procedures,and proper notification to any and all involved agencies. b. Pursuant to the requirements of the South Coast Air Quality Management District,an asbestos survey shall be completed. c. The applicant shall complete all Notification requirements of the South Coast Air Quality Management District. Page 33— Council-Agency Nlinutes — February 22, 2000 d. The City of Huntington Beach shall receive ,Nritten verification from the South Coast Air Qualit}• Management District that the Notification procedures have been completed. e. All asbestos shalt be removed from all buildings prior to demolition of any portion of any building. f. A truck hauling and routing plan for all trucks involved in asbestos removal and demolition of the existing structures shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works and approved by the Director of Public`Yorks. g. The applicant shall disclose the method of demolition on the demolition permit application for review and approval by the Building and Safety Director. h. An adequate monitoring and/or bonding program shall be established between the City and property owners to ensure that demolition and construction vibration impacts do not adversely affect offsite structures. (Mitigation ivleasure) i. All facets of the project related to historic preservation shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Huntington Beach. (Mitigation Measure) j. The applicant shall provide 45 days«Titten notice to the City of Huntington Beach Historic Resources Board informing them of such activity. The Board may relocate, fully document and/or preserve significant architectu-ral elements. The applicant/property owner shall not incur any costs associated with moving or documenting the structure by the Board. (Mitigation Measure) k. Comprehensive documentation of the project site, as it currently exists, shall be prepared prior to the issuance of any building,grading,and/or demolition permits. The documentation shall be in accordance with standards established by the Historical American Buildings Survey/Historical American Engineering Records(RABS41AER). The report shall be archivally maintained with Provisions for public access. The costs associated with preparation and maintenance of the documentation shall be the responsibility of the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency. (Mitigation Measure) I. Pursuant to Section 65590 of the California Government Code,the applicant shall submit a plan for replacement of any existing residential units occupied by persons and families of low or moderate income that are converted or demolished as a result of this project for review and approval by the Planning Department. 3. Prior to issuance of grading permits,the following shall be completed: a. A grading plan,prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer,shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval.(PNV) Page 34— Council ency Minutes February 22, 2000 S b. The name and phone number of a field supervisor who is on-site shall be submitted to the Pla_i ring Department and Public Works Department. In addition, clearly visible signs shall be posted on the perimeter of the site indicating whom to contact for information regarding this development a_•id any construction/grading activity. This contact person shall be available immediately to address any concerns or issues raised by adjacent property owners during the construction activity. He/she «ill be responsible for ensuring compliance with the conditions herein, specifically, grading activities, truck routes,construction hours,noise, etc. c. A project-specific soils and engineering report shall be prepared by a qualified soils engineer based on a detailed plan of the project. All recommendations of this report shall be.incorporated into the project. Ml itigation Measure) d. A pre-grading meeting shall be arranged to discuss the recommendations of the soil investigation and project requirements. Representatives of all concerned parties shall be present. (Mitigation Measure) e. It shall be the responsibility of the oti,,ner and/or contractor to: bring to the attention of a certified soils engineer any unusual conditions which may be encountered in the course of project development and to request appropriate guidance before proceeding with the affected work,and to ensure that the recommendation_ s of the soil report and any supplemental reports are implementer (Mitigation Measure) f. The applicant shall provide documentation of existing structural conditions in the vicinity of frie proposed project and the estimated extent and impact of subsidence on surrounding structures and other improvements,to the satisfaction of the Building Department. (Mitigation Measure) g. Should ground water be found during excavation,dewatering of the project site shall be required. The applicant shall monitor the extent of subsidence and its associated impacts through placerrient of appropriate testing devices under the supervision and surveillance of a qualified soil engineer. The City shall be kept informed regarding any structural impacts on adjacent properties and other improvements,and if feasible and necessary,construction process will be modified to eliminate such impacts.(Mitigation Measure) 4. Prior to submittal for building permits,the following shall be completed: a. Zoning entitlement conditions of approval shall be printed verbatim on all the working drawing sets used for issuance of building permits(architectural, structural, electrical,mechanical and plumbing)and shall be referenced in the index. b. This project shall be submitted as one plan check submittal to include all four properties(117,119, 121, 123 Main Street)to assure that all four properties are developed as one integrated project as . presented on the approved plans and rendering. c. All Fire Department requirements shall be noted on the building plans. (FD) • CityofHuntington BeachPlanning Department �< g J� k � MWMNGTON BEACH TO: Planning.Commission FROM: Howard Zelefsky, Director of Planning BY: Ricky Ramos,Assistant Planner lZpt, DATE: December 14, 1999 SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.98-37/COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 98-12/SPECIAL PERMIT NO. 99-1/SPECIAL PERMIT NO. 99-2 (117, 119, 121, 123 MAIN STREET COMMERCIAL)(Continued from November 23, 1999 With Public Hearing Closed) LOCATION: 117, 119, 121, and 123 Main Street(west side between PCH and Walnut Ave.) STATEMENT OF ISSUE: Conditional Use Permit No. 98-37 with Special Permits and Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12 represent requests by Jeff Bergsma to add new 2nd stories to 119, 121, and 123 Main Street and to complete interior and exterior remodels including a new common fagade for 117 through 123 Main Street. A new restaurantibanquet facility with outdoor patio dining and alcohol service is proposed on the 2n1 floor of 117 Main Street to complement the existing Perq's Bar on the 1s`floor. The Planning Commission continued the project from the November 23, 1999 meeting and directed staff to prepare findings and conditions for approval for consideration by the Planning Commission. In addition,the Planning Commission directed the applicant to include a request for a Special Permit to allow the 2nd floor balcony for all four buildings at a setback of two (2)feet in lieu of the five (5) feet build-to-line required along Main Street. The applicant has submitted a narrative indicating why the Special Permit is necessary and how the findings for approval can be made (Attachment No. 4). Proper legal notice was published in the Huntington Beach/Fountain Valley Independent on December 2, 1999, and notices were sent to property owners, occupants, and individuals/organizations requesting notification. Pursuant to direction from the Planning Commission,the applicant revised the site plan, floor plans, and elevations to be consistent with the rendering submitted and to incorporate the recommendations of the Design Review Board(DRB), including adding potted plants to the front and rear of the buildings and special pavers along the entries. The applicant has yet to incorporate the DRB's recommendation to add architectural treatments/accents to the front windows. Staff continues.to recommend denial of the Conditional Use Permit, Coastal Development Permit, and Special Permit based on the following: • The project is not in compliance with the Mediterranean and pedestrian-oriented design called for in the Downtown Design Guidelines. The project does not incorporate adequate building setback and roofline variation and articulation, decorative architectural details/elements,and multi-paned decorative windows as outlined in the Downtown Design Guidelines. • The project is not in compliance with the minimum development standards for the front setback for the 2"d floor balconies as well as the intent of providing the required public open space where it is most readily visible, accessible, and usable by the general public. • The project is not in compliance with several goals, policies, and objectives of the General Plan relating to architectural design and site layout. RECOMMENDATION: Motion to: "Deny Conditional Use Permit No. 98-37, Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12, Special Permit No. 99-1, and Special Permit No. 99-2 with findings for denial." (Attachment No. 1) ALTERNATIVE ACTION(S): The Planning Commission may take alternative actions such as: A. "Approve Conditional Use Permit No. 98-37, Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12, Special Permit No. 99-1 with findings and suggested conditions of approval and deny Special Permit No. 99-2 with findings for denial."(Attachment No. 2-Staffs Alternative Recommendation) B. "Continue Conditional Use Permit No. 98-37, Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12, Special Permit No. 99-1, and Special Permit No. 99-2 and direct staff accordingly." ANALYSIS: Staff is fecommending denial of the project based on concerns relating to code compliance and building design/site layout and overall lack of design creativity as envisioned by the Downtown Specific Plan. The applicant has submitted a Special Permit to allow the 2"d floor balcony for all four buildings at a setback of two (2) feet in lieu of the five (5) feet build-to-line required along Main Street. Staff believes that the applicant's requested Special Permit is not consistent with the approved design of the first block of Main Street. The requested Special Permit does not promote a better living environment and there are no significantly greater benefits to be provided from the project than would occur if all the minimum requirements were met. The Special Permit will allow the 2"d floor balconies to encroach three (3) feet into the required five (5) feet build-to-line which will not be consistent with the setback approved on the adjacent Oceanview Promenade development at the northwest corner of PCH and Main. The special Staff Report- 12/14/99 2 99SR57A permit will not provide for a site layout consistent with other new construction in the area which do not have balconies encroaching into the required build-to-line. Because the area is anticipated for high intensity development, additional consideration must be given to upper-story setbacks and preservation of view, light, and air corridors to assure that the area remain a pleasant pedestrian environment. Staff is recommending that if the project were approved, that the staff recommended Special Permit be included to require both the 1" and 2"d floor for all four buildings be setback seven(7) feet(no balcony encroachment)to,be consistent with the setback for the adjacent Oceanview Promenade development. This Special Permit promotes a better living environment and provides significantly greater benefits than would occur if all the minimum requirements were met. It will provide a continuous retail fagade and allows for a wider sidewalk for improved pedestrian circulation and outdoor dining opportunities consistent with the goal of pedestrian-oriented development in the downtown. The objective of the specific plan was to create a relationship between the public space and the store front. This project as proposed by the applicant fails to accomplish this in a satisfactory manner. The increased setback(7') will accomplish an important aspect of the design concept for downtown. The increased sidewalk width will continue to extend Main Street inland from the ocean and pier and encourage pedestrian movement along the street. By facilitating the extension of pedestrian activity from the pier,the commercial core along Main Street can become a livelier shopping thoroughfare oriented to pedestrians and offering opportunities to shop, dine or browse in a beach-oriented atmosphere. The location of the public common open space is another concern to staff. The specific plan requires that all developments within District 3 provide public open space equivalent to.a minimum of ten (10)percent of the net site area. The applicant is proposing to meet the minimum area requirement. However, the proposed open space is located in the rear 2"d floor balconies of the buildings facing the alley. Staff believes that the intent of the requirement is to provide public open space that is readily seen, accessed, and used for public enjoyment. The applicants' proposal does not comply with the intent of the requirement because the public open space is proposed in an undesirable location where it will remain unused by the general public. If the project were approved, staff recommends requiring the public common open space to be provided along Main Street where it will be more visible, accessible, and useable (see Attachment No. 6). Such a design concept is critical to enhancing the vitality and magnetism associated with pedestrian oriented developments because a well-designed public open space area such as a public plaza serves as a focal point for pedestrian activity. This design concept is consistent with the public open space provided for several projects downtown, including Main Promenade, Pierside Pavilion, Oceanview Promenade, and Standard Market. i The last significant issue pertains to the architecture,building design and site layout, and compliance with the Downtown Design Guidelines (DTDG). The design of the project has been revised since the initial plans were submitted. The applicant has attempted to incorporate several of staff and DRB's recommendations. The recommendations included a common architectural theme for all four buildings while incorporating unique storefronts to provide the appearance of small-scale individual establishments in accord with the "Village Concept". In addition,the rear(alley elevation)has been modified to provide a fully enclosed rear building design in lieu of the wrought iron enclosure originally proposed. The project conforms to the DTDG by incorporating the following: Staff Report- 12/14/99 3 99SR57A • the roofs • stucco as the primary exterior material • a light main color scheme with brightly colored accents • balconies • arched elements • a variety of secondary materials (such as glass, tile, brick,painted metal) However, staff also presented the following additional design changes to the DRB in order to attain greater compliance with the goals and objectives of the Downtown Design Guidelines which envisioned contemporary Mediterranean architecture comprised of influences from coastal Spain and other areas. The adopted theme is an expression of the coastal influence on Huntington Beach. The climate and ocean proximity dictate orientation to the prevailing breezes,protection from the sun and wind, and views of the ocean. The Mediterranean concept can be achieved through use of. varied and creative building forms and mass, setbacks that relate to the human scale and adjacent buildings; site layout that creates varied and interesting pedestrian spaces such as plazas; ws well as development of structures designed to respect the views of existing buildings. Specifically,the guidelines require the following: • The guidelines indicate that the use of appropriate roof forms either alone or in combination should be encouraged to achieve the varying roofline characteristic of Mediterranean Villages. The roofline and building elevations proposed are too linear and should incorporate more variation and offsets. • The guidelines call for orienting downtown development towards pedestrians. This can be achieved by providing varied building setbacks to create plaza-like areas which attract pedestrians whenever possible. Staff acknowledges that this is difficult to achieve in this case since there are four separate properties with different owners. However,the inclusion of a courtyard/plaza should be considered to provide a break in the fagade and for added visual interest. • The guidelines indicate that to maintain a human scale, building facades shall be detailed in such a way as to make them appear shorter. One way of achieving this is by increasing the level of detail on the buildings at the street level. The front and rear elevations of all four buildings, as well as the south elevation of 117 Main(along the pedestrian alley) should incorporate more decorative architectural details/elements for visual interest. Likewise, the rear stairs should be enclosed within the building to provide a more attractive elevation facing the alley as now shown on the revised plans which now incorporate glass block along the rear. The provision of potted plants and/or planter boxes will also achieve further compliance with this guideline. • The guidelines state that windows in the Mediterranean style are typically multi-paned and should incorporate variation by including treatments such as: tile borders, colored window framing, shutters, plant-on relief features, iron or wooden grills, dormers,projecting bay windows,window boxes, and pop-outs. The project should be revised to incorporate several of these elements. • The guidelines also suggest that project entries are a major design element in the Mediterranean style and are typically highly ornate and detailed. Special pavers/tile lead-in paths to the main entry should be used. • Finally, to acknowledge the historic value of the buildings,a plaque should be incorporated into the project and/or the materials from the existing buildings should be incorporated into the design of the new buildings as appropriate. Staff Report- 12/14/99 4 99SR57A The proposed architecture, building design and site layout do not fully achieve the goals and objectives that the Downtown Design Guidelines require and has been achieved in other development in the downtown. Inadequate rooflines,pedestrian orientation, fagade treatments, window treatments, and project entries are proposed by the applicant's design. The proposed design does not achieve the desired architectural style and design proposed by the Downtown Design Guidelines. Finally, as indicated in the November 23, 1999 staff report,the project is below the threshold of projected development and is therefore determined to be adequately parked under the shared parking concept of the Downtown Parking Master Plan (DPMP). Alternatively,the DPMP also allows the Planning Commission to require additional measures to ensure that adequate parking is provided if in the opinion of the Planning Commission the project does not comply with the DPMP. The Planning Commission may impose one, 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. In conclusion, staff does not support the project because the proposal does not provide adequate setbacks along Main Street, does not provide accessible public open space, and does not further the goals and objectives of the Downtown Design Guidelines which promote a Mediterranean and pedestrian-oriented design. It does not provide the creative and visually pleasing contemporary Mediterranean architecture intended for the downtown. ATTACHMENTS: 1. 2. ) 3. , 4. iquirative frum appMant - 5. C SH:HF:RR:kjl Staff Report- 12/14/99 5 99SR57A • City.of Huntington Bea6 anning Department STAFF-SREpOR'I' 4 MUNTINGTON BEACH g : .... -• � _.�'" .. �., ; , TO: Planning Commission FROM: Howard Zelefsky, Director of Planning BY: Ricky Ramos, Assistant Planner-PZIL DATE: November 23, 1999 SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 98-37/COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 98-12/SPECIAL PERMIT NO. 99-1 (117, 119, 121, 123 MAIN STREET COMMERCIAL) LOCATION: 117, 119, 121, and 123 Main.Street(west side between PCH and Walnut Ave.) y. STATEMENT OF ISSUE: Conditional Use Permit.No. 98-37 and Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12 represent a request by Jeff Bergsma to complete interior and exterior remodels, including a new common fagade for 117 through 123 Main Street. The proposal includes a new 2"d story addition to 119 and 121 Main Street. The existing one-story building at 123 Main Street is proposed to be demolished and replaced with a new two-story building. A new restaurant/banquet facility with outdoor patio dining and alcohol service is proposed on the 2"d floor of 117 Main Street. A special permit is recommended by staff to require the 1 S` and 2"d floors of the buildings to be setback at a seven(7) feet build-to-line in lieu of five (5) feet as required by code. The special permit recommendation is consistent with the approved setback of the adjacent Oceanview Promenade project. It should be noted the applicant is not in support of the 7 feet setback on both the I" and 2nd floor where the balconies are proposed at a two (2) feet build-to-line. Staff is recommending denial of the request as submitted by the applicant because the project is not in compliance with the Downtown Design Guidelines, is not in compliance with the staff recommended setbacks along Main Street, and does not provide accessible public open space. Therefore the proposed project is not compatible with the development downtown and will be a detriment to the general welfare of the immediate area. Staff recommends denial of the Conditional Use Permit and Coastal Development Permit based on the following: • The project is not in compliance with the Mediterranean and pedestrian-oriented design called for in the Downtown Design Guidelines. The project does not incorporate adequate building setback and roofline variation and articulation, decorative architectural details/elements, multi-paned decorative windows, and special pavers/tile lead-in paths to the main entry as outlined in the Downtown Design Guidelines. ATTACuHMENT NO* • �_�)111111111111111111111 �� nui nn i 11IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII � � ��,�� ++++ ++ ++i Will g H IIgN gglllq glNigN C��'oci V,�� ++ „ 1111111 = �H� NIIIIIIII ggNqq Nllgail 8 p �� +�►+ � ► " - 1111111 HIM 1 HHMIII RUHHH NNHNH IMIHII �IIIHH a�I1H ""� " " - "' II HMHH HIIIHIH HNHHH IHHIHH HHN tlHNgH I�gOH HIHHIII HIIHHa - an HHnHN HHHHH HNHIIN gaily HMHa HHHHN Hflu HHIIIa HIIIIHa .� ' _ HOUR IIHHgH HHHgN NHg smilmulin HIIII HmHIN HUH IIIHm .■ ��■ g I II gRIIHN PUM = HHHHH HIHIN HIIHIIH HIIIHfI WHO HHHHH on HI • nn� HBO HHHHH HHHIIb NaHaH.Heal.HIM IIIIIIM � IIIIH� gHHaH H �1� �� ggNNIINgI'INgN NIIIIgNNItlNNNIN II�gNI1gNNNNNNtlI� 11b '€IINININ IIIH�N�HI.NatlNtlHtltlagtl = _ illlllllllllfil illflififlflllff ililllllllflfflliflllll� �I HHH HHaHHI ® �VA�� ®IIIHItlHaaa HIIII� HMHIII,HH� I�� ,g�• �d 1 4 • The project is not in compliance with the minimum development standards for the front setback for the 2"d floor balconies as well as the intent of providing the required public open space where it is most readily visible, accessible, and usable by the general public. • The project is not in compliance with several goals,policies,and objectives of the General Plan relating to architectural design and site layout. RECOMMENDATION: Motion to: "Deny Conditional Use Permit No. 98-37 and Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12 with findings (Attachment No. 1)." ALTERNATIVE ACTION(S): The Planning Commission may take alternative actions such as: A. "Approve Conditional Use Permit No. 98-37 and Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12 as submitted by the applicant with findings and modified conditions of approval." (Applicant's Request) B. "Approve Conditional Use Permit No. 98-37, Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12, and Special Permit No. 99-1 as modified by staff with findings and conditions of approval." C. "Continue Conditional Use Permit No. 98-37, Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12, and Special Permit No. 99-1 and direct staff accordingly." GENERAL INFORMATION: APPLICANT: Jeff Bergsma, 221 Main Street, Suite H, Huntington Beach, CA 92648 PROPERTY .117 Main St—Gary Mulligan, 221 Main Street,#6,Huntington Beach, CA 92648 OWNER: 119 Main St—Frank Alfonso, 6630 Vickiview Drive, Canoga Park, CA 91307 121 Main St—George Draper, 1210 Pecan Street, Huntington Beach, CA 92648 123 Main St—Ann Mase, 16642 Intrepid Lane,Huntington Beach, CA 92649 REOUEST: To allow the following: 117 Main Street: 1)Exterior and interior remodel of the 1'and . 2 nd floor; 2)Establish a restaurantibanquet facility with outdoor patio dining and alcohol service on the 2"d floor. 119 Main Street: 1)Exterior and interior remodel of the I' floor; 2) Construct a new 2"1 floor for retail or office use; 3)Abandonment of three(3) feet of alley on the west side. 121 Main Street: 1)Exterior and interior remodel of the V floor; 2) Construct a new 2"d floor for office use. 123 Main Street: 1)Demolish the existing building and construct a new two-story building with retail on the 1'floor and office on the 2"d floor. The request also includes a Special Permit to allow a staff recommendation of seven(7) feet build-to-line in lieu of the required five (5)feet along Main Street. Staff Report- 11/23/99 2 99SR57 DATE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: MANDATORY PROCESSING DATE(S): October 22, 1999 January 22, 2000 SUBJECT PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING LAND USE, ZONING AND GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATIONS: LOCATIONSGENE ` L PhPLAN� g ZONING F� Fq�$� LAND USES Q l% '. �,vam Z7 Subject Property MV-F12-sp-pd (Mixed Downtown Specific Plan— Retail/Commercial/ Use Vertical-Specific District 3 (Visitor Serving Restaurant/Office Plan Overlay-Pedestrian Commercial)—Coastal Overlay) Zone North of Subject MV-F12-sp-pd (Mixed Downtown Specific Plan— Retail/Commercial/ Property Use Vertical-Specific District 3 (Visitor Serving Restaurant/Office Plan Overlay-Pedestrian Commercial)—Coastal Overlay) Zone East of Subject MV-F12-sp-pd(Mixed Downtown Specific Plan— Retail/Commercial/ Property (across Use Vertical-Specific District 3 (Visitor Serving Restaurant/Office Main Street) Plan Overlay-Pedestrian Commercial)—Coastal Overlay) Zone South of Subject MV-F12-sp-pd (Mixed Downtown Specific Plan— Retail/Commercial/ Property Use Vertical-Specific District 3 (Visitor Serving Restaurant/Office Plan Overlay-Pedestrian Commercial)—Coastal Overlay) Zone West of Subject MV-F12-sp-pd (Mixed Downtown Specific Plan— Parking lot Property (across Use Vertical-Specific District 3 (Visitor Serving alley) Plan Overlay-Pedestrian Commercial)—Coastal Overlay) Zone PROJECT PROPOSAL: Conditional Use Permit No. 98-37 and Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12 represent a request for the following: 117 Main: A. To permit the exterior and interior remodel of the 1"and 2nd floor pursuant to Section 4.5.01(b) of the Downtown Specific Plan(DTSP)and Section 245.06 of the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance (HBZSO). B. To establish a restaurantibanquet facility with outdoor patio dining and alcohol service on the 2nd floor of 117 Main Street pursuant to Section 4.5.01(b) of the DTSP and Section 245.06 of the HBZSO. Staff Report- 11/23/99 3 99SR57 119 Main: To permit the exterior and interior remodel of the I" floor and the construction of a new 2nd floor for retail or office use pursuant to Section 4.5.01(b) of the DTSP and Section 245.06 of the HBZSO. 121 Main: To permit the exterior and interior remodel of the V floor and the construction of a new 2nd floor for office use pursuant to Section 4.5.01(b) of the DTSP and Section 245.06 of the HBZSO. 123 Main: To demolish the existing one-story commercial building and permit the construction of a new two-story building with retail on the V floor and office on the 2"d floor pursuant to Section 4.5.01(b) of the DTSP and Section 245.06 of the HBZSO. Summary of Uses Address 1st Floor Floor 117 Main Exis:ling Perq's Bar Restaurant/Banquet Facility 119 Main Retail Retail or Office 121 Main Retail Office 123 Main Retail Office Special Permit No. 99-1 represents a request to allow a seven (7) feet build-to-line in lieu of five (5) feet for the 1 S` and 2"d floors along Main Street pursuant to Section 4.1.02 of the Downtown Specific Plan. The applicant is proposing to comply with the five (5) feet build-to-line on the ?floor but not for the second floor balconies. The Special Permit request is a staff recommendation so that the project will have the same setback as the adjacent Oceanview Promenade development located to the south. A two-story building presently exists at 117 Main with the 1"floor currently occupied by Perq's Bar which will remain after the remodel. The 2"d floor is reportedly occupied by one residential unit with the remaining floor area vacant and proposed as a new restaurant/banquet facility with outdoor patio dining and alcohol service. The other three properties at 119, 121, and 123 Main are presently developed with one-story commercial buildings. The applicant proposes to add a new 2"d story on the existing building at both 119 and 121 Main for office uses. As part of the submittal,the applicant is proposing to abandon three (3) feet of alley along the rear(west side) of 119 Main Street to match 117, 121, and 123 Main Street. Finally 123 Main is presently developed with a one-story building. The applicant proposes to demolish this building entirely and construct a new two-story building for retail use on the V.floor and office use on the 2"d floor. The proposal includes a new common facade design for all four properties consisting primarily of light colored stucco for a cohesive appearance. Each building is proposed to have a unique storefront design,with accent colors, and materials such as marble and brick. No parking is proposed for the project. All parking requirements for this project are provided in the Downtown Parking Master Plan. A dedication of four (4) feet along Main Street is required to accommodate angled parking and two-way traffic along Main Street. The dedication requirement is consistent with the dedication requirements imposed on other new developments along both sides of Main Street. They include such projects as Pierside Pavilion, Oceanview Promenade, the Coultrup proposal and Standard Market. The Staff Report- 11/23/99 4 99SR57 applicant has noted the dedication requirement on the submitted plans but has done so in protest(see Attachment No. 4). The applicant has indicated that the request is necessary (Attachment No.. 3)to allow the respective property owners to maximize the use of their property. The restaurantibanquet facility with outdoor patio dining and alcohol service on the 2"d floor of 117 Main is proposed to complement the existing Perq's Bar located on the V floor and to provide more visitor serving commercial uses in the downtown. Staff is in - the process of inspecting the 2"d floor at 117 Main to verify if any legal residential units exist. If so, residential units in the coastal zone occupied by persons and families of low or moderate income that are converted or demolished must be replaced pursuant to Section 65590 of the California Government Code. Background: In 1993,the City Council approved Tentative Tract Map No. 14666, Conditional Use Permit No. 92-17 with Special Permits, Coastal Development Permit No. 92-14, and Conditional Exception No. 92-28 which is commonly referred to as the Coultrup plan. The project was a request to construct an 80-unit condominium project anhwo commercial buildings totaling 40,810 square feet on the two blocks bounded by 6`' Street, Main Street,.PCH, and Walnut Avenue (which included the subject properties). ISSUES: General Plan Conformance: The General Plan Land Use Map designation on the subject property is MV-1712-sp-pd(Mixed Use Vertical—Maximum FAR of 3.0—Specific Plan Overlay Pedestrian Overlay). The proposed commercial uses are consistent with this designation. However,the proposed project design is not consistent with the goals and objectives of the City's General Plan as follows: Land Use Element Goal L U 4: Achieve and maintain high quality architecture, landscape, and public open spaces in the City. Policy LU 7.1.1: Accommodate existing uses and new development in accordance with the Land Use and Density Schedules. Goal L U 8: Achieve a pattern of land uses that preserves, enhances, and establishes a distinct identity for the City's neighborhoods, corridors, and centers. Police LU 10.1.4: Require that commercial buildings and sites be designed to achieve a high level of architectural and site layout quality. Policy 11.1.7: Require that mixed-use development projects be designed to achieve a consistent and high quality character, including the consideration of architectural treatment of building elevations to convey the visual character of multiple building volumes and individual storefronts. I Staff Report- 11/23/99 5 99SR57 PolLc2 LU 15.2.2: Require that structures located in the pedestrian overlay zone be sited and designed to enhance pedestrian activity along the sidewalks, in consideration of the following guidelines: 1) Incorporation of uses that stimulate pedestrian activity in the first floor along the street frontage, encouraging professional offices, data computing, and other similar uses to be located in the rear or above the first floor unless economically infeasible; 2) Siting of the linear frontage of the building along the front yard property line to maintain a "building wall" character, except for areas contiguous with the structure use for outdoor dining or courtyards; 3) Assurance that areas between building storefronts and public sidewalks are visually and physically accessible to pedestrians, except as may be required for landscape and security; 4) Extensive articulation of the building fagade and use of multiple building volumes and planes; 5) Incorporation of landscape and other elements such as planter beds,planters, and window boxes that visually distinguish the site and stricture; 6) Incorporation of arcades, courtyards, and other recesses along the street elevation to provide visual relief and interest; 7) Use of roofline and height variation to break up the massing and provide visual interest; 8) Visual differentiation of upper and lower floors; 9) Distinct treatment of building entrances; and 10)Use of pedestrian-oriented signage. As proposed,the project does not incorporate adequate building setback, roofline variation and articulation, decorative architectural details/elements,multi-paned decorative windows, and special pavers/tile lead-in paths to the main entry to break up the massing of the buildings. The project does not provide visual interest, achieve a high level of architectural and site layout quality, and enhance the pedestrian experience in the downtown. Lastly,the subject properties are also located within Community Subarea I(Main Street/PCH Core) and complies with its standards including a maximum of three(3) stories for buildings occupying less than a full block. However,the project does not comply with design guidelines pertaining to providing.highly articulated facades, expanded streetscape amenities, and pedestrian-oriented design. Staff Report- 11/23/99 6 99SR57 Zoning Compliance: This project is located in the Downtown Specific Plan—District 3 (Visitor Serving Commercial)zoning district and each of the four buildings comply with the requirements of that zone except as noted below. The following is a zoning conformance matrix that compares all four buildings with the applicable development standards: SECTION ISSUE�,a�,� � r��:�-x: „ CODE PROVISION � �"� PROPOSED ' `' 4.5.02 Lot Area Min. 2,500 sq. ft. Min. 2,725 sq. ft. 4.5.02 Lot Width Min. 25 ft. Min. 25 ft. 4.5.03 FAR Zoning Max. 2.6 Max. 1.66 General Plan Max. 3.0 4.5.04 Building Height I Zoning Max 3 stories/35 ft high Max. 2 stories/33 ft-4 inches (measured from highest (measured from highest adjacent street level to the adjacent street level to the highest point of the coping of highest point of the coping of a flat roof) a flat roof) General Plan Max. 3 stories 4.2.04 Additional Height Max. 49 feet(35 + 14) Max. 35 feet—8 inches (to peak of roof element for (with max. additional 14 feet elevator at 117 Main) in height allowed for elevator equipment) 4.5.05 Site Coverage No max. NA Setbacks 4.5.06 Front(Main St) 5 ft. build-to-line Applicant proposal: I'floor- 5 ft. build-to-line 2"floor—balcony at 2 ft setback* Staff recommendation: 7 ft. build-to-line* for both the I'and 2nd floors 4.5.07 Side Zero Zero 4.5.08 Rear(alley) Min. 3 ft. Min. 3 ft. 4.5.09 Upper story Min. 10 ft from build-to-line No 3rd story proposed for 3`d story Staff Report- 11/23/99 7 99SR57 i SECTION. 'TISSUE I�ODEAPROVISION PROPOSED" .c*3�,�,.a.atz ,,,.:,��a r_v"k-..7. Via.. ,am. �-�-�,-�sv-_h.�L.:r., ` E.".-_''u -•,-...__�..=n:ar 4.5.10 Public Open Space Min. 272.5 sq. ft. Min. 295 sq. ft. (provided in rear balcony) (Min. 10% of net lot area) Off-Street Parking - 32 parking spaces (restaurants) None Number 38 parking spaces (retail) (Project is parked pursuant to 4 parking spaces(office) Downtown Parking Master 74 total Plan) 4.2.22 Refuse Storage Must be enclosed or screened Enclosed and screened by with a masonry wall solid gate 4.2.15 Landscaping None None 4.2.17 Access Ways Mink 24 ft. commercial alley Dedication of 4.5 ft. in with'12 ft. dedicated from one addition to existing 7.5 ft. side. from alley centerline for total of 12 ft. Min. 4 ft. dedication along 4 ft. dedication along Main St. Main St. *Special Permit required Downtown Parking Master Plan: The subject properties are located in the Downtown Parking Master Plan(DPMP). The DPMP established a shared parking concept for the core area along Main Street. The core area is divided into two parts, Area 1 south of Orange Ave., and Area 2 north of Orange Ave. The DPMP projected a total of 500,000 sq. ft. of commercial building area(retail/office/restaurant/misc. space). The DPMP also established overall (Areas 1&2) development thresholds of 50,000 sq. ft. for miscellaneous (theaters, etc.), 100,000 sq. ft. for restaurant, 100,000 sq. ft. for office, and 250,000 sq. ft. for retail. The project site is located within Block A of Area 1,which has the greatest concentration of retail, restaurant, office and miscellaneous uses. Area 1 was projected for a maximum of 358,255 square feet of total commercial development. -Block A has 94,050 square feet of allowed development within the amount identified for Area 1. Within these thresholds,the DTPMP allocated the following amount of development: DPMP DEVELOPMENT THRESHOLDS Building T es Total�Area PotentialBwlding.Area ProposedBuildingArea Retail 30,953 s.f. 12,000 s.f. 9,525 s.f. Restaurant 22,798 s.f. 20,000 s.f. 4,685 s.f. Office 40,299 s.f.. 10,000 s.f. 4,050 s.f. TOTALS 94,050 s.f. 142,000 s.f. 18,260 s.f Staff Report- 11/23/99 8 99SR57 The proposed project requires the following number of parking spaces: Addy s � Restaurant Area =Re fl Area a Office Area � g ba..� .� .�. 117 Main 2,500 s.f. (l'floor) NA NA 2,185 s.f. (2"d floor— including patio dining) 119 Main NA 2,500 s.f. (1"floor) NA 2;025 s.f. (2"d floor) 121 Main NA 2,500 s.f. (1'floor) 2,025 s.f. (2"d floor) 123 Main NA 2,500 s.f. (1"floor) 2,025 s.f (2"d floor) Total 4,685 s.f./150 s.f. =31.2 9,525 s.f./250 s.f. =38.1 4,050 s.f./1,000 s.f. =4.1 parking spaces parking spaces parking space The DPMP identifies a total of 1,655 parking spaces in Area 1 with Block A providing 142 spaces. The total parking required for all four properties is 74 parking spaces (32+ 38 +4)which are accounted for in the total allocated for Block A. The shared parking concept approved as part of the DPMP allocated these 142 parking spaces for the mix of uses and,therefor parked the development of approximately 94,050 sq. ft. Alternatively,the DPMP allows the Planning Commission to require additional measures to ensure that adequate parking is provided. The Planning Commission may impose one, 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. Because the proposed project falls within the development threshold of the DTPMP,the project complies with the parking requirements of the DTPMP and no additional parking is required. Environmental Status: The proposed project is covered under Environmental Impact Report No. 89-6 and an addendum,which were certified by the City Council on November 19, 1991 for the Main Pier Phase II project. That project included the construction of approximately 115,000 square feet of commercial retail and 140 residential Staff Report- 11/23/99 9 99SR57 units. The environmental impact report and its addendum analyzed project impacts in the areas of land use compatibility, aesthetics, earth resources,historic resources, light and glare, and parking. The City Council adopted a statement of overriding consideration to address the unavoidable adverse impacts created by light and glare and impacts to historic structures. Impacts to historic resources are a result of the demolition of existing historic buildings on the property. Through the implementation of the mitigation measures identified in the EIR, the potentially adverse impacts associated with the project are mitigated to a level of insignificance. Coastal Status: The proposed project is within the non-appealable portion of the Coastal Zone. Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12 is being processed concurrently pursuant to Chapter 245 of the HBZSO. Except for the front setback,the project complies with the zoning code and Coastal Zone requirements. y Redevelopment Status: The project is located in the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Project, Main-Pier subarea. The Economic Development Department has reviewed the request and comments that the use of brick on portions of the Main Street facade should be considered carefully since this issue was contentiously debated during the review of a previous entitlement regarding its appropriateness for the Mediterranean style. Design Review Board: The project was presented to the Design Review Board(DRB) on June 10, July 1, July 22, and October 14, 1999. At the October 14, 1999 DRB meeting staff presented the request and outlined revisions to the plans that have been incorporated based upon recommendations made by the DRB. However, staff presented their recommendations and identified areas of non-compliance with the Downtown Specific Plan and the Design Guidelines and recommended the following changes: • The front setback along Main Street should be at seven(7) feet build-to-line in lieu of the required five (5) feet for both the I"and 2"d floors to be consistent with the adjacent Oceanview Promenade development. . • The common open space proposed to be provided on the 2°d floor rear balconies should be relocated to a more visible and accessible location to meet the intent of the requirement. • The roofline and building elevations are too linear and should incorporate more variation and offsets. • The front and rear elevations, as well as the south elevation of 117 Main(along the pedestrian walkway) should incorporate more architectural details/elements for visual interest. • The rear stairs should be enclosed within the building to provide a more attractive elevation facing the alley. • The inclusion of a courtyard/plaza should be considered to provide a break in the fagade and for added visual interest. • Multi-paned and recessed windows should be provided. • Special pavers/tile should be used along the entries into the project. Staff Report- 11/23/99 10 99SR57 • Potted plants should be added to the front and rear of the buildings. • To acknowledge the historic value of the buildings, a plaque should be incorporated into the project and/or the materials from the existing buildings should be incorporated into the design of the new buildings. The DRB accepted the changes made to the plans based on their previous direction to the applicant and recommended approval of the project. The DRB did not recommend all of staffs changes but did recommend the following changes: • Potted plants shall be added to the front and rear of the buildings. • Special pavers shall be used along the entries into the project. • Architectural treatments/accents shall be added to the front windows. • The metal enclosure for the rear stairways shall be painted (powder coating) The DRB also directed the applicant to preparI.revised rear elevations that show a full enclosure in lieu of the wrought iron railing proposed for the Planning Commission to consider. The applicant has revised the plans to incorporate glass block along the rear to provide an improved enclosure design while still providing some visibility into the rear stairs as recommended by the Police Department. Subdivision Committee: Not applicable. Other Departments Concerns: The Departments of Public Works, Fire, and Police have recommendations which are incorporated into the conditions of approval. The Building and Safety Department indicates that the project must comply with the building code. The Police Department comments that the rear stairwells should be visible from the alley and that a minimum of one foot candle of light should be provided along the rear of the buildings. Public Notification: Legal notice was published in the Huntington Beach/Fountain Valley Independent on November 11, 1999, and notices were sent to property owners of record within a 300 ft. and occupants within a 100 ft radius of the subject property, individuals/organizations requesting notification(Planning Department's Notification Matrix),.occupants of the subject properties, applicant,and interested parties. As of November 18, 1999, no communication supporting or opposing the request has been received. ANALYSIS: The primary issues with this project mi clude compatibility with the surrounding area, code compliance, and building design/site layout. The project site is located in District 3 (Visitor-Serving Commercial)of the Downtown Specific Plan which permits a broad category of commercial activities. These activities are intended to serve the needs of the surrounding community and provide an off-season clientele for the Main Street area. The District allows office uses in conjunction with the required visitor-serving Staff Report- 11/23/99 11 99SR57 commercial uses. The entire I"floor of all four.buildings will consist of visitor serving commercial uses which meet the purpose of the zoning district. The proposed development will also include a second floor restaurant with alcohol service which is also permitted in this district. The proposed uses are consistent with the identified uses in the Downtown Specific Plan and General Plan. The proposed project complies with the minimum development standards (such as building height, floor area, and parking) for the District with the exception of the required 2"d floor setback. The applicant's proposal depicts a 2"d story front balcony setback of two (2) feet in lieu of the required five (5)feet build- to-line. This applies to all four buildings. The applicant did not apply for a special permit to allow the reduced setback for the balconies because they do not agree with the staff interpretatiori. Staff recommends that the plans be revised to comply with the seven(7) feet build-to-line setback requirement consistent with the adjacent Oceanview Promenade development. This recommendation requires the approval of a special permit to allow the increased build-to-line in lieu of the required five (5) feet for both the I`and 2"d story. This will promote abetter living environment that will present greater benefits than would occur if the minimum requirement are met because it will provide a consistent"building wall" and wider sidewalk for improved pedestrian circulation and opportunities for outdoor dining along the first block of Main Street. Staff does not support the applicant's.proposed design and reduced setback. The location of the common open space is another concern to staff. The specific plan requires that all developments within District 3 provide public open space equivalent to a minimum of ten(10)percent of the net site area. The applicant provides the minimum open space area to meet this code requirement. However,the proposed open space is located in the rear 2"d floor balconies of the buildings facing the alley. Staff believes that the intent of the requirement is-to provide public open space that is readily seen and accessible for public enjoyment. The applicant's proposal does not comply with the intent of the requirement because the public open space is proposed in an undesirable location where it will remain unused by the public. Staff does not support the applicant's design of the proposed open space area. The last main issue pertains to the building design and site layout and compliance with the Downtown Design Guidelines (DTDG). The design of the project has been revised since the initial plans were submitted. The applicant has attempted to incorporate several of staff and DRB's recommendations. The recommendations included a common architectural theme for all four buildings while incorporating unique storefronts to provide the appearance of small-scale individual establishments in accord with the "Village Concept". In addition,the rear(alley elevation)has been modified to provide a fully enclosed rear building design in lieu of the wrought iron enclosure originally proposed. The project incorporates the DTDG in the following areas: •. tile roofs • stucco as the primary exterior material • a light main color scheme with brightly colored accents • balconies • arched elements • a variety of secondary materials (such as glass,tile, brick,painted metal) Staff Report- 11/23/99 12 99SR57 However, staff also presented several design changes to the DRB. Staff recommended these changes in order to obtain greater compliance with the Downtown Design Guidelines. The additional recommendations made to the applicant and the DRB are as follows: • The guidelines indicate that the use of appropriate roof forms either alone or in combination should be encouraged to achieve the varying roofline characteristic of Mediterranean Villages. The roofline and building elevations proposed are too linear and should incorporate more variation and offsets. • The guidelines call for orienting downtown development towards pedestrians. This can be achieved by providing varied building setbacks to create plaza-like areas which attract pedestrians whenever possible. Staff acknowledges that this is difficult to achieve in this case since there are four separate properties with different owners. However,the inclusion of a courtyard/plaza should be considered to provide a break in the fagade and for added visual interest. • The guidelines indicate that to maintain a human scale,building facades shall be detailed in such a way as to make them appear shorter. One way of achieving this is by increasing the level of detail on the buildings at the street level. The front and rear elevations of all four buildings, as well as the south elevation of 117 Main(along the pedestrian alley) should incorporate more decorative architectural details/elements for visual interest. Likewise, the rear stairs should be enclosed within the building to provide a more attractive elevation facing the alley as now shown on the revised plans which now incorporate glass block along the rear. The provision of potted plants and/or planter boxes will also achieve further compliance with this guideline. • The guidelines state that windows in the Mediterranean style are typically multi-paned and should incorporate variation by including treatments such as: tile borders, colored window framing, shutters, plant-on relief features, iron or wooden grills, dormers,projecting bay windows, window boxes, and pop-outs. The project should be revised to incorporate several of these elements. • The guidelines also suggest that project entries are a major design element in the Mediterranean style. and are typically highly ornate and detailed. Special pavers/tile lead-in paths to.the main entry should be used. • Finally,to acknowledge the historic value of the buildings, a plaque should be incorporated into the project and/or the materials from the existing buildings should be incorporated into the design of the new buildings as appropriate. .. The staff does not support the project because the proposal does not provide adequate setbacks along Main Street, does not provide accessible public open space, and does not further the goals and objectives of the Downtown Design Guidelines which promote a Mediterranean and pedestrian-oriented design.. SUMMARY: Staff recommends denial of the Conditional Use Permit and Coastal Development Permit based on the following: • The project is not in compliance with the Mediterranean and pedestrian-oriented design called for in the Downtown Design Guidelines. The project does not incorporate adequate building setback and roofline variation and articulation, decorative architectural details/elements,multi-paned decorative Staff Report- 11/23/99 13 99SR57 lip windows, and special pavers/tile lead-in paths to the main entry as outlined in the Downtown Design Guidelines. • The project is not in compliance with the minimum development standards for the front setback for the 2"d floor balconies as well as the intent of providing the required public open space where it is most readily visible, accessible, and usable by the general public. • The project is not in compliance with several goals,policies, and objectives of the General Plan relating to architectural design and site layout. ATTACHMENTS: , vvr-raar��r�zvTae:en=o aaovat.++��zr:» 3. eive ove , 4. 9, 1999 a. SH:HF:RR:kjl Staff Report- 11/23/99 14 99SR57 pro F i ' AWN I I � ------ PL/BLtC PAAK.tAfD --------- 1 J - - - - - � I I I ` I I fO.flfO. I JO! !O! , C1 f\� T\ •G®M p p - _ - MASN SrR.EEr I ® , I' , ® tl0 Lp.N11M M II[.iY1RL. COl I6(Me • ..• 117,11C Pf�OPOSEO J'J, NAJN SL.00l< JOW -E,4ST 97w`r m , JMrr AEBT UMA r//� MM / CFFSCE9 �e.�m�ce eErCK c� "-1 u! O e /y c, 1 cor» ..or,a for s, for Lr 3 mraua --- a s a � s a a ,llrN Il1YIl .• •• YIL1Y G (TI MAIN STi7EET • •• Z - - SITE PLAN -I p ( t �?A•�1°1 W N Iqi ./IMP r M LI i l l i 0100 ® 0 N Irwo�.I.o��I,.I.I. / ` IM'I/. �({�� •1 Iw�s Iom � I pmmat Are"Alta -r-� JL 00 00 13 I �IIIIIIII I � OLI�11� I I , I � ' ..4• � gel � l .� ....�:�. W!N IIIW.fI1Y��f MYV I.I. 11 uY WHIYn N � a ni.�nnm arru: ' I I Mla1 Atio � tY � Q NAIN n.u. NLlNTJAtiT • ��I.�icr L:IL JFR�VJI aO&rZ W J-2Mr AA"M AZOOR PLANS A72 Y te R51D ASED AZMWW LEMM,ZC09 ALAN � 4 rt i I ' —1 J Am-a-sm Pmwr A-ngL ROIM ALwN NU 2 K..uana. I � I I I I I 9TNEEf m �--- _. .KWTIA,� �0 BEICM _G`7_••}I EXlBT"p/IligT LEYEL FLIXi9 PLAN Ae.•�[c� CILJIpQNJI FLOOR PLANS � A3 I � • I I � I I a �I AM MAW AECOW L&IM PLOID9 RUN =Tor 11 jqI _ -GI I � 4V. PYi09R�P?I7YT LdHeiZ PLG�4 fr IN r -- -- I I I I I ,• I I I � m.autr n .o n.mw s m uannc. tiV. I � PY IAI� I i 1?1 ��>• . 7 MV z eeicN sk=rrrw Pmvs s.erUM Psaov awn 'p,`,:o, cAcriowr.. O �Q jt•2a•ag -T I I , 1 � 9PPWW IM wrrAM ®' � N Avv w-cwfiv seaav ZZ12Z PUMV 19LAN - ' I11 � I IIAt?T LBI•>2 R.Oi09 P1CAN r-----_--_--_— �• � I 1 ti , AtllTJAS AQlIa - W 7o mQo10L+1M® as'otn. ru• rw... Z air.Hann I , JAN ' --------_-- NA 9T.9EBT . BCACf/ I017stJ/W/SI/ivT t.tlY1Y R,gA7 IetAN :�[.�ir�cii CAG!/CRNII O W ,.4 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ - - - --- - - - - - - -�-- - - - - - - - -�— - - - - - -r-- - - -OWL .,®. ' Ml1•N•Y/101Oafv)Mtdfl/O.YlO•.P'Y'I L- .42':r,Y A aY4rrav .r.ror Ila bin y �wrv>r�a. 117,1JD wA w....n• ry rn ..�..... JPJ,JP9 ...,v i a+aarerr 9TRBBr , Srlrr AMAW.4y7Awl rXAV BRAG/ jic.�i,�ci GLI/LWNII O �• 'ON iN3VVHO d1.id I I ' I � 1 I I I I " 1 IA � la 1 I I I 1 i 1 I 5 $ 1 I i � 8 , C � 1 i 1 I ti 1 ti i I I O � 1 � o . 41 D•E•S•1-G - N :,tY"`b:Y:°l"c,v y .,\" '?YYi`y;Y:.�Y. ,�1:?1�::�.:�Y• :;;�^,'.```.:YYuv'�^,Y t .:i�`,"`.}Yi�:`` vs.. x,t•»l:}` z Y'nc?t•:;YY>tcYYY«YY��N:>:•za::.z,,,.zi`��'„: w�Ykr.::. ,.:.a:., •:.z v«,IYYYa., � � *t �y. t*,i `"�`" ;+;a ;Y.• .,,, .lx.S,,,•.,,,,.,llv.,,.. •.,l,Y„vl:kv:::.:,lvv:.11lY•.:^Y .,,.kk`}.1:: ?,v:.v:. •.,,tYlvlll ll:v:: �kX�#itY�.• •:�1`klt�l .v"l.�Y *:t:2�� ,l ,:�r �YY::. lli�l„v .+l'Yy`n'Y..l, •,;,.x..,llllll•,k^w.0 ,,y...Y�,w,.;�`„yw .:..YY;^.::;'-r,.;.,;..;\.111,;r1r•.:. :lO.l; lv.�.,,;,.,,:.,,. .,,;>..;,,.:..•::.r..,; ,.1 111\ltY::: :::•l::%i`::`*,:C\. YYh`ki.:?.;..;1.N.l.11;....,.,..,,.,..;.}, .vl;`.f.:.11.,, ,. ll.\\l: .YY`YYY?nl Y;L,Y.l YYk`1;:.,.,,.::,,,."Yf'YY"`YyY;]`.:, .Y,. , �`lY :�•�'. IIIYYY`Y::YY.'•>YYY`YY:r,Y`:•tY`; `:2k•:•{`:�2�;t:2Y:{``::Y�::,^•.�::.i?t lYtl':.YY>YYYdI,ti y,Y.„Y..,nt. ti :YY: 2 .::.'..�. Y k. .;,,. „i'�Y?v.,,,.::.,,,1,.,.,.::.kt.:.tY,.Y t•1,.1?,,..,..,,,,1,..,•.{l•.1.�.,..,..:,.,:;,Y\+`...�YY,.lw�.y*µ, g,,;y�."r..`Y};:' a] y� `j; �w '.Y,l�,YY'l?,`.Y22,.:.,.l:kk:•.Y,„l„••.k ll•.„.l?Y„,,,,•.,,,1,1,,..11l,,,l,,,,,.,.,ll l F.i*:.�ih�Y��V�'k 3.i�:tF:'Y � "T � � iPt�: w-`2 ...,,....,.t, a.,as..,...,?s.,Y,,,z..;.,zw...,..,�...,.a.x�,.. .w...,..,zwlYzzzY�.:::...,..,,.. •..,,a.,;ztk.;�,......,�Cz.. ..�kz.v...,,....�E<.�,,,z:.,.. :,t APRIL 28, 1999 RECEIVE ® NOV 1 71999 Department of Planning NARRATIVE Request: The Property Owners of the above addresses are requesting a Conditional Use Permit to reconstruct their buildings and provide new front and rear facades. The intent is to add second floors to 119, 121 & 123 Main Street Buildings to match the second floor height of 117 Main Street. These 15141dings will be architecturally designed to incorporate a compatible Mediterranean theme providing for a cohesive front and rear elevation with storefronts unique to each. 117 Main: The 2-story building located at 117 Main recently underwent seismic and tenant improvement renovation. The first level has been completely remodeled.The second level apartments were demolished (save one apartment) and the space is now vacant. The Property Owner is proposing a restaurant banquet room for the second level to complement the existing first level use, and .will have separate alcohol permit or an extension of e)dsting permit. 9 in• The 1-story building located at 119 Main was a restaurant and is currently retail use. The recent seismic renovation is complete. The structure was engineered to handle the loading of an additional floor. The Property Owner is proposing to have the first floor as retail use a new second floor as office or retail use. Three feet of the rear alley would be abandon so that all adjacent properties align. 121 Mgin: The 1-story building located at 121 Main has single story of retail use and recently underwent seismic renovation. The structure was engineered to handle the loading of an additional second floor. The Property Owner is proposing to keep the first floor as retail and use the new second floor as an office. I 123 Main, The 1-story wood framed building located at 123 main presently has retail use and the Property Owner is proposing to keep retail use and add a second level story for office space. Parking: Parking for these uses is provided within the Downtown Master Parking Plan. Background: The applicants have all owned their individual Main Street properties for more than 15 years. The City of Huntington Beach created the downtown Redevelopment Project Area known as Main-Pier in 1982. Since that time the Property Owners have worked with the Redevelopment Agency, staff and the various developers as selected by the agency on several different development scenarios without success. They need to develop second story uses to maximize their properties and recoup historical loses due to failed redevelopment projects. 2 2 1 MAIN STREET, SUITE H HUNTINGTON BEACH. CA 92648 PHONE (7 14)536-5888 FAX (7 14)960-3350 AITAC1-iMENT NO. 3 ' � DECEIVED N 0 V 1 71999 Department of Planning In July of 1993, the City of Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency approved a Dispositional Development Agreement between the Agency and the Coultrup Companies (with the applications and three other Block 104 owners as partners) for the redevelopment of Block 104 (Retail / Commercial) and Block 105 (Residential). The City on that same day approved the entitlements that were appealed to the Council. (C.U.P. No..92-17). The approval of those entitlements was subsequently appealed to the California Coastal Commission which denied the appeal (leaving the citys approval in tact). Nonetheless, some two years later the City/Agency and the Coultrup Companies could not finalize terms as it related to each parties ability to finance their obligations and the DDA was terminated. The Property Owners were disappointed to say the least but proceeded to investigate the feasibility of proceeding with their Main Street portion of the plan as approved under C.U.P.92-17. In September of 1997,the Agency issued a Request for Owner Participant Development Qualifications for Blocks 104$105. The Main Street property owners in cooperation with T.C. Management, Inc.submitted a comprehensive proposal that would provide for the redevelopment of Main Street. On April 6, 1998, the City Council directed staff to prepare an Exclusive Negotiation Agreement with CIM for the development of Blocks 104 & 105 and has asked for several extension to prepare a disposition and development agreement. In the interim, the Citys Building Officials stepped up enforcement of the Citys seismic ordinance on 117, 119 & 121 Main Street. Now that the property owners have incurred debt to complete the seismic Improvements it is imperative that they maximize the utility of their properties in order to pay down the seismic retrofit construction costs. The property owners cannot once again suspend their efforts to improve their properties due to the fact the Agency may or may,not complete a deal with CIM or any other party. Therefore, we are respectfully submitting the subject request. This request, as submitted, meets all the requirements of the Downtown Specific Plan "Village concept"for District No. 3 and has the code required parking per the Downtown Master Parking plan that made allowances for the specific use expansions requested. Significant parking is provided directly behind the properties in the Citys parking lots. In the end, whether redevelopment happens on this block or not, these Property Owners must take the necessary steps to insure their livelihood and their investment. Findings For Approval 1. The proposed project is properly adapted to streets,walks and adjacent structures in a harmonious manner. 2. The visitor-serving commercial uses are consistent with the General Plan in particular the Coast and Land Use Element. 3. The proposed project is consisted with the uses permitted in the Downtown Specific Plan. 4. The project will not be detrimental to the general welfare or persons'working or residing in the vicinity of the properties and improvements in the Downtown area. TM..O.-W Bbri M-Sn"lull." 2 2 1 MAIN STREET. SUITE H HUNTINGTON BEACH. CA 9 2 6 4 8 PHONE (71 4)536-5888 FAX (71 4)960-3350 A T TAGS-Il M ENT N0. 3•Z. i November 30, 1999 City of Huntington Beach. Planning Department 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Re: Block 104, C.U.P. 98-37 Special Permit 99-2 Special Permit Narritive: r The Downtown Specific Plan allows for minor deviations from development regulations by granting a special permit. Per section 4.1.02 "Special Permits" of the D.T.S.P. Special Permits shall be allowed by the Planning Commission if a greater benenfit is derived than following the minimum code standard. We request a Special Permit to extend the second floor balconies into the front yard setback created by the "Build-to".(requirement in section 4.-5.06) by a maximum of three (3) feet. The proposed balcony design extends from one (1) foot to three (3) in a curvlinear design. This design is consistent with General Code section 230.68 which allows a maximum three (3) foot projection into the front yard for balconies. The balcony projection improves the appearance of the facade by providing visual interest and detail. The second floor facade also steps back providing undulations which enhances the architectural character of the buildings. The Special Permit can be approved because it promotes a better living environment, maximizes the use of aesthetically pleasing architecture, is not detrimental to general health, welfare, safety and convenience of the public,. is consistent with the objectives of the D.T.S.P. and Costal Element, and it complies with State and Federal law. ATTACHMENT NO. '-4 • • � � � �, � �= R � � � � �_ � r ,� ,,� _,, _ � =' _ c � a x s M.::; .. > - x:- � _ .__ .. ..tea. =x �' S" 5. The applicant shall submit a check in the amount of$38.00 for the po e Notice of Determination at the County of Orange Clerk's Office. The chec a made out to the ( County of Orange and submitted to the Planning Department o (2) days of the Planning Commission's action. 6. All common and private landscaping shall be maintai neat and clean manner, and in conformance with the HBZSO. Prior to removin_ r r- acing any landscaped areas, check with the Departments of Planning and Public or or Code requirements. Substantial changes may require approval by the Pla n: ommission. 7. Traffic Impact Fees shall be pai ime of final inspection or issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. (PW) 8. An encroachment i all be required for all work within the right-of-way. (PW) 9. A County ermit shall be required for all encroachments into OCFCD right-of- way. B-2 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 98-37/COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 98-12/SPECIAL PERMIT NO. 99-2 (117, 119, 121, 123 MAIN STREET COMMERCIAL) (CONTINUED FROM THE DECEMBER 14, 1999 MEETING):.. APPLICANT: Jeff Bergsma LOCATION: 117, 119, 121, and 123 Main Street(west side between PCH and Walnut . . Ave.) - PROJECT PLANNER: Ricky Ramos Conditional Use Permit No. 98-37 with Special Permits and Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12 represent requests by Jeff Bergsma to add new 2"d stories to 119, 121, and 123 Main Street and to complete interior and exterior remodels including a new common fagade for 1 l7 through 123 Main Street. A new restaurant/banquet facility with outdoor patio dining and alcohol service is proposed on the 2"d floor of 117 Main Street to complement the existing Perq's Bar on the 14. floor. The Planning Commission continued the project from the November23, 1999 meeting and directed staff to prepare findings and conditions for approval for consideration by the Planning Commission. In addition, the Planning Commission directed the applicant to include a request for a Special Permit to allow the 2"d floor balcony for all four buildings at a setback-of two(2) feet in lieu of the five(5) feet build-to-line required along Main Street. The applicant has submitted a narrative indicating why the Special Permit is necessary and how the findings for. approval can be mad. Proper legal notice was published in the Huntington Beach/Fountain Valley Independent on December 2, 1999, and notices were sent to property owners, occupants,-' and individuals/organizations requesting notification. PC Minutes— 1/11/00 21 (OOpcm111) Pursuant to direction fro•e Planning Commission the aPPlican �evised the si aplan, floor plans, and elevations to be consistent with the rendering submitted and to incorporate the recommendations of the Design Review Board (DRB), including'adding potted plants to the front and rear of the buildings and special pavers along the entries. The applicant.has yet to incorporate the DRB's recommendation to add architectural treatments/accents to the front . windows. The Planning Commission continued the project from the December 14, 1999 meeting to allow the Planning Commission to complete a study session on the Downtown Specific Plan and Design Guidelines. Staffs recommendation remains unchanged from the December 14, 1999 staff report. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff continues to recommend denial of the Conditional Use Permit, Coastal Development Permit, and Specia'1 Permit based on the following: • The pto ect is not in compliance with the Mediterranean and pedestrian-oriented design called for in the Downtown Design Guidelines. The project does not incorporate adequate building setback and roofline variation and articulation, decorative architectural details/elements, and multi-paned decorative windows as outlined in the Downtown Design Guidelines. • The project is not in compliance with the minimum development standards for the front setback for the 2nd floor balconies as well as the intent of providing the required public open space where it is most readily visible, accessible, and usable by the.general public. • The project is not in compliance with several goals, policies, and objectives of-the General Plan relating to architectural design and site layout. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS RE-OPENED. Keith Bohr, 415 Townsquare Lane, #219, representing applicant, stated that the project meets code requirements and no special permits should be required. .He stated he was available to. answer questions. Jeff Bergsma, 924 Main Street, applicant, stated that he does not feel that special permits are necessary in his interpretation of the code requirements: He also stated that he feels they meet. the Design Guidelines of the downtown area. James Lane,.637 Frankfort Avenue,spoke in support of the proposed request stating it will increase sale tax revenue and property values. . Frank Alfonso, 6630, Vickiview Drive, West Hills, property owner, spoke in support of the request stating that the applicant and property owners have complied with all the requests made of them at the previous meeting. E Ron Mase, 16642 Intrepid Lane, property owner, spoke in support of the request. f . . Thomas Callahan, 928 Lake Street, spoke in support of the request stating it was a.beautiful development. PC Minutes— 1/11/00 22 (OOPCM111) Gary Mulligan, 117 Main Street, spoke in support of the request. •Billy Stade, 121 Main Street, spoke in support of the request. THERE WERE NO OTHER PERSONS PRESENT TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE REQUEST AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. The Commission took straw votes on the applicant's proposed changes and incorporated them into their motion for approval. They included in the conditions of approval a requirement that each building have and display a historical plaque. A MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD, SECONDED BY LAIRD, TO APPROVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 98-37, COASTAL DEVELOPMENT_NO. 98-12 AND SPECIAL PERMIT NO. 99-2 AS REVISED BY THE COMMISSION WITH FINDINGS AND MODIFIED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AND DENY SPECIAL PERMIT NO. 99-1 WITH MODIFIED FINDINGS FOR DENIAL, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Laird, Mandic, Chapman, Biddle, Livengood NOES: Kerins, Speaker ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED FINDINGS FOR PROJECTS SUBJECT TO CEOA: The Planning Commission finds that the project is covered by Environmental Impact Report No. 89-6 and will comply with all applicable mitigation measures and will not have any significant effect on the environment. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL- CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 98-37: 1. Conditional Use Permit No. 98-37 for the establishment, maintenance and operation of the following: a. 117 Main Street: 1)Exterior and interior remodel of the 1st and 2nd floor;-2)Establish a restaurant/banquet facility with outdoor patio dining and alcohol service on the 2"d floor. b. 119 Main Street: 1)Exterior and interior remodel of the lst floor; 2) Construct anew 2" floor for retail or office use; 3) Abandonment of three(3)feet of alley on the west side. c. 121 Main.Street: 1)Exterior and interior remodel of the I"floor; 2) Construct a new 2nd floor for office use. d. 123 Main Street: 1)Demolish the existing building and construct a new two-story building with retail on the 1'`floor and office on the 2nd floor. PC Minutes— 1/11/00 23 (OOpcm111) will not be detrimental to the general welfare of persons working or residing in the vicinity or detrimental to the value of the property and improvements in the neighborhood. The project as proposed and modified by the conditions imposed, will improve a visually degraded site and will enhance the appearance of the general area based on the proposed integrated { development with a common facade design incorporating all four properties for a cohesive appearance. The project is consistent with the Downtown Specific Plan and the Design Guidelines and will add to the Mediterranean and pedestrian character of the downtown. Adequate parking for the project is provided within the Downtown Parking Master Plan. 2. The conditional use permit will be compatible with surrounding uses because the proposed construction and Visitor Serving Commercial uses are an extension of the existing character of the downtown. It will include retail and.other uses that will add to the vitality and pedestrian orientation envisioned for the downtown. 3. The conditional use permit, as modified by the conditions imposed, will comply with the provisions of the base district and other applicable provisions in Titles 20-25.of the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance and any specific condition required for the proposed use in the district in which it would be located, except for any special permits approved concurrently. The project complies with all minimum development standards including lot size, building height, setbacks, floor area, and parking. 4. The granting of the conditional use permit will not adversely affect the General Plan. It is consistent with the Land Use Element designation of Mixed Use Vertical on the subject property. In addition, it is consistent with the following goals and policies of the General Plan: r. a. Goal LU 8: Achieve a pattern of land uses that preserves, enhances, and establishes a . distinct identity for the City's neighborhoods, corridors, and centers. b. Objective LU 10.1: Provide for the continuation of existing and the development of a diversity of retail and service commercial uses that are oriented to the needs of local. residents, serve the surrounding region, serve visitors to the City, and capitalize on Huntington Beach's recreational resources. c. Policy LU 10.1.4: Require that commercial buildings and sites be designed to achieve a high level of architectural and site layout quality. d. Policy 11.1.7: Require that mixed-use development projects be designed to achieve a consistent and high quality character; including the consideration of architectural treatment of building elevations to convey the visual character of multiple building volumes and individual storefronts. e. Policy LU 15.2.2: Require that structures located in the pedestrian overlay zone be sited and designed to enhance pedestrian activity along the sidewalks, in consideration of the following guidelines: 1. Incorporation of uses that stimulate pedestrian activity in the first floor along the street frontage, encouraging professional offices, data computing, and other similar uses to be located in the rear or above the first floor unless economically infeasible; : PC Minutes— 1/11/00 24 (OOpcm111) 2. Siting of the linear frontage of the building along the fro yard property line to maintain a"building wall" character, except for areas contiguous with the structure use for outdoor dining or courtyards; { 3. Assurance that areas between building storefronts and public sidewalks are visually and physically accessible to pedestrians, except as may be required for landscape and security; 4. Extensive articulation of the building facade and use of multiple building volumes and planes; 5. Incorporation of landscape and other elements such as planted beds, planters, and window boxes that visually distinguish the site and structure; 6. Incorporation of arcades, courtyards, and other recesses along the street elevation to provide visual relief and interest; 7. Use of roofline and height variation to break up the massing and provide.visual interest; 8. Visual differentiation of upper and lower floors; 9. Distinct treatment of building entrances; and 10. Use of pedestrian-oriented signage. f. Objective ED 2.6: Expand and enhance the existing visitor serving uses. g. Policy ED 3.2.3: Attract visitor-serving uses near the beach in order to create better linkages between the beach and visitor supporting retail uses. h. Policy 5: Protect, encourage, and where feasible provide visitor-serving facilities in the coastal zone which are varied in type and price. i. Polices Improve the appearance of visually degraded areas. The project is an extension of other similar uses found in the downtown with visitor servicing commercial uses located on the 1"floor, and office or other commercial uses located on the 2"d floor. The project as modified by the conditions of approval will . provide a pedestrian oriented design and conform to the Downtown Design Guidelines. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL- COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 98-12: 1. Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12 for the development project, as proposed.or as modified by conditions of approval, conforms with the General Plan, including the Local Coastal Program. The project is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Element designation of Mixed-Use Vertical. The project will comply with the Downtown Specific Plan—District 3 (Visitor Serving Commercial)because the proposed uses, particularly on the first floor will add to the variety of Visitor Serving Commercial uses and will further the pedestrian oriented objective for the downtown. 2. The project is consistent with the requirements of the CZ Overlay District, the base zoning district, as well as other applicable provisions of the Municipal Code. The project, as modified by conditions, will conform to all development standards including setbacks, height, and parking. PC Minutes— 1/11/00 25 (OOpcmi 11) 3. At the time of occupancy the proposed development can be provided with infrastructure in a manner that is consistent with the Local Coastal Program. All infrastructure currently exist on the subject site and will be modified as needed to conform to the City's current standards. - 4. The development conforms to the public access and public recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the California Coastal Act. The development will not impact any public access and recreation opportunities. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL—SPECIAL PERMIT NO. 99-2: (2 feet setback for 2"d sto 1. The requested special permit to allow the 2"d floor balcony for all four buildings at a setback of two (2)feet in lieu of the required five(5) feet build-to-line along Main Street promotes a better living environment. There are greater benefits to be provided from the project than would occur if all the minimum requirements were met. The special permit allows for greater articulation of the elevation to provide a more aesthetically pleasing appearance consistent with the Downtown Design Guidelines. 2. The special permit provides better land planning techniques with maximum use of aesthetically pleasing types of architecture, landscaping, site layout, and design. The special permit will allow for'added visual interest by providing greater offsets and variation in the building elevation. 3. The special permit will not be detrimental to the general health, welfare, safety and convenience of the neighborhood or City in general, nor be detrimental or injurious to the value of property or improvements of the neighborhood or of the City in general because it represents a minor three(3) feet encroachment of the 2"d floor balcony for all four buildings �.._ into the required five (5) feet build-to-line. 4. The special permit is consistent with the objectives of the Downtown Specific Plan in achieving a development adapted to the terrain and compatible with the surrounding environment. The modified project does not block views and adds variation to the building elevation for added visual interest consistent.with the requirements of the Downtown Specific Plan and Design Guidelines. - 5. The special permit is consistent with the policies of the Coastal Element of the City's...... General Plan and the California Coastal Act because it will not impact any public access or recreation opportunities and will provide a better elevation design. FINDINGS FOR DENIAL— SPECIAL PERMIT NO. 99-1: (7 feet setback for 13 and 2"d sto 1. The requested special permit to allow a seven (7) feet build-to-line in lieu of the required five (5) feet along Main Street does not promote a better living environment. There will not be significantly greater benefits to be provided from the project than would occur if all the minimum requirements were met. The special permit for greater setbacks is inconsistent with a pedestrian-oriented design which calls for buildings to be located close.to the street for a more pedestrian scale. PC Minutes— 1/11/00 26 (OOPCMI11) 2. The special permit does of provide better land planning techn es with maximum use of P , P P P g aesthetically pleasing types of architecture, landscaping, site layout, and design. The special permit will not provide for a pedestrian-oriented design with building facades close to the street as envisioned for District 3 of the Downtown Specific Plan. 3. The special permit will be detrimental to the general health, welfare, safety and convenience of the neighborhood or City in general, and detrimental or injurious to the value of property or improvements of the neighborhood or of the City in general because it will result in a . development that is setback too far from the street which is inconsistent with a pedestrian- oriented design which calls for buildings to be located towards the street for a more human scale. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL— CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 98-37/COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 98-12/SPECIAL PERMIT NO. 99-2: 1. The site plan, floor plans and elevations received and dated November 29, 1999 shall be the conceptually approved layout with the following modifications (applicable to all four buildings) subject to the review and approval of the Planning Department: a. Elevations shall depict colors and building materials as approved by the Design Review Board. b. Glass block at rear stairwell shall be translucent for Police visibility. (PD) c. A minimum of one foot candle of light shall be provided along the rear of the buildings to _ ff the approval of the Police Department. (PD) l „ d. Approved plants shall be installed in the front and rear planters of the buildings. (DRIB) e. Special pavers shall be installed as shown on site plan. (DRB) f. Transom windows and side lites to be divided as shown on elevations. (DRB) g. The City shall implement consistency of similar hardscape and landscape on both sides of Main Street. (Mitigation Measure) h. Depict all utility apparatus, such as but not limited to back flow devices and Edison transformers on the site plan. Utility meters shall be screened from view from public rights-of-way. Electric transformers in a required front or street side yard shall be enclosed in subsurface vaults. Backflow prevention devices shall be prohibited in the front yard setback and shall be screened from view. (Code Requirement) i. All exterior mechanical equipment shall be screened from view on all sides. Rooftop mechanical equipment shall be setback 15 feet from the exterior edges of the building. Equipment to be screened includes, but is not limited to, heating, air conditioning; refrigeration equipment, plumbing lines, ductwork and transformers. Said screening shall be architecturally compatible with the building in terms of materials and colors. If { screening is not designed specifically into the building, a rooftop mechanical equipment plan showing screening must be submitted for review and approval with the application for building permit(s). (Code Requirement) PC Minutes— 1/11/00 27 (OOpcm111) j. Depict all gLs meters, water meters, electrical panels, air conditioning units, mailbox facilities and similar items on the site plan and elevations. If located on a building, they shall be architecturally designed into the building to appear as part of the building. They shall be architecturally compatible with the building and non-obtrusive, not interfere with sidewalk areas and comply with required setbacks. k. Additional decorative architectural details/accents (i.e. the insets, decorative lighting) . shall be provided on both the front and rear_elevations of all four buildings, as well as the south elevation of 117 Main (along the pedestrian alley). 1. Window design and treatment shall be subject to Design Review Board review. m:. A plaque shall be incorporated into the building design of 117, 119, 121 and 123 Main Street identifying the historic significance of the sites and/or the materials from the " existing building shall be incorporated into the design of the new building as appropriate. 2. Prior to issuance of demolition permits, the following shall be completed:. a. The applicant shall follow all procedural requirements and regulations of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and any other local, state, or federal law regarding the removal and disposal of any hazardous material including asbestos, lead, and PCB's. These requirements include but are not limited to: survey, identification of removal methods, containment measures, use and treatment of water, proper truck hauling, disposal procedures, and proper notification to any and all involved agencies. b. Pursuant to the requirements of the South Coast Air Quality Management District, an asbestos survey shall be completed. c. The applicant shall complete all Notification requirements of the South Coast Air Quality Management District. d. The City of Huntington Beach shall receive written verification from the South Coast Air Quality Management District that the Notification procedures have been completed. .. e. All asbestos shall be removed from all buildings prior to demolition'of any portion of any building. f. A truck hauling and routing plan for all trucks involved in asbestos removal and. demolition of the existing structures shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works and approved by the Director of Public Works. g. The applicant shall disclose the method of demolition on the demolition permit application for review and approval by the Building and Safety Director. h. An adequate monitoring and/or bonding program shall be established between the City and property owners to ensure that demolition and construction vibration impacts do not adversely affect offsite structures. (Mitigation Measure) PC Minutes— 1/11/00 28 (OOpcm111) i. All facets of the project related to historic reservation shaloreviewed and approved P J P PP by the City of Huntington Beach. (Mitigation Measure) j. The applicant shall provide 45 days written notice to the City of Huntington Beach _ . Historic Resources Board informing them of such activity. The Board may relocate, fully document and/or preserve significant architectural elements. The applicant/property . owner shall not incur any costs associated with moving or documenting the structure by the Board. (Mitigation Measure) k. Comprehensive documentation of the project site, as it currently exists, shall be prepared prior to the issuance of any building, grading, and/or demolition permits. The documentation shall be in accordance with standards established by the Historical American Buildings Survey/Historical American Engineering Records (HABS/HAER). The report shall be archivally maintained with provisions for public access. The costs associated with preparation and maintenance of the documentation shall be the responsibility of the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency. (Mitigation Measure) 1. Pursuant to Section 65590 of the California Government Code, the applicant shall submit a plan for replacement of any existing residential units occupied by persons and families of low or moderate income that are converted or demolished as a result of this project for review and approval by the Planning Department. 3. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the following shall be completed: a. A grading plan, prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer, shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. (PW) b. The name and phone number of a field supervisor who is on-site shall be submitted to the Planning Department and Public Works Department. In addition, clearly visible signs shall be posted on the perimeter of the site indicating whom to contact for information regarding this development and any construction/grading activity. This contact person shall be available immediately to address any concerns or issues raised by adjacent property owners during the construction activity. He/she will be responsible for ensuring compliance with the conditions herein, specifically, grading activities, truck routes, construction hours, noise, etc. c. A project-specific soils and engineering report shall be prepared by a qualified soils engineer based on a detailed plan of the project. All recommendations of this report shall be incorporated into the project. (Mitigation Measure) d. A pre-grading meeting shall be arranged to discuss the recommendations of the soil investigation and project requirements. Representatives of all concerned parties shall be present. (Mitigation Measure) e. It shall be the responsibility of the owner and/or contractor to: bring to the attention of a certified soils engineer any unusual conditions which may be encountered in the course of project development and to request appropriate guidance before proceeding with the affected work, and to ensure that the recommendations of the soil report and any �...: supplemental reports are implemented. (Mitigation Measure) PC Minutes— 1/11/00 29 (OOpcm111) f. The applicant shall provide documentation of existing structural conditions in the vicinity of the proposed project and the estimated extent and impact of subsidence on surrounding structures and other improvements, to the satisfaction of the Building Department. (Mitigation Measure) g. Should ground water be found during excavation, dewatering of the project site shall be required. The applicant shall monitor the extent of subsidence and its associated impacts through placement of appropriate testing devices under the supervision and surveillance of a qualified soil engineer. The City shall be kept informed regarding any structural impacts on adjacent properties and other improvements, and if feasible and necessary, construction process will be modified to eliminate such impacts. (Mitigation Measure) 4. Prior to submittal for building permits, the following shall be completed: a.- Zoning entitlement conditions of approval shall be printed verbatim on all the working drawing sets used for issuance of building permits (architectural, structural, electrical, mechanical and plumbing) and shall be referenced in the index. b. This project shall be submitted as one plan check submittal to include all four properties (117, 119, 121, 123 Main Street)to assure that all four properties are developed as one integrated project as presented on the approved plans and rendering. c. All Fire Department requirements shall be noted on the building plans. (FD) d. Grading and foundation plans, when available and prior to approval, shall be transmitted to a qualified soils engineer for review for compliance with their recommendations.. (Mitigation Measure) e. All structures shall be designed in accordance with the seismic design provisions of the Uniform Building Codes to promote safety in the event of an earthquake. (Mitigation Measure) 5. Prior to issuance of building permits, the following shall be completed: a. Submit a copy of the revised site plan, floor plans and elevations pursuant to Condition No. 1 for review and approval and inclusion in the entitlement file to the Planning Department; and submit 8 inch by 10 inch colored photographs of all colored renderings, elevations, materials sample board, and massing model to the Planning Department for inclusion in the entitlement file: b. A Landscape Construction Set must be submitted to the Department of Public Works and approved by the Departments of Public Works and Planning. The Landscape Construction Set shall include a landscape plan-prepared and signed by a State Licensed Landscape Architect which identifies the location, type, size and quantity of all existing plant materials to remain, existing plant materials to be removed and proposed plant materials; an irrigation plan; a grading plan; an approved site plan and a copy of the entitlement conditions of approval. The landscape plans shall be in conformance with Chapter 232 of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance and applicable Design Guidelines. (PW) (Code Requirement) PC Minutes— 1/11/00 30 (OOpcm111) c. An interim parking and/or building materials storage plan spbe submitted to the Planning Department to assure adequate parking and restroom facilities are available for employees, customers and contractors during the project's construction phase and that adjacent properties will not be impacted by their location. The applicant shall obtain any necessary encroachment permits from the Department of Public Works. d. Dedicate the following to the City of Huntington Beach: (PW)(Code Requirement) 1. 4 feet along the front of all four properties along Main Street 2. 4.5 feet along the rear of 117, 121, and 123 Main Street along the alley e. The alley abandonment for 119 Main Street shall be approved by the City Council. f. A grading plan, prepared by a Registered Engineer, shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. This plan, in addition to grading, shall include all of the required off-site improvements. g. The Departments of Planning and Public Works shall approve a detailed lighting plan. The plan shall be consistent with the Downtown lighting plan and lighting standards in the Downtown Design Guidelines. Outdoor lighting shall utilize energy-saving lamps. All outside lighting shall be directed to prevent"spill-over".onto adjacent properties and shall be shown on the site plan and elevations. Lighting shall be capable of being dimmed to a minimum security level during of hours of non-operation of the facility. (Mitigation Measure) (Planning) (PW) - { h. A sign and landscape plan shall be submitted to the Design Review Board for review and approval. The location and type of all signs shall conform to the provisions of the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance and be consistent with the standards listed on page 33 of the Downtown Design Guidelines. (Mitigation Measure) i. The applicant shall enter into a Maintenance Agreement with the City for maintenance of all portions of public property along the project site. j. Elevations shall show all roofing materials as approved by Design Review Board. Solid concrete block walls, grape stake, or chain link fencing shall not be permitted. (Mitigation Measure) 6. Phased or individual.construction of buildings is prohibited and all four buildings shall be :.demolished and/or remodeled at the same time. Construction and improvements for all four buildings shall be done simultaneously as approved by Conditional Use Permit No. 98-37, Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12, and Special Permit No. 99-2. All conditions of approval shall be applicable to all four buildings and shall be complied with. 7. During demolition, grading, site development, and/or construction, the following shall be adhered to: a. Use water trucks or sprinkler systems in all areas where vehicles travel to keep damp enough to prevent dust raised when leaving the site: PC Minutes— 1/11/00 31 (OOpcml 11) b. Wet down areas in the late morning and after work is completed for the day; c. Use low sulfur fuel (.05%)by weight for construction equipment; d. Attempt to phase and schedule construction activities to avoid high ozone days (first stage smog alerts); e. Discontinue construction during second stage smog alerts. f. Ensure clearly visible signs are posted on the perimeter of the site identifying the name and phone number of a field supervisor to contact for information regarding the development and any construction/grading activity. 8. Prior to final building permit inspection and approval and issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for any of the four buildings, the following shall be completed: a. All improvements to all four properties shall be completed in accordance with the Approved plans and conditions of approval specified herein, including: 1) Landscaping. 2) Fire extinguishers will be installed and located in areas to comply with Huntington Beach Fire Code Standards. (FD) 3) A fire alarm system will be installed to comply with Huntington Beach Fire .. Department and Uniform Fire Code Standards. Shop drawings will be submitted to and approved by the Fire Department prior to installation. .The system will provide the following: a. manual pull stations; b. water flow, valve tamper and trouble detection; c. 24 hour supervision; d. annunciation; e. audible alarms; f. smoke detectors (FD) 4) Address numbers will be installed to comply with City Specification No. 428. The numbers will be sized a minimum of six(6) inches.with a brush stroke of one and one-half(1-1/2) inches. (FD) 5) Exit signs and exit path markings will be provided in compliance with the Huntington Beach Fire Code and Title 24 of the.California Administrative Code. (FD) - 6) An automatic fire sprinkler system shall be approved and installed throughout pursuant to Fire Department regulations. Shop drawings shall be submitted and approved by the Fire Department prior to system installation. The buildings will be considered as one unit. (FD) 7) Submit a Fire Protection Plan for Fire Department approval in compliance with City Specification 428. (FD) 8) If elevators are installed, they shall be sized to accommodate an ambulance gurney. The minimum dimensions are 6'8"_wide by 4'3" deep with a 42-inch minimum right or left side opening. Center opening doors require a 54-inch depth::(FD) 9) Construct new sewer lateral to each building unless existing lateral is proven to be in good condition to the satisfaction of the City Inspector. (PV ) PC Minutes— 1/11/00 32 (OOpcm111) 10)The sewer service lateral size shall be 6" min. (PW) I I)If the existing 2" domestic meter and service lateral serving the building at 117 Main Street meets the minimum requirements set by the Uniform Plumbing Code ' (UPC) and the Uniform Fire Code(UFC), then it may be used to serve the development at this address. (PW) 12)The existing service to 121 Main Street currently being served from 119 Main Street service shall be abandoned, per City Standards. (PW) 13)The existing 3/4 inch water meter and service for the building at 123 Main Street shall be abandoned to the main line. (PW) 14)Each of the buildings proposed at 119, 121 and 123 Main Street shall have new separate domestic water services with(touch read type) meters and backflow - protection devices. The water service laterals and meter size shall meet the minimum requirements set by the Uniform Plumbing Code(UPC)and Uniform Fire Code (UFC), but shall be a minimum service of 2 inches in size. (PW) IS)If the Fire Department requires that a separate fire service is to be constructed, it shall have a separate backflow device. (PW) 16)Remove and replace the existing sidewalk, per the Downtown Specific Plan, adjacent to project (Main Street). (PW) 17)Remove the existing curb and construct new curb and gutter adjacent to project (Main Street). (PW) 18)Install one street light along property frontage in a location compatible with the Public Works street lighting plan for Main Street. (PW) 19)Remove and replace any deteriorated portion of east side of alley. Grind and cap east one-half(1/2) of alley(PW) 20)The applicant shall underground all new and existing electrical, telephone and cable TV service connections. (PW) 21)The existing angled parking is to remain or the in-lieu parking fee shall be paid for each parking space lost. (PW) 22)The developer shall submit a composite utility plan, showing existing public water system facilities and all other underground utilities (existing and proposed)to each structure. (PW) 23)The applicant shall install public improvements pursuant to City Council adopted Main Street improvement plans. b. Compliance with all conditions of approval specified herein shall be accomplished and verified by the Planning Department. c. All building spoils, such as unusable lumber, wire, pipe, and other surplus.or unusable material, shall be disposed of at an off-site facility equipped to handle them. d. Existing fill materials and disturbed, loose soils shall be removed and replaced with . component material as required by qualified soils engineer. Site preparation, excavation, and earthwork compaction operations shall be performed under the observation and. testing of a soil engineer. Certification of such reports, shall be submitted to the City Engineer prior to issuance of building permits. (Mitigation Measure) PC Minutes- 1/11/00 33 (OOPCMI11) 9. The project shall comply with the following: a. Prior to the sale of alcoholic beverages, a copy of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Board (ABC) license, along with any special conditions imposed by the ABC, shall be submitted to the Planning Department for the file. Any conditions that are more restrictive than those set forth in this approval shall be adhered to. b. The City and individual landowners shall meet with residential and business tenants to explain conversion process and-relocation assistance. (Mitigation Measure) c. The City and individual landowners shall assist in the relocation of persons affected by this redevelopment project. (Mitigation Measure) d. The applicant shall provide a relocation coordinator who will provide general relocation assistance to all tenants. Availability of such a relocation assistant shall be to the approval of the City Council and shall be incorporated into the Relocation Assistance Program required by Article 927 of the Municipal Code. (Mitigation Measure) e. The project shall implement mitigation measures included in Downtown Specific Plan EIR 82-2. (Mitigation Measure) f. The applicant shall provide relocation assistance to all.displace businesses in accordance with the State Guidelines of Title 25, Chapter 6. This assistance will include information on the availability of other suitable sites, as well as payments to cover moving expenses and/or the loss of income including: the cost of the physical move; the cost of anything rendered useless.as a consequence of the move (i.e. business cards, etc.); the cost of physical improvements. (Mitigation Measure) ,: 10. The Planning Director ensures that all conditions of approval herein are complied with. The Planning Director shall be notified in writing if any changes to the site plan, elevations and floor plans are proposed as a result of the plan check process. Building permits shall not be issued until the Planning Director has reviewed and approved the proposed changes for conformance with the intent of the Planning Commission's action and the conditions herein. If the proposed changes are of a substantial nature, an amendment to the original entitlement reviewed by the Planning Commission may be required pursuant to the BBZSO. INFORMATION ON SPECIFIC CODE REQUIREMENTS: 1. Conditional Use Permit No. 98-37, Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12, and Special Permit No. 99-2 shall not become effective until the ten working day appeal period has elapsed. 2. Conditional Use Permit No. 98-37, Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12, and Special Permit No. 99-2 shall become null and void unless exercised within one year of the date of final approval or such extension of time as may be granted by the Director pursuant to a written request submitted to the Planning Department a minimum 30 days prior to the expiration date. PC Minutes— 1/11/00 34 (OOpcm111) 3. The PlanningCommis3'fon reserves the right to revoke Condit* Use Permit No. 98-37, g Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12, and Special Permit No. 99-2, pursuant to a public hearing for revocation, if any violation of these conditions or the Huntington Beach Zoning l .- and Subdivision Ordinance or Municipal Code occurs. 4. All applicable Public Works fees shall be paid. 5. The development shall comply with all.applicable provisions of the Municipal Code, Building Department, and Fire Department as well as applicable local, State and Federal Fire Codes, Ordinances, and standards, except as noted herein. 6. Construction shall be limited to Monday- Saturday 7:00 AM to 8:00 PM. Construction shall be prohibited Sundays and Federal holidays. 7. The applicant shall submit a check in the amount of$38.00 for the posting of the Notice of Determination at the County of Orange Clerk's Office. The check shall be made out to the County of Orange and submitted to the Planning Department within two (2) days of the Planning Commission's action. 8. All landscaping shall be maintained in a neat and clean manner, and in conformance with the HBZSO. Prior to removing or replacing any landscaped areas, check with the Departments of Planning and Public Works for Code requirements. Substantial changes may require approval by the Planning Commission. 9. All signs shall conform.to the HBZSO and Downtown Design Guidelines. Prior to installing any new signs, or changing sign faces, a building permit shall be obtained from the Planning Department. 10. Traffic Impact Fees shall be paid at the time of final inspection or issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. (PW) 11. State-mandated school impact fees shall be paid prior to issuance of building permits. 12. Prior to issuance of Building Permits for new construction in the Downtown Specific.Plan (SP-5) area, a Downtown Specific Plan fee shall be paid. 13. An encroachment permit shall be required for all work within the right-of-way. (PW) 14.,Development shall meet all local and State regulations.regarding installation and operation of all underground storage tanks. (FD) 15. A Certificate of Occupancy must be issued by the Planning Department and Building and Safety Department prior to occupying the building. 16. Live entertainment and dancing for any other suite other than the 1'`floor of 117 Main Street shall require separate entitlement. PC Minutes—1/11/00 35 (OOpcm111) x • Environmental Status: Covered by Environmental Impact Report No. 89-6. Coastal Status: Located in the non-appealable jurisdiction of the Coastal Zone and includes Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12, filed on May 8, 1998, in conjunction with the above request. The Coastal Development Permit hearing consists of a staff report, public hearing, City Council discussion and action. Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12 is not appealable to the California Coastal Commission. On February 22, 2000, the Huntington Beach City Council approved Alternative Action per attached City Council February 22, 2000, Action Agenda. Enclosed also is the February 22, 2000 City Council Agency Minutes. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact our office at 714/536-5227. Sincerely, d�V�i Connie Brockway, C C City Clerk Enclosure: February 22, 2000 Action Agenda, Pages 10, 11 February 22, 2000 Minutes, Pages 16-18, 27-40 Cc: City Administrator City Attorney Howard Zelefsky, Planning Director Scott Hess, Principle Planner Ricky Ramos, Assistant Planner G:fo l l owu p/Letters/9 0 d ay It r (10) 2/22/2000 - Council/Agency Agenda - Page 10 D-3. (City Council) Public Hearing —Appeal Filed by Councilmember Sullivan of the Planning Commission Approval of Conditional Use Permit 98-371 —Coastal Development 98-12—Special Permit 99-11 Special Permit 99-2 (Applicant Jeff Berasma)— 117, 119, 121, 123 Main Street—W/S Corner Between PCH &Walnut Avenue (420.40) - Public hearing to consider an appeal filed by Councilman Dave Sullivan of the Planning Commission's approval of the following: Applicant: Jeff Bergsma. Request: Conditional Use Permit and Coastal Development Permit to allow the following: 117 Main Street: (1) Exterior and interior remodel of the 1st and 2"d floor; (2) Establish a restaurant/banquet facility with outdoor patio dining and alcohol service on the 2"d floor. 119 Main Street: (1) Exterior and interior remodel of the 1st floor; (2) Construct a new 2"d floor for retail or office use; (3) Abandonment of three (3) feet of alley on the west side. 121 Main Street: (1) Exterior and interior remodel of the 1st floor; (2) Construct a new 2"d floor for office use. 123 Main Street: (1) Demolish the existing building and construct a new two-story building with retail on the 1st floor and office on the 2"d floor. Special permits to allow the 2"d floor balcony of all four (4) buildings at a setback of two (2) feet in lieu of the five (5) feet build-to-line required along Main Street and to allow a seven (7) feet build-to-line in lieu of the required five (5) feet for the 1st and 2"d stories of all four (4) buildings along Main Street (staff recommendation). Location: 117, 119, 121, and 123 Main Street(west side between Pacific Coast Highway and Walnut Ave). Environmental Status: Covered by Environmental Impact Report No. 89-6. Coastal Status: Located in the non-appealable jurisdiction of the Coastal Zone and includes Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12, filed on May 8, 1998, in conjunction with the above request. The Coastal Development Permit hearing consists of a staff report, public hearing, City Council discussion and action. Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12 is not appealable to the California Coastal Commission. On File: A copy of the proposed request is on file in the Planning Department, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California 92648, for inspection by the public. A copy of the staff report will be available to interested parties at City Hall or the Main Street Library (7111 Talbert Avenue) after February 17, 2000. All interested persons are invited to attend said hearing and express opinions or submit 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 the planning Department at 536-5271 and refer to the above item. Direct your written communications to the City Clerk (Continued next page) (11) 2/22/2000 - Counciltncy Agenda - Page 11 Recommended Action: , and SpeGial PeRnit No. 99-2 with findiRgS, and renditions of appFeval and den i Special PeFFn;t No oa_,1 with findings foF denial as set fe#ti en AttaGhFnent No.1- s^^7''ca�i ccr-r-c:rr�Trrrvv—c.�.r--r-v Of Staff ReGOFArnendat*oR4AtUGhme.n.!- .�-!2-. ?-); Motion to- 1. Deny Conditional Use Permit No. 98 37 with fiRdings for denial. 7 Deny Coastal Development Permit No 98 12 with findings for denial ��v��y--vva.c.�saa c.r�.r�. vla��. . 3. Deny SpeGial PeFM;t No. 99 1 to allow a seven feet build to line in lieu of th 4. deny Special Permit NG 99_2 to allow the -2" flooF balGeny of all feuF buildings. setback of twefeet in lieu of the-Fequ+red five feet with findings fGF.genial (Finding-s fer denial as set forth on Attachment Ne 2.) Alternative Actions (Attachment No. 3): Motion to: 1. Approve Conditional Use Permit No. 98-37 with findings, and condition of approval, as set forth in Attachment No. 3, with the following recommended changes: a. The public open space requirement for the project shall be provided along Main Street in a central location on the ground floor. This open space must be designed such that the public can access it without walking through any tenant space. b. Include Design Guidelines recommendations for varied and offset rooflines, pedestrian orientation by including a plaza or courtyard (see 1 a), enhanced fagade treatments at the street level by including greater architectural detail for visual interest, window treatments such as multi-paned windows with tile borders, and accented entries that are ornate and detailed. c. Historic plaques shall be incorporated and the materials from the existing buildings shall be incorporated to the greatest extent possible. d. The project shall be referred back to the Planning Director for final review in consultation with the city's Urban Design Consultant for compliance with the Design Guidelines and the outlined recommendations. 2. Approve Coastal Development Permit 98-12 with findings and conditions of approval as set forth in Attachment No. 3. 3. Approve Special Permit No. 99-1 to allow a seven feet build-to-line for the 1st and 2nd story of all four buildings in lieu of the required five feet with findings. 4. Deny Special Permit No. 99-2 to allow the 2"d floor balcony of all four buildings at a setback of two feet in lieu of the required five feet with findings for denial, as set forth in Attachment No. 3. Approved Alternative Action #3 5-2 (Garofalo, Julien NO) Page 16 - Council-Agency Minutes --February 22, 2000 (CITY COUNCIL) PUBLIC HEARING—APPEAL FILED BY COUNCILMEMBER SULLIVAN OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 98-371 —COASTAL DEVELOPMENT 98-12—SPECIAL PERMIT 99-11 —SPECIAL PERMIT 99-2 (APPLICANT JEFF BERGSMA)— 117, 119, 121, 123 MAIN STREET—WEST SIDE BETWEEN PCH &WALNUT AVENUE (420.40) Mayor.Garofalo announced that this was the time scheduled for a public hearing to consider an appeal filed by Councilmember Dave Sullivan of the Planning Commission's approval of the following appeal: Applicant: Jeff Bergsma. Appellant: Councilmember Dave Sullivan Request: Conditional Use Permit and Coastal Development Permit to allow the following:_117 Main Street: (1) Exterior and interior remodel of the 15' and 2. floor; (2) Establish a restaurant-banquet facility with outdoor patio dining and alcohol service on the 2"d floor. 119 Main Street: (1) Exterior and interior remodel of the 1s'floor; (2) Construct a new 2"d floor for retail or office use; (3) Abandonment of three (3) feet of alley on the west side. 121 Main Street: (1) Exterior and interior remodel of the 15' floor; (2) Construct a new 2"d floor for office use 123 Main Street: (1) Demolish the existing building and construct a new two-story building with retail on the 1s'floor and office on the 2"d floor. Special permits to allow the 2"d floor balcony of all four(4) buildings at a setback of two (2) feet in lieu of the five (5) feet build-to-line required along Main Street and to allow a seven (7) feet build-to-line in lieu of the required five (5) feet for the 1s'and 2"d stories of all four(4) buildings along Main Street (staff recommendation). Location: 117, 119, 121, and 123 Main Street (west side between.Pacific Coast Highway and Walnut Ave). Environmental Status: Covered by Environmental Impact Report No. 89-6. Coastal Status: Located in the non-appealable jurisdiction of the Coastal Zone and includes Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12, filed on May 8, 1998, in conjunction with the above request. The Coastal Development Permit hearing consists of a staff.report, public hearing, City Council discussion and action. Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12 is not appealable to the California Coastal Commission. Legal notice as provided to the City Clerk's Office by staff had been mailed, published and posted. Councilmember Sullivan presented reasons for his appeal. City Attorney Hutton, at the request of Councilmember Bauer, reported on her legal opinions written relative to whether there is a conflict of interest for Councilmembers Julien, Bauer, and Garofalo on this issue. The City Attorney referred to two documents which she had prepared on this issue. The documents were titled Conflict of Interest—Agenda Item D-3, Appeal of CUP 98-371, CDP 98-12, Special Permits 99-2, 99-11 City Council Meeting of February 22, 2000 dated February 22, 2000 and Finding of No Conflict of Interest in Connection with Voting on CUP 98-37, Nor Block 104-105 Redevelopment— Indexed Internal Organization Operation, Conflict of Interest, General, Political Reform Act, Police Power, Land Use,Planning, Redevelopment dated February 22, 2000. • February 22, 2000 - Council-Ageip Minutes - Page 17 City Attorney Hutton reported that Mayor Garofalo does not have foreseeable financial effect nor will Councilmember Julien-'also that Councilmember Bauer would not have a conflict of interest. She made reference to the fact that Planning Commissioner Mandic had also been allowed to vote on this application at the Planning Commission level. I Discussion was held between the Planning Director and the City Council regarding the appeal. Mayor Garofalo declared the public hearing open. Earlier in the meeting, the City Clerk had announced that the following late communication of this item had been provided to the City Council: Slide show presentation from the Planning Department titled, 117, 119, 121, and 123 Main Street Commercial: Conditional Use Permit No. 98-37, Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12; Special Permit No. 99-1; Special Permit No. 99-2. Jeff Bergsma, applicant, addressed Council and presented a slide report using the slide report announced earlier in the meeting by the City Clerk. He presented a document to the Council titled 117, 119, 121, 123 Main Street CUP 98-37-Planning Issues (no date). FRANK ALFONSO, owner of property at 119 Main Street, addressed Council and presented reasons why he believes the application should be approved. He stated that his project improves the area and the city will not have to pay any money towards these improvements. THOMAS CALLAHAN informed Council that everyone who has seen his work on Starbucks and the gym is aware of the quality work of his projects. He stated that he cannot believe the city will have a problem with the plan as proposed in this application. GARY MULLIGAN spoke regarding the history of the project as it went through the Board of Zoning Adjustments and the Planning Commission. He stated that if the setback is as requested by staff their project will not be able to be seen as their building will be hidden behind a column. Mr. Mulligan informed Council that the Planning Commission and the Design Review Board had recommended approval. BILLY STADE, owner of The Closet, 121 Main Street, requested that Council approve the recommended action. KEITH BOHR spoke on behalf of the project and its applicant, Jeff Bergsma. There being no persons present to speak further on the matter and there being no protests filed, either written or oral, the hearing was closed by the mayor. In response to Council, Planning Director Zelefsky reported on the history of the issue including the setback issue and the staff recommendation for setback. Mr. Bergsma, applicant, responded to Councilmember Julien's question regarding setback footage. Councilmember Dettloff spoke regarding reasons why she favored the alternative action as set forth in Attachment No. 3 to the Request for Council Action. Page 18 - Council-Agency Minutes —February 22, 2000 A motion was made by Dettloff, second Green to approve alternative action-Attachment No. 3 1. Approve Conditional Use Permit No. 98-37 with findings, and condition of approval, as set forth in Attachment No. 3, with the following recommended changes: a. The public open space requirement for the project shall be provided along Main Street in a central location on the ground floor. This open space must be designed such that the public can access it without walking through any tenant space. b. Include Design Guidelines recommendations for varied and offset rooflines, pedestrian orientation by including a plaza or courtyard (see 1 a), enhanced fagade treatments at the street level by including greater architectural detail for visual interest, window treatments such as multi-paned windows with tile borders, and accented entries that are ornate and detailed. c. Historic plaques shall be incorporated and the materials from the existing buildings shall be incorporated to the greatest extent possible. d. The project shall be referred back to the Planning Director for final review in consultation with the city's Urban Design Consultant for compliance with the Design Guidelines and the outlined recommendations. 2. Approve Coastal Development Permit 98-12 with findings and conditions of approval as set forth in Attachment No. 3. 3. Approve Special Permit No. 99-1 to allow a seven feet build-to-line for the 15` and 2"d story of all four buildings in lieu of the required five feet with findings as set forth in Attachment No. 3. 4. Deny Special Permit No. 99-2 to allow the 2"d floor balcony of all four buildings at a setback of two feet in lieu of the required five feet with findings for denial, as set forth in Attachment No. 3. The Findings and Conditions are set forth on Page No. 28 of the February 22, 2000 Council-Agency Minutes. Following further discussion the motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Sullivan, Harman, Green, Dettloff, Bauer NOES: None ABSENT: None (CITY COUNCIL-REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY) CONTINUED OPEN TO MARCH 20, 2000 -JOINT PUBLIC HEARING BETWEEN CITY COUNCIL-REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY- PROPOSED DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT PROVIDING FOR THE SALE OF REAL PROPERTY OUTSIDE THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA BUT TO THE BENEFIT OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH TO HABITAT FOR HUMANITY, ORANGE COUNTY— N-W AND S-W CORNER OF YORKTOWN-ENGLAND, S-W CORNER OF YORKTOWN-FLORIDA (600.30) Mayor Garofalo announced this was the time scheduled for a joint public hearing between the City Council and Redevelopment Agency pursuant to the California Community Redevelopment Law (Health and Safety Code Sections 33000, et seq.) for the purpose of considering the approval of a proposed Disposition and Development Agreement between the Agency and Habitat for Humanity of Orange County, Inc., a California nonprofit public benefit corporation (Developer). The Agreement provides for the sale of approximately 12,925 square feet (or.296 acres) of real property (three individual remnant parcels) generally described as the northwest corner of Yorktown Avenue and England Street, the southwest corner of Yorktown Avenue and Florida Street and the southeast corner of Yorktown Avenue and England Street (the "Site"), to the Developer and the Page 27— Council-Agency Minutes — February 22, 2000 ATTACHitiZENT NO. 3 (Staffs Alternative Motion) SUGGESTED FINDING' S AND CONDITIONS OF A.PPROVAL"FOR -. CONDITIONAL USE PERtiIIT NO.98-37/COASTAL DEVELOPM.EN'T PERMIT.Nq— 93-121 SPECIALPERNIIT NO. 0-1 'ANT.SUGGESTED FIirTDII�'GS'�`ORDENIAii SPECIAL PER_ti11T-NO. 99-2 � - - SUGGESTED FINDINGS FOR PROJECTS SUBJECT TO CEOA- The Planning Commission finds that the project is covered by Environmental Impact Report No. 89-6 and will comply with all applicable mitigation measures and will not have any significant effect on the environment. SUGGESTED FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL- CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO 98-37• 1. Conditional Use Permit No. 98-37 for the establishment, maintenance and operation of the follotitiin;: a. 117 Main Street: 1)Exterior and interior remodel of the 1" and 2nd floor; 2)Establish a restaurant/banquet facility with outdoor patio dining and"alcohol service on the 2nd floor. b. 119 Main Street: 1)Exterior and interior remodel of the 1" floor;2) Construct anew 2nd floor for retail or office use;3)Abandonment.of three(3) feet of alley on the west side. c. 121 Main Street: 1)Exterior and interior remodel of the 1"floor; 2) Construct a new 2nd floor for office use. d. 123 Main Street: 1)Demolish the existing building and construct a new two-story building with retail on the I"floor and office on the 2ad floor. will not be detrimental to the general welfare of persons working or residing in the vicinity'or detrimental to the value of the property and improvements in the neighborhood. The project as proposed and modified by the conditions imposed,will improve a visually degraded site and will enhance the appearance of the general area based on the proposed integrated development with a common fagade design incorporating all four properties for a cohesive appearance. The project is consistent with the Downtown Specific Plan and the Design Guidelines and will add to the Mediterranean and pedestrian character of the downtown. Adequate parking for the project is provided within the Downtown Parking Master Plan. i Page 28—Council ency Minutes February 22, 2000 • 2. The conditional use permit will be compatible with surrounding uses because the proposed construction and Visitor Serving Commercial uses are an extension of the existing character of the downtown. It will include retail and other uses that will add to the vitality and pedestrian orientation envisioned for the do%ntown. 3. The conditional use permit,as modified by the conditions imposed, will comply with the provisions of the base district and other applicable provisions in Titles 20-25 of the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance and any specific condition required for the proposed use in the district in which it would be located,except for any special permits approved concurrently. The project complies with all minimum development standards including lot size,building height, setbacks,floor area,and parking. 4. The granting of the conditional use permit will not adversely affect the General Plan. It is consistent with the Land Use Element designation of Mixed Use Vertical on the subject property. In addition,it is consistent with the following goals and policies of the General Plan: a. Goat LU 8: Achieve a pattern of land uses that preserves, enhances,and establishes a distinct identity for the City's neighborhoods, corridors, and centers. b. ©biective LU 101•Provide for the continuation of existing and the development of a diversity of retail and service commercial uses that are oriented to the needs of local residents, serve the surrounding region,serve visitors to the City,and capitalize on Huntington Beach's recreational resources. c. Policv L U 10.1.4.Require that commercial buildings and sites be designed to achieve a high level of architectural and site Iayout quality. d. Policv 11.1.7:Require that mixed-use development projects be designed to achieve a consistent and high quality character, including the consideration of architectural treatment of building elevations to convey the visual characier of multiple building volumes and individual storefronts. e. EQU LU 1 S 2 2•Require that structures located in the pedestrian overlay zone be sited and. designed t enhance ee ance pedestrian activity along the sidewalks,in consideration of the followi g guidelines: L Incorporation of uses that stimulate pedestrian activity in the first floor along the street frontage,encouraging professional offices,data computing,and other similar uses to be located in the rear or above the first floor unless economically infeasible; 2. Siting of the linear frontage of the building along the front yard property line to maintain a "building wall"character, except for areas contiguous with the structure use for outdoor dining or courtyards; 3. Assurance that areas betweea building storefronts and public sidewalks are visually and physically accessible to pedestrians,except as may be required for landscape and security; 4. Extensive articulation of the building facade and use of multiple building volumes and planes. Page 35— Council-Agency Minutes — February 22; 2000 d. GradLng and foundation plans,when available and prior to approval,shall be transmitted to a qualified soils engineer for review for compliance with their recommendations. (itilitigation pleasure) e. All structures shall be designed in accordance with the seismic design provisions of the Uni►orrt Building Codes to promote safety in the event of an earthquake. (Mitigation Measure) 5. Prior to issuance of building permits,the following shall be completed: - a. Submit a copy of the revised site plan, floor plans and elevations pursuant to Condition.No..I for review and approval and inclusion in.the entitlement file to the Planning Department; and submit 8 inch by 10 inch colored photographs of all colored renderings, elevations, materials sample board, and massing model to the Planning Department for inclusion in the entitlement file. b. A Landscape Construction Set must be submitted to the Department of Public`Yorks and approved by the Departments of Public Works and Planning. The Landscape Construction Set shall include a landscape plan prepared and signed by a State Licensed Landscape Architect which identifies the location,type, size and quantity of all existing-plant materials to remain,existing plant materials to be removed and proposed plant materials; an irrigation plan;.a grading plan; an approved site plan and a copy'of the entitlement conditions of approval. The landscape plans shall be in conformance%,,ith Chapter 232 of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance and applicable Design Guidelines. (Pti ) (Code Requirement) C. An interim parking and/or building materials storage plan shall be submitted to the PIanning Department to assure adequate parking and restroom facilities are available for employees, customers and contractors during the project's construction phase and that adjacent properties will not be impacted by their location. The applicant shall obtain any necessary encroachment permits from the Department of Public Works.: . d. Dedicate the following to the City of Huntington Beach: (PNV)(Code Requirement) 1. 4 feet along the front of all four properties along Main Street 2. 4.5 feet along the rear of 117, 121,and 123 Main Street along the alley e. The alley abandonment for 119 Main Street shall be approved by the City Council. f. A grading plan,prepared by a Registered Engineer, shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. This plan,in addition to grading,shall include all of the required off-site improvements. g. The Departments of Planning and Public Works shall approve a detailed lighting plan. The plan shall be consistent with the Downtown lighting plan and lighting standards in the Downtown Design Guidelines. Outdoor lighting shall utilize energy-saving lamps. Alt outside lighting shall Page 36 —Council•ency Minutes February 22, 2000 be directed to prevent"spill-over" onto adjacent properties and shall be shown on the site plan and elevations. Lighting shall be capable of being dimmed to a minimum security level during of hours of non-operation of the facility. (Mitigation Measure) (Planning) (PNN� h. A sign and landscape plan shall be submitted to the Design Review Board for review and approval. The location and type of all signs shall conform to the provisions of the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance and be consistent with the standards listed on page 33 of the Downtown Design Guidelines. (Mitigation Measure) i. The applicant shall enter into a Maintenance Agreement with the City for maintenance of all portions of public property along the project site. j. Elevations shall show all roofing materials to be characteristic of Mediterranean architecture. Flat roofs shall be avoided. Walls shall be integrated with the overall building design. Solid concrete block walls, grape stake,or chain link fencing shall not be permitted. (Mitigation Measure) 6. Phased or individual construction of buildings is prohibited and all four buildings shall be demolished at the same time. Construction and improvements for all four buildings shall be done simultaneously as approved by Conditional Use Permit No. 98-37,.Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12, and Special Permit No.99-1. All conditions of approval shall be applicable to all four buildings and shall I be complied with. 7. During demolition, grading,site development,and/or construction,the following shall be adhered to: a. Use water trucks or sprinkler systems in all areas where vehicles travel to keep damp enough to prevent dust raised when leaving the site: = b. Vet down areas in the late morning and after work is completed for the day; C. Use low sulfur fuel (.05%)by weight for construction equipment; d. Attempt to phase and schedule construction activities to avoid high ozone days(first stage,5mog alerts); e. Discontinue construction during second stage smog alerts. f. Ensure clearly visible signs are posted on the perimeter of the site identifying the name and phone number of a field supervisor to contact for information regarding the development and any construction/grading activity. 8. Prior to final building permit inspection and approval and issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for any of the four buildings,the following shall be completed: Page 37—Council-Agency Minutes — February* 2, 2000 a. All improvements Wall four properties shall be completed in accordance Nvith the approved plans and conditions of approval specified herein,including: 1) Landscaping. 2) Fire extinguishers will be installed.and located in areas to comply with Huntington Beach Fire Code Standards.(FD) 3) A fire alarm system will be installed to comply with Huntington Beach Fire Department and Uniform Fire Code Standards. Shop drawings will be submitted to and approved by the Fire Department prior to installation. The.system will provide the following: a. manual pull stations; b. water flow,valve tamper and trouble detection; C. 24 hour supervision; d. annunciation; e. audible alarms; f. smoke detectors(FD) 4) Address numbers will be installed to comply with City Specification No. 428. The numbers will be sized a minimum of six(6) inches with a brush stroke of one and one-half(1-1/2) inches. (FD) 5) Exit signs and exit path markings will be provided in compliance with the Huntington Beach Fire Code and Title 24 of the California Administrative Code. (FD) 6) An automatic fire sprinkler system shall be approved and installed throughout pursuant to Fire Department regulations. Shop drawings shall be submitted and approved by the Fire Department prior to system installation. The buildings will be considered as one unit. (FD) 7) Submit a Fire Protection Plan for Fire Department approval in compliance with City Specification 428.(FD) 8) If elevators are installed,they shall be sized to accommodate an ambulance gumey. The - minimum dimensions are 6'8"wide by 4'3"deep with a 42-inch minimum right or left side opening. Center opening doors require a 54-inch depth. (FD) 9) Construct new sewer lateral to each building unless the existing lateral is proven to be in good condition to the satisfaction of the City inspector. (PSY) 10)The sewer service lateral size shall be 6"min.(PtiV) - 11)If the existing 2"domestic meter and service lateral serving the building at 117 Main Street meets the minimum requirements set by the Uniform Plumbing Code(UPC)and the Uniform Fire Code(UFC),they it maybe used to serve the development at this address. (PW) . 12)The existing service to 121 Main Street currently being served from 119 Main Street service shall be abandoned,per City Standards.(PYV) 13)The existing'/4 inch water meter and service for the building at 123 Main Street.shall be abandoned to the main line.(PTV) 14)Each of the buildings proposed at 119, 121 and 123 Main Street shall have new separate domestic water services with(touch read type)meters and backflow protection devices. The water service laterals and meter size shall meet the minimum requirements set by the Uniform Plumbing Code(UPC) and Uniform Fire Code (UFC), but shall be a minimum of 2 inches in size.(PjV) Page 38—Council 0 ency Minutes February 22, 2000 • 1 5)If the Fire Department requires that a separate fire service is to be constructed, it shall have a separate backflow device. (PNV 16)Remove and replace the existing sidewalk,per the Downtown Specific Plan, adjacent to project(Main Street). (PW) 17)Remove the existing curb and construct new curb and gutter adjacent to project(Main Street). (PNY) 18)Install one street light alq�ig property frontage in a location compatible Frith the Public Works street lighting plan for Main Street. (PNV) 19)Remove and replace any deteriorated portion of east side of alley. Grind and cap east one- half(1I2)alley.(PNY) 20)The applicant shall underground all new and existing electrical,telephone and cable.TV service connections. (PtiV) 21)The existing angled parking is to remain or the in-lieu parking fee shall be paid for each parking space lost. (PNV) 22)The developer shall submit a composite utility plan, showing existing public water system facilities and all other underground utilities(existing and proposed)to each structure. (PNV) 23)The applicant shall install public improvements pursuant to City Council adopted Main Street improvement plans. b. Compliance with all conditions of approval specified herein shall be accomplished and verified by the Planning Department. C. All building spoils,such as unusable lumber,wire,pipe,and other surplus or unusable material, shall be disposed of at an off-site facility equipped to handle them. d. Existing fill materials and disturbed,loose soils shall be removed and replaced with component material as required by qualified soils engineer. Site preparation,excavation,and earthwork compaction operations shall be performed under the observation and testing of a soil engineer. Certification of such reports,shall be submitted to the City Engineer prior to issuance of building permits. (Mitigation Measure) 9. The project shall comply with the following: a. Prior to the sale of alcoholic beverages, a copy of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Board(ABC) license,along with any special conditions imposed by.the ABC,shall be submitted to the Planning Department for the file. Any conditions that are more restrictive than those set forth in this approval shall be adhered to. b. The City and individual landowners shall meet with residential and business tenants to explain conversion process and relocation assistance.(Mitigation Measure) c. The City and individual landowners shall assist in the relocation of persons affected by this redevelopment project. (Mitigation Measure) • Page 39— Council-Agency Minutes — February 22, 2000 d. The applicant sha11 provide a relocation coordinator who will provide general relocation assistance to all tenants. Availability of such a relocation assistant shall be to the approval of the City Council and shall be incorporated into the Relocation Assistance Program required by Article 927 of the Municipal Code. (Mitigation Measure) e. The project shall implement;mitigation measures included in Dotimtown Specific Plan EIR 82-2. (Mitigation Measure) f. The applicant shall provide relocation assistance to all displace businesses in accordance with the State Guidelines of Title 25, Chapter 6. This assistance will include information on the. availability of other suitable-sites, as well as payments to cover moving expenses and/or.the loss of income including: the cost of the physical move;the cost of anything rendered useless as a consequence of the move (i.e. business cards, etc.);the cost of physical improvements. (Mitigation Measure) 10.The Planning Director ensures that all conditions of approval herein are complied with. The Planning Director shall be notified in writing if any changes to the site plan, elevations and floor plans are proposed as a result of the plan check process. Building permits shall not be issued until the Planning Director has reviewed and approved the proposed changes for conformance with the intent of the Planning Commissiores-actionand the conditions herein.If the proposed changes are of a substantial, nature, an amendment to the original entitlement reviewed by the Planning Commission may be required pursuant to the HBZSO. I'L\rF )R.Mt LTIOiNr ON SPECIFIC CODE REQUIREMENTS- 1. Conditional Use Permit No.98 317, Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12,and Special Permit No. _ 99-1 shall not become effective until the ten working day appeal period has elapsed. 2. Conditional Use Permit No. 98-37, Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12,and Special Permit No. 99-1 shall become null and void unless exercised within one year of the date of final approval or such extension of time as may be granted by the Director pursuant to a written request submitted to the Planning Department a minimum 30 days prior to the expiration date. 3. The Planning Commission reserves the right to revoke Conditional Use Permit No.98-37,Coastal Development Permit No.98-12,and Special Permit No.99-1,pursuant to a public hearing for -- revocation,if any violation of these conditions or the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance or Municipal Code occurs. 4. All applicable Public Works fees shall be paid. 5. The development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Municipal Code,Building Department, and Fire Department as well as applicable local,State and Federal Fire Codes, Ordinances, and standards,except as noted herein. Page 40 — Coun ' gency Minutes February 22, 2000 6. Construction shalt be'Iiinited to Monday-Saturday 7:00 AM to 8:00 PM. Construction shall be prohibited Sundays and Federal holidays. 7. The applicant shall submit a check in the amount of S38.00 for the posting of the Notice of Determination at the County of Orange Clerk's Office. The check shall be made out to the County of Orange and submitted to the Planning Department w-itrun two (2)days of the Planning Commission's action. 8. All landscaping shall be maintained in a neat and clean manner, and in conformance with the HBZSO. Prior to removing or replacing any landscaped areas,check with the Departments of Planning and Public Works for Code requirements. Substantial changes may require approval by the Planning Commission. . 9. All signs shall conform to the HBZSO and Downtown Design Guidelines. Prior to installing any new signs,or changing sign faces, a building permit shall be obtained from the Planning Department. 10.Traffic Impact Fees shall be paid at the time of final inspection or issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. (PNV 11. State-mandated school impact fees shall be paid prior to issuance of building permits. 12.Prior to issuance of Building Permits for new construgtion in the Downtown Specific Plan(SP-5) area,a Downtown Specific Plan fee shall be paid. 13.An encroachment permit shall be required for all work within the right-of-way. (PNV) 14.Development shall meet all local and State regulations regarding installation and operation of all underground storage tanks.(FD) 15.A Certificate of Occupancy must be issued by the Planning Department and Building and Safety Department prior to occupying the building: 16.Live entertainment and dancing for any other suite other than the V floor of 117 Main Street shall require separate entitlement. CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 2000 MAIN STREET CALIFORNIA 92648 OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK r March 23, 2000 California Coastal Commission South Coast Area Office 200 Oceangate, 10" Floor Long Beach, California 90801-4302 Re: Public Hearing held at Huntington Beach City Council Meeting February 22, 2000 Appeal of Conditional Use Permit No. 98-37/Coastal Development Permit No. 98- 121/Special Permit No. 99-1/Special Permit No. 99-2 (117, 119, 121 and 123 Main Street) I have enclosed the February 22, 2000 City Council minutes including Conditions and Findings. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact our office at 714/536-5227. Sincerely, Connie Brockway, CIVIC / City Clerk Cc: Jeff Bergsma, Applicant Howard Zelefsky Planning Director Scott Hess, Principle Planner Ricky Ramos, Assistant Planner (Telephone:714-536-5227) Page 16 - Council-Aged Minutes —February 22, 2000 • (CITY COUNCIL) PUBLIC HEARING—APPEAL FILED BY COUNCILMEMBER SULLIVAN OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 98-371 —COASTAL DEVELOPMENT 98-121 —SPECIAL PERMIT 99-11 — SPECIAL PERMIT 99-2 (APPLICANT JEFF BERGSMA) — 117, 119, 121, 123 MAIN STREET—WEST SIDE BETWEEN PCH &WALNUT AVENUE (420.40) Mayor Garofalo announced that this was the time scheduled for a public hearing to consider an appeal filed by Councilmember Dave Sullivan of the Planning Commission's approval of the following appeal: Applicant: Jeff Bergsma. Appellant: Councilmember Dave Sullivan Request: Conditional Use Permit and Coastal Development Permit to allow the following:_117 Main Street: (1) Exterior and interior remodel of the 1st and 2"d floor; (2) Establish a restaurant-banquet facility with outdoor patio dining and alcohol service on the 2"d floor. 119 Main Street: (1) Exterior and interior remodel of the ls'floor; (2) Construct a new 2"d floor for retail or office use; (3) Abandonment of three (3) feet of alley on the west side. 121 Main Street: (1) Exterior and interior remodel of the 1st floor; (2) Construct a new 2"d floor for office use 123 Main Street: (1) Demolish the existing building and construct a new two-story building with retail on the 1s'floor and office on the 2"d floor. Special permits to allow the 2"d floor balcony of all four(4) buildings at a setback of two (2) feet in lieu of the five (5) feet build-to-line required along Main Street and to allow a seven (7) feet build-to-line in lieu of the required five (5) feet for the 1 s'and 2"d stories of all four(4) buildings along Main Street(staff recommendation). Location: 117, 119, 121, and 123 Main Street (west side between Pacific Coast Highway and Walnut Ave). Environmental Status: Covered by Environmental Impact Report No. 89-6. Coastal Status: Located in the non-appealable jurisdiction of the Coastal Zone and includes Coastal - Development Permit No. 98-12, filed on May 8, 1998, in conjunction with the above request. The Coastal Development Permit hearing consists of a staff report, public hearing, City Council discussion and action. Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12 is not appealable to the California Coastal Commission. Legal notice as provided to the City Clerk's Office by staff had been mailed, published and posted. Councilmember Sullivan presented reasons for his appeal. City Attorney Hutton, at the request of Councilmember Bauer, reported on her legal opinions written relative to whether there is a conflict of interest for Councilmembers Julien, Bauer, and Garofalo on this issue. The City Attorney referred to two documents which she had prepared on this issue. The documents were titled Conflict of Interest—Agenda Item D-3, Appeal of CUP 98-371, CDP 98-121, Special Permits 99-2, 99-11 City Council Meeting of February 22, 2000 dated February 22, 2000 and Finding of No Conflict of Interest in Connection with Voting on CUP 98-37, Nor Block 104-105 Redevelopment— Indexed Internal Organization Operation, Conflict of Interest, General, Political Reform Act, Police Power, Land Use, Planning, Redevelopment dated February 22, 2000. • February 22, 2000 - Council-Agey Minutes - Page 17 City Attorney Hutton reported that Mayor Garofalo does not have foreseeable financial effect nor will Councilmember Julien;also that Councilmember Bauer would not have a conflict of interest. She made reference to the fact that Planning Commissioner Mandic had also been allowed to vote on this application at the Planning Commission level. Discussion was held between the Planning Director and the City Council regarding the appeal. Mayor Garofalo declared the public hearing open. Earlier in the meeting, the City Clerk had announced that the following late communication of this item had been provided to the City Council: Slide show presentation from the Planning Department titled, 117, 119, 121, and 123 Main Street Commercial. Conditional Use Permit No. 98-37; Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12; Special Permit No. 99-1; Special Permit No. 99-2. Jeff Bergsma, applicant, addressed Council and presented a slide report using the slide report announced earlier in the meeting by the City Clerk. He presented a document to the Council titled 117, 119, 121, 123 Main Street CUP 98-37-Planning Issues(no date). FRANK ALFONSO, owner of property at 119 Main Street, addressed Council and presented reasons why he believes the application should be approved. He stated that his project improves the area and the city will not have to pay any money towards these improvements. THOMAS CALLAHAN informed Council that everyone who has seen his work on Starbucks and the gym is aware of the quality work of his projects. He stated that he cannot believe the city will have a problem with the plan as proposed in this application. GARY MULLIGAN spoke regarding the history of the project as it went through the Board of Zoning Adjustments and the Planning Commission. He stated that if the setback.is as requested by staff their project will not be able to be seen as their building will be hidden behind a column. Mr. Mulligan informed Council that the Planning Commission and the Design Review Board had recommended approval. BILLY STADE, owner of The Closet, 121 Main Street, requested that Council approve the recommended action. KEITH BOHR spoke on behalf of the project and its applicant, Jeff Bergsma. There being no persons present to speak further on the matter and there being no protests filed, either written or oral, the hearing was closed by the mayor. In response to Council, Planning Director Zelefsky reported on the history of the issue including the setback issue and the staff recommendation for setback. Mr. Bergsma, applicant, responded to Councilmember Julien's question regarding setback footage. Councilmember Dettloff spoke regarding reasons why she favored the alternative action as set forth in Attachment No. 3 to the Request for Council Action. Page 18 - Council-A tY Minutes —February 22, 2000 • A motion was made by Dettloff, second Green to approve alternative action-Attachment No. 3 1. Approve Conditional Use Permit No. 98-37 with findings, and condition of approval, as set forth in Attachment No. 3, with the following recommended changes: a. The public open space requirement for the project shall be provided along Main Street in a central location on the ground floor. This open space must be designed such that the public can access it without walking through any tenant space. b. Include Design Guidelines recommendations for varied and offset rooflines, pedestrian orientation by including a plaza or courtyard (see 1a), enhanced fagade treatments at the street level by including greater architectural detail for visual interest, window treatments such as multi-paned windows with the borders, and accented entries that are ornate and detailed. c. Historic plaques shall be incorporated and the materials from the existing buildings shall be incorporated to the greatest extent possible. d. The project shall be referred back to the Planning Director for final review in consultation with the city's Urban Design Consultant for compliance with the Design Guidelines and the outlined recommendations. 2. Approve Coastal Development Permit 98-12 with findings and conditions of approval as set forth in Attachment No. 3. 3. Approve Special Permit No. 99-1 to allow a seven feet build-to-line for the 15' and 2"d story of all four buildings in lieu of the required five feet with findings as set forth in Attachment No. 3. 4. Deny Special Permit No. 99-2 to allow the 2"d floor balcony of all four buildings at a setback of two feet in lieu of the required five feet with findings for denial, as set forth in Attachment No. 3. The Findings and Conditions are set forth on Page No. 28 of the February 22, 2000 Council-Agency Minutes. Following further discussion the motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Sullivan, Harman, Green, Dettloff, Bauer NOES: None ABSENT: None ( COUNCIL-REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY) CONTINUED OPEN TO MARCH 20, 2000 -JOINT PUB FARING BETWEEN CITY COUNCIL-REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY- PROPOSED DISPOSIT AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT PROVIDING FOR THE SALE OF REAL PROPERTY O E THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA BUT TO THE BENEFIT OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEAC O HABITAT FOR HUMANITY, ORANGE COUNTY—N-W AND S-W CORNER OF YORKTOW - GLAND, S-W CORNER OF YORKTOWN-FLORIDA (600.30) Mayor Garofalo announced this was the ' e scheduled for a joint public hearing between the City Council and Redevelopment Agency pursuan he California Community Redevelopment Law (Health and Safety Code Sections 33000, et seq.) a purpose of considering the approval of a proposed Disposition and Development Agreement betw the Agency and Habitat for Humanity of Orange County, Inc., a California nonprofit public benefit corpo ' n (Developer). The Agreement provides for the sale of approximately 12,926 square feet 96 acres) of real property (three individual remnant parcels) generally described as the northwest er of Yorktown Avenue and England Street, the southwest corner of Yorktown Avenue and Florida Str and the southeast corner of Yorktown Avenue and England Street (the "Site"), to the Developer and Page 27—Council-Agency Minutes — February 22, 2000 ATTACHMENT NO. 3 (Staffs Alternative Motion) SUGGESTED FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERT IIT NO. 98-37/COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 9842/ SPECIAL PERMIT NO. 99-1 AND.SUGGESTED FINDINGS FOR DENIAL OF SPECIAL PERI�IIT N0.99-2 SUGGESTED FINDINGS FOR PROJECTS SUBJECT TO CEOA: The Planning Commission finds that the project is covered by Environmental Impact Report No. 89-6 and will comply with all applicable mitigation measures and will not have any significant effect on the environment. SUGGESTED FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL- CONDITIONAL USE PERiI�lIT NO. 98-37: 1. Conditional Use Permit No. 98-37 for the establishment,maintenance and operation of the following: a. 117 Main Street: 1)Exterior and interior remodel of the V and 2nd floor; 2) Establish a restaurant/banquet facility with outdoor patio dining and alcohol service on the 2"d floor. b. 119 Main Street: 1)Exterior and interior remodel of the V floor; 2) Construct a new 2"d floor for retail or office use; 3)Abandonment of three(3) feet of alley on the west side. c. 121 Main Street: 1)Exterior and interior remodel of the ?floor;2) Construct a new 2"d floor for office use. d. 123 Main Street: 1)Demolish the existing building and construct a new two-story building with retail on the 1"floor and office on the 2"d floor. will not be detrimental to the general welfare of persons working or residing in the vicinity or . detrimental to the value of the property and improvements in the neighborhood. The project as proposed and modified by the conditions imposed,will improve a visually degraded site and will enhance the appearance of the general area based on the proposed integrated development with a common fagade design incorporating all four properties for a cohesive appearance. The project is consistent with the Downtown Specific Plan and the Design Guidelines and will add to the Mediterranean and pedestrian character of the downtown. Adequate parking for the project is provided within the Downtown Parking Master Plan. • Page 28—Council-Agency Minutes February 22, 2000 _ 2. The conditional use permit will be compatible Mth surrounding uses because the proposed construction and Visitor Serving Commercial uses are an extension of the existing character of the downtown. It will include retail and other uses that titiill add to the vitality and pedestrian orientation envisioned for the dovmtown. 3. The conditional use permit, as modified by the conditions imposed, will comply with the provisions of the base district and other applicable provisions in Titles 20-25 of the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance and any specific condition required for the proposed use in the district in which it would be located, except for any special permits approved concurrently. The project complies with all minimum development standards including lot size,building height, setbacks,floor area, and parking. 4. The granting of the conditional use permit v ill not adversely affect the General Plan. It is consistent with the Land Use Element designation of Mixed Use Vertical on the subject property. In addition, it is consistent with the following goals and policies of the General Plan: a. Goal LU 8: Achieve a pattern of land uses that preserves, enhances, and establishes a distinct identity for the City's neighborhoods,corridors, and centers. b. Objective LU 10.1:Provide.for the continuation of existing and the development of a diversity of retail and service commercial uses that are oriented to the needs of local residents, serve the surrounding region,serve visitors to the City, and capitalize on Huntington Beach's recreations. resources. c. Policv LU 10.1.4:Require that commercial buildings and sites be designed to achieve a high level of architectural and site layout quality. d. Policy 11.1.7:Require that mixed-use development projects be designed to achieve a consistent and high quality character,including the consideration of architectural treatment of building elevations to convey the visual character of multiple building volumes and individual storefronts. e. Policy LU 15.2.2:Require that structures located in the pedestrian overlay zone be sited and designed to enhance pedestrian activity along the sidewalks,in consideration of the following guidelines: 1. Incorporation of uses that stimulate pedestrian activity in the first floor along the street frontage,encouraging professional offices,data computing, and other similar uses to be located in the rear or above the first floor unless economically infeasible; 2. Siting of the linear frontage of the building along the front yard property line to rnaintain a "building wall"character,except for areas contiguous with the structure use for outdoor dining or courtyards; 3. Assurance that areas between building storefronts and public sidewalks are visually and physically accessible to pedestrians,except as may be required for landscape and security; 4. Extensive articulation of the building faqade and use of multiple building volumes and planes; Page 29—Council-Agency Minutes—February 22, 2000 5. Incorporation-of landscape and other elements such as planted beds, planters, and window boxes that visually distinguish the site and structure; 6. Incorporation of arcades, courtyards, and other recesses along the street elevation to provide visual relief and interest; 7. Use of roofline and height variation to break up the massing and provide visual interest; 8. Visual differentiation of upper and lower floors; 9. Distinct treatment of building entrances; and 10. Use of pedestrian-oriented signage. f. Obiective ED 2.6: Expand and enhance the existing visitor serving uses. g. Policy ED 3.2.3: Attract visitor-serving uses near the beach in order to create better linkages-between the beach and visitor supporting retail uses. h. Policy S: Protect, encourage, and where feasible provide visitor-serving facilities in the coastal zone which are varied in type and price. i. Policy 7: Improve the appearance of visually degraded areas. The project is an extension of other similar uses found in the downtown with visitor servicing commercial uses located on the 1"floor, and office or other commercial uses located on the 2°4 floor. The project as modified by the conditions.of approval will provide a pedestrian oriented design and conform to the Downtown Design Guidelines. SUGGESTED FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL- COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 98-12: 1. Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12 for the development project, as proposed or as modified by conditions of approval,conforms with the General Plan, including the Local Coastal Program. The project is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Element designation of Mixed-Use Vertical. The project will comply with the Downtown Specific Plan—District 3 (Visitor Serving Commercial) because the proposed uses,particularly on the first floor will add to the variety of Visitor Serving Commercial uses and will further the pedestrian oriented objective for the downtown. 2. The project is consistent with the requirements of the CZ Overlay District,the base zoning district,as well as other applicable provisions of the Municipal Code. The project,as modified by conditions, will conform to all development standards including setbacks,height,and parking. 3. At the time of occupancy the proposed development can be provided with infrastructure in a manner that is consistent with the Local Coastal Program. All infrastructure currently exist on the subject site and will be modified as needed to conform to the City's current standards. 4. The development conforms to the public access and public recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the California Coastal Act. The development will not impact any public access and recreation opportunities. Page 30— Council-Agency Minutes February 22, 2000 SUGGESTED FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL—SPECIAL PERMIT NO. 99-1: (7 feet setback for 1" and 2"d storv) l. The requested special permit to allow a seven(7)feet build-to-line in lieu of the required five (5) feet along Main Street promotes a better living environment. There are significantly greater benefits to be provided from the project than would occur if all the minimum requirements were met. The special permit allows for greater setbacks to be consistent with that approved on the adjacent Oceanview Promenade Development at the northwest corner of PCH and Main. This provides a more consistent "building wall"and allows for a wider sidewalk for improved pedestrian circulation and outdoor dining opportunities. 2. The special permit provides better land planning techniques with maximum use of aesthetically pleasing types of architecture, landscaping,site layout, and design. The special permit will allow for a site layout consistent with other new construction in the area. 3. The special permit will 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 because it will allow for a wider pedestrian passage way consistent with the adjacent development which furthers the goal of pedestrian-oriented development in the downtown. 4. The special permit is consistent with the objectives of the Downtown Specific Plan in achieving a development adapted to the terrain and compatible with the surrounding environment. The modified project does not block views and provides setbacks consistent with new construction in District 3 of the Downtown Specific Plan. 5. The special permit is consistent with the policies of the Coastal Element of the City's General Plan and the California Coastal Act because it will not impact any public access or recreation opportunities and will provide better pedestrian circulation with a wider sidewalk. SUGGESTED FINDINGS FOR DENIAL—SPECIAL PERMIT NO.99-2• (2 feet setback for 2"d story) 1. The requested special permit to allow the 2"d floor balcony for all four buildings at a setback of two(2) feet in lieu of the required five(5)feet build-to-line along Main Street does not promote a better living environment. There are no significantly greater benefits to be provided from the project than would occur if all the minimum requirements were met.. The special permit will allow the 2"d floor balconies to encroach into the required five (5)feet build-to-line which will not be consistent with the setback approved on the adjacent Oceanview Promenade Development at the northwest corner of PCH and Main. It will not maintain the retail fagade,and visual and pedestrian corridor established and envisioned for District 3 of the Downtown Specific Plan. 2. The special permit does not provide better land planning techniques with maximum use of - aesthetically pleasing types of architecture,landscaping, site layout, and design. The special permit Page 31—Council-Agency Minutes— February 22, 2000 will not provide fora site layout consistent with other new construction in the area which do not have balconies encroaching into the required build-to-line. It will not maintain view corridors to the ocean which would have been achieved with a consistent setback along the first block of Main Street. 3. The special permit will be detrimental to the general health, welfare, safety and convenience of the neighborhood or City in general, and detrimental or hrijurious to the value of property or improvements of the neighborhood or of the City in general because it will not maintain a"building wall"that is consistent with the adjacent development. 4. The special permit is inconsistent with the objectives of the Downtown Specific Plan in achieving a development adapted to the terrain and compatible with the surrounding environment. The:modified project will not include setbacks consistent with new construction in District 3 of the Downtown Specific Plan which would have provided an adequate visual and pedestrian corridor. SUGGESTED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL—CO\TITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.98-37, COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PEPUMIT NO. 98-12,ANT SPECIAL PERIMIT NO. 99-2: 1. The site plan, floor plans and elevations received and dated November 29, 1999 shall be the conceptually approved layout with the following modifications(applicable to all four buildings) subject to the review and approval of the Planning Department: a. Elevations shall depict colors and building materials as approved by the Design Review Board. b. The rear stairwells shall be visible from the alley to the approval of the Police Department. (PD) c. A minimum of one foot candle of light shall be provided along the rear of the buildings to the approval of the Police Department. (PD) d. Potted plants shall be added to the front and rear of the buildings. (DRB) e. The City shall implement consistency of similar hardscape and landscape on both sides of Main Street. (Mitigation Measure) f. Depict all utility apparatus,such as but not limited to back flow devices and Edison transformers on the site plan. Utility meters shall be screened from view from public rights-of-way. Electric transformers in a required front or street side yard shall be enclosed in subsurface vaults. Backflow prevention devices shall be prohibited in the front yard setback and shall be screened from view. (Code Requirement) g. All exterior mechanical equipment shall be screened from view on all sides. Rooftop mechanical equipment shall be setback 15 feet from the exterior edges of the building. Equipment to be screened includes,but is not limited to,heating,air conditioning,refrigeration equipment, plumbing lines,ductwork and transformers. Said screening shall be architecturally compatible with the building in terms of materials and colors. If screening is not designed specifically into the Page 32— Council-Agency Minutes February 22, 2000 building, a rooftop mechanical equipment plan showing screening must be submitted for review and approval with the application for building permit(s). (Code Requirement) h. Depict all gas meters, water meters, electrical panels, air conditioning units, mailbox facilities and similar items on the site plan and elevations. If located on a building,they shall be architecturally designed into the building to appear as part of the building. They shall be architecturally compatible with the building and non-obtrusive, not interfere with sidewalk areas and comply with required setbacks. i. A seven(7)feet build-to-line shall be provided along Main Street for all four properties on both the 1" and 2"d floor. j. Historic plaques shall be incorporated and the materials from the existing buildings shall be incorporated to the greatest extent possible. k. The public open space requirement for the project shall be provided along Main Street in a central location on the ground floor. This open space must be designed such that the public can access it without walking through any tenant space. 1. The project shall be referred back to the Planning Director for final review in consultation with the City's Urban Design Consultant for compliance with the Design Guidelines and the outlined recommendations. m. Include Design Guidelines recommendations for varied and offset rooflines,pedestrian orientation by including a plaza or courtyard, enhanced fagade treatments at the street level by including greater architectural detail for visual interest,window treatments such as multi-paned windows- with tile borders,and accented entries that are ornate and detailed. 2. Prior to issuance of demolition permits,the following shall be completed: a. The applicant shall follow all procedural requirements and regulations of the South Coast Air Quality Management District(SCAQMD)and any other local,state,or federal law regarding the removal and disposal of any hazardous material including asbestos,lead,and PCB's. These requirements include but are not limited to: survey,identification of removal methods, containment measures,use and treatment of water,proper truck hauling,disposal procedures,and proper notification to any and all involved agencies. b. Pursuant to the requirements of the South Coast Air Quality Management District,an asbestos survey shall be completed. c. The applicant shall complete all Notification requirements of the South Coast Air Quality Management District. Page 33—Council-Agency Minutes — February 22, 2000 d. The City of Huntington Beach shall receive written verification from the South Coast Air Quality Management District that the Notification procedures have been completed. e. All asbestos shall be removed from all buildings prior to demolition of any portion of any building. f. A truck hauling and routing plan for all trucks involved in asbestos removal and demolition of the existing structures shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works and approved by the Director of Public Works. g. The applicant shall disclose the method of demolition on the demolition permit application for review and approval by the Building and Safety Director. h. An adequate monitoring and/or bonding program shall be established between the City and property owners to ensure that demolition and construction vibration impacts do not adversely affect offsite structures. (Mitigation Measure) i. All facets of the project related to historic preservation shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Huntington Beach.(Mitigation Measure) j. The applicant shall provide 45 days written notice to the City of Huntington Beach Historic Resources Board informing them of such activity. The Board may relocate, fully document and/or preserve significant architectural elements. The applicant/property owner shall not incur any costs associated with moving or documenting the structure by the Board. (Mitigation Measure) k. Comprehensive documentation of the project site, as it currently exists, shall be prepared prior to the issuance of any building, grading, and/or demolition permits. The documentation shall be in accordance with standards established by the Historical American Buildings Survey/Historical American Engineering Records(HABS/HAER). The report shall be archivally maintained with provisions for public access. The costs associated with preparation and maintenance of the documentation shall be the responsibility of the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency. (Mitigation Measure) 1. Pursuant to Section 65590 of the California Government Code,the applicant shall submit a plan for replacement of any existing residential units occupied by persons and families of low or moderate income that are converted or demolished as a result of this project for review and approval by the Planning Department. 3. Prior to issuance of grading permits,the following shall be completed: a. A grading plan,prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer, shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. (PW) Page 34—Council-Agency Minutes February 22, 2000 b. The name and phone number of a field supervisor who is on-site shall be submitted to the Planning Department and Public Works Department. In addition, clearly visible signs shall be posted on the perimeter of the site indicating whom to contact for information regarding this development and any construction/grading activity. This contact person shall be available immediately to address any concerns or issues raised by adjacent property owners during the construction activity. He/she will be responsible for ensuring compliance with the conditions herein, specifically, grading activities, truck routes,construction hours,noise,etc. l c. A project-specific soils and engineering report shall be prepared by a qualified soils engineer based on a detailed plan of the project. All recommendations of this report shall be incorporated into the project. (Mitigation Measure) d. A pre-grading meeting shall be arranged to discuss the recommendations of the soil investigation and project requirements. Representatives of all concerned parties shall be present. (Mitigation Measure) e. It shall be the responsibility of the owner and/or contractor to: bring to the attention of a certified soils engineer any unusual conditions which may be encountered in the course of project development and to request appropriate guidance before proceeding with the affected work, and to ensure that the recommendations of the soil report and any supplemental reports are implemented (Mitigation Measure) f. The applicant shall provide documentation of existing structural conditions in the vicinity of the proposed project and the estimated extent and impact of subsidence on surrounding structures and other improvements,to the satisfaction of the Building Department. (Mitigation Measure) g. Should ground water be found during excavation,dewatering of the project site shall be required. = The applicant shall monitor the extent of subsidence and its associated impacts through placement of appropriate testing devices under the supervision and surveillance of a qualified soil engineer. The City shall be kept informed regarding any structural impacts on adjacent properties and other improvements,and if feasible and necessary,construction process will be modified to eliminate such impacts. (Mitigation Measure) 4. Prior to submittal for building permits,the following shall be completed: a. Zoning entitlement conditions of approval shall be printed verbatim on all the working drawing sets used for issuance of building permits(architectural,structural, electrical, mechanical and plumbing) and shall be referenced in the index. b. This project shall be submitted as one plan check submittal to include all four properties (117, 119, 121, 123 Main Street)to assure that all four properties are developed as one integrated project as presented on the approved plans and rendering. c. All Fire Department requirements shall be noted on the building plans. (FD) Page 35—Council-Agency Minutes — February 22, 2000 d. Grading and foundation plans,when available and prior to approval, shall be transmitted to a qualified soils engineer for review for compliance with their recommendations. (Mitigation Measure) e. All structures shall be designed in accordance with the seismic design provisions of the Uniform Building Codes to promote safety in the event of an earthquake. (Mitigation Measure) 5. Prior to issuance of building permits,the following shall be completed: a. Submit a copy of the revised site plan, floor plans and elevations pursuant to Condition No. 1 for review and approval and inclusion in the entitlement file to the Planning Department; and submit 8 inch by 10 inch colored photographs of all colored renderings, elevations, materials sample board, and massing model to the Planning Department for inclusion in the entitlement file. b. A Landscape Construction Set must be submitted to the Department of Public Works and approved by the Departments of Public Works and Planning. The Landscape Construction Set shall include a landscape plan prepared and signed by a State Licensed Landscape Architect which identifies the location,type, size and quantity of all existing plant materials to remain, existing plant materials to be removed and proposed plant materials; an irrigation plan;a grading plan;an approved site plan and a copy of the entitlement conditions of approval. The landscape plans shall be in conformance with Chapter 232 of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance and applicable Design Guidelines. (PtiV) (Code Requirement) c. An interim parking and/or building materials storage plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department to assure adequate parking and restroom facilities are available for employees, customers and contractors during the project's construction phase and that adjacent properties will not be impacted by their location. The applicant shall obtain any necessary encroachment permits from the Department of Public Works. d. Dedicate the following to the City of Huntington Beach: (P`V)(Code Requirement) 1. 4 feet along the front of all four properties along Main Street . 2. 4.5 feet along the rear of 117, 121,and 123 Main Street along the alley e. The alley abandonment for 119 Main Street shall be approved by the City Council. f. A grading plan,prepared by a Registered Engineer, shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. This plan, in addition to grading, shall include all of the required off-site improvements. g. The Departments of Planning and Public Works shall approve a detailed lighting plan. The plan shall be consistent with the Downtown lighting plan and lighting standards in the Downtown Design Guidelines. Outdoor lighting shall utilize energy-saving lamps. All outside lighting shall • • Page 36—Council-Agency Minutes February 22, 2000 be directed to prevent"spill-over" onto adjacent properties and shall be shown on the site plan and elevations. Lighting shall be capable of being dimmed to a minimum security level during of hours of non-operation of the facility.(Mitigation Measure) (Planning) (PNV) h. A sign and landscape plan shall be submitted to the Design Review Board for review and approval. The location and type of all signs shall conform to the provisions of the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance and be consistent with the standards listed on page 33 of the Downtown Design Guidelines. (Mitigation Measure) i. The applicant shall enter into a Maintenance Agreement with the City for maintenance of all portions of public property along the project site. j. Elevations shall show all roofing materials to be characteristic of Mediterranean architecture. Flat roofs shall be avoided. Walls shall be integrated with the overall building design. Solid concrete block walls, grape stake, or chain link fencing shall not be permitted. (Mitigation Measure) 6. Phased or individual construction of buildings is prohibited and all four buildings shall be demolished at the same time. Construction and improvements for all four buildings shall be done simultaneously as approved by Conditional Use Permit No. 98-37,.Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12, and Special Permit No. 99-1. All conditions of approval shall be applicable to all four buildings and shall be complied with. 7. During demolition, grading, site development, and/or construction,the following shall be adhered to: a. Use water trucks or sprinkler systems in all areas where vehicles travel to keep damp enough to prevent dust raised when leaving the site: b. Wet down areas in the late morning and after work is completed for the day; c. Use low sulfur fuel (.05%)by weight for construction equipment; d. Attempt to phase and schedule construction activities to avoid high ozone days(first stage smog alerts); e. Discontinue construction during second stage smog alerts. f. Ensure clearly visible signs are posted on the perimeter of the site identifying the name and phone number of a field supervisor to contact for information regarding the development and any construction/grading activity. 8. Prior to final building permit inspection and approval and issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for any of the four buildings,the following shall be completed: Page 37—Council-Agency Minutes—February 22, 2000 a. All improvements to'all four properties shall be completed in accordance with the approved plans and conditions of approval specified herein, including: 1) Landscaping. 2) Fire extinguishers will be installed and located in areas to comply with Huntington Beach Fire Code Standards.(FD) 3) A fire alarm system will be installed to comply with Huntington Beach Fire Department and Uniform Fire Code Standards. Shop drawings will be submitted to and approved by the Fire Department prior to installation. The.system will provide the following: a. manual pull stations; b. water flow,valve tamper and trouble detection; c. 24 hour supervision; ' d. annunciation; e. audible alarms; f. smoke detectors(FD) 4) Address numbers will be installed to comply with City Specification No. 428. The numbers will be sized a minimum of six(6) inches with a brush stroke of one and one-half(1-1/2) inches. (FD) 5) Exit signs and exit path markings will be provided in compliance with the Huntington Beach Fire Code and Title 24 of the California Administrative Code. (FD) 6) An automatic fire sprinkler system shall be approved and installed throughout pursuant to Fire Department regulations. Shop drawings shall be submitted and approved by the Fire Department prior to system installation. The buildings will be considered as one unit. (FD) 7) Submit a Fire Protection Plan for Fire Department approval in compliance with City Specification 428. (FD) 8) If elevators are installed,they shall be sized to accommodate an ambulance gurney. The minimum dimensions are 6'8"wide by 4'3"deep with a 42-inch minimum right or left side opening. Center opening doors require a 54-inch depth. (FD) 9) Construct new sewer lateral to each building unless the existing lateral is proven to be in good condition to the satisfaction of the City inspector. (PW) 10)The sewer service lateral size shall be 6" min. (P`V) 11)If the existing 2" domestic meter and service lateral serving the building at 117 Maui Street meets the minimum requirements set by the Uniform Plumbing Code(UPC)and the Uniform Fire Code(UFC),then it may be used to serve the development at this address. (PW) 12)The existing service to 121 Main Street currently being served from 119.Main Street service shall be abandoned,per City Standards. (PW) 13)The existing'/4 inch water meter and service for the building at 123 Main Street shall be abandoned to the main line. (PNV) 14)Each of the buildings proposed at 119, 121 and 123 Main Street shall have new separate domestic water services with(touch read type)meters and backflow protection devices. The water service laterals and meter size shall meet the minimum requirements set by the Uniform Plumbing Code(UPC) and Uniform Fire Code (UFC), but shall be a minimum of 2 inches in size. (PW) • Page 38— Council-Agency Minutes February 22, 2000 _ I i 1 5)If the Fire Department requires that a separate fire service is to be constructed, it shall have a separate backflow device. (PNV) 16)Remove and replace the existing sidewalk,per the Downtown Specific Plan, adjacent to project(\ ain Street). (PNV) 17)Remove the existing curb and construct new curb and gutter adjacent to project(Main Street). (PNV) 18)Install one street light along property frontage in a location compatible with the Public Works street lighting plan for Main Street. (PNV) 19)Remove and replace any deteriorated portion of east side of alley. Grind and cap east one- half(1/2) alley. (PNV) 20)The applicant shall underground all new and existing electrical, telephone and cable TV service connections. (PNV) 21)The existing angled parking is to remain or the in-lieu parking fee shall be paid for each parking space lost. (PNV) 22)The developer shall submit a composite utility plan, showing existing public water system facilities and all other underground utilities (existing and proposed)to each structure. (PNV) 23)The applicant shall install public improvements pursuant to City Council adopted Main Street improvement plans. b. Compliance with all conditions of approval specified herein shall be accomplished and verified 1-• the Planning Department.- c. All building spoils, such as unusable lumber,wire,pipe, and other surplus or unusable material, shall be disposed of at an off-site facility equipped to handle them. d. Existing fill materials and disturbed, loose soils shall be removed and replaced with component _ material as required by qualified soils engineer. Site preparation, excavation, and earthwork compaction operations shall be performed under the observation and testing of a soil engineer. Certification of such reports,shall be submitted to the City Engineer prior to issuance of building permits. (Mitigation Measure) 9. The project shall comply with the following: a. Prior to the sale of alcoholic beverages,a copy of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Board(ABC) license, along with any special conditions imposed by the ABC,shall be submitted to the Planning Department for the file. Any conditions that are more restrictive than those set forth in this approval shall be adhered to. b. The City and individual landowners shall meet with residential and business tenants to explain conversion process and relocation assistance.(Mitigation Measure) c. The City and individual landowners shall assist in the relocation of persons affected by this redevelopment project. (Mitigation Measure) ., • • Page 39—Council-Agency Minutes —February 22, 2000 d. The applicant shall provide a relocation coordinator who will provide general relocation assistance to all tenants. Availability of such a relocation assistant shall be to the approval of the City Council and shall be incorporated into the Relocation Assistance Program required by Article 927 of the Municipal Code. (Mitigation Measure) e. The project shall implement mitigation measures included in Downtown Specific Plan EIR 82-2. (Mitigation Measure) f. The applicant shall provide relocation assistance to all displace businesses in accordance with the State Guidelines of Title 25, Chapter b. This assistance will include information on the availability of other suitable sites, as well as payments to cover moving expenses and/or the loss of income including: the cost of the physical move;the cost of anything rendered useless*as a consequence of the move (i.e.business cards, etc.);the cost of physical improvements. (Mitigation Measure) 10.The Planning Director ensures that all conditions of approval herein are complied with. The Planning Director shall be notified in writing if any changes to the site plan, elevations and floor plans are proposed as a result of the plan check process. Building permits shall not be issued until the Planning Director has reviewed and approved the proposed changes for conformance with the intent of the Planning Commission's action and the conditions herein.If the proposed changes are of a substantial nature, an amendment to the original entitlement reviewed by the Planning Commission may be required pursuant to the HBZSO. INFORMATION ON SPECIFIC CODE REQUIREMENTS: 1. Conditional Use Permit No. 98 37, Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12, and Special Permit No. 99-1 shall not become effective until the ten working day appeal period has elapsed. 2. Conditional Use Permit No. 98-37, Coastal Development Permit No.98-12,and Special Permit No. 99-1 shall become null and void unless exercised within one year of the date of final approval or such extension of time as may be granted by the Director pursuant to a written request submitted to the Planning Department a minimum 30 days prior to the expiration date. 3. The Planning Commission reserves the right to revoke Conditional Use Permit No.98-37,Coastal Development Permit No.98-12,and Special Permit No. 99-1,pursuant to a public hearing for revocation,if any violation of these conditions or the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance or Municipal Code occurs. 4. All applicable Public Works fees shall be paid. 5. The development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Municipal Code,Building Department,and Fire Department as well as applicable local, State and Federal Fire Codes, Ordinances,and standards, except as noted herein. Page 40— Council-Agency Minutes February 22, 2000 6. Construction shall be limited to Monday -Saturday 7:00 AM to 8:00 PM. Construction shall be prohibited Sundays and Federal holidays. 7. The applicant shall submit a check in the amount of$38.00 for the posting of the Notice of Determination at the County of Orange Clerk's Office. The check shall be made out to the Countv of Oranee and submitted to the Planning Department within two (2)days of the Planning Commission's action. 8. All landscaping shall be maintained in a neat and clean manner, and in conformance with the HBZSO. Prior to removing or replacing any landscaped areas, check with the Departments of Planning and Public`Yorks for Code requirements. Substantial changes may require approval by the Planning Commission. 9. All signs shall conform to the HBZSO and Downtown Design Guidelines. Prior to installing any new signs, or changing sign faces, a building permit shall be obtained from the Planning Department. 10.Traffic Impact Fees shall be paid at the time of final inspection or issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. (PtiV 11. State-mandated school impact fees shall be paid prior to issuance of building permits. 12.Prior to issuance of Building Permits for new construction in the Downtown Specific Plan(SP-5) area,a Downtown Specific Plan fee shall be paid. 13.An encroachment permit shall be required for all work within the right-of-way. (PNV 14.Development shall meet all local and State regulations regarding installation and operation of all underground storage tanks. (FD) 15.A Certificate of Occupancy must be issued by the Planning Department and Building and Safety Department prior to occupying the building. 16.Live entertainment and dancing for any other suite other than the V floor of 117 Main Street shall require separate entitlement. 0 , CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 2000 MAIN STREET CALIFORNIA 92648 OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK March 3, 2000 Jeff bergsma 221 Main Street, Suite H Huntington Beach, California 92648 Dear Mr. Bergsma: The City Council of the City of Huntington Beach at its regular meeting held Tuesday, February 22, 2000 took action on the Appeal of Conditional Use Permit No. 98-37/Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12/Special'Permit No. 99- 1/Special Permit No. 99-2 (117, 119, 121, and 123 Main Street) and approved Alternative Action per attached City Council Action Agenda. The minutes of February 22, 2000, including findings and conditions will be forwarded to you when they are approved. This is a final decision. You are hereby notified that pursuant to provisions of Section 1094.6 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the State of California you have ninety days from March 2, 2000 to apply to the courts for judicial review. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact our office at 714/536-5227. Sincerely, doy�' OW-04V7' . Connie Brockway, CM City Clerk Enclosure: Findings for Approval Government Code 1094.6 Cc: City Administrator City Attorney Howard Zelefsky, Planning Director Scott Hess, Principle Planner Ricky Ramos, Assistant Planner G:\fb11owup\Letters\90day1tr (Telephone:714.536-5227) (10) 2/22/2000 - CWl/Agency Agenda - Page 10 D-3. (City Council) Public Hearinq —Appeal Filed by Councilmember Sullivan of the Planning Commission Approval of Conditional Use Permit 98-371 — Coastal Development 98-121 — Special Permit 99-11 —Special Permit 99-2 (Applicant Jeff Bergsma) — 117, 119, 121, 123 Main Street—W/S Corner Between PCH &Walnut Avenue (420.40) - Public hearing to consider an appeal"filed by Councilman Dave Sullivan of the Planning Commission's approval of the following: Applicant: Jeff Bergsma. Request: Conditional Use Permit and Coastal Development Permit to allow the following: 117 Main Street: (1) Exterior and interior remodel of the 15t and 2"d floor; (2) Establish a restaurant/banquet facility with outdoor patio dining and alcohol service on the 2"d floor. 119 Main Street: (1) Exterior and interior remodel of the 15`floor; (2) Construct a new 2"d floor for retail or office use; (3)Abandonment of three (3)feet of alley on the west side. 121 Main Street: (1) Exterior and interior remodel of the 1s'floor; (2) Construct a new 2"d floor for office use. 123 Main Street: (1) Demolish the existing building and construct a new two-story building with retail on the 1s'floor and office on the 2"d floor. Special permits to allow the 2"d floor balcony of all four (4) buildings at a setback of two (2) feet in lieu of the five (5) feet build-to-line required along Main Street and to allow a seven (7) feet build-to-line in lieu of the required five (5) feet for the 1st and 2"d stories of all four (4) buildings along Main Street (staff recommendation). Location: 117, 119, 121, and 123 Main Street (west side between Pacific Coast Highway and Walnut Ave). Environmental Status: Covered by Environmental Impact Report No. 89-6. Coastal Status: Located in the non-appealable jurisdiction of the Coastal Zone and includes Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12, filed on May 8, 1998, in conjunction with the above request. The Coastal Development Permit hearing consists of a staff report, public hearing, City Council discussion and action. Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12 is not appealable to the California Coastal Commission. On File: A copy of the proposed request is on file in the Planning Department, 2000. Main Street, Huntington Beach, California 92648, for inspection by the public. A copy of the staff report will be available to interested parties at City Hall or the Main Street Library (7111 Talbert Avenue) after February 17, 2000. All interested persons are invited to attend said hearing and express opinions or submit 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 the planning Department at 536-5271 and refer to the above item. Direct your written communications to the City Clerk. (Continued next page) .w 11( 2/22/2000 - Council/Agency Agenda - Pa a 11) g g Recommended Action: • Cnerial Permit No. 99_1 With findings fnr menial as set feFt en Attunhm`nt No. r 1. Deny Conditional Use Permit No. 98 37 with findings f9F deRial. 7 Deny Goastal development Permit No 98_49 with findings fnr deni..l �. Deny Special Permit No. 99 1 to allow v seven feet build to line in lied: of the required five feet feF all feuF buildings with fiRd;ngs for de 4,. rm Special Deit No 99_2 to allowthe 2 fld set;?Q^ck of two feet in lieu of the-FequiFed five feet with findings fQF deRial. (Findings Alternative Actions (Attachment No. 3): Motion to: 1. Approve Conditional Use Permit No. 98-37 with findings, and condition of approval, as set forth in Attachment No. 3, with the following recommended changes: a. The public open space requirement for the project shall be provided along Main Street in a central location on the ground floor. This open space must be designed such that the public can access it without walking through any tenant space. b. Include Design Guidelines recommendations for varied and offset rooflines, pedestrian orientation by including a plaza or courtyard (see 1a), enhanced fagade treatments at the street level by including greater architectural detail for visual interest, window treatments such as multi-paned windows with the borders, and accented entries that are ornate and detailed. c. Historic plaques shall be incorporated and the materials from the existing buildings shall be incorporated to the greatest extent possible. d. The project shall be referred back to the Planning Director for final review in consultation with the city's Urban Design Consultant for compliance with the Design Guidelines and the outlined recommendations. 2. Approve Coastal Development Permit 98-12 with findings and conditions of approval as set forth in Attachment No: 3. 3. Approve Special Permit No. 99-1 to allow a seven feet build-to-line for the 1st and 2nd story of all four buildings in lieu of the required five feet with findings. 4. Deny Special Permit No. 99-2 to allow the 2"d floor balcony of all four buildings at a setback of two feet in lieu of the required five feet with findings for denial, as set forth in Attachment No. 3. Approved Alternative Action 5-2 (Garofalo, Julien NO) § 1094.5 SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS Part 3 Mote 378 n.anded fnr iw%v trial Ile wine,l rwmt, i..;iriiwr ling no jurixtlirtinn valifnrnin In.x. Appenlx 11-1. nntl Ilid not Ilelernline nu•rits, Writteru Air (C►7ti) 1'_7 t't11.Rplr. Fill. 67 l',.\.atl '::1. (.Itn•x till-. v. tobirski (IUtil) 1'2 CnUilitr. Trinl court'N Jmdgnu•nl 11--ming writ ttf 71P, 11111'.:\:'da11i, ntowdnre to compel director of agrieultmru Vnvt. that. letter discharging Ncnior typ- In Pwt nside h(x deeiAtin n•vnkiwi; l:rrltintt•. Ixt eh•rk in office of vomit% clerk stated er'r license us nirt-raft l:ih:t in )ImximrNx 14 11111t she %tax guilty of ntixt•uodurt in re- pest rural rol WAN reverxed will rtl8e re moviiia publir rrrurds f roil lhn file& awl minmllvd in trial t4nirt with direetiuux tm imitilating will srrroltir them on vnr)omx rt•mand ewxe if) dirrrior fur purltut•e of tlutcx, wherenN ill hearing before county 'a rta-onxideriug the prnnlly previously im- rieil xervier cwunnixsiom evidrnre wile in• posed, where it wns found thnt Borne of troduced only nit to wlinr took place on rile charges +igninxt petitionl•r were. not Alit: of thr dater:• did wit require the elix- Nopported by evidence. Wingfield v. triet court of uppcnl on nl.prnl from ju,lg- Direcinr of Atriculture (1972) 1(r•3 Cal. meat nwnrtling srmior lypi>t clerk writ of Irptr.019,20 C.A.34 200: inandnte, lifter reversing tl:o Judgmcut of 11roeced)ug for revlew of droinl by rom. the superior enurt, to remand ttte cutter to the rt,mm,ixxiun for re-olaidt!ration. minnge r of roe fights o of permit rx whcrn there q•mx n siniiinrity of fnctt: sure wuult;c voting rights p or votirt for romnllitig remi-val of till- dtK•umicnts un all fleter he rnn'Mietl to here iqr [curt for of the dntert. Prot v. Low Angeles Comn- detcrminnriot whether there wwa suhstnm� tial evidence to support umnm)eniuner•s ty Civil Serviv. l'omtnieyiuu (19G2) 2a8 findings, where comet 'improperly deter• I'_d'3.1(1J C.A'd 114. § 1094.6. Judicial review; decisions of local aageric:tes; petition; filing; time; record; decision and Marty defined; or- dinance or resolution (a) Judicial review of any decision of a local agcmc}, other than school district, as the term local agency is defined.in Section 54951 of the Government Code, or of any commission, board, officer or agent th+.-reof, may be had pursuant to Section 1094:a of this code only if the petition for writ;of mandate pursuant to such section is filed 1,vithin the time limits specified in this section. (b) Any such petition Shall be filed nut later than the 90th day following the date on which the decision becomes final. If there is no provision for reconsideration of the decision in any applicable provi- sion of any statute, charter, or rule, for the purposes of this section, the declsN . is final on the date it is made. If there is such provision for reconsideration, the decision is final for the purposes of this sec- tion upon the expiration of the period during which such reconsidera- tion can be sought; provided, that if reconsideration is sought pursu- arit to.any such provision the decision is final for the purposes.of this :ectlon on the date that reconsideration is rejected. (c) The complete rvvord of the proceedings shnIl Ix• prepared by tilt_` 1(x.-;tl agelley or ilx vo)llillis!:itnl, bo:11-fl, officer, or ;agent which lluuie the decision .and shall he flolivered to the petitioner within M ci.tys titter he has filed ;a written request therefor. The local agency may recover from the petitioner its actual costs for transcribing or otherwise preparing the record. Such record shall include the tran Script of 1ht_ proceedings, all pleadings, all notices and (:ceders, any proposed decision by a hearing officer, the final decision, all admitted 674 1 • Title 1 WRIT OF MANDATE § 1094.6 exhibits, all rejected exhibits in the possession of the local agency or its commrssion, board, officer, or agent, all written evidence, and any other Papers in the case. (d) It the petitioner files a m(west for the record ns specified in - suhtlivision ic) within 10 days arler the dale the decision becomes fi- nal its provided in subdivision (b), llu• time within which a petition pui:Nuant to &vtion 109.1.5 mity he filed shall he extended to not later than the 30th day following the date on which the record is either personally delivered or mailed to the petitioner or his attorney of rec- ord, if he has one. (e) As used in this section, decision means adjudicatory admin- istrative decision made, after hearing, suspending, demoting, or dis- missing an officer or employee, revoking or denying an application for a permit or a license, or denying an application for any retire- ment benefit or allowance. (f) In making a final decision as defined in subdivision (e), the local agency shall provide notice to the party that the time within 1 which judicial review must be sought is governed by this section. As used in this subdivision, "party" means an officer_ or em- ployee who has been suspended, demoted or dismissed; a person whose permit or license has been revoked or whose application for a permit or license has been denied; or a person whose application for a retirement benefit or allowance has been denied. I (g) This section shall be applicable in a local agency only if the governing board thereof adopts an ordinance or resolution making this section applicable. If such ordinance or resolution is adopted, the provisions of this section shall prevail over any conflicting provision in any otherwise applicable law relating to the subject matter. (Added by Stats.197G,c.276,p.581, § 1.) Forme 'ice Witg 't Valiforuin Cale Forms,Civil Procedure. Library References Admiuinrntlrr l.nw and l'roveilurt, C T.S. Publir. Administrative Bodies and Procedure 1 193. Notes of Decisions In general 1 Hutt poblie employment relattoatt hoard Exhaustion of administrative remedies 2 luul rxvhmivo Jurimlietion to clutermine whrtlu•r the unfnir pructice eltnreex were Justified: and. itt view of teachers' failure to exhanat their mhninirtrative remedies t. In general uu$er the Itntlda Act. trial court erred in tiehnol hoard's •Zntihtterul frerzim: of granting writ of mttulate to compel snior- teaelu:rn' s,d+triex after het;inninig ur view iutemi.•nt or district anti otltorx to rubgr school ,rcnr, while rnntrnet ur>otintiunx x:dnrl.-s of rertttia traclters. Atnndor Vul- w•cre pemliag, urptably witx tat unfuir 1,•y S,-t4 ditry Edtteatorx A.ra'u I. \rwlitt pruatict• iu viulutiuu of tilt! Itudda Arc of, (10701 151 Cut.ltytr. 724, M C.AZI 25-1. 675 tI, '^ • CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH' 2000 MAIN STREET CALIFORNIA 92648 OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK March 3, 2000 California Coastal Commission South Coast Area Office 200 Oceangate, 101h Floor Long Beach, California 90801-4302 NOTICE OF ACTION COASTAL DEVELOPMENT 98-121 Applicant: Jeff Bergsma. Request: Conditional Use Permit and Coastal Development Permit to allow the following: 117 Main Street: (1) Exterior and interior remodel of the 1"and 2"d floor; (2) Establish a restaurant/banquet facility with outdoor patio dining and alcohol service on the 2"d floor. 119 Main Street: (1) Exterior and interior remodel of the 1s`floor; (2) Construct a new 2" floor for retail or office use; (3)Abandonment of three (3) feet of alley on the west side. 121 Main Street: (1) Exterior and interior remodel of the 1st floor; (2) Construct a new 2 na floor for office use. 123 Main Street: (1) Demolish the existing building and construct a new two- story building with retail on the 1sl floor and office on the 2"d floor. Special permits to allow the 2"d floor balcony of all four (4) buildings at a setback of two (2) feet in lieu of the five (5) feet build-to-line required along Main Street and to allow a seven (7) feet build-to-line in lieu of the required five (5) feet for the 1st and 2"d stories of all four(4) buildings along Main Street (staff recommendation). Location: 117, 119, 121, and 123 Main Street (west side between Pacific Coast" Highway and Walnut Ave). Environmental Status: Covered by Environmental Impact Report No..89-6. Coastal Status: Located in the non-appealable jurisdiction of the Coastal Zone and includes Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12, filed on May 8, 1998, in conjunction with the above request. The Coastal Development Permit hearing consists of a staff report, public hearing, City Council discussion and action. Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12 is not appealable to the California Coastal Commission. (Telephone:714-536-5227) Page NO. 2 • • On February 22, 2000, the Huntington Beach City Council approved Alternative Action per attached City Council February 22, 2000, Action Agenda. Sincerely yours, Connie Brockway, CMC City Clerk CB:cc Enclosure: Action Agenda Page Nos. 10 and 11 Cc: City Administrator City Attorney Planning Director Ricky Ramos, Assistant Planner ` (10) 2/22/2000 - Cois/Agency Agenda - Page 10 D-3. (City Council) Public Hearing —Appeal Filed by Councilmember Sullivan of the Planning Commission Approval of Conditional Use Permit 98-371 —Coastal Development 98-121 — Special Permit 99-11 —Special Permit 99-2 (Applicant Jeff Bergsma) — 117, 119, 121, 123 Main Street—W/S Corner Between PCH &Walnut Avenue (420.40) - Public hearing to consider an appeal filed by Councilman Dave Sullivan of the Planning Commission's approval of the following: Applicant: Jeff Bergsma. Request: Conditional Use Permit and Coastal Development Permit to allow the following: 117 Main Street: (1) Exterior and interior remodel of the 1st and 2"d floor; (2) Establish a restaurant/banquet facility with outdoor patio dining and alcohol service on the 2"d floor. 119 Main Street: (1) Exterior and interior remodel of the 1st floor; (2) Construct a new 2"d floor for retail or office use; (3)Abandonment of three (3)feet of alley on the west side. 121 Main Street: (1) Exterior and interior remodel of the 1st floor; (2) Construct a new 2nd floor for office use. 123 Main Street: (1) Demolish the existing building and construct a new two-story building with retail on the 1st floor and office on the 2"d floor. Special permits to allow the 2"d floor balcony of all four (4) buildings at a setback of two (2)feet in lieu of the five (5) feet build-to-line required along Main Street and to allow a seven (7)feet build-to-line in lieu of the required five (5) feet for the 1st and 2"d stories of all four (4) buildings along Main Street (staff recommendation). Location: 117, 119, 121, and 123 Main Street (west side between Pacific Coast Highway and Walnut Ave). Environmental Status: Covered by Environmental Impact Report No. 89-6. Coastal Status: Located in the non-appealable jurisdiction of the Coastal Zone and includes Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12, filed on May 8, 1998, in conjunction with the above request. The Coastal Development Permit hearing consists of a staff report, public hearing, City Council discussion and action. Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12 is not appealable to the California Coastal Commission. On File: A copy of the proposed request is on file in the Planning Department, 2000, Main Street, Huntington Beach, California 92648, for inspection by the public. A copy of the staff report will be available to interested parties at City Hall or the Main Street Library (7111 Talbert Avenue) after February 17, 2000. All interested persons are invited to attend said hearing and express opinions or submit 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 the planning Department at 536-5271 and refer to the above item. Direct your written communications to the City Clerk. (Continued next page) (11) • 2/22/2000 - Councaency Agenda - Page 11 Recommended Action: AttaGhfAent Ne. 1): Motion to- . OF 1. Deny Conditional Use PeFrAit No. 98 37-with findings fGF denial. 7 Deny Coastal Development Perm:} No. 98_12 with findings fGF denial 3. Deny SpeGial Permit No. 99 1 to allow a seven feet build to Iine in lieu of the r1 v Cn ial P 1�10 OD 7 }n elln��i}he .end 4—veRyvpe6rn, PeFM"In v ctA ZW'Al a��c setbaGk of Nye feet in lieu of the FequiFed five fPetemt Mdth f*.A(-I'ngs feF denial. (FindiRgs for denial as set forth on AttaGhmen} No 7 Alternative Actions (Attachment No. 3): Motion to: 1. Approve Conditional Use Permit No. 98-37 with findings, and condition of approval, as set forth in Attachment No. 3, with the following recommended changes: a. The public open space requirement for the project shall be provided along Main Street in a central location on the ground floor. This open space must be designed such that the public can access it without walking through any tenant space. b. Include Design Guidelines recommendations for varied and offset rooflines, pedestrian orientation by including a plaza or courtyard (see 1a), enhanced fagade treatments at the street level by including greater architectural detail for visual interest, window treatments such as multi-paned windows with the borders, and accented entries that are ornate and detailed. c. Historic plaques shall be incorporated and the materials from the existing buildings shall be incorporated to the greatest extent possible. d. The project shall be referred back to the Planning Director for final review in consultation with the city's Urban Design Consultant for compliance with the Design Guidelines and the outlined recommendations. 2. Approve Coastal Development Permit 98-12 with findings and conditions of approval as set forth in Attachment No. 3. 3. Approve Special Permit No. 99-1 to allow a seven feet build-to-line for the 1s`and 2"d story of all four buildings in lieu of the required five feet with findings. 4. Deny Special Permit No. 99-2 to allow the 2"d floor balcony of all four buildings at a setback of two feet in lieu of the required five feet with findings for denial, as set forth in Attachment No. 3. Approved Alternative Action 5-2 (Garofalo, Julien NO) , A C; (gpvtowsl/ 9TY OF HUNTINGTON BEAR 14 MEETING DATE: February 22, 2000 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PL00-10 Council/Agency Meeting Held: .Z• .?Z -OD Deferred/Continued to: Approved, ❑ onditionally Approved ❑ Denied � City Clerk's Signature ,ve AA Council Meeting Date: February 22, 2000 Department ID Number: PL00-10 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH REQUEST FOR ACTION SUBMITTED TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS SUBMITTED BY: RAY SILVER, City Administra or �� c - PREPARED BY: HOWARD ZELEFSKY, Director of Planning 14kW.Ad SUBJECT: DENY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 98-37/COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 98-12/SPECIAL PERMIT NO. 99- 1/SPECIAL PERMIT NO. 99-2 (117, 119, 121, AND 123 MAIN STREET) Statement of Issue,Funding Source,Recommended Action,Alternative Action(s),Analysis,Environmental Status,Attachments) Statement of Issue: Transmitted for your consideration is an appeal by Councilmember Dave Sullivan of the Planning Commission's approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 98-37/Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12/Special Permit No. 99-2 and denial of Special Permit No. 99-1 for 117, 119, 121, and 123 Main Street. This application represents a request to allow the exterior and interior remodel of the existing buildings, the construction of a 2"d story at 119 and 121 Main Street, and the construction of a new two-story building at 123 Main Street. The request also includes the establishment of a restaurant/banquet facility with outdoor patio dining and alcohol service on the 2nd floor of 117 Main Street (Perq's Bar). The request includes Special Permit No. 99-2 to allow the 2"d floor balcony of all four buildings at a setback of two (2) feet in lieu of the five (5) feet build-to-line required along Main Street. Finally, the request also includes a staff initiated Special Permit to have all four buildings setback seven (7) feet to align with the existing Oceanview Promenade building (Abdelmuti). PL00-10 -2- 02/14/001: M REQUEST FOR ACTION • MEETING DATE: February 22, 2000 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PL00-10 The appeal by Councilman Dave Sullivan is based on the following reasons: 1. The approval of the Special Permit for the 2nd floor balcony encroachment of three (3) feet along Main Street. 2. The approval of the five (5) feet build-to-line for the 1st and 2n1 stories in lieu of staffs recommendation of seven (7) feet to match the adjacent Oceanview Promenade project. 3. The inaccessible public open space located at the rear of the building and on the 2nd story. 4. The project's lack of architectural and design conformance to the Downtown Design Guidelines. The Planning Commission approved the request (Recommended Action - A) finding the project complies with the Downtown Specific Plan as well as the Design Guidelines and the proposal would be an improvement to the subject properties. Staff is recommending denial (Recommended Action - B) because of concerns relating to code compliance, building design/site layout, and overall lack of design creativity as envisioned by the Downtown Specific Plan and Design Guidelines. Funding Source: Not applicable. Recommended Action: A. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: (ATTACHMENT NO. 1) tion to: "Approve onditional Use Permit No. 98-37,Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12, and Special Perm o. 99-2 with findings and conditions of approval and deny Special Permit No. 99-1 with fin i s for denial." Plannin Commission Acts on Januaty 11 2000: THE MOTION MADE BY LIV GOOD, SECONDED BY LAIRD, TO APPROVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 9 7/COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 98- 12/SPECIAL PERMIT NO. 99-2, WITH FI INGS AND CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL AND TO DENY SPECIAL PERMIT NO. 9-1 WITH FINDINGS FOR DENIAL (ATTACHMENT NO. 1) CARRIED BY THE FOLLO VOTE: AYES: LIVENGOOD, LAIRD, BIDDLE, CHAPMAN, M DIC NOES: KERINS, SPEAKER ABSENT: NONE ABSTAIN: NONE MOTION PASSED ' PL00-10 -3- 02/14/00 1:36 PM • REQUEST FOR ACTION MEETING DATE: February 22, 2000 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PI00-10 B. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: (ATTACHMENT NO. 2) M to: 1. "Deny Condition a Permit No. 98-37 with findings for denial." 2. "Deny Coastal Developm rmit No. 98-12 with findings for denial." 3. "Deny Special Permit No. 99-1 to a seven feet build-to-line in lieu of the required five feet for all four buildings with findings for I." 4. "Deny Special Permit No. 99-2 to allow the 2"d floor ny of all four buildings at a setback of two feet in lieu of the required five feet with findings o ial." Alternative Action(s): The City Council may make the following alternative motion(s): C. Alternative Motion: (ATTACHMENT NO. 3) 1. "Approve Conditional Use Permit No. 98-37 with findings and condition of approval with the following recommended changes:" a. The public open space requirement for the project shall be provided along Main Street in a central location on the ground floor. This open space must be designed such that the public can access it without walking through any tenant space. b. Include Design Guidelines recommendations for varied and offset rooflines, pedestrian orientation by including a plaza or courtyard (see 1a), enhanced fagade treatments at the street level by including greater architectural detail for visual interest, window treatments such as multi-paned windows with tile borders, and accented entries that are ornate and detailed. C. Historic plaques shall be incorporated and the materials from the existing buildings shall be incorporated to the greatest extent possible. d. The project shall be referred back to the Planning Director for final review in consultation with the City's Urban Design Consultant for compliance with the Design Guidelines and the outlined recommendations. 2. "Approved Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12 with findings and conditions of approval." 3. "Approve Special Permit No. 99-1 to allow a seven feet build-to-line for the 1" and 2nd story of all four buildings in lieu of the required five feet with findings. PL00-10 -4- 02/14/00 1:36 PM • REQUEST FOR ACTION MEETING DATE: February 22, 2000 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PL00-10 4. "Deny Special Permit No. 99-2 to allow the 2"d floor balcony of all four buildings at a setback of two feet in lieu of the required five feet with findings for denial." Analysis: A. PROJECT PROPOSAL: Applicant: Jeff Bergsma, 221 Main Street, Suite H, Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Appellant. Dave Sullivan, Councilmember Location: 117, 119, 121, and 123 Main Street (west side between PCH and Walnut Ave.) Conditional Use Permit No. 98-37 and Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12 represent a request for the following: 117 Main Street (Perq's Bar): A. To permit the exterior and interior remodel of the 1st and 2nd-floor pursuant to Section 4.5.01(b) of the Downtown Specific Plan (DTSP) and Section 245.06 of the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance (HBZSO). B. To establish a restaurant/banquet facility with outdoor patio dining and alcohol service on the 2"d floor pursuant to Section 4.5.01(b) of the DTSP and Section 245.06 of the HBZSO. 119 Main Street (Cat Walks To permit the exterior and interior remodel of the 1st floor and construction of a new 2"d floor for retail or office use pursuant to Section 4.5.01(b) of the DTSP and Section 245.06 of the HBZSO. 121 Main Street (The Closet): To permit the exterior and interior remodel of the 1st floor and construction of a new 2"d floor for office use pursuant to Section 4.5.01(b) of the DTSP and Section 245.06 of the HBZSO. 123 Main Street (Sunshine Suit Co.): To demolish the existing one-story commercial building and construct a new two-story building with retail on the 1st floor and office on the 2"d floor pursuant to Section 4.5.01(b) of the DTSP and Section 245.06 of the HBZSO. Special Permit No. 99-1 represents a request to allow a staff recommendation of seven (7) feet build-to-line in lieu of the required five (5) feet for the 1st and 2nd stories of all four buildings along Main Street pursuant to Sections 4.1.02 and 4.5.06 of the DTSP. PL00-10 -5- 02/14/00 1:36 PM 0 REQUEST FOR ACTION 0 MEETING DATE: February 22, 2000 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PL00-10 Special Permit No. 99-2 represents a request to allow the 2"d floor balcony of all four buildings at a setback of two (2) feet in lieu of the five (5) feet build-to-line required along Main Street pursuant to Sections 4.1.02 and 4.5.06 of the DTSP. A two-story building presently exists at 117 Main with the Vt floor currently.occupied by Perq's Bar which will remain after the remodel. The 2"d floor is currently mostly vacant except for a small office and another room illegally used for residential purposes. The applicant is proposing a new restaurant/banquet facility with outdoor patio dining and alcohol service for the 2"d floor. The other three properties at 119, 121, and 123 Main Street are presently developed with one-story commercial buildings. The applicant proposes to add a new 2"d story onto the existing building at both 119 and 121 Main Street for retail/office and office use respectively. As part of the submittal, the applicant is proposing to abandon three (3) feet of alley along the rear (west side) of 119 Main Street to match 117, 121, and 123 Main Street. Finally 123 Main Street is presently developed with a one-story building. The applicant proposes to demolish this building entirely and construct a new two-story building for retail use on the 1" floor and office use on the 2"d floor. The proposal includes a new common facade design for all four properties consisting primarily of light colored stucco. Each building is proposed to have a varied storefront design with accent colors. The following is a breakdown of the existing and proposed square footage: Address Existing Proposed 117 Main 5,000 s.f. 4,685 s.f. 119 Main 2,500 s.f. 4,525 s.f. 121 Main 2,500 s.f. 4,525 s.f. 123 Main 1,875 s.f. 4,525 s.f. Totals 11,875 s.f. 18,260 s.f. The subject properties are located in the Downtown Parking Master Plan (DPMP). The DPMP established a shared parking concept for the core area along Main Street. The core area is divided into two parts, Area 1 south of Orange Ave., and Area 2 north of Orange Ave. The DPMP projected a total of 500,000 sq. ft. of commercial building area (retail/office/restaurant/misc.). The DPMP also established overall (Areas 1&2) development thresholds of 50,000 sq. ft. for miscellaneous (theaters, etc.), 100,000 sq. ft. for restaurant, 100,000 sq. ft. for office, and 250,000 sq. ft. for retail. The project site is located within Block A of Area 1, which has the greatest concentration of retail, restaurant, office and miscellaneous uses. Area 1 was projected for a maximum of 358,255 square feet of total commercial development. Block A has 94,050 square feet of allowed development within the amount identified for Area 1. Within these thresholds, the DPMP allocated the following amount of development: PL00-10 -6- 02/14/00 1:36 PM • REQUEST FOR ACTION . MEETING DATE: February 22, 2000 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PL00-10 DPMP DEVELOPMENT THRESHOLDS gBuildina __TotalArea'= Potential Bu�ld�ng Proposed Builiing Use Area Retail 30,953 s.f. 12,000 s.f. 9,525 s.f. Restaurant 22,798 s.f. 20,000 s.f. 4,685 s.f. Office 40,299 s.f. 10,000 s.f. 4,050 s.f. TOTALS 94,050 s.f. 42,000 s.f. 18,260 s.f. Parking for the project is provided through the implementation of the Downtown Parking Master Plan (DPMP). No on-site parking is proposed for the project. The project is below the threshold of allowed development within Block A and is therefore determined to be adequately parked under the shared parking concept of the DPMP. Alternatively, the DPMP allows the City Council to require additional measures to ensure that adequate parking is provided if in the opinion of the City Council the project does not comply with the DPMP. The City Council may impose one, 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. A dedication of four (4) feet along Main Street is required to accommodate angled parking and two-way traffic along Main Street. The dedication requirement is consistent with the dedication requirements imposed on other new developments along both sides of Main Street. The applicant has noted the dedication requirement on the submitted plans but has done so in protest (Attachment No. 9). The applicant has indicated that the current request is necessary (Attachment No. 7) to allow the respective property owners to maximize the use of their property. The restaurant/banquet facility with outdoor patio dining and alcohol service on the 2"d floor of 117 Main is proposed to complement the existing Perq's Bar located on the 1st floor and to provide more visitor serving commercial uses in the downtown. PL00-10 -7- 02/14/00 1:36 PM • REQUEST FOR ACTION • MEETING DATE: February 22, 2000 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PL00-10 B. BACKGROUND In 1993, the City Council approved Tentative Tract Map No. 14666, Conditional Use Permit No. 92-17 with Special Permits, Coastal Development Permit No. 92-14, and Conditional Exception No. 92-28 which is commonly referred to as the Coultrup plan. The project was a request to construct an 80=unit condominium project and two commercial buildings totaling 40,810 square feet on the two-blocks bounded by 6th Street, Main Street, PCH, and Walnut Avenue (which included the subject properties). The Coastal Commission approved the project as well but the applicants were unable to perform and the entitlements expired. C. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AND RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST: On January 11, 2000, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed request. Eight people spoke in favor of the project stating that it will be an improvement to the area and will allow the property owners to maximize the use of their property. The speakers believed that the project complies with the Downtown Specific Plan and the Design Guidelines. The project architect explained that the proposal complies with the required five (5) feet build-to-line and aligns with the major features of the adjacent Oceanview Promenade development. He explained that the balcony projection will provide architectural relief. He also believes that the-Downtown-Specific states that the,open space requirement can be met anywhere in the development and that their proposal complies with the requirement. The Planning Commission reviewed all of the applicant's-proposed changes to the conditions of approval. After discussion and straw votes of numerous project issues, the Planning Commission approved the project on a 5-2 vote with revisions. The Planning Commission supported the project because they believe it complies with the Downtown Specific Plan and Design Guidelines and will improve the four deteriorated properties. D. APPEAL: Council Member Dave Sullivan filed an appeal (Attachment No. 4) based on the following reasons: 1. The approval of the Special Permit for the 2"d floor balcony encroachment of three (3) feet along Main Street. 2. The approval of the five (5) feet build-to-line for the 1" and 2"d stories in lieu of staffs recommendation of seven (7) feet to match the adjacent Oceanview Promenade project. 3. The inaccessible public open space located at the rear of the building and on the 2nd story. 4. The project's lack of architectural and design conformance to the Downtown Design Guidelines. PL00-10 -8- 02/14/00 1:36 PM REQUEST FOR ACTION MEETING DATE: February 22, 2000 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PL00-10 E. STAFF ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION: The Downtown Specific Plan envisions District Three (Visitor-Serving Commercial) as the hub of the Downtown core containing higher intensity visitor-serving uses. To achieve this high intensity development the District encouraged consolidated multi-block development for greater design flexibility. The Oceanview Promenade (Abdelmuti) building set the stage for this block by establishing building setbacks and design features along both Main Street and Pacific Coast Highway. When reviewing the proposal, the proposal is not only critiqued as to compliance with code and design requirements but also to the integration of the full block development envisioned for the District. Staff did not review this as a stand alone project only but as a project that can integrate and complement the vision for the District. The primary issues with this project include compatibility with the surrounding area, code compliance, and building design/site layout. The following is an analysis of the primary issues and the basis for the appeal. Appeal Issue No. 1: The applicant has submitted a request for a Special Permit to allow the 2"d story front balcony for all four buildings at a setback of two (2) feet in lieu of the five (5) feet build-to-line required along Main Street. Staff believes that the applicant's requested Special Permit is not consistent with the approved design of the first block of Main Street. The Special Permit does not promote a better living environment and there are no significantly greater benefits to be provided from the project than would occur if all the minimum requirements were met. The Special Permit will allow the 2"d floor balconies to encroach three (3) feet into the required five (5) feet build-to-line which will not be consistent with the setback approved on the adjacent Oceanview Promenade development at the northwest corner of PCH and Main. The special permit will not provide for a site layout consistent with other new construction in the area which do not have balconies encroaching into the required build-to-line. Because the area is anticipated for high intensity development, additional consideration must be given to upper-story setbacks and preservation of view, light, and air corridors to assure that the area remains a pleasant pedestrian environment. Staff does not support the applicant's proposed design with reduced setback. Denial of this Special Permit will be consistent with the City Council's denial of a Special Permit for Standard Market (126 Main Street) to allow the 2"d floor balcony at a zero setback in lieu of the required five feet build-to-line. Appeal Issue No. 2: The proposed project is not a stand-alone development and should be viewed in the context of the whole block. The approval of the Oceanview Promenade development (Abdelmuti) set the stage for this block with .its seven feet setback along Main Street. Staff is PL00-10 -9- 02/14/00 1:36 PM • REQUEST FOR ACTION • MEETING DATE: February 22, 2000 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PL00-10 recommending that if the project were approved, that the staff recommended Special Permit be included to require both the 1st and 2"d floor for all four buildings be setback seven (7) feet (no balcony encroachment) to be consistent with the setback for the adjacent Oceanview Promenade development. The 1995 amendment to the Downtown Specific Plan established a "Village Concept" for the downtown that calls for pedestrian-oriented design. The Downtown Design Guidelines serve as a companion document to the Specific Plan and present architectural and siting guidelines for development downtown. It states that new buildings shall be designed to create pleasing transitions to surrounding development and that the bulk of new buildings shall relate to the prevailing scale of adjacent development. As such, the project is being analyzed in the context of the larger block in which it belongs. To create a pleasing transition and to provide a pedestrian-oriented design with adequate sidewalk width, the seven feet setback is being recommended to match the Oceanview Promenade development which has set the tone in terms of site layout for the entire block. The Design Guidelines state that the municipal pier is the focal point of the design concept set forth in the Downtown Specific Plan because it serves as the main attraction in the downtown. The plan seeks to draw pedestrians up and down Main Street from the pier. Therefore, adequate and consistent pedestrian walkways are critical along Main Street, particularly along the first block, which is closest to the pier where the pedestrian concentration is highest. Additionally, the increased setback will provide a continuous retail fagade and allows for a wider sidewalk for improved pedestrian circulation and outdoor dining opportunities consistent with the goal of pedestrian-oriented development in the downtown. The objective of the specific plan was to create a relationship between the public space and the storefront. The project as proposed by the applicant fails to accomplish this in a satisfactory manner. The increased setback of seven (7) feet will accomplish an important aspect of the design concept for downtown. The increased sidewalk width will continue to extend Main Street inland from the ocean and pier and encourage pedestrian movement along the street. By facilitating the extension of pedestrian activity from the pier, the commercial core along Main Street can become a livelier shopping thoroughfare oriented to pedestrians and offering opportunities to shop, dine or browse in a beach-oriented atmosphere. Appeal Issue No. 3: The location of the project's public open space is another concern to staff. The specific plan requires that all developments within District 3 provide public open space equivalent to a minimum of ten (10) percent of the net site area. The applicant provides the minimum open space area to meet this code requirement. However, the open space is practically unusable in the location proposed at the rear 2"1 floor balconies of the buildings facing the alley. The Specific Plan states that the public open space requirement cannot be met by open areas which are inaccessible to the general public or are contrary to specific requirements of a PL00-10 -10- 02/14/00 1:36 PM • REQUEST FOR ACTION 0 MEETING DATE: February 22, 2000 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PL00-10 district. Staff believes that the intent of the requirement is to provide public open space that is readily seen, accessed, and used for public enjoyment. The applicant's proposal does not comply with the intent of the requirement because the public open space is proposed in an undesirable location where-it will remain unused by the public. Staff does not support the applicant's design of the proposed open space area. If the project were approved, staff recommends requiring the public common open space to be provided along Main Street where it will be more visible, accessible, and useable (Attachment No. 10). Such a design concept is critical to enhancing the vitality and magnetism associated with pedestrian oriented developments because a well-designed public open space area such as a public plaza serves as a focal point for pedestrian activity. This design concept is consistent with the public open space provided for several projects downtown, including Main Promenade, Pierside Pavilion, Oceanview Promenade, and Standard Market. Appeal Issue No. 4: The last main issue pertains to the building design and site layout and compliance with the Downtown Design Guidelines (DTDG). The design of the project has been revised since the initial plans were submitted. The applicant has attempted to incorporate several of staffs and the Design Review Board's (DRB)- recommendations 'but still falls short. The architecture of this project fails to recognize it is a part of a greater whole. The proposal stands out without complimenting the existing Oceanview Promenade. In discussions with the applicant, staff presented design changes in order to achieve greater compliance with the goals and objectives of the Downtown Design Guidelines which envisioned contemporary Mediterranean architecture comprised of influences from coastal regions. The adopted theme is an expression of the coastal influence on Huntington Beach. The climate and ocean proximity dictate orientation to the prevailing breezes, protection from the sun and wind, and views of the ocean. The Mediterranean concept can be achieved through use of: varied and creative building forms and mass, setbacks that relate to the human scale and adjacent buildings; site layout that creates varied and interesting pedestrian spaces such as plazas; as well as development of structures designed to respect the views of existing buildings. Specifically, the guidelines require the following: • The guidelines indicate that the use of appropriate roof forms either alone or in combination should be encouraged to achieve the varying roofline-characteristic of Mediterranean Villages. The roofline and building elevations proposed are too linear and should incorporate more variation and offsets. • The guidelines call for orienting downtown development towards pedestrians. This can be achieved by providing varied building setbacks to create plaza-like areas which attract pedestrians whenever possible. Staff acknowledges that this is difficult to achieve in this case since there are four separate properties with different owners. PL00-10 -11- 02/14/00 1:36 PM • REQUEST FOR ACTION MEETING DATE: February 22, 2000 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PL00-10 However, the inclusion of a courtyard/plaza should be considered to provide a break in the facade and for added visual interest. • The guidelines indicate that to maintain a human scale, building facades shall be detailed in such a way-as to make them appear shorter. One way of achieving this is by increasing the level of detail on the buildings at.the street Jevel...The front and rear elevations of all four buildings, as well as the south elevation of 117 Main (along the pedestrian alley)-should incorporate more decorative architectural details/elements for visual interest. Likewise, the rear stairs should be enclosed within the building to provide a more attractive elevation facing the alley as now shown on the revised plans which now incorporate glass block along the rear. The provision of potted plants and/or planter boxes will also achieve further compliance with this guideline. • The guidelines state that windows in the Mediterranean style are typically multi-paned and should incorporate variation by including treatments such as: the borders, colored window framing, shutters, plant-on relief features, iron or wooden grills, dormers, projecting bay windows, window boxes, and pop-outs. The project should be revised to incorporate several of these elements. • The guidelines also suggest that project entries are a major design element in the Mediterranean style and are typically highly ornate and detailed. Special pavers/tile lead-in paths to the main entry should be used. • Finally, to acknowledge the historic value of the buildings, a plaque should be incorporated into the project and/or the materials from the existing buildings should be incorporated into the design of the new buildings as appropriate. The staff does not support the project because the proposal does not provide adequate setback along Main Street, does not provide accessible public open space, and does not further the goals and objectives of the Downtown Design Guidelines which promote a Mediterranean and pedestrian-oriented design. The proposed architecture, building design and site layout do not fully achieve the goals and objectives that the Downtown Design Guidelines require and has been achieved in other development in the downtown. Inadequate rooflines, pedestrian orientation, facade treatments, and window treatments are proposed by the applicant's design. Environmental Status: The proposed project is covered under Environmental Impact Report No. 89-6 and an addendum, which were certified by the City Council on November 19, 1991 for the Main Pier Phase II project. That project included the construction of approximately 115,000 square feet of commercial retail and 140 residential units. The environmental impact report and its addendum analyzed project impacts in the areas of land use compatibility, aesthetics, earth resources, historic resources, light and glare, and parking. The City Council adopted a statement of overriding consideration to address the unavoidable adverse impacts created by light and glare and impacts to historic structures. Impacts to historic resources are a PL00-10 -12- 02/14/00 1:36 PM • REQUEST FOR ACTION • MEETING DATE: February 22, 2000 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PL00-10 result of the demolition of existing historic buildings on the property. Through the implementation of the mitigation measures identified in the EIR, the'potentially adverse impacts associated with the project are mitigated to a level of insignificance. Attachment(s): NumberCity Clerk's Page . Description 1. Findings and Suggested Conditions of Approval - Conditional Use Permit No. 98-37/Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12/Special Permit No. 99-2 and Findings for Denial of Special Permit No. 99-1 (Planning Commission Action) 2. Findings for Denial - Conditional Use Permit No. 98-37/Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12/Special Permit No. 99-1/Special Permit No. 99-2 (Staff Recommendation) 3. Alternative Findings and Suggested Condition of Approval — Conditional Use Permit No. 98-37/Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12//Special Permit No. 99-1 and Findings for Denial of Special Permit No. 99-2 (Staff's Alternative Recommendation) 4. Appeal Letter Received 1/20/00 from Council Member Dave Sullivan 5 PC Staff Reports dated 1/11/, 12/14/00, 11/23/00 w/out attachments 6 Site plan, floor plan, elevations dated November 29, 1999 7 Project Narrative(s) dated 4/28/99 and 11/30/99 8 Planning Commission Minutes dated January 11, 2000 9 Letter from Michael Leifer, Attorney at Law dated September 9, 1999 10 Conceptual public open space plan prepared by staff RCA Author: HZ:SH:HF:RR PL00-10 -13- 02/14/00 1:36 PM • • C ., �a i /n1 _70 FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 98-37/ COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 98-12/ SPECIAL PERIVIIT NO. 99-2 FINDINGS FOR DENIAL SPECIAL PERMIT NO. 99-1 FINDINGS FOR PROJECTS SUBJECT TO CEOA: The Planning Commission finds that the project is covered by Environmental Impact Report No. 89-6 and will comply with all applicable mitigation measures and will not have any significant effect on the environment. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL- CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 98-37: 1. Conditional Use Permit No. 98-37 for the establishment, maintenance and operation of the . following: a. 117 Main Street: 1)Exterior and interior remodel of the 1't and 2nd floor; 2)Establish a restaurant/banquet facility with outdoor patio dining and alcohol service on the 2nd floor. b. 119 Main Street: 1)Exterior and interior remodel of the 1't floor;2) Construct a new 2nd floor for retail or office use; 3)Abandonment of three (3)feet of alley on the west side. c. 121 Main Street: 1)Exterior and interior remodel of the 1't floor; 2) Construct a new 2nd floor for office use. d. 123 Main Street: 1)Demolish the existing building and construct a new two-story building with retail on the l'floor and office on the 2nd floor. will not be detrimental to the general welfare of persons working or residing in the vicinity or detrimental to the value of the property and improvements in the neighborhood. The project as proposed and modified by the conditions.imposed, will improve'a visually degraded site and will enhance the appearance of the general area based on the proposed integrated development with a common fagade design incorporating all four properties for a cohesive appearance. The project is consistent with the Downtown Specific Plan and the Design Guidelines and will add to the Mediterranean and pedestrian character of the downtown. Adequate parking for the project is provided within the Downtown Parking Master Plan. (00c1111-26) 2. The conditional use permit will be compatible with surrounding uses because the proposed construction and Visitor Serving Commercial uses are an extension of the existing character - of the downtown. It will include retail and other uses that will add to the vitality and pedestrian orientation envisioned for the downtown. 3. The conditional use permit, as modified by the conditions imposed, will comply with the provisions of the base district and other applicable provisions in Titles 20-25 of the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance and any specific condition required for the proposed use in the district in which it would be located, except for any,special permits approved concurrently. The project complies with all minimum development standards including lot size, building height, setbacks, floor area, and parking. 4. The granting of the conditional use permit will not adversely affect the General Plan. It is consistent with the Land Use Element designation of Mixed Use Vertical on the subject property. In addition, it is consistent with the following goals and policies of the General Plan: a. Goal LU8: Achieve a pattern of land uses that preserves, enhances, and establishes a distinct identity for the City's neighborhoods, corridors, and centers. b. Objective LU10.1:Provide for the continuation of existing and the development of a f diversity of retail and service commercial uses that are oriented to the needs of local residents, serve the surrounding region, serve visitors to.the City, and capitalize on Huntington Beach's recreational resources. c. PoILU LU 10.1.4. Require that commercial buildings and sites be designed to achieve a high level of architectural and site layout quality. d. Policy 11.1.7:Require that mixed-use development projects be designed to achieve a consistent and high quality character, including the consideration of architectural treatment of building elevations to convey the visual character of multiple building volumes and individual storefronts. e. Policy LU 15.2.2: Require that structures located in the pedestrian overlay zone be sited and designed to enhance pedestrian activity along the sidewalks, in consideration of the following guidelines: 1. Incorporation of uses that stimulate pedestrian activity in first floor along the street frontage, encouraging professional offices, data computing, and other similar uses to be located in the rear or above the first floor unless economically infeasible; 2. Siting of the linear frontage of the building along the front yard property line to maintain a"building wall" character, except for areas contiguous with the structure use for outdoor dining or courtyards; 3. Assurance that areas between building storefronts and public sidewalks are visually and physically accessible to pedestrians, except as may be required for landscape and security; (00d111-27) 4. Extensive articulation of the building fagade and use of multiple building volumes and planes; 5. Incorporation of landscape and other elements such as planted beds, planters, and window boxes that visually distinguish the site and structure; 6. Incorporation of arcades, courtyards, and other recesses along the street elevation to provide visual relief and.interest; 7. Use of roofline and height variation to break up the massing"and provide visual interest; 8. Visual differentiation of upper and lower floors; 9. Distinct treatment of building entrances; and 10. Use of pedestrian-oriented signage. f. Objective ED 2.6:Expand and enhance the existing visitor serving uses. g. Policy ED 3.2.3: Attract visitor-serving uses near the beach in order to create better linkages between the beach and Visitor supporting retail uses. h. Policy S:Protect, encourage, and where feasible provide visitor-serving facilities in the coastal zone which are varied in type and price. i. Policy 7: Improve the appearance of visually degraded areas. The project is an extension of other similar uses found in the downtown.with visitor servicing commercial uses located on the.It floor, and office or other commercial uses located on the 2ad floor. The project as modified by the conditions of approval will provide a pedestrian oriented design and conform to the Downtown Design Guidelines. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL- COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 98-12: 1. Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12 for the development project, as proposed or as modified by conditions of approval, conforms with the General Plan, including the Local Coastal Program. The project is consistent with the General Plan Land.Use Element designation of Mixed-Use Vertical. The project will comply with the Downtown Specific Plan—District 3 (Visitor Serving Commercial)because the proposed uses, particularly on the first floor will add to the variety of Visitor Serving Commercial uses and will further the pedestrian oriented objective for the downtown. 2. `The project is consistent with the requirements of the CZ Overlay District,the base zoning district, as well as other applicable provisions of the Municipal Code. The project, as modified by conditions, will conform to all development standards including setbacks, height, and parking. 3. At the time of occupancy the proposed development can be provided with infrastructure in a manner that is consistent with the Local Coastal Program. All infrastructure currently exist on the subject site and will be modified as needed to conform to the City's current standards. (00c1111-28) 4. The development conforms to the public access and public recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the California Coastal Act. The development will not impact any public access and recreation opportunities. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL—SPECIAL PERMIT NO. 99-2: (2 feet setback for 2"d sto 1. The requested special permit to allow the 2"d floor balcony for all four buildings at a setback of two(2)feet in lieu of the required five(5)feet build-to-line along Main Street pro omotes a better living environment. There are greater benefits to be provided from the project than would occur if all the minimum requirements were met. The special permit allows for greater articulation of the elevation to provide a more aesthetically pleasing appearance consistent with the Downtown Design Guidelines. 2. The special permit provides better lAnd planning techniques with maximum use of aesthetically pleasing types of architecture,landscaping, site layout, and design. The special permit will allow for added visual interest by providing greater offsets and variation in the building elevation. 3. The special permit will not be detrimental to the general health, welfare, safety and convenience of the neighborhood or City in general, nor be detrimental or injurious to the value of property or improvements of the.neighborhood or of the City in general because it represents a minor three(3)feet encroachment of the 2nd floor balcony for all four buildings into the required five(5) feet build-to-line. 4. The special permit is consistent with the objectives of the Downtown Specific Plan in achieving a development adapted to the terrain and compatible with the surrounding environment. The modified project does not block views and adds variation to the building elevation for added visual interest consistent with the requirements of the Downtown Specific Plan and Design Guidelines. 5. The special permit is consistent with the policies of the Coastal Element of the City's General Plan and the California Coastal Act because it will not impact any public access or recreation opportunities and will provide a better elevation design. FINDINGS FOR DENIAL—SPECIAL PERART NO. 99-1: (7 feet setback for 1t and 2nd sto 1. The requested special permit to allow a seven(7)feet build-to-line in lieu of the required five (5)feet along Main Street does not promote a better living environment. There will not be significantly greater benefits to be provided from the project than would occur if all the minimum requirements were met. The special permit for greater setbacks is inconsistent with a pedestrian-oriented design which calls for buildings to be located close to the street for a more pedestrian scale. (00cll 11-29) 2. The special permit does not provide better land planning techniques with maximum use of aesthetically pleasing types of architecture, landscaping, site layout, and design. The special permit will not provide for a pedestrian-oriented design with building facades close to the street as envisioned for District 3 of the Downtown Specific Plan. 3. The special permit will be detrimental to the general health, welfare,safety and convenience of the neighborhood or City in general, and detrimental or injurious to the value of property or improvements of the neighborhood or of the City in general because it will result in a development that is setback too far from the street which is inconsistent with a pedestrian- oriented design which calls for buildings to be located towards the street fora more human. scale. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL—CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 98-37/COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 98-12/SPECIAL PERNIIT NO. 99-2: 1. The site plan, floor plans and elevations received and dated November 29, 1999 shall be the conceptually approved layout with the following modifications (applicable to all four buildings) subject to the review and approval of the Planning Department: a. Elevations shall depict colors and building materials as approved by the Design Review Board. b. Glass block at rear stairwell shall be translucent for Police visibility. (PD) c. A minimum of one foot candle of light shall be provided along the rear of the buildings to . the approval of the Police Department. (PD) d. Approved plants shall be installed in the front and rear planters of the buildings. (DRB) e. Special pavers shall be installed as shown on site plan. (DRB) f. _ Transom windows and side lites to be divided as shown on elevations. (DRB) g. The City shall implement consistency of similar hardscape and landscape on both sides of Main Street. (Mitigation Measure) +: h. Depict all utility apparatus, such as but not limited to back flow devices and Edison transformers on the site plan. Utility meters shall be screened from view from public rights-of-way. Electric transformers in a required front or street side.yard shall be enclosed in subsurface vaults. Backflow prevention devices shall be prohibited in the front yard setback and shall be screened from view. (Code Requirement) (00c1111-30) i. All exterior mechanical equipment shall be screened from view on all sides. Rooftop mechanical equipment shall be setback 15 feet from the exterior edges of the building. Equipment to be screened includes, but is not limited to, heating, air conditioning, refrigeration equipment, plumbing lines, ductwork and transformers. Said screening shall be architecturally compatible with the building in terms of materials and colors. If screening is not designed specifically into the building, a rooftop mechanical equipment plan showing screening.must be submitted for review and approval with the application- for building permit(s). (Code Requirement) j. Depict all gas meters, water meters, electrical panels, air conditioning units, mailbox facilities and similar items on the site plan and elevations. If located on a building, they shall be architecturally designed into the building to appear as part of the building. They shall be architecturally compatible with the building and non-obtrusive, not interfere with sidewalk areas and comply with required setbacks. k. Additional decorative.architectu�al details/accents(i.e. the insets, decorative lighting) shall be provided on both the front and rear elevations of all four buildings, as well as the south elevation of 117 Main(along the pedestrian alley). 1. Window design and treatment shall be subject to Design Review Board review. m. A plaque shall be incorporated into the building design of 117, 119, 121 and 123 Main Street identifying the historic significance of the sites.and/or the materials from the existing building shall be incorporated into the design of the new building as appropriate. 2. Prior to issuance of demolition permits, the following shall be completed: a. The applicant shall follow all procedural requirements and regulations of the South Coast Air Quality Management District(SCAQMD) and any other local, state, or federal law regarding the removal and disposal of any hazardous material including asbestos,lead, and PCB's. These requirements include but are not limited to: survey, identification of removal methods, containment measures, use and treatment of water, proper truck i hauling, disposal procedures, and proper notification to any and.all involved agencies. b. Pursuant to the requirements of the South Coast Air Quality Management District, an asbestos survey shall be completed: c. The applicant shall complete all Notification requirements of the South Coast Air Quality Management District. d. The City of Huntington Beach shall receive written verification from the South Coast Air Quality Management District that the Notification procedures have been completed. e. All asbestos shall be removed from all buildings prior to demolition of any portion of any building. (00c1111-31) f. A truck hauling and routing plan for all trucks involved in asbestos removal and demolition of the existing structures shall be submitted to the Department of Public - Works and approved by the Director of Public Works. g. The applicant shall disclose the method of demolition on the demolition permit application for review and approval by the Building and Safety Director. h. An adequate monitoring and/or bonding program shall be established between the City and property owners to ensure that demolition and construction vibration impacts do not adversely affect offsite structures. (Mitigation Measure) i. All facets of the project related to historic preservation shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Huntington Beach. (Mitigation Measure) j. The applicant shall provide 45 days written notice to the City of Huntington Beach Historic Resources Board inforrung them of such activity. The Board may relocate, fully document and/or preserve significant architectural elements. The applicant/property owner shall not incur any costs associated with moving or documenting the structure by the Board. (Mitigation Measure) k. Comprehensive documentation of the project site,as it currently exists, shall be prepared prior to the issuance of any building, grading, and/or demolition permits. The documentation shall be in accordance with standards established by the Historical American Buildings Survey/Historical American Engineering Records (HABS/HAER). The report shall be archivally maintained with provisions for public access. The costs associated with preparation and maintenance of the documentation shall be the responsibility of the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency. (Mitigation Measure) 1. Pursuant to Section 65590 of the California Government Code,the applicant shall submit a plan for replacement of any existing residential units occupied by persons and families of low or moderate income that are converted or demolished as a result of this project for review and approval by the Planning Department. 3. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the following shall be completed: a. A grading plan, prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer, shall be.submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval..(PW) b. The name and phone number of a field supervisor who is on-site shall be submitted to the Planning Department and Public Works Department. In addition, clearly visible signs shall be posted on the perimeter of the site indicating whom to contact for information regarding this development and any construction/grading activity. This contact person shall be available immediately to address any concerns or issues raised by adjacent property owners during the construction activity. He/she will be responsible for ensuring compliance with the conditions herein, specifically, grading activities, truck routes, construction hours, noise, etc. (00cI111-32) c. A project-specific soils and engineering report shall be prepared by a qualified soils engineer based on a detailed plan of the project. All recommendations of this report shall be incorporated into the project. (Mitigation Measure) d. A pre-grading meeting shall be arranged to discuss the recommendations of the soil investigation and project requirements. Representatives of all concerned parties shall be present. (Mitigation Measure) e. It shall be the responsibility of the owner and/or contractor to: bring to the attention of a certified soils engineer any unusual conditions which may be encountered in the course of project development and to request appropriate guidance before proceeding with the affected work, and to ensure that the recommendations of the soil report and any supplemental reports are implemented. (Mitigation Measure) f. The applicant shall provide docu'nentation of existing structural conditions in the vicinity V. of the proposed project and the estimated extent.and impact of subsidence on surrounding structures and other improvements, to the satisfaction of the Building Department. (Mitigation Measure) g. Should ground water be found during excavation, dewatering of the project site shall be required. The applicant shall monitor the extent of subsidence and its associated impacts through placement of appropriate testing devices under the supervision and surveillance of a qualified soil engineer. The City shall be kept informed regarding any structural impacts on adjacent properties and other improvements, and if feasible and necessary, construction process will be modified to eliminate such impacts. (Mitigation Measure) 4. Prior to submittal for building permits, the following shall be completed: a. Zoning entitlement conditions of approval shall be printed verbatim on all the working drawing sets used for issuance of building permits(architectural, structural, electrical, mechanical and plumbing) and shall be referenced in the index. b. This project shall be submitted as one plan check submittal to include all four properties (117, 119, 121, 123 Main Street)to assure that all four properties are developed as one integrated project as presented on the approved plans and rendering. c. All Fire Department requirements shall be noted on the building plans. (FD) d. Grading and foundation plans, when available and prior to approval, shall be transmitted to a qualified soils engineer for review for compliance with their recommendations. (Mitigation Measure) e. All structures shall be designed in accordance with the seismic design provisions of the Uniform Building Codes to promote safety in the event of an earthquake. (Mitigation Measure) (00c1111-33) 5. Prior to issuance of building permits, the following shall be completed: a. Submit a copy of the revised site plan, floor plans and elevations pursuant to Condition No. 1 for review and approval and inclusion in the entitlement file to the Planning Department; and submit 8 inch.by 10 inch colored photographs of all colored renderings, elevations, materials sample board, and massing model to the Planning Department for inclusion in the entitlement file. b. A Landscape Construction Set must be submitted to the Department of Public Works and approved by the Departments of Public Works and Planning. The Landscape Construction Set shall include a landscape plan prepared and signed by a State Licensed Landscape Architect which identifies the location, type, size and quantity of all existing plant materials to remain, existing plant materials to be removed and proposed plant materials; an irrigation plan; a grading plan; an approved site plan and a copy of the entitlement conditions of approval. The landscape plans shall be in conformance with Chapter 232 of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance and applicable Design Guidelines. (PW) (Code Requirement) c. An interim parking and/or building materials storage plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department to assure adequate parking and restroom facilities are available for employees, customers and contractors during the project's construction phase and that adjacent properties will not be impacted by their location. The applicant shall obtain any . necessary encroachment permits from the Department of Public Works. d. Dedicate the following to the City of Huntington Beach: (PW)(Code Requirement) 1. 4 feet along the front of all four properties along Main Street 2. 4.5 feet along the rear of 117, 121, and 123 Main Street along the alley e. The alley abandonment for 119 Main Street shall be approved by the City Council. f. A grading plan, prepared by a Registered Engineer, shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. This plan, in addition to grading, shall include all of the required off-site improvements. �,g. The Departments of Planning and Public Works shall.approve a detailed lighting plan. The plan shall be consistent with the Downtown lighting plan and lighting standards in the Downtown Design Guidelines. Outdoor lighting shall utilize energy-saving lamps. All outside lighting shall be directed to prevent."spill-over" onto adjacent properties and . shall be shown on the site plan and elevations. Lighting shall be capable of being dimmed to a minimum security level during of hours of non-operation of the facility. (Mitigation Measure) (Planning) (PW) (00cI111-34) h. A sign and landscape plan shall be submitted to the Design Review Board for review and approval. The location and type of all signs shall conform to the provisions of the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance and be consistent with the standards listed on page 33 of the Downtown Design Guidelines. (Mitigation Measure) i. The applicant shall enter into a Maintenance.Agreement with the City for maintenance of all portions of public property along the project site. j. Elevations shall show all roofing materials as approved by Design Review Board. Solid concrete block walls, grape stake, or chain link fencing shall not be permitted. (Mitigation Measure) 6. Phased or individual construction of buildings is prohibited and all four buildings shall be demolished and/or remodeled at the same time. Construction and improvements for all four buildings shall be done simultaneously as approved by Conditional Use Permit No. 98-37, Coastal Development Permit No. 98 j12, and Special Permit No. 99-2. All conditions of approval shall be applicable to all four buildings and shall be complied with. 7. During demolition, grading, site development, and/or construction, the following shall be adhered to: a. Use water trucks or sprinkler systems in all areas where vehicles travel to keep damp enough to prevent dust raised when leaving the site: b. Wet down areas in the late morning and after work is completed for the day; c. Use low sulfur fuel (.05%)by weight for construction equipment; d. Attempt to phase and schedule construction activities to avoid high ozone days (first stage smog alerts); e. Discontinue construction during second stage smog alerts. f, Ensure clearly visible signs are posted on the perimeter of the site identifying the name and phone number of a field supervisor to contact for information regarding the development and any construction/grading activity. 8. Prior to final building permit inspection and approval and issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for any of the four buildings, the following shall be completed: a. All improvements to all four properties shall be completed in accordance with the approved plans and conditions of approval specified herein, including: 1) Landscaping. 2) Fire extinguishers will be installed and located in areas to comply with Huntington - Beach Fire Code Standards. (FD) (00dI 11-35) 3) A fire alarm system will be installed to comply with Huntington Beach Fire Department and Uniform Fire Code Standards. Shop drawings will be submitted to and approved by the Fire Department prior to installation. The system will provide the following: a. manual pull stations; b. water flow,,valve tamper and trouble detection; c. 24 hour supervision; d. annunciation; e. audible alarms; f. smoke detectors (FD) - 4) Address numbers will be installed to comply with City Specification No. 428. The numbers will be sized a minimum of six(6).inches with a brush stroke of one and one-half(1-1/2) inches. (FD) 5) Exit signs and exit.path markings will be provided in compliance with the Huntington Beach Fire Code end Title 24 of the California Administrative Code. (FD) 6) An automatic fire sprinkler system shall be approved and installed throughout pursuant to Fire Department regulations. Shop drawings shall be submitted and approved by the Fire Department prior to system installation. The buildings will be considered as one unit. (FD) 7) Submit a Fire Protection Plan for Fire Department approval in compliance with City Specification 428. (FD) 8) If elevators are installed, they shall be sized to accommodate an ambulance gurney. The minimum dimensions are 6'8" wide by 4'3" deep with a 42-inch minimum right or left side opening. Center opening doors require a 54-inch depth. (FD) 9) Construct new sewer lateral to each building unless existing lateral is proven to be in good condition to the satisfaction of the City Inspector. (PW) 10)The sewer service lateral size shall be 6" min. (PW) 11)If the existing 2" domestic meter and service lateral serving the building at 117 Main Street meets the minimum requirements set by the Uniform Plumbing Code (UPC) and the Uniform Fire Code(UFC), then it may be used to serve the development at this address. (PW) 12)The existing service to 121 Main Street currently being served from 119 Main Street service shall be abandoned, per City Standards. (PW). 13)The existing% inch water meter and service for the building at 123 Main Street: shall be abandoned to the main line. (PW) . 14)Each of the buildings proposed at 119, 121 and 123 Main Street shall have new separate domestic water services with(touch read type) meters and backflow protection devices. The water service laterals and meter size shall meet the minimum requirements set by the Uniform Plumbing Code(UPC)and Uniform Fire Code (UFC), but shall be a minimum service of 2 inches in size. (PW) 15)If the Fire Department requires that a separate fire service is to be constructed, it shall have a separate backflow device. (PW) (00c1111-35) 16)Remove and replace the existing sidewalk, per the Downtown Specific Plan, adjacent to project(Main Street). (PW) 17)Remove the existing curb and construct new curb and gutter adjacent to project (Main Street). (PW) 18)Install one street light along property frontage in a location compatible with the Public Works street lighting.plan for Main Street. (PW) 19)Remove and replace any deteriorated portion of east side of alley. Grind and cap east one-half(1/2) of alley (PW) 20)The applicant shall underground all new and existing electrical, telephone and cable TV service connections. (PW) 21)The existing angled.parking is to remain or the in-lieu parking fee shall be paid for each parking space lost. (PW) .22)The developer shall submit a composite utility plan, showing existing public water system facilities and all other underground utilities(existing and proposed)to each structure. (PW) 23)The applicant shall install puOic improvements pursuant to City Council adopted Main Street improvement plans. b. Compliance with all conditions of approval specified herein shall be accomplished and verified by the Planning Department. c. All building spoils, such as unusable lumber, wire, pipe, and other surplus or unusable material, shall be disposed of at an off-site.facility equipped to handle them. d. Existing fill materials and disturbed, loose soils shall be removed and replaced with component material as required by qualified soils engineer. Site preparation, excavation, and earthwork compaction operations shall be performed under the observation and testing of a soil engineer. Certification of such reports, shall be submitted to the City Engineer prior to issuance of building permits. (Mitigation Measure) 9. The project shall comply with the following: a. Prior to the sale of alcoholic beverages, a copy of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Board (ABC) license, along with any special conditions imposed by the ABC, shall be submitted to the Planning.Department for the file. Any conditions that are more Nt restrictive than those set forth in this approval shall be adhered to. b. The City and individual landowners shall meet with residential and business tenants to explain conversion process and relocation assistance. (Mitigation Measure) c. The City and individual landowners shall assist in the relocation of persons affected by this redevelopment project. (Mitigation Measure) (00c1111-37) d. The applicant shall provide a relocation coordinator who will provide general relocation assistance to all tenants. Availability of such a relocation assistant shall be to the approval of the City Council and shall be incorporated into the Relocation Assistance Program required by Article 927 of the Municipal Code. (Mitigation Measure) e. The project shall implement mitigation,measures included in Downtown Specific Plan EIR 82-2. (Mitigation Measure) f. The applicant shall provide relocation assistance to all displace businesses in accordance with the State Guidelines of Title 25, Chapter 6. This assistance will include information on the availability of other suitable sites, as well as payments to cover moving expenses and/or the loss of income including: the cost of the physical move; the cost of anything rendered useless asa consequence of the move(i.e. business cards, etc.); the cost of physical improvements. (Mitigation Measure) 10. The Planning Director ensures that aL conditions of approval herein are complied with. The Planning Director shall be notified in writing if any changes to the site plan, elevations and floor plans are proposed as a result of the plan check process. Building permits shall not be issued until the Planning Director has reviewed.and approved the proposed changes for conformance with the.intent of the Planning Commission's action and the conditions herein. If the proposed changes are of a substantial nature, an amendment to the original entitlement reviewed by the Planning Commission may be required pursuant to the HBZSO. INFORMATION ON SPECIFIC CODE REOUIREMENTS: 1. Conditional Use Permit No. 98-37, Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12, and Special Permit No. 99-2 shall not become effective until the ten working day appeal period has elapsed. 2. Conditional Use Permit No. 98-37, Coastal Development,Permit No. 98-12, and Special Permit No. 99-2 shall become null and void unless exercised within one year of the date of final approval or such extension of time as may be granted by the Director pursuant to a written request submitted to the Planning Department a minimum 30 days prior to the expiration date. 3. The Planning Commission reserves the right to revoke Conditional Use Permit No. 98-37, +Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12;and Special Permit No. 99-2, pursuant to a public hearing for revocation, if any violation of these conditions or the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance or Municipal Code occurs. 4. All applicable Public Works fees shall be paid. 5. The development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Municipal Code, Building Department, and Fire Department as well as applicable local, State and Federal Fire Codes, Ordinances, and standards, except as noted herein. (00cI111-38) 6. Construction shall be limited to Monday- Saturday 7:00 AM to 8:00 PM. Construction shall be prohibited Sundays and Federal holidays. 7. The applicant shall submit a check in the amount of$38.00 for the posting of the Notice of Determination at the County of Orange Clerk's Office. The check shall be made out to the County of Orange and submitted to the Planning Department within two (2) days of the Planning Commission's action. 8. All landscaping shall be maintained in a neat and clean manner, and in conformance with the BBZSO. Prior to removing or replacing any.landscaped areas, check with the Departments of Planning and Public Works for Code requirements. Substantial changes may require approval by the Planning Commission. 9. All signs shall conform to the BBZSO and Downtown Design Guidelines. Prior to installing any new signs, or changing sign faces, a building permit shall be obtained from the Planning Department. I y. 10. Traffic Impact Fees shall be paid at the time.of final inspection or issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. (PW) 11. State-mandated school impact fees shall be paid prior to issuance of building permits. 12. Prior to issuance of Building Permits.for new construction in the Downtown Specific Plan (SP-5)area, a Downtown Specific Plan fee shall be paid. 13. An encroachment permit shall be required for all work within the right-of-way. (PW) 14.Development shall meet all local and State regulations regarding installation and operation of all underground storage tanks. (FD) 15. A Certificate of Occupancy must be issued by the Planning Department and Building and Safety Department prior to occupying the building. 16.Live entertainment and dancing for any other suite other than the 1d floor of 117 Main Street shall require separate entitlement. (00c1111-39) ATTACHMENT NO.OL SUGGE*ST'EDFINDINGS"FORDENIAL FOR ' " 4 , r a z CODITIONAL,USE'PERMI NOy 9$ 37/COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMITNO 98 s 12/SPECIAL PERMIT NO 991/SPECIAI.3PE07 RMITNO 99 2 Elf SUGGESTED FINDINGS FOR DENIAL-CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 98-37: 1. Conditional Use Permit No. 98-37 for the establishment, maintenance and operation of the following: a. 117 Main Street: 1) Exterior and interior remodel of the V and 2°d floor; 2) Establish a restaurant/banquet facility with outdool patio dining and alcohol service on the 2°d floor. b. 119 Main Street: 1) Exterior and interior remodel of the 1"floor; 2) Construct a new 2°d floor for retail or office use. c. 121 Main Street: 1) Exterior and interior remodel of the I"floor; 2) Construct a new 2°d floor for office use. d. 123 Main Street: 1) Demolish the existing building and construct a new two-story building with retail on the V floor and office on the 2°d floor. will be detrimental to the general welfare of persons working or residing in the vicinity or detrimental to the value of the property and improvements in the neighborhood. The project is not in full compliance with the Downtown Specific Plan and the Design Guidelines, specifically regarding setbacks, open space, and design, and therefore will not conform to the Mediterranean and pedestrian character of the downtown. 2. The conditional use permit will not be compatible with surrounding uses because the project will not provide adequate 15`and 2°d story build-to-line setbacks as approved for the adjacent Oceanview Promenade development and therefore will not maintain a consistent"building wall" and an appropriate sidewalk width for the first block of Main Street as envisioned in the Downtown Specific Plan. The project will not be compatible with surrounding new development because it is not in full compliance with the Downtown Design Guidelines. 3. The conditional use permit does not comply with the provisions of the base district and other applicable provisions in Titles 20-25 of the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance and any specific condition required for the proposed use in the district in which it would be located. The 2°d floor front balconies do not comply with the required setback and the intent of providing a consistent view and pedestrian corridor, and the public open space requirement proposed along the rear balconies do not comply with the intent of the requirement to provide readily visible, accessible, and usable open space along Main Street. 4. The granting of the conditional use permit will adversely affect the General Plan. It is inconsistent with the following goals, policies, and objectives of the General Plan: a. Goal L U 4: Achieve and maintain high quality architecture, landscape, and public open spaces in the City. b. Policy LU 10.1.4: Require that commercial buildings and sites be designed to achieve a high level of architectural and site layout quality. c. Policy 11.1.7: Require that mixed-use development projects be designed to achieve a consistent and high quality character, including the consideration of architectural treatment of building elevations to convey the visual character of multiple building volumes and individual storefronts. d. Policy L U 15.2.2: Require that structures located in the pedestrian overlay zone.be sited and designed to enhance pedestrian activit'along the sidewalks, in consideration of the following guidelines: 1) Incorporation of uses that stimulate pedestrian activity in the first floor along the street frontage, encouraging professional offices, data computing, and other similar uses to be located in the rear or above the first floor unless economically infeasible; 2) Siting of the linear frontage of the building along the front yard property line to maintain a "building wall"character, except for areas contiguous with the structure use for outdoor dining or courtyards; 3) Assurance that areas between building storefronts and public sidewalks are visually and physically accessible to pedestrians, except as may be required for landscape and security; 4) Extensive articulation of the building fagade and use of multiple building volumes and planes; 5) Incorporation of landscape and other elements such as planted beds,planters, and window boxes that visually distinguish the site and structure; 6) Incorporation of arcades, courtyards, and other recesses along the street elevation to provide visual relief and interest; 7) Use of roofline and height variation to break up the massing and provide visual interest; 8) Visual differentiation of upper and lower floors; 9) Distinct treatment of building entrances; and 10)Use of pedestrian-oriented signage. The project does not incorporate adequate building setbacks, roofline variation and articulation, decorative architectural details/elements, multi-paned decorative windows, and special pavers/tile lead-in paths to the main entry to break up the massing and provide visual interest, achieve a high level of architectural and site layout quality, and enhance the pedestrian experience in the downtown. SUGGESTED FINDINGS FOR DENIAL -COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 98-12: 1. Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12 for the development project, as proposed does not conform with the General Plan, including the Local Coastal Program. The project is inconsistent with the Staff Report- 12/14/99 7 99SR57A goals,policies, and objectives of the General Plan that outline design guidelines to achieve a high _ level of architectural and site layout quality. The project does not comply with the Downtown Specific Plan—District 3 (Visitor Serving Commercial)with regard to the 2"d story balcony setback proposed at two (2) in lieu.of the required five (5) feet build-to-line and the intent of providing public , open space that is readily visible, accessible, and usable along Main Street. 2. The project is inconsistent with the requirements of the CZ Overlay District,the base zoning district, as well as other applicable provisions of the Municipal Code. The proposed project does not conform to the required five (5) feet build-to-line setback for the 2"d story balcony as well as the intent of the public open space requirement. The project as proposed does not provide a pedestrian-oriented Mediterranean design to the greatest extent possible in keeping with the Downtown Design E Guidelines. SUGGESTED FINDINGS FOR DENIAL—SPECIAL PERMIT NO. 99-1: L. The requested special permit to allow a seven (7)feet build-to-line in lieu of the required five (5)feet along Main Street does not promote a better living environment. There will not be significantly greater benefits to be provided from the project than would occur if all the minimum requirements were met. The special permit for greater setbacks is inconsistent with a pedestrian-oriented design which calls for buildings to be located close to the street for a more human and pedestrian scale. 2. The special permit does not provide better land planning techniques with maximum use of aesthetically pleasing types of architecture, landscaping, site layout, and design. The special permit will not provide for a pedestrian-oriented design with building facades close to the street as envisioned for District 3 of the Downtown Specific Plan. 1 3. The special permit will be detrimental to the general health, welfare, safety and convenience of the neighborhood or City in general, and detrimental or injurious to the value of property or improvements of the neighborhood or of the City in general because it will result in a development that is setback too far from the street which is inconsistent with a pedestrian-oriented design which calls for buildings to be located towards the street for a more human scale. SUGGESTED FINDINGS FOR DENIAL—SPECIAL PERMIT NO. 99-2: 1. The `requested special permit to allow the 2"a floor balcony for all,four buildings at a setback of two (2) feet in lieu of the required five (5) feet build-to-line along Main Street does not promote a better living environment. There are no significantly greater benefits to be provided from the project than would occur if all the minimum requirements were met. The special permit will allow the 2"d floor balconies to encroach into the required five (5) feet build-to-line which will not be consistent with the setback approved on the adjacent Oceanview Promenade Development at the northwest corner of PCH and Main. It will not maintain the retail fagade, and visual and pedestrian corridor established and envisioned for District 3 of the Downtown Specific Plan. Staff Report- 12/14/99 8 99SR57A 2. The special permit does not provide better land planning techniques with maximum use of aesthetically pleasing types of architecture, landscaping, site layout, and design. The special permit will not provide fora site layout consistent with other new construction in the area which do not have balconies encroaching into the required build-to-line. It will not maintain view corridors to the ocean which would have been achieved with a consistent setback along the first block of Main Street. r 3. The special permit will be detrimental to the general health, welfare, safety and convenience of the neighborhood or City in general, and detrimental or injurious to the value of property or improvements of the neighborhood or of the City in general because it will not maintain a"building wall"that is consistent with the adjacent development. 4. The special permit is inconsistent with the objectives of the Downtown Specific Plan in achieving a development adapted to the terrain and compatible with the surrounding environment. The modified project will not include setbacks consistent with new construction in District 3 of the Downtown Specific Plan which would have provided ftn adequate visual and pedestrian corridor. Staff Report- 12/14/99 9 99SR57A i � � � -- �- �__ �- � � �� -` �_ � � , " ATTACHMENT NO. 3 (Staffs Alternative Motion):'.. Aal .w = 40, flaw ._ Al S ,GGBST-ED FI°NEDINGS AND CONDITIONS OFxAPPROVAL FOR CONDITIONALUSE�PERM�ITN09837/COASALDEyEI.®PMENTPERMITNO SPECIALWPERMIMNO 99 1 ak _- AND S€UGGESTED F�I�NDINGS FOR DEI�TIA�L�OF p SPEUSTAM- ERMIT N® 99 2 SUGGESTED FINDINGS FOR PROJECTS SUBJECT TO CEOA: The Planning Commission finds that the project is covered by Environmental Impact Report No. 89-6 and will comply with all applicable mitigation measures and will not have any significant effect on the environment. SUGGESTED FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 98-37: 1. Conditional Use Permit No. 98-37 for the establishment, maintenance and operation of the following: a. 117 Main Street: 1) Exterior and interior remodel of the 1 S`and 2nd floor; 2) Establish a restaurantibanquet facility with outdoor patio dining and alcohol service on the 2"d floor. b. 119 Main Street: 1)Exterior and interior remodel of the 1 S`floor; 2) Construct a new 2°d floor for retail or office use; 3) Abandonment of three (3) feet of alley on the west side. c. 121 Main Street: 1) Exterior and interior remodel of the 1 S`floor; 2) Construct a new 2°d floor for office use. d. 123 Main Street: 1) Demolish the existing building and construct a new two-story building with retail on the l'floor and office on the 2°d floor. will not be detrimental to the general welfare of persons working or residing in the vicinity or detrimental to the value of the property and improvements in the neighborhood. The project as proposed and modified by the conditions imposed, will improve a visually degraded site and will enhance the appearance of the general area based on the proposed integrated development with a common facade design incorporating all four properties for a cohesive appearance. The project is consistent with the Downtown Specific Plan and the Design Guidelines and will add to the Mediterranean and pedestrian character of the downtown. Adequate parking for the project is provided within the Downtown Parking Master Plan. 7 2. The conditional use permit will be compatible with surrounding uses because the proposed construction and Visitor Serving Commercial uses are an extension of the existing character of the downtown. It will include retail and other uses that will add to the vitality and pedestrian orientation envisioned for the downtown. 3. The conditional use permit, as modified by the conditions imposed, will comply with the provisions of the base district and other applicable provisions in Titles 20-25 of the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance and any specific condition required for the proposed use in the district in which it would be located, except for any special permits approved concurrently. The project complies with all minimum development standards including lot size, building height, setbacks, floor area, and parking. 4. The granting of the conditional use permit will not adversely affect the General Plan. It is consistent with the Land Use Element designation of Mixed Use Vertical on the subject property. In addition, it is consistent with the following goals and policies of the General Plan: a. Goal L U 8: Achieve a pattern of land uses that preserves, enhances, and establishes a distinct identity for the City's neighborhoods, corridors, and centers. b. Obiective LU 10.1: Provide for the continuation of existing and the development of a diversity of retail and service commercial uses that are oriented to the needs of local residents, serve the surrounding region, serve visitors to the City, and capitalize on Huntington Beach's recreational resources. c. Policy LU 10.1.4: Require that commercial buildings and sites be designed to achieve a high level of architectural and site layout quality. d. Policy 11.1.7:"Require that mixed-use development projects be designed to achieve a consistent and high quality character, including the consideration of architectural treatment of building elevations to convey the visual character of multiple building volumes and individual storefronts. e. Policy L U 1 S.2.2: Require that structures located in the pedestrian overlay zone be sited and designed to enhance pedestrian activity along the sidewalks, in consideration of the following guidelines: 1. Incorporation of uses that stimulate pedestrian activity in the first floor along the street frontage, encouraging professional offices, data computing, and other similar uses to be located in the rear or above the first floor unless economically infeasible; 2. Siting of the linear frontage of the building along the front yard property line to maintain a "building wall"character, except for areas contiguous with the structure use for outdoor dining or courtyards; 3. Assurance that areas between building storefronts and public sidewalks are visually and physically accessible to pedestrians, except as may be required for landscape and security; 4. Extensive articulation of the building fagade and use of multiple building volumes and planes; 5. Incorporation of landscape and other elements such as planted beds,planters, and window boxes that visually distinguish the site and structure; 6. Incorporation of arcades, courtyards, and other recesses along the street elevation to provide visual relief and interest; 7. Use of roofline and height variation to break up the massing and provide visual interest; 8. Visual differentiation of upper and lower floors; 9. Distinct treatment of building entrances; and 10. Use of pedestrian-oriented signage. f. Objective ED 2.6: Expand and enhance the existing visitor serving uses. g. Policy ED 3.2.3: Attract visitor-serving uses near the beach in order to create better linkages between the beach and visitor supporting retail uses. h. Policy S: Protect, encourage, and where feasible provide visitor-serving facilities in the coastal zone which are varied in type and price. i. Polices Improve the appearance of visually degraded areas. The project is an extension of other similar uses found in the downtown with visitor servicing commercial uses located on the 1 S`floor, and office or other commercial uses located on the 2nd floor. The project as modified by the conditions of approval will provide a pedestrian oriented design and conform to the Downtown Design Guidelines. SUGGESTED FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 98-12: 1. Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12 for the development project, as proposed or as modified by conditions of approval, conforms with the General Plan, including the Local Coastal Program. The project is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Element designation of Mixed-Use Vertical. The project will comply with the Downtown Specific Plan—District 3 (Visitor Serving Commercial) because the proposed uses, particularly on the first floor will add to the variety of Visitor Serving Commercial uses and will further the pedestrian oriented objective for the downtown. 2. The project is consistent with the requirements of the CZ Overlay District, the base zoning district, as well as other applicable provisions of the Municipal Code. The project, as modified by conditions, will conform to all development standards including setbacks, height, and parking. 3. At the time of occupancy the proposed development can be provided with infrastructure in a manner that is consistent with the Local Coastal Program. All infrastructure currently exist on the subject site and will be modified as needed to conform to the City's current standards. 4. The development conforms to the public access and public recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the California Coastal Act. The development will not impact any public access and recreation opportunities. SUGGESTED FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL—SPECIAL PERMIT NO. 99-1: (7 feet setback for 1" and 2"d story) 1. The requested special permit to allow a seven(7) feet build-to-line in lieu of the required five (5) feet along Main Street promotes a better living environment. There are significantly greater benefits to be provided from the project than would occur if all the minimum requirements were met. The special permit allows for greater setbacks to be consistent with that approved on the adjacent Oceanview Promenade Development at the northwest corner of PCH and Main. This provides a more consistent "building wall" and allows for a wider sidewalk for improved pedestrian circulation and outdoor dining opportunities. 2. The special permit provides better land planning techniques with maximum use of aesthetically pleasing types of architecture, landscaping, site layout, and design. The special permit will allow for a site layout consistent with other new construction in the area. 3. The special permit will 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 because it will allow for a wider pedestrian'passage way consistent with the adjacent development which furthers the goal of pedestrian-oriented development in the downtown. 4. The special permit is consistent with the objectives of the Downtown Specific Plan in achieving a development adapted to the terrain and compatible with the surrounding environment. The modified project does not block views and provides setbacks consistent with new construction in District 3 of the Downtown Specific Plan. 5. The special permit is consistent with the policies of the Coastal Element of the City's General Plan and the California Coastal Act because it will not impact any public access or recreation opportunities and will provide better pedestrian circulation with a wider sidewalk. SUGGESTED FINDINGS FOR DENIAL—SPECIAL PERMIT NO. 99-2: (2 feet setback for 2"d sto 1. The requested special permit to allow the 2"d floor balcony for all four buildings at a setback of two (2) feet in lieu of the required five (5) feet build-to-line along Main Street does not promote a better living environment. There are no significantly greater benefits to be provided from the project than would occur if all the minimum requirements were met. The special permit will allow the 2"d floor balconies to encroach into the required five (5) feet build-to-line which will not be consistent with the setback approved on the adjacent Oceanview Promenade Development at the northwest corner of PCH and Main. It will not maintain the retail fagade, and visual and pedestrian corridor established and envisioned for District 3 of the Downtown Specific Plan. 2. The special permit does not provide better land planning techniques with maximum use of aesthetically pleasing types of architecture, landscaping, site layout, and design. The special permit will not provide for a site layout consistent with other new construction in the area which do not have balconies encroaching into the required build-to-line. It will not maintain view corridors to the ocean which would have been achieved with a consistent setback along the first block of Main Street. 3. The special permit will be detrimental to the general health, welfare, safety and convenience of the neighborhood or City in general, and detrimental or injurious to the value of property or improvements of the neighborhood or of the City in general because it will not maintain a"building wall"that is consistent with the adjacent development. 4. The special permit is inconsistent with the objectives of the Downtown Specific Plan in achieving a development adapted to the terrain and compatible with the surrounding environment. The modified project will not include setbacks consistent with new construction in District 3 of the Downtown Specific Plan which would have provided an adequate visual and pedestrian corridor. SUGGESTED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL—CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 98-37, COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 98-12,AND SPECIAL PERMIT NO. 99-2: 1. The site plan, floor plans and elevations received and dated November 29, 1999 shall be the conceptually approved layout with the following modifications (applicable to all four buildings) subject to the review and approval of the Planning Department: a. Elevations shall depict colors and building materials as approved by the Design Review Board. b. The rear stairwells shall be visible from the alley to the approval of the Police Department. (PD) c. A minimum of one foot candle of light shall be provided along the rear of the buildings to the approval of the Police Department. (PD) d. Potted plants shall be added to the front and rear of the buildings. (DRB) e. The City shall implement consistency of similar hardscape and landscape on both sides of Main Street. (Mitigation Measure) f. Depict all utility apparatus, such as but not limited to back flow devices and Edison transformers on the site plan. Utility meters shall be screened from view from public rights-of-way. Electric transformers in a required front or street side yard shall be enclosed in subsurface vaults. Backflow prevention devices shall be prohibited in the front yard setback and shall be screened from view. (Code Requirement) g. All exterior mechanical equipment shall be screened from view on all sides. Rooftop mechanical equipment shall be setback 15 feet from the exterior edges of the building. Equipment to be screened includes, but is not limited to, heating, air conditioning, refrigeration equipment, plumbing lines, ductwork and transformers. Said screening shall be architecturally compatible with the building in terms of materials and colors. If screening is not designed specifically into the building, a rooftop mechanical equipment plan showing screening must be submitted for review and approval with the application for building permit(s). (Code Requirement) h. Depict all gas meters, water meters, electrical panels, air conditioning units, mailbox facilities and similar items on the site plan and elevations. If located on a building, they shall be architecturally designed into the building to appear as part of the building. They shall be architecturally compatible with the building and non-obtrusive, not interfere with sidewalk areas and comply with required setbacks. i. A seven (7) feet build-to-line shall be provided along Main Street for all four properties on both the 1" and 2"d floor. j. Historic plaques shall be incorporated and the materials from the existing buildings shall be incorporated to the greatest extent possible. k. The public open space requirement for the project shall be provided along Main Street in a central location on the ground floor. This open space must be designed such that the public can access it without walking through any tenant space. 1. The project shall be referred back to the Planning Director for final review in consultation with the City's Urban Design Consultant for compliance with the Design Guidelines and the outlined recommendations. m. Include Design Guidelines recommendations for varied and offset rooflines, pedestrian orientation by including a plaza or courtyard, enhanced fagade treatments at the street level by including greater architectural detail for visual interest, window treatments such as multi-paned windows with tile borders, and accented entries that are ornate and detailed. 2. Prior to issuance of demolition permits, the following shall be completed: a. The applicant shall follow all procedural requirements and regulations of the South Coast Air Quality Management District(SCAQMD) and any other local, state, or federal law regarding the removal and disposal of any hazardous material including asbestos, lead, and PCB's. These requirements include but are not limited to: survey, identification of removal methods, containment measures, use and treatment of water, proper truck hauling, disposal procedures, and proper notification to any and all involved agencies. b. Pursuant to the requirements of the South Coast Air Quality Management District, an asbestos survey shall be completed. c. The applicant shall complete all Notification requirements of the South Coast Air Quality Management District. d. The City of Huntington Beach shall receive written verification from the South Coast Air Quality Management District that the Notification procedures have been completed. e. All asbestos shall be removed from all buildings prior to demolition of any portion of any building. f. A truck hauling and routing plan for all trucks involved in asbestos removal and demolition of the existing structures shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works and approved by the Director of Public Works. g. The applicant shall disclose the method of demolition on the demolition permit application for review and approval by the Building and Safety Director. h. An adequate monitoring and/or bonding program shall be established between the City and property owners to ensure that demolition and construction vibration impacts do not adversely affect offsite structures. (Mitigation Measure) i. All facets of the project related to historic preservation shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Huntington Beach. (Mitigation Measure) j. The applicant shall provide 45 days written notice to the City of Huntington Beach Historic Resources Board informing them of such activity. The Board may relocate, fully document and/or preserve significant architectural elements. The applicant/property owner shall not incur any costs associated with moving or documenting the structure by the Board. (Mitigation Measure) k. Comprehensive documentation of the project site, as it currently exists, shall be prepared prior to the issuance of any building, grading, and/or demolition permits. The documentation shall be in accordance with standards established by the Historical American Buildings Survey/Historical American Engineering Records (HABS/HAER). The report shall be archivally maintained with provisions for public access. The costs associated with preparation and maintenance of the documentation shall be the responsibility of the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency. (Mitigation Measure) 1. Pursuant to Section 65590 of the California Government Code,the applicant shall submit a plan for replacement of any existing residential units occupied by persons and families of low or moderate income that are converted or demolished as a result of this project for review and approval by the Planning Department. 3. Prior to issuance of grading permits,the following shall be completed: a. A grading plan, prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer, shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. (PW) b. The name and phone number of a field supervisor who is on-site shall be submitted to the Planning Department and Public Works Department. In addition, clearly visible signs shall be posted on the perimeter of the site indicating whom to contact for information regarding this development and any construction/grading activity. This contact person shall be available immediately to address any concerns or issues raised by adjacent property owners during the construction activity. He/she will be responsible for ensuring compliance with the conditions herein, specifically, grading activities, truck routes, construction hours, noise, etc. c. A project-specific soils and engineering report shall be prepared by a qualified soils engineer based on a detailed plan of the project. All recommendations of this report shall be incorporated into the project. (Mitigation Measure) d. A pre-grading meeting shall be arranged to discuss the recommendations of the soil investigation and project requirements. Representatives of all concerned parties shall be present. (Mitigation Measure) e. It shall be the responsibility of the owner and/or contractor to: bring to the attention of a certified soils engineer any unusual conditions which may be encountered in the course of project . development and to request appropriate guidance before proceeding with the affected work, and to ensure that the recommendations of the soil report and any supplemental reports are implemented. (Mitigation Measure) f. The applicant shall provide documentation of existing structural conditions in the vicinity of the proposed project and the estimated extent and impact of subsidence on surrounding structures and other improvements,to the satisfaction of the Building Department. (Mitigation Measure) g. Should ground water be found during excavation, dewatering of the project site shall be required. The applicant shall monitor the extent of subsidence and its associated impacts through placement of appropriate testing devices under the supervision and surveillance of a qualified soil engineer. The City shall be kept informed regarding any structural impacts on adjacent properties and other improvements, and if feasible and necessary, construction process will be modified to eliminate such impacts. (Mitigation Measure) 4. Prior to submittal for building permits, the following shall be completed: a. Zoning entitlement conditions of approval shall be printed verbatim on all the working drawing sets used for issuance of building permits (architectural, structural, electrical, mechanical and plumbing) and shall be referenced in the index. b. This project shall be submitted as one plan check submittal to include all four properties (117, 119, 121, 123 Main Street) to assure that all four properties are developed as one integrated project as presented on the approved plans and rendering. c. All Fire Department requirements shall be noted on the building plans. (FD) d. Grading and foundation plans, when available and prior to approval, shall be transmitted to a qualified soils engineer for review for compliance with their recommendations. (Mitigation Measure) e. All structures shall be designed in accordance with the seismic design provisions of the Uniform Building Codes to promote safety in the event of an earthquake. (Mitigation Measure) 5. Prior to issuance of building permits,the following shall be completed: a. Submit a copy of the revised site plan, floor plans and elevations pursuant to Condition No. 1 for review and approval and inclusion in the entitlement file to the Planning Department; and submit 8 inch by 10 inch colored photographs of all colored renderings, elevations, materials sample board, and massing model to the Planning Department for inclusion in the entitlement file. b. A Landscape Construction Set must be submitted to the Department of Public Works and approved by the Departments of Public Works and Planning. The Landscape Construction Set shall include a landscape plan prepared and signed by a State Licensed Landscape Architect which identifies the location,type, size and quantity of all existing plant materials to remain, existing plant materials to be removed and proposed plant materials; an irrigation plan; a grading plan; an approved site plan and a copy of the entitlement conditions of approval. The landscape plans shall be in conformance with Chapter 232 of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance and applicable Design Guidelines. (PW) (Code Requirement) c. An interim parking and/or building materials storage plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department to assure adequate parking and restroom facilities are available for employees, customers and contractors during the project's construction phase and that adjacent properties will not be impacted by their location. The applicant shall obtain any necessary encroachment permits from the Department of Public Works. d. Dedicate the following to the City of Huntington Beach: (PW)(Code Requirement) 1. 4 feet along the front of all four properties along Main Street 2. 4.5 feet along the rear of 117, 121, and 123 Main Street along the alley e. The alley abandonment for 119 Main Street shall be approved by the City Council. f. A grading plan, prepared by a Registered Engineer, shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. This plan, in addition to grading, shall include all of the required off-site improvements. g. The Departments of Planning and Public Works shall approve a detailed lighting plan. The plan shall be consistent with the Downtown lighting plan and lighting standards in the Downtown Design Guidelines. Outdoor lighting shall utilize energy-saving lamps. All outside lighting shall be directed to prevent"spill-over" onto adjacent properties and shall be shown on the site plan and elevations. Lighting shall be capable of being dimmed to a minimum security level during of hours of non-operation of the facility. (Mitigation Measure) (Planning) (PW ) h. A sign and landscape plan shall be submitted to the Design Review Board for review and approval. The location and type of all signs shall conform to the provisions of the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance and be consistent with the standards listed on page 33 of the Downtown Design Guidelines. (Mitigation Measure) i. The applicant shall enter into a Maintenance Agreement with the City for maintenance of all portions of public property along the project site. j. Elevations shall show all roofing materials to be characteristic.of Mediterranean architecture. Flat roofs shall be avoided. Walls shall be integrated with the overall building design. Solid concrete block walls, grape stake, or chain link fencing shall not be permitted. (Mitigation Measure) 6. Phased or individual construction of buildings is prohibited and all four buildings shall be demolished at the same time. Construction and improvements for all four buildings shall be done simultaneously as approved by Conditional Use Permit No. 98-37, Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12, and Special Permit No. 99-1. All conditions of approval shall be applicable to all four buildings and shall be complied with. 7. During demolition, grading, site development, and/or construction, the following shall be adhered to: a. Use water trucks or sprinkler systems in all areas where vehicles travel to keep damp enough to prevent dust raised when leaving the site: b. Wet down areas in the late morning and after work is completed for the day; c. Use low sulfur fuel (.05%)by weight for construction equipment; d. Attempt to phase and schedule construction activities to avoid high ozone days (first stage smog alerts); e. Discontinue construction during second stage smog alerts. f. Ensure clearly visible signs are posted on the perimeter of the site identifying the name and phone number of a field supervisor to contact for information regarding the development and any construction/grading activity. 8. Prior to final building permit inspection and approval and issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for any of the four buildings,the following shall be completed: a. All improvements to all four properties shall be completed in accordance with the approved plans and conditions of approval specified herein, including: 1) Landscaping. 2) Fire extinguishers will be installed and located in areas to comply with Huntington Beach Fire Code Standards. (FD) 3) A fire alarm system will be installed to comply with Huntington Beach Fire Department and Uniform Fire Code Standards. Shop drawings will be submitted to and approved by the Fire Department prior to installation. The.system will provide the following: a. manual pull stations; b. water flow, valve tamper and trouble detection; c. 24 hour supervision; d. annunciation; e. audible alarms; f. smoke detectors (FD) 4) Address numbers will be installed to comply with City Specification No. 428. The numbers will be sized a minimum of six (6) inches with a brush stroke of one and one-half(1-1/2) inches. (FD) 5) Exit signs and exit path markings will be provided in compliance with the Huntington Beach Fire Code and Title 24 of the California Administrative Code. (FD) 6) An automatic fire sprinkler system shall be approved and installed throughout pursuant to Fire Department regulations. Shop drawings shall be submitted and approved by the Fire Department prior to system installation. The buildings will be considered as one unit. (FD) 7) Submit a Fire Protection Plan for Fire Department approval in compliance with City Specification 428. (FD) 8) If elevators are installed, they shall be sized to accommodate an ambulance gurney. The minimum dimensions are 6'8"wide by 4'3"deep with a 42-inch minimum right or left side opening. Center opening doors require a 54-inch depth. (FD) 9) Construct new sewer lateral to each building unless the existing lateral is proven to be in good condition to the satisfaction of the City inspector. (PW) 10)The sewer service lateral size shall be 6" min. (PW) 11)If the existing 2" domestic meter and service lateral serving the building at 117 Main Street meets the minimum requirements set by the Uniform Plumbing Code (UPC) and the Uniform Fire Code (UFC), then it may be used to serve the development at this address. (PW) 12)The existing service to 121 Main Street currently being served from 119 Main Street service shall be abandoned, per City Standards. (PW) 13)The existing 3/4 inch water meter and service for the building at 123 Main Street shall be abandoned to the main line. (PW) 14)Each of the buildings proposed at 119, 121 and 123 Main Street shall have new separate domestic water services with(touch read type) meters and backflow protection devices. The water service laterals and meter size shall meet the minimum requirements set by the Uniform Plumbing Code (UPC) and Uniform Fire Code (UFC), but shall be a minimum of 2 inches in size. (PW) 15)If the Fire Department requires that a separate fire service is to be constructed, it shall have a separate backflow device. (PW) 16)Remove and replace the existing sidewalk,per the Downtown Specific Plan, adjacent to project(Main Street). (PW) 17)Remove the existing curb and construct new curb and gutter adjacent to project(Main Street). (PW) 18)Install one street light along property frontage in a location compatible with the Public Works street lighting plan for Main Street. (PW) 19)Remove and replace any deteriorated portion of east side of alley. Grind and cap east'one- half(1/2) alley. (PW) 20)The applicant shall underground all new and existing electrical,telephone and cable TV service connections. (PW) 21)The existing angled parking is to remain or the in-lieu parking fee shall be paid for each parking space lost. (PW) 22)The developer shall submit a composite utility plan, showing existing public water system facilities and all other underground utilities (existing and proposed)to each structure. (PW) 23)The applicant shall install public improvements pursuant to City Council adopted Main Street improvement plans. b. Compliance with all conditions of approval specified-herein shall be accomplished and verified by the Planning Department. c. All building spoils, such as unusable lumber, wire,pipe, and other surplus or unusable material, shall be disposed of at an off-site facility equipped to handle them. d. Existing fill materials and disturbed, loose soils shall be removed and replaced with component material as required by qualified soils engineer. Site preparation, excavation, and earthwork compaction operations shall be performed under the observation and testing of a soil engineer. Certification of such reports, shall be submitted to the City Engineer prior to issuance of building permits. (Mitigation Measure) 9. The project shall comply with the following: a. Prior to the sale of alcoholic beverages, a copy of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Board (ABC) license, along with any special conditions imposed by the ABC, shall be submitted to the Planning Department for the file. Any conditions that are more restrictive than those set forth in this approval shall be adhered to. b. The City and individual landowners shall meet with residential and business tenants to explain conversion process and relocation assistance. (Mitigation Measure) c. The City and individual landowners shall assist in the relocation of persons affected by this redevelopment project. (Mitigation Measure) d. The applicant shall provide a relocation coordinator who will provide general relocation assistance to all tenants. Availability of such a relocation assistant shall be to the approval of the City Council and shall be incorporated into the Relocation Assistance Program required by Article 927 of the Municipal Code. (Mitigation Measure) e. The project shall implement mitigation measures included in Downtown Specific Plan EIR 82-2. (Mitigation Measure) f. The applicant shall provide relocation assistance to all displace businesses in accordance with the State Guidelines of Title 25, Chapter 6. This assistance will include information on the availability of other suitable sites, as well as payments to cover moving expenses and/or the loss of income including: the cost of the physical move; the cost of anything rendered useless as a consequence of the move (i.e. business cards, etc.); the cost of physical improvements. (Mitigation Measure) 10. The Planning Director ensures that all conditions of approval herein are complied with. The Planning Director shall be notified in writing if any changes to the site plan, elevations and floor plans are proposed as a result of the plan check process. Building permits shall not be issued until the Planning Director has reviewed and approved the proposed changes for conformance with the intent of the Planning Commission's action and the conditions herein. If the proposed changes are of a substantial nature, an amendment to the original entitlement reviewed by the Planning Commission may be required pursuant to the HBZSO. INFORMATION ON SPECIFIC CODE REQUIREMENTS: 1. Conditional Use Permit No. 98-37, Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12, and Special Permit No. 99-1 shall not become effective until the ten working day appeal period has elapsed. 2. Conditional Use Permit No. 98-37, Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12, and Special Permit No. 99-1 shall become null and void unless exercised within one year of the date of final approval or such extension of time as may be granted by the Director pursuant to a written request submitted to the Planning Department a minimum 30 days prior to the expiration date. 3. The Planning Commission reserves the right to revoke Conditional Use Permit No. 98-37, Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12, and Special Permit No. 99-1,pursuant to a public hearing for revocation, if any violation of these conditions or the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance or Municipal Code occurs. 4. All applicable Public Works fees shall be paid. 5. The development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Municipal Code, Building Department, and Fire Department as well as applicable local, State and Federal Fire Codes, Ordinances, and standards, except as noted herein. 6. Construction shall be limited to Monday - Saturday 7:00 AM to 8:00 PM. Construction shall be prohibited Sundays and Federal holidays. 7. The applicant shall submit a check in the amount of$38.00 for the posting of the Notice of Determination at the County of Orange Clerk's Office. The check shall be made out to the Countti of Orange and submitted to the Planning Department within two (2) days of the Planning Commission's action. 8. All landscaping shall be maintained in a neat and clean manner, and in conformance with the HBZSO. Prior to removing or replacing any landscaped areas, check with the Departments of Planning and Public Works for Code requirements. Substantial changes may require approval by the Planning Commission. 9. All signs shall conform to the HBZSO and Downtown Design Guidelines. Prior to installing any new signs, or changing sign faces, a building permit shall be obtained from the Planning Department. 10. Traffic Impact Fees shall be paid at the time of final inspection or issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. (PW) 11. State-mandated school impact fees shall be paid prior to issuance of building permits. 12. Prior to issuance of Building Permits for new construction in the Downtown Specific Plan (SP-5) area, a Downtown Specific Plan fee shall be paid. 13. An encroachment permit shall be required for all work within the right-of-way. (PW) 14. Development shall meet all local and State regulations regarding installation and operation of all underground storage tanks. (FD) 15. A Certificate of Occupancy must be issued by the Planning Department and Building and Safety Department prior to occupying the building. 16. Live entertainment and dancing for any other suite other than the 1 S` floor of 117 Main Street shall require separate entitlement. on CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ' CITY COUNCIL COMMUNICATION AT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members o , FROM: Dave Sullivan, City Council Member DATE: January 20, 2000 SUBJECT: APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 98-37/COASTAL DEVELOPMENI`'ra PERMIT NO. 98-12/SPECIAL PERMIT NO. 99-2 AND DENIAL OF SPECIAL PERMIT NO. 99-1 (117, 119, 121,AND 123 MAIN STREET) I am"appealing the Planning Commission's action of January 11, 2000 on the above-noted project for the following reasons: 1. The approval of the five (5) feet build-to-line for the Is' and 2"d stories in lieu of staffs recommendation of seven(7)feet to match the adjacent Oceanview Promenade project. 2. The approval of the Special Permit for the 2"d floor balcony encroachment of 3 feet. 3. The inaccessible public open space located at the rear of the building and on the 2"d story. 4. The project's lack of architectural and design conformance to the Downtown Design Guidelines. XC. Connie Brockway, City Clerk Howard Zelefsky, Director of Planning "Qw • C,ty�of Huntington Beach=Plann>ng Department �� STAFFREP RAT777 HUNTINGTON BEACH TO: Planning Commission . FROM: Howard Zelefsky, Director of Planning BY: Ricky Ramos, Assistant Planner 17-17— DATE: January 11, 2000 SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 98-37/COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 98-12/SPECIAL PERMIT NO. 99-1/SPECIAL PERMIT NO. 99-2 (Continued From December 14, 1999 With Public Hearing Closed-117, 119, 121, 123 MAIN STREET) LOCATION: 117, 119, 121 and 123 Main Street(west side between PCH and Walnut Ave.) STATEMENT OF ISSUE: The Planning Commission continued the project from the December 14, 1999 meeting to allow the Planning Commission to complete a study session on the Downtown Specific Plan and Design Guidelines. Staff s recommendation remains unchanged from the December 14, 1999 staff report (attached). I, I� LAW OFFICES PALMIERI, TYLER, WIENER, WILHELM & WALDRON LLP A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROrESSIONAL CORPORATIONS ' 2603 MAIN STREET - �. ANGELO J. PALMIERI (1926.19961 EAST TOWER—SUITE ISOO.' '-� - P.-O. Box 19712v ROBERT F.WALDRON (1927.19981 IRVINE, CA 924523 712 IRVINE,CALIFORNIA 9 2 614-622 8 ALAN H.WIENER' - GARY C.WEISBERG ROBERT C. IHRKC' MICMAEL N. LEIFER (949) 851-9400 - �• G WILNCLM• _ �� 1 '. ••.�� 2•' --•I.,, WRITERS DIRECT JAMCS SCOTT R. CARPENTER - LI =`•`•--I�; ;'�;�'� _I'•ti 1 DENNIS O.TYLCRP RICMARD A. SALUS . 'L•1 J DIAL NUMBER ' `' (949) 851-7293 MICMAEL J. GRCCNCC NORMAN J. ROOICH, - (RANK C. ROTMROCK- D. SUSAN WIENS DENNIS W.GMANP RONALD M. COLE - DAVID D. PARR* LUCEE S. KIRKA �1 [� TELECOPIER (949) 851-1554 CHARLES H. RANTER- LORI K. DAVIESSeptember 9, 1999 (949) 851-3844 GEORGE J.WALL PAUL B. LA SCALA L. RICMARD RAWLS MICMAEL L. D'ANGELO (949).757-1225 PATRICK A. HENNESSEY MARIA A RICHLEY (949) 651-2351 DON FISHER CHARLES S. KROLIKOWSKI GREGORY N.WEILER MICMAEL J. SARRAO - WARREN A.WILLIAMS TROY THOMAS - JOHN R.LISTER JAMES R. McCOY JR. REFER TO FILE NO, BRUCE W. OANNEMEYER ELIZABETH J. DAVIS 16 8 0 8—0 0 0 CYNTHIA M.WOLCOTT CAROLYN Y. HAMADA JOEL P. KEW RAYMOND W. SAKAI MICMELLE M.FUJIMOTO STEPHEN A. SCHECK *A►ROV92SIONAL CORPORATIGH Gail Hutton City Attorney City of Huntington Beach Redevelopment .Agency, of- the City. of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington" Beach, CA 92648 Re: Application for- Conditional. Use Permit -No. . 98-37;. 117 Main Street, Huntington .Beach Dear Ms. Hutton: As you are presumably aware, the City/Agency has stalled the processing of our clients' _ application for Conditional Use Permit No. 98-37. The City/Agency staff asserts that a requirement exists to dedicate four feet along Main Street. For months, the applicants have sought clarification -and documentation from the City staff supporting this purported four-foot dedication requitement. *-After mwV1 months of -staff delay.,- in a. Notice of Filing Status dated August AO, 1999, 'the City mcikes reference to Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance. section. 230,84 (Dedication and Improvements) , to attempt to justify the demanded four foot dedication. This Section is clearly not applicable to the subject CUP application. The City/Agency demanded dedication is further evidence of unreasonable and oppressive conduct. The City's/Agency's refusal to process the application for consideration by the planning .commission is unreasonable. The refusal to process the application is based on the.Agency's agenda,-to further its redevelopment project under the .Disposition and Development Agreement between the Redevelopment Agency and CIM Group. This letter will put the City..and- the Redevelopment Agency on notice that our clients, in an attempt to mitigate the ongoing ATTACHMENT NO. PALMIERII TYLER. WIENER. ..'iLHELM & WALDRON LLP Gail Hutton September 9, 1999 Page 2 damages to the subject property, agree to comply with the- legally unenforceable exaction under duress. The property owners reserve all rights to seek compensation for this illegal taking and damaging of their property and property interests.. . Alternatively, we would accept the City's/Agency's immediate withdrawal of the illegal dedication demand. We demand that CUP Application No. 98-37 be immediately set for hearing by the planning commission. We intend to fully address the illegal, unauthorized and undocumented demand that the property owners dedicate four feet along Main Street as a condition of processing/approval of the application .at -such planning commission hearing. Please inform me when the application has been set for hearing by the planning commission. AVery ly yours,e1 er MHL;pr cc: Gary Mulligan Loren Johnson Jeff Bergsma S� • �:. :}' �_r .� - tea, x r. ,r � � -� f ,.. - t HALArMAY I t , 0 LA y y14 , 4Xs 0 d a t y b b ti I� m z • J� OHUNTING TON BEACH HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING Mf-r i RCA ROUTING SHEET INITIATING DEPARTMENT: Planning SUBJECT: Appeal of Conditional Use Permit No. 98-37/Coastal Development Permit No.98-12/Special Permit No. 99- 1/Special Permit No. 99-2 COUNCIL MEETING DATE: February 22, 2000 RCA ATTACHMENTS M STATUS Ordinance (w/exhibits & legislative draft if applicable) Not Applicable Resolution (w/exhibits & legislative draft if applicable) Not Applicable Tract Map, Location Map and/or other Exhibits Attached Contract/Agreement (w/exhibits if applicable) (Signed in full by the City Attorney) Not Applicable Subleases, Third Party Agreements, etc. (Approved as to form by City Attorney) Not Applicable Certificates of Insurance (Approved by the City Attorney) Not Applicable Financial Impact Statement (Unbudget, over $5,000) Not Applicable Bonds (If applicable) Not Applicable Staff Report (If applicable) Attached Commission, Board or Committee Report (If applicable) Not Applicable Findings/Conditions for Approval and/or Denial Attached _.................. EXP,LANATION.FOR MISSING ATTACHMENTS REVIEWED RETURNED FORWARDED.. Administrative Staff ( ) ( ) Assistant City Administrator (Initial) ( ) ( ) City Administrator (Initial) ( ) ( ) City Clerk ( ) ..EXPLANATION: FOR RETURN OF.ITEM. Only)(Below Space For City Clerk's Use RCA Author: HZ:SH:HF:RR:kjl / U0k,VhM LeA i C. CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY PUBLIC HEARING R QUES C40NO l V N�L- lily 42 OlS- � SUBJECT: ►oL-[ go alai— 1 DEPrIvIEll T: J K t N b MEETING DATE: Z-(22 I Ofl CO ACT: G1L,� G� PHONE: Jr' 3Co 52� i N/A YES NO Is the notice attached? ( ) ( ) Do the Heading and Closing of Notice reflect City Council(and/or Redevelopment Agency)hearing? Are the date,day and time of the public hearing correct? If an appeal,is the appelcant's name included in the notice? If Coastal Development Permit,does the notice include appeal language? Is there an Environmental Status-to be approved by Council? i . ( ) ( ) Is a map attached for publication? lam ) ( ) ( ) Is a larger ad required? Size ( ) ( ) Is the verification statement attached indicating the source and accuracy of the mailing list? 2, t3 P&I 1014f='F 00 ( ) ( ) Are the applicant's name and address part of the mailing labels? P)0M1 LV 0tVr coo t4 �t. ( ) ( ) Are the appellant's name and address part of the mai7.ing labels? p1�. huW ( ) ( ( ) If Coastal Development Permit,is the Coastal Commission part of the mailing labels? If Coastal Development Permit,are the resident labels attached? Is the Report 33433 attached? (Economic Development Dept.items only) Pleas complete the following: 1. Minimum days from publication to hearing date 2. Number of times to be published 3. Number of days between publications 21 NOTICE 0", WEAL TO PLANNING COMP" ~SION ACTION �/zd zo0o OF January 11 , 2000 Date of Planning Commission Action TO: Planning Dept (2 copies) DATE: 1/2 0/2 0 0 0 • City Attorney (1 copy) FILED BY nave Sullivan., rounciAmember Approval of the Planning Commission' s Approval of Condition, REGARDING: Use Permit No. 98-37/Coastal Development Permit No. ;98=12-, Special Permit No. 99-2 and Denial of Special Permit No.99-. (117, 119, 121, and 123 MAIN Street) Tentative Date for Public Hearing: To be determined Copy of Appeal Letter attached. LEGAL NOTICE AND A.P. MAILING LIST MUST BE RECEIVED Pit THE CITY CLERK'S • OFFICE 15 DAYS PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING DATE Connie Brockway City Clerk x5227 I NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE 2/1,d/� CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on Tuesday, February 22, 2000, 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 item: 1. ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 99-2 (SMALL LOT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE): Applicant: City of Huntington Beach Request: To amend the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance by establishing development standards for small lot residential subdivisions in Medium, Medium-High, and High Density Residential Districts citywide. Location: RM, RMH and RH Districts Citywide. Project Planner: Wayne Carvalho 2. APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 98-37/COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 98-12/SPECIAL PERMIT NO. 99-1/SPECIAL PERMIT NO. 99-2 (117, 119, 121,AND 123 MAIN STREET COMMERCIAL): Appellant: Councilman Dave Sullivan Applicant: Jeff Bergsma. Public hearing on an appeal filed by Councilman Dave Sullivan of the Planning Commission's approval of the following: Request: Conditional Use Permit and Coastal Development Permit to allow the following: 117 Main Street: 1)Exterior and interior remodel of the 151 and 2"d floor; 2) Establish a restauraut/banquet facility with outdoor patio dining and alcohol service on the 2"d floor. 119 Main Street: 1)Exterior and interior remodel of the V floor; 2) Construct a new 2"d floor for retail or office use; 3) Abandonment of three (3) feet of alley on the west side. 121 Main Street: 1) Exterior and interior remodel of the I" floor; 2) Construct a new 2"d floor for office use. 123 Main Street: 1) Demolish the existing building and construct a new two-story building with retail on the 1"floor and office on the 2"d floor. Special Permits to allow the 2"1 floor balcony of all four(4) buildings at a setback of two (2) feet in lieu of the five (5) feet build-to-line required along Main Street and to allow a seven(7) feet build-to-line in lieu of the required five (5) feet for the I" and 2"d stories of all four(4)buildings along Main Street(staff recommendation). Location: 117, 119, 121, and 123 Main Street(west side between PCH and Walnut Ave.) Project Planner: Ricky Ramos NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that item#1 is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental.Quality Act. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that item#2 is covered by Environmental Impact Report No.89-6. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that item#2 is located in the non-appealable jurisdiction of the Coastal Zone and include Coastal Development Permit No. 98-12, filed on May 8, 1998, in conjunction with the above request. The Coastal Development Permit hearing consists of a staff report,public hearing, City Council discussion and action. Item#2 is not appealable to the California Coastal Commission. ON FILE: A copy of the proposed request is on file in the Planning Department, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California 92648, for inspection by the public. A copy of the staff \\HB ITFPS 02\COMMDE V\LEGALS\COUNCIL\00\00cc0222.doc report will be available to interested parties at City Hall or the Main City Library (7111 Talbert Avenue) after February 17, 2000. ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to attend said hearing and express opinions or submit 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 the Planning Department at 536-5271 and refer to the above item. Direct your written communications to the City Clerk. Connie Brockway, City Clerk City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street, 2nd Floor Huntington Beach, California 92648 (714) 536-5227 a \\HBITFPS02\COMMDEV\LEGALS\COUNCIL\00\00cc0222.doc SUSAN W. CASE, INC. OWNERSHIP LISTING SERVICE 917 Glennepv Stree4 Suite 7,Laguna Beach, CA 92651 PHONE(949)494-6105•FAX(949)494-7418 CERTIFICATION OF PROPERTY OWNERS LIST THrzLOCATED LIST REPRESENTS_ THE NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF ALL PROPERTY WITHIN FEET OF THE EXTERIOR BOUNDARIES .OF THE - PROPERTY LOCATED AT l 7 , l ( L , ��-I /y3 M �* dif WA&l THIS INFORMATION WAS OBTAINED THROUGH TRANSAMERICA INTELLITECH, A DATA SOURCE UTILIZING THE COUNTY ASSESSMENT ROLLS AND OTHER DATA SOURCES. THIS INFORMATION IS GENERALLY DEEMED RELIABLE, BUT IS NOT GUARANTEED. SUSAN W., CASE, INC. r; Smooth Feed SheetsTM Or • Use templat r 51600 G�•#� GI S-3� �C.�7�o18—I Z 117,119,121,123 MAIN FILE#9991227 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 300' OWNERS 100' OCCUPANTS 024 153 05,07,17,18 S EPTEMBER .3 0 1999 02 09 1 02414610 2 02414614 3 Ronald Ronald Wood Emad&Viola Samuel 19681 Quiet Ba 19681 Quiet Bay Ln 5732 Serene Dr Huntington Beach CA 48 Huntington Beach CA 92648 Huntington Beach CA 92649 024 146 15 4 4 147 03 5 024 147 05 6 Max&Marian Groussman Vera 'tzen VeNA-hLj William Gallegos 421 S Rolling Hills PI. 9770 Jam 'ver Cir 210 5th St Anaheim�CA 92807 Fountain Valley 2708 Huntington Beach CA 92648 024 147 08 7 024 147 09 8 024 147 14 9 H INGTON BEACH R DEVELOP SURF CITY CAPITAL Douglas S Langevin 2000 �f= 6621 E Pacific Coast Hwy 8196 Pawtucket Dr Huntington B;'gdv.QA 9264A Long Beach CA 90803 - Huntington Beach CA 92646 024 147 15 10 024 147 23 - 11 024 147 25 12 LOVI PICO PARTNERSHIP Timothy&Michele Turner Richard Harlow 347 N La Jolla Ave 18052 Freshwater Cir 1742 Main St Los Angeles CA 90048 Huntington Beach CA 92648 Huntington Beach CA 92648 024 147 28 13 02 29 14 024 147 30 15 Robert Koury HUNTI EACH REDEVELOP i ' &Philomene 68" gos � 200 Main St#206 2000 Main St �A- -�98-bth �Be2648 Huntington Beach CA 92648 Huntington Beach Huntingto 024147 33 16 024147 34 17 024 147 37 18 CITY HMIQUGTON BEACH ✓ REDE NT AGENCY OF CIT GARY HATCH . 2000 Main Slz 2000 Main St ✓. PO .BOX 5653 Huntington Beach C 8 ach Huntington Be CA 9264 LAKE HAVASU CITY 864 4147 38 19 024147 40 20 024150 06 21 Jo ohn Gallagher S� ✓ Tho averly CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 3255 Reva C 2Z l 553 Temple ' r 1 Mann St Concord CA 9451 Laguna Beach CA Irvine CA 92612 15016 22 024 23 02415210 24 STAT - IFORNIA D OF G HUNTI CH REDEVELOP Frank Cracchiolo 650 Howe Ave 2000 Main St 19712 Quiet Bay Ln Sacramento CA 95825 Huntington Beach CA 92 Huntington Beach CA 92648 AVERY@ Address Labels Laser 5960TM � G C u P 4 �-37�C Smooth Feed SheetsTM �.- Use template for 51600" 024 152 11 25 02415212 26 0241 4 27 HUN BEACH REDEVELOP HUNT BEACH REDEVELOP HUNTIN ACH REDEVE 2000 Main S 2000 Main St 2000 Main St Huntington Beach CA Huntington Beach CA Huntington Beach CA 024 153 01 28 024 15 29 024 153 03 30 R ENT AGENCY OF CIT REDEV AGENCY OF CIT RED ENT AGENCY O 2000 Main S 2000 Main St 2000 Main Huntington;each C Huntington Beach 2648 Huntington Beach 024 153 04 31 02415306 32 024 153 07 33 James Lane Ronald Mase JOHNSON LOREN 637 Frankfort Ave 16642 Intrepid Ln 221 MAIN ST 6 Huntington Beach CA 92648 Huntington Beach CA 92649 HUNTINGTON BEACH 92 E 0241 34 02415311 35 02 3 36 REDEVEL AGENCY CITY O Eldon Willard Bagstad REDEV GENCY OF 2000 Main St 901 Catalina Ave 2000 Main tea�ch Huntington Beach CA Seal Beach CA 90740 Huntington 02415317 37 02415318 38 024 153.2t 39 George Draper Frank Alfonso RED T AGENCY Cl- 1210 Pecan Ave 6630 Vickiview Dr PO Box 190 Huntington Beach CA 92648 West Hills CA 91307 Huntington Beach CA 64 024 153 23 40 024 154 01 41 024154 02 42 ABDELMUTI DEVELOPMENT CO MAZEN M ZEIDAN Carol Farris 101 Main St 301 17TH ST 3417 Buckeye PI Huntington Beach CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH 92648 Newbury Park CA 91320 024154 03 43 024 154 04 44 15417 45 MORNING JADE CORPORATIO LINDA D BIGGS Pier Haseko ✓ 11642 PINE ST 125 MANHATTAN BEACH BLV 350 S Figuero 55 LOS ALAMITOS CA 90720 MANHATTAN BEACH C 90266 Los Angeles CA 90 93719232 46 93719233 47 . CI TON BEACH Robert Koury 2000 Main S V 200 Main St#206N�l Hunting ton Beach 2 Huntington Beach CA 92648 C4= N-14"1-M OZ�- 14�-3v_. __._ ._..... .. J �W$vapor`.-1 N�tJU�c► ZZ I M -4_M tdt'l tJ # -�'G4-'� 3��t► {r1,0 utZ 61. #3 1 tJ�J'T=. ✓ (� a12(Oj-f rls£ , g2t�t�o '�''�k�'1 OZiI - LSH-1'1 %-f -tKm Nqj C-4a LO MAV'ERYS Address Labels e P Laser 5960TM OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT i01 MAIN ST 101-2A MAIN ST 101-26 MAIN ST HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92E OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT 101-2C MAIN ST 101-21)MAIN ST 101-2G MAIN ST HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92E OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT 101-21-1 MAIN ST 101-3A MAIN ST 101-3A MAIN ST HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92E OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT 101-36 MAIN ST 101-3B MAIN ST 101-3C MAIN ST HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92E OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT 101-3C MAIN ST 101-3G MAIN ST 101-3G MAIN ST HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92648 _ HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92E OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT 109 MAIN ST 111 MAIN ST 113 MAIN ST HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92E OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT 116 MAIN ST 116 1/2 MAIN ST 117 MAIN ST HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92E OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT 118 MAIN ST 119 MAIN ST 120 MAIN ST HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92E OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT 121 MAIN ST 122 MAIN ST 123 MAIN ST HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92E OCCUPANT OCCUPANT 126 MAIN ST 127 MAIN ST HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92648 c W10 (:f- vp 15 3-7 5;�4 OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT 200-301 COAST HWY 200-303 COAST HWY 300-104 COAST HWY HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92E OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT 300-106A COAST HWY 300-108 COAST HWY 300-112 COAST HWY HUNTINGTON BEACH'CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92E OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT 300-201 COAST HWY 300-202 COAST HWY 300-203 COAST HWY HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92E OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT 300-305 COAST HWY 300-310 COAST HWY 300-406 COAST HWY HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92648 ' HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92E OCCUPANT' OCCUPANT . . OCCUPANT. 300-407 COAST HWY 300-410 COAST HWY 300-410 COAST HWY HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92648 : HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 926 OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT 300-414 COAST HWY 300-416 COAST HWY 300-C COAST HWY HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 926 OCCUPANT OCCUPANT 410 COAST HWY 412 COAST HWY HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92648 U to 8-3-7/C-z P 99--12- • • uAv,' -18-3`7 / - 12 PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION CHECKLIST "B" may, p-r=: Vt t-T MAILING LABELS -January 13, 1999 No, Gt,9- I Ctrl - Z President Huntin arbor POA 10 F S 16 H.B.Chamber of Commerce P.0.Box 791 John 2100 Main Street,Suite 200 Sunset Beach,CA 90 19425 Castlew Circle Huntington Beach,CA 92648 Huntington Beach, 2648 Judy Legan (`) William D.Holman 1 SuejQbnson 16 Orange County Assoc.of Realtors PLC 19671 Qw-Zr4a<Lane 25552 La Paz Road 23 Corporate Plaza,Suite 250 Huntington Bea 92648 Laguna Hills,CA 92653 Newport Beach CA 92660-7912 �65351 3 Mr.Tom Zanic 1? Edna Littlebury _ . 17s De hica New Urban West Gldn St.Mob.Hmi.Owners Leag. Bolsa Chica Stre to 312 520 Broadway Ste. 100 11021 Magnolia Blvd. Huntington Beach,CA 92646 Santa Monica,CA 90401 Garden Grove,CA 92642 Sunset Beach Community Assoc. 4 Pres.,H.B.Hist Society a Pacific Coast Archaeological 1E Pat Tlue , dent C/O Newland House Museum Socie c. PO Box 215 19820 Beach Blvd. P.O.Box 10 Sunset Beach,CA 90742-0215 Huntington Beach,CA 92648 Costa Mesa,CA 92 Attn:Jane Gothold President �J Community Services Dept. 14 County of Orange/EMA 14 Huntington Beach Tomorrow Chairperson Michae . uane,Dir. PO Box 865 Historical Resources Bd. P.O.Box 4048 Huntington Beach,CA 92648 Santa Ana,CA 92702 Juli andermost 6 Co cil on Aging 15 County of Orange/EMA 1s BIA-OC 170G Or ve. Tho athews 9 Executive Circle 0 Huntington Be 92648 P.O.Box Irvine Ca 92714-6734 Santa Ana,CA 92 48 Richard Spicer Jeff etzel 16 Tanning Department V SGAG Seacli Oran unty EMA . 818 West 7t3612th Floor 19391 Shady Circle P. 0.Box 40 Los Angeles,CA 90017 Huntington Beach,CA 48 Santa Ana,CA 92702 48 E.T.I.Coj 100 8 John Roe 16 CountV of Orange/EMA 1' Mary B Sea A Tim IIVLW 20292 East�roo 19382 Surfdale a P.O.Box 4048 Huntington Beach,CA 92 46 Huntington Beach, 48 Santa Ana,CA 92702- _ John Scandura /J) Lou Mannone 16 PI g Dir. 2 Environmental Board Chairman IIJJ Seac]i City of Mesa 17492 Valeworth Circle 19821 Ocean B ircle P.0.Box 12�9262 Huntington Beach,.CA 92649 Huntington Beach CA 8 Costa Mesa, 200 h:langel:phlbl C 0 P - 37/c Z) Z . PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION CHEC IST "B" MAILING LABELS -January 13, 1999 Planning Dir. 21 Dr.Duane Dishno 29 Country View Estates HOA 37 City o untain Valley HB Ci entary School Dist. Carrie omas 10200 Slater-Aft, PO Box 71 6642 Trotte rive Fountain Valley,CA 708 Huntington Beach,CA 2626 Huntington Beac 92648 Planning Director 22 Jerry chanan 29 Co Vew Estates HO_k 37 Ci Westminster HB City eFCSA chool Dist Gerald an 8200 Wes ter Blvd. 20451 Craimer 6742 Shire Circ «/estminster,CA 83 Huntington Bea , 92648 Huntington Beach 648 Planning Director 23 James Jones 30 HB H tons HOA 37 f Seal Beach Ocean w Elementary Keystone c Prop.I<iangmt Inc. 211 Eight School distric 16845 Von Karin venue,Suite 200 Seal Beach,CA 17200 Pinehurst L Irvine,CA 92606 Huntington Beach CA 92647 California Coastal Commission Barbara Winars 31 Sally Graham 38 Theresa Henry Wes School District Me lark Area South Coast Area Office 14121 Cedarw Avenue 5161 Gel Circle 200 Oceangate,10th Floor Westminster CA 92 Huntington Bead , 92649 Long Beach,CA 92802-4302 California Coastal Commission 24 Patricia Koch 32 Che le Browning 38 South Coast Area Office HB High School Disrict. Me ado Area 200 Oceangate,loth Floor 10251 Yorkto venue 16771 Roosev ane Long Beach,CA 92802-4302 Huntington Beach, 2646 Huntington Beach, 2649 . Robert oseph 25 CSA 33 CA Co�CA Communities,Inc. 39 Caltrans t 12 730 El C Way#200 6 Exece Suite 250 3347 Michelson Suite 100 Tustin,CA 92680 Irvine, 92614 Irvine,CA 92612-0661 Director 26 Goldenwest College 34 Bols Chica Land Trust 40 Solid Waste Enf.Agy. Attn: r ens Nanry van O.C.He are Agency 15744 Golden t 4831 Los Patos P.O.Bog 355 Huntington Beach CA 47 Huntington Beach, 2649 Santa Ana,CA 92702 New Growth Coordinator ® OC County Harbors,Beach 35 Bokz Chica Land Trust 4' Huntington Beach Post Office and t Paul ,President 6771 Warner Ave. P.O.Bog 4048 207-21s'Stree Huntington Beach,CA 92647 Santa Ana,CA 92702 Huntington Beach, 648 Marc Ecker 28 Huntington Beach Mall 36 SE 4" Foua Valley A t Rogers-Laude 22032 Capis Lane Elementary ool District 7777 Edia e.#300 Huntington Beach, 92646-8309 17210 Oak Street _ Huntington Beach 2647. Fountain Valley CA 92708 Uangel--phlbl 024-147-03 5 024-147-03 5 024-147-08 7 ,DONAL'D GALITZEN • VERA GALITZEN HUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOP. .9710 JAMES RIVER CIR 9770 JAMES RIVER CIR DEPT FOUNTAIN VAY,LEY,CA 92708 FOUNTAIN VALLEY,-CA 92708 2000 MAIN ST HUNTINGTON BEACH,CA 92648 024-147-09 8 024-147-30 15 024-147-30 15 NEWPORT FINANCIAL EXPRESS CORP WILLIAM&PHILOMENE GALLEGOS WILLIAM&PHILOMENE GALLEGO C/O KENNETH BERNARD 210 5TH ST 208 5TH ST 3991 MACARTHUR BLVD 9350 HUNTINGTON BEACH,CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH,CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH,CA 92660-3041 024-147-38 19 024-147-38 19 024-14740 20 JOHN GALLAGHER JOHN&JOHN GALLAGHER SR THOMAS CAVERLY 209 MAIN ST 2212 FIELD ST 553 TEMPLE HILLS DR HUNTINGTON BEACH,CA 92648 ANTIOCH,CA 94509-3920 LAGUNA BEACH,CA 92651 024-150-16 22 024-153-07 33 024-154-17 45 STATE CA DEPT OF G GARY MULLIGAN PIER COLONY HASEKO 650 HOWE AVE 221 MAIN ST#6 350 S FIGUEROA ST#255 SACRAMENTO,CA 95825 HUNTINGTON BEACH,CA 92648-8111 LOS ANGELES,CA 90071 t 024-154-17 45 ARIZONA KYRAY LLC LIABILITY CO JEFF BERGSMA 16210 BERTELLA DR 221 MAIN ST UNIT H ENCINO,CA 91436 HUNTINGTON BEACH,CA 92648 111-123 picON 5rr. 6012aunc�4-5 0 '-7,P- 37 AA ' ti� LJ D MEETING DATE: February 22, 2000 DEPARTMENT SUBJECT: REQUESTING: C Economic Development Proposed Disposition & Development Agreem(6t foRthi� Sale of Real Property Outside the Redvelopm4 Area to: Habitat for Humanity Planning Zoning Text Amendment No. 99-2 Planning Appeal of Conditional Use Permit 98-371, Coastal Development Permit 98-121, Special Permit 99-11, Special Permit No. 99-2 TODAY"S DATE February 3, 2000 VERIFIED BY ADMININSTRATION: 2/3/00 11:51 AM Connie Brockway, City Clerk -V 0 City of Huntington Beach K Office of the City Clerk 1 10,00 71 ,rn r U P.O. Box 190 1'jV' n Huntington Beach, CA 92648 C n H f�tETER 5 5 024-147-38 JOHN&jo 9 2212 FIELD'CA S GALLAGHE SR ANTIOCH, ING LA GALLRIR 945091-008 1A99 16 0a/16/00 RETURN TO SENDER GALLAGER ' JOHN MOVED LEFT NO ADDRESS UNABLE TO FORWARD It its RETURN TO SENDER NTY LEGAL NOTICE '�i 2. im Connie Brockway, City Clerk Oc— L)y ty City of Huntington BeachOffice of the City Clerk 'P.O. BOX 190Huntin ton Beach, CA 92648 g . WH METER 5� OCCUPANT INi6T��, 1161/2 MAIN ST l p'c ��,.,d..,•o B�. HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92648 list- ... I. ....... ..... LEGAL NOTICE- PUBLIC HEARING IN 7 >`� s 4 s a, -%P-6q% MYA? 1111 l,,,1111 l I,:,I„i l„I:I I„,,,,I I i,1„I I,,,I,I„I I,I,,,II II Connie Brockway, City Clerk City of Huntington Beach FEB 10,00 Office of the City Clerk H I-IFTFI? Sfj.� P.O. Box 190 C 11 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 1 /0171 A CA 024-153-07 33 GARY MULLIGAN 221 MAIN ST#6 ING HUNTINGTON BE CA 92648-8111 C.3 MULL-aal 926461020 1199 0.5 02115100 FORWARD TIME EXP RTN TO SEND :MU7LLIGAN STPROPERTIES 11 MAIN HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92648-5125 T1 LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING Connie Brockway, City Clerk City of Huntington Beach T r Office of the City Clerk P.O. Box 190 n V-) FEB 11 0 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 H METEF? CA ��s�rl A CA 927 024 1.53 07 33 'PUI/ IN JOHNSON LOREN G v 2 21 MAIN ST 6 �NjHUNTINGTON BEACH 9264.8 o RETURN 45 AUNTY: -LEG'At OTICE- PUBLIC HEARING ildiff-1111dill fill 1111 111111111111)1)111)11111 111 11113 of 1111 y 1 )ckway, City Clerk .� ,- \r�T cti untington Beach '` � ' f the City Clerkov s ;_ +a rc31�'�., ). BOX 190 Beach, CA 92648 ✓� N C H 41 E 7 F R ,5 L .Y. J7 .t I - t OCCUPANT I- 300-416 COAST AY IN6tpy� ti HU �NGTON BEAC� is YTY ca LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING 1 1t tt '�f� t t 11 t 1 1 :)ckway, City Clerk «, i` c ice. ) untington Beach „ tf the City Clerk �f�V' -`; i L ' :Q , w I Box 190 i Ce 7. f`] Beach,CA 92648 l c " PA E? K �'y OCCUPANT-. a '``-P 300-407 COAST HWY /-f, , HUNT) TON BEACH Cti, `�4,15 fiA IIN6tpy� Ix is /1 'NTY LEGAL NOTICE- PUBLIC HEARING rockway, City Clerk AV S. � i F Huntington Beach C PO�,I A -V A� of the City Clerk .0. Box 190 n Beach, CA 92648 117,119,121,12 3 MAIN I HUNTINGTON REACH CA JING 3001. oWN.ERS 100, OCCUp.Z 90"R ONO a, 024 153 05,07,17,18 SEPT-EMBJER .30 1999 Os LEGAL NOTICE- PUBLIC HEARING C P', F. c)ckway, City Clerk iuntington Beach All- )f the City Clerk ). Box 190 1 Beach, CA 92648 C A H M ETE R 5 S 024-150-16 22 STATE CA DEPT OF G 650 HOWE AVE SACRANMNTO,CA 95825 IING' 101 'NT1 ca LEGAL N = ING •!:E 4 111111111111I)IIIIIJ1111 I lilt • 1. ockway, City Clerk vv 4► m G� untington Beach )f the City Clerk I BOX 190 i Beach, CA 92648 �- c . :9*1V r1� i :1r=►-1 : .0, r:"L =� •z Jam' a i• '..1i.r tl : : 47b*'Cosas- 8 URFL Hwy Long C� 03 SURF621 C;06033011 1N 12 02/14/00 - - RETURN TO SENDER NO FORWARD ORDER ON FILE UNABLE TO r'ORWAr%D r;190 `\ -- OCTI IO AI TA CCAI(1FG 'NTV �a LEGAL NOTICE- PUBLJC Htr MRING so C311:..•C��P � 3u �+r�rur�r�r��rrr�rr��rr�r��rurrr��i�ri��rrr�r�rr��nrrr�r�� 117, 1.19, 121, 123 MAIN STREET C.U.P. 98-37 RECEIVED FROM �• AND MADE A PART OF THE RECOR T �Gd COUNCIL MEETING OF OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK PLANNING ISSUES CONNIE BROCKWAY,CITY CLERK • Front Setback Staff: Recommends 7' (code 5' + extra 2').to align the buildings with the adjacent Abdelmuti Building. Applicant: Proposes 5' which complies with zoning code and aligns with major Abdelmuti Building features such as Jack's Surf Shop entrance and the Arch adjacent to subject property. Pierside Pavilion and Standard Market have 5' setbacks. Coultrup Project approved with 0' setback. • Balcony Projection Staff: Recommends denial of Special Permit to allow 2' average projection into front yard. Applicant: Proposes balcony project a maximum 3' which complies to zoning code 230.68. Balcony projection gives architectural relief to front facade. All new buildings downtown have some type of projection. • Open Space Staff: Asserts proposed open space does not meet the intent of the code. Applicant: Relies on definition in D.T.S.P. (page 4) that states "open space requirement can be met anywhere in the development." • Design Guidelines Staff: Asserts project does not comply with Downtown Design Guidelines. Applicant: Project complies with all aspects of Downtown Design Guidelines and has requested that staff be definitive to "what and why" in regard to compliance. ( Refer to related Attachments for visual clarification) - rA For , 47 QS `i f l; i ,1 r { 7� t 110 1 1 i i ,. 1 •:1 6� 1: - 1� � � i Si l�- a }'7 ?r ,E � �f t�4 f l pf}) r ^!�! er �tf lylt fr ( ^ i1 ,J 54 a� lS h { I. ( � t�1h t � fll MAF } k 7 1}.: e t jif au � i t - fir , ,..it7 q t5ti yr I. r �tsJ fa . 4 i.� � � ,F'��! t n 1, I�'4 '_��'r(tl r,�(•� �_ �i �,fr1 �4n�rutrgC � .�r,alb {�jary, Y�, .r}r�y��j�_f�1�Jrr �k..rr 111�i�}E{.ly ,t � Y.t ��I MS�� Poly u I yr' ,t �.�. f e-i. ,'r 5 7�4��-i,� 1 G.:kb 1.{{� I.i � �^S 1�3;v•rJ-�k `4`'�Ya'lxµ( tfi;T�''-1�'4.�h1 �',v' �#S1`,hk fr, rYd rfiJ;� 1 �j '�' "r yr��r,�f'�;•; r Y ILK ..•-5 �'T iri7g a� '� ti ,,,>-rt�. (' (J(i''F`Ai �S e<�Tlh- i l �t }S r4�'1tr>a,F tEr1 }' pf'r,l"�'ht('�AL�J i ti?'InYt iii �..rr '� cr., � �,..,{.. ( �{-Sr a �� t!�'M - r.� �n✓�^n x yG �- '�B 4'wb h -� �''�-P r,r� LN`�'7�a��,..Ft��`;t Y!�-# 1{k1?° _-r fir,5,•y 3,, +�4r`�. a brC.��t,�fE• •� v/�s'FA �iS y' ri"',51'9�}� r.r 't f 1 i !C*�ti} v 1y a [' u SRy_ w-Ja r _J �y�fni`�Jv,". 1 f✓ F//. -[y fJr" ,+ r F' `�= Lf r'�"'! rIt 1 1r,��: p. i'i "t�'`x.(' �t Ea' a'�'J r-mg'S'Iy �2 "�� } + �'� a 't•!i 4r�• ..a •',.. l � �y,,'Jy:r;�h ,�./uf t-� { fur 3 „tnz 4e�a iLt¢•fS ll n I"7^ �Rq� d s:,> {fix i�"��•�+'t h Y .r ,T� . .t �rt 1 ry 1�. d y 14^ Lei - K�� .ywt�jv�Yi��t fi � MJ�a~ s�pprry� Z 1 fi I 1 .mot r� '`•..:,>,.m.«rig'•. 4 - "':, _ ". .,� _ 'J7� �. . v t' � M1;�jtc�aj I � 1 it {s+{f rj,,,4• r a.5" rr a r -' �, yl�5 iJ} 6-f � �rg�d4ry� �t�,�'`�w,✓'{�N'�e 7rv�U '� a'�''+'d"�^`�1 �i�`a"F �b,.it,.r I � � I 5i, F 1 ,Ac� �J Y f s .F 0. nil I 9�,P yt�+q*'fir r''��fJJ f� '�e n yYA W`R•"U a � I h '. 5 [(±+Mry ,•^j `7 a _ �'' a� �S.tS( x z�a �,�Y4 .'Cc^s a�t'•i a t �- r _I`I � r Y,;<- I+,�h'I�}I•q k,�;� �{'�T� r.�"';�j y, 5 .:r�,:.' � �*M�ry'�,t��y r�e1�" 7 a f -� - ' AM.r£'�wkr �S• t* �' .e II u� M1'xl k�� '� 5 c-+�'-r �J�.�z trc, l khF� ,�`y'°�,) , 121 MrJ„a�s n '3'�. 1�` r..-.. to 'I �Yi JJ✓"' p t ��(s,,�t�T�� MRA.; —,r, 1% 1 r—Ir- 177FTIJ z por r 1 f ,.. y I, (r •t L' r.. r 1 1 , r r f}tx"f yak. f- rI' It- tYl 11 PIIr i 1 1 f ' I it ca.l 4 61 ti4xJ+1` I I l lk'4 lrJ C,7 .aJ 'fia .'i• 'r.P t .JF .4 y 'ram ,+44t i•L.• Y,,�� .t`b �f. 4 s 13 r*' �t�t '�.,.r j� rl) f pp .'t r q_ J �, >� ' # s i r,� L t ,F'? 71 -.'. FR n -I. I 1 .s7hr♦ � ,1 ,'..I t; -r i I T I , n •ti` 1 r' .q� r I ! � jlt �'! t JY � a , , alYf.vt lr r. ts.' I1s�r{I, � �1 r�r , tI �(�tii 5 � #/trt 4� 71 rx i j P� I'�a'4t t` i( {t f I fyt r h Ir ! #✓' J I,1 1 i !1t �13 iY'r'. ' ',f,r'L4zt;tx�1)1 >f}f` v5'C r r Ilt Y L r:: fftf `'! i• -,t ky r S{ 4l ,75 ? l t r f.i"•^'u } ..Pf:w'i t �., �}>t it rl a 4 tis ''17F t y -ii s "J Ihr:A6 a4fp f."A i1'd. x1L i iac t 7i� k�r•, I 7 � �� III + 5r{ ! I Fh; !h'n +� r r�i e r -3 �Irgl ;''i.r ram•.--,'-.,----••-r.. 1 5-�is'4 Nti.J �¢y,"�' �w., , f'�`• V ,il rs-`J'{ I .. ��._,..>~ �:t t h v' .r � `��' I��T li• � z 2:ti��; r�e^.,a,a J'�"'y'�,`t r+`;j�F�rq�71�'-�'' t'+fM'n ' �.IiNI �.s� y It .1 r r g rj s r r! a(S!, F d rvry 5rf4 9� �7dilvr��rit� ��44j��"rN a r •, (r .t s it-�L aj�"3''+`{ �'R n"s y�z - t 'PWI•y'HsY --St;3�t kix•�+�' �...•�}rilrs.il �l ;�< t 211, 1'>z t ,�:E;s�;"a' 1$f�. 1 i •lic ek rj' Er '4 �'tr4 'a "� a mar,. �knd i' a t 'iIx :T=i� �r{r t`t•.,. u�}�i �4 ,rl. } t�e • 1. ^} � hP��1�., rV W4('��' .'Sr��'r�•��41�tau X`��'`�YP"z,'"7 n.,•'n`F>`� i '�� Y�v�'�i -:'�'^g _ $.�, r �.,.K y,tl L,�1 Mt,�x^` ,7�.`s�' "��ti-r..#". 'G�a�`c�i'�l` �r��'�•7n+k a., -fi. [J} Y• 'nr,;:kr.�°n. ��', v +'J r •� 1��1.f f Z-J �' � '�;;a+'� �� i Wi�r%�j4{y�J�1�' �`' �: •�S« .Tw,,r �, r � # � °"'�� Ll��`YA'bIP "' e �r r wri a L �C3'pi4A�`,' �. .�yf rrt'r ' N �u � ('a� � „z, 3t}u �Y 4 -e i'{ � U.' , rTi'l,".• ?-Y.�`,�'+ F .. rt..a�t` � s».,.'f"+!'T['�1�.•• m tr �Y„"'1,�'tly'`":e'+� t,,.-.vF` .f�,' +r y ,� 1h', �.,,-i�� y,y '%'j+ rr �C u,d t. �K�(1.r' ., x.4fi""'";""-,'+•3,"�v+'r�`?�'{!3,r' 7 5 a;F' '=7��y, 'ski i�p .�7''` �'�. jpyl9 �•�(y '''4 rfv"A ar.'C�r�r � s�4 1 1 t�3• �q.Y"•• n.�� JS.�`(� r J.Za .ii�yn t m � Y Ic {r S•v-:� V� `7¢I. '.. flE �. S"+n-r 1J �rzi 1 ,� rd�.q,aj, {,I`k'rg".@zq• \ti4.`^,i L r ��,.�ah' f rgfr�r, � ,.,� � th � ,+:,cJ•s,r+�r�1�3�b�` Irr;mr>F' t' S yr� yt� '9 � � •� �+r`ed�•a E1 " , ''eS:� � �r [ �'" 7�'•�` a ^G 6 a �-+CF Y�, c 3t9t'.., n` L�`�a.�-' 1•dg.-. ( 4 T�s L � �f.1 9 G 1 �"`�vl yt y -ij`'�ff 5 i,e'{r Ss!y"-3"a"��Y '� �; �:.. /4 i � � �� gry'r 4 iz �:,w`• 4 x�L� ��t�''#tl 5t'ftk`t?1 r .�•`-'�'r. �`'..�_ .,r :�,._d_I., ,..:I I...�,.-.'.r"i.:d....,'i`�yi'...4„+�-'�''t�f 'FL S;�.K-t ` ��:� 1'� ,'•�,#� _ •r" p '? �r- -.y .. 1 1.4 `.'. � � �p•�6 ;fit, l,>� yJ� f�. :, r � I I i ... , " :�. .I �r,c:. f,�'1.<t �c' �, Ytlf d,;,�(.<i �.1 a�w .�.wg• a�� vk rr �fu4��.�, P:r n,+� f {Jf'i,�Fc,i� "'/� ,.t3 i, .f+l. ry� 4(A xi+Y11 �. ) '' .fir' —.r .�t�,.tzl rx..� d ..-n+ nr:,?'�,? h n. . ,. y� •h: �aF?.. r..-7' t wr:r,•t'.,..u... ,F.zp z�a',wj- f�§`�'"'.� ':`{L�' �n _rV� ', c � gyp, yl� J�''�'Y�R .n. { �} ,4r rfi. . ., y� .,G r�}''h',{'; U{� '�� S,t},SF . '�:y�, '{1 h.:�!�Fxih�.,�.;lYs {^� 1x,,? r.,17'b ,!slrr ,rcr Y+ .k:e-. $-� L:� -i. ,1=,,...``JI ,xe,,A.21 k �;,k �(.:;Y1,t 1; ,r�, i,..,: r'":� •rta.'�e'c° �., -; <r { � t '�f��.,,�gGlr'P�'}�,f}X!'''�'S�a�•*� ;...r��jjjj��C�``11��f�J,ne - .•. �c�t', .,1:�✓r4 1�45�",.,i.�ry'� ;�k 1 i e��J�Y'i+?°ss{45^,5il r,C,Ji ,c � y ;,6r�a�•s7Yr�-� s f; i �',' r c '�lu� 4 -�.{ S ,�a .,� �'t, ,1-,, l i 4'F�'i�' 't}'�LI r f��{�.,-1kE•y rtt-s� ,��rr af'aa'f'�+� � uqvg. 51 i,I:�K 7l 'u 1 j y ' J �'l.r p�`t�'� hat t �i' 1 �.,f Y17•.��L r.t F K fljf-i �' y'k' Y r P(. IaMly�i-�c L d ST Pf it 19 xt t r}�' �> ��'i � YI K I 3;EJr 1 t rr r hl i"rt�:l.0 4tu;c ti� � 'IfAh �y �'rr I+1giE�'i AX Kyh FSv^� �-,J r>w'l'a 4��'v�rE`,� ,�ik��g.�P� �iytu� �r�,�,�a[�,��,•t��' z: I.�Ii �Y � fU .ril 4 ,t+k e;r n,F i v `T, i t�� ✓�,��'� �U� �_ `E - i � , 1 fl -N��lt'� ,•'a , � _ ��'ti�c+��3 pJ1�,r�?��`'3'�1� ,{S'y ,��.,...--....._. j u � i" 'zs,`'- yr tS.r1 .v E' rn*,� k , %`'•t :.3u»,.a,r�i 7 :'' `�',F - ';,,,,�Lxt •,,��'.. .. ♦ :,rp.`�y • i• , I �4 I 1 2 ' - {a r .:nag •'a r I ! 1 r \ � t ` � 0 0 0 1 Q O1 I R ti 0 1 0 CODE S TA FF APPL ICANT saa STORY SET-BACK f7E0UlRED a.IrHOUr BALCONY P170✓ECr.MV "7?V BALCONY P/70✓ECTION `A CAGE �'f�t7FILES • ' "•` 230.68-230.70C - 230.68 Building Projections Into Yards and Courts Projections into required yards and courts shall be permitted as follows: ALLOWABLE PROJECTIONS IN FEETa Front Side Street Side Rear Yard Yard Yard Yard Fireplace or chimney 2.5 2.5b 2.5 2.5 Cornice, eaves and ornamental features 3 2.5b 3 3 Mechanical equipment 2 2b 2b 2 Uncovered porches, terraces, platforms, 6 3 4 5 subterranean garages, decks, and patios not more than 3 feet in height serving only the first floor Stairs, canopies, awnings and uncovered porches 4 2b 4 4b more than 3 feet in height Bay windows --2-.55 2.5b 2.5 2.5 Balconies \ 3 l 2b 3 3 Covered patios 0 0 5c 5 NTotes: aN. o individual projection shall exceed 1/3 of the building length, and the total of all projections shall not exceed 2/3 of the building length on which they are located. bA 30-inch clearance from the property line shall be maintained. c o projection shall extend more than 1/2 the width of the street side yard. 230.70 Measurement of Height This section establishes standards for determining compliance with the maximum building height limits prescribed for each zoning district or as modified by an overlay district. A. Datum (100) shall be set at the highest point of the-curb along the front property line. If no curb exists, datum shall be set at the highest centerline of the street along the front property line. B. The differential between top of subfloor and datum shall be a maximum of two (2) feet as determined by Public Works. In the event that any subfloor, stemwall or footing is proposed greater than two (2) feet above datum, the height in excess shall be deducted from the maximum allowable ridgeline height. C. Lots with a grade differential of three (3) feet or greater between the high point and the low point, determined before rough grading, shall be subject to conditional use permit approval by the Zoning Administrator. Conditonal use permit approval shall be based upon a building and grading plan which terraces the building with the grade and which is compatible with adjacent development. Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Chapter 230 230-2 11l95 (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 (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. M4.5.06 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 was 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. GOWNTWNSP 30 Downtown Specific Plan Revised 6/1/95 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 o en s ace: Outdoor or unenclosed area on the ground floor or above floor eves estgne 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 oneove the first floor, or open to the sky. Theo ens ace re uirement can be me an herein the devel • however, open space provided a ove 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 rieht-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. Riizht-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. G:DWNTWNSP 4Q Downtown Specific Plan Revised 6/1/95 DOWNTOWN DESIGN GUIDELINES for publicprivate improvements ��aaa ►y►a��. I�u,�`WA II111111111Iillilllilllillllil IIIIIIIlllpI IIIII I III►91111UI111!►Ililllllll l 11 lily � �plll llu�„„��I IIIU►n��,�n l(llll n I I �11 lu -24 '1 , ' I �ullll I 1 �Itnmrirrpl►IIYI. IIIIIINIIII� INV own IN City of Huntington Beach %licI lei-dt ,.resign ana siting guidelines ; 5 BUILDING FORM AND MASS The relationship of buildings to pedestrian spaces is the key to a lively and exciting outdoor environment in down- town Huntington Beach. Because the downtown area is to be of a "human scale" , care must be taken to keep the buildings from becoming too massive or imposing. Tall buildings shall be made less • imposing by physically stepping A. Step buildings back from the street. them back from the street level . (See Diagram A) ® Building facades shall be detailed ` in such a way as to make them appear shorter. This can be done by articulating the separate floor levels with horizontal bands or by increasing the level of detail on the buildings at the street level . i New buildings shall be designed to create pleasing transitions to surrounding development. The bulk of new buildings should relate to the prevailing scale of adjacent development. (See Diagram B) B. The bulk of new -buildings should relate to adjacent buildings as shown in the bottom diagram- The building shown in the top diagram does not relate. 6 THE PEDESTRIAN EXPERIENCE New development within the downtown should be oriented to pedestrians . The way buildings are sited creates pedestrian spaces. The uses they house contribute to a varied and lively streetscape . �+ Buildings facing pedestrian streets and plazas shall incorporate design features that provide visual interest at the street level. In addition, buildings are required to provide street level uses such as shops, restaurants and services that cater to: pedestrians. Where appropriate in commercial and _ mixed-use areas, buildings should A. Create a pedestrian environment with varied provide additional pedestrian and interesting shops and restaurants. activities at levels above or below the street lev.el. (See Diagram A) Building setbacks along major pedestrian streetks should be varied to create pla a dike areas which attract ped strians whenever pbs-sible. Cs e Diagram B) 1 B. Varied building setbacks create plaza-like areas. PRIMARY MATERIALS colors can greatly affect the imagery and mood of the downtown area . A harmonious uniform materials and consistent style color scheme with bright accents will shall be evident in all exterior produce a lively atmosphere encouraging elevations . The dominant exterior year-round use , material of a building shall be one of the following: BACKGROUND COLOR Stucco (smooth and textured) 01* Base walls of buildings and other large Smooth Block expanses shall be light colored . Soft Granites.,se tones ranging from white to very light Marblee pastels are required . Neutrals such as off-whites , beige and sand are also " Reflective glass is not permitted as a acceptable colors . Light salmon and primary exterior material . other muted colors give a pleasing • ACCENT MATERIALS contemporary .appearance , ACCENT COLOR Secondary materials shall be used to highlight building features and provide Some building elements shall be brightly visual interest . Secondary materials may colored to contrast with the light include one or more of the following: colored background in order to produce a Wood Lively streetscape. Glassiv_� Building details such as doors, chimneys , Tile window framing, trim, railings , awnings BrickWOOO or light fixtures may used to carry Concrete the bright accent color . Care should be Painted Metal taken not to use too many bright colors Wrought Iron or too many different types of details so as to avoid an overwhelming or cluttered- looking building. The goal is to achieve a clean, contemporary look . 10 - Roofs Appropriate and simple forms include the shed, gable, and hip roofs which may be used alone or in combination to achieve the varying roofline characteristic of Mediterranean villages . ® Flat roofs shall be avoided. Shed Roof materials most indicative of Gable Mediterranean architecture include clay shingle tile, concrete shingle tile, Mission tile and other the-like • designs . Other acceptable roof materials include copper and painted metal . Chimneys, roof flashing, rain gutters, downspouts, vents and other roof protrusions should be finished to complement or accent the adjacent materials and colors. This can be accomplished by using materials similar Hipl. Combinations to those used on the building or by painting the detail in an accent color . Screening of rooftop mechanical equipment shall be incorporated into the building design. Mechanical equipment shall not be visible from any angle or any height outside of the building. • Avoid flat roofs. 14 Balconies Balconies- create outdoor living areas and serve to break up blank walls on the upper levels of buildings . Balconies allow people to take advantage of the ocean breezes , views and mild climate year-round. A balcony can be designea as a creep inset on the building form or it can be designed as a pro3ection from a building. _ Varying wall angles creates unique spaces an6 interesting building forms . iInset balcony Projecting balcony Decorative iron grills can be used to give emphasis to small balconies. In this mild coastal climate it is very desirable to use roof tops to provide usable outdoor space in both residential and commercial developments. Awriings,. the and railings can be used for color accent. Balconies in residential projects shall be - constructed of a solid material up to a height of two feet i from the floor of the balcony. Above that height open rails or grill work may be used. I rooftop makes an exciting outdoor space_ } I ILK RA L VI % CIUtLa7 Arches are the most clearly recognizable feature of Mediterranean architecture . ' They originally developed as a way to _ provide structural support for a doorway . i Care must be taken that arches �w appear authentic. The integrity of an arch is lost when its mass is not proportional- to its size. Columns must relate in scale to 4 that portion of the building. which F they visually support. .i When arches are repeated along the length �-- of a building, an arcade is created. Arcades are especially appropriate in the .commercial and mixed use areas to protect I pedestrians from sun and inclement weather . Arcades create cool shaded spaces and pedestrian-scaled walkways . Columns with mass and integrity. They can also create protected areas for . ,.temporary outdoor displays and outdoor dining. These columns are much too thin. Stairways 13 Stairways , while functional , often become a major focal point in the design of a building. They can create effects ranging from majestic entryways to understated level changes . As a design element, stairways create visual transitions .from one level to another . i' People are drawn to stairs as a place to , y sit and view the surro unding plazas , people and buildings . y s - An ornate stairway identifies a major building entrance. I • �1i Tile risers and rails add colorful highlights. SIZE/LOCATION : Signs should be consistent with the proportion and scale of building elements within the facade. The placement of signs provide visual clues to business location and affects the design integrity of the entire building. SUNSNIN ,'S y (�a ° 0 Ground level signs should be 11 � smaller than those on higher levels . Pedestrian-oriented signs should be smaller than automobile oriented signs . • a Signs should establish rhythm, scale and proport:i.on in facades and arcades. son These signs block building elements and create a chaotic image. 0 Sign placement on a facade should i complement building elements rat than block them„ ILLUMINATION - There are two methods of illuminating signs: internal with the light source inside the sign and external with an outside light directed at the sign . tUCL�S, ® Internal illumination is permitted ® on channel letters only. ® Signs without channel letters must be illuminated externally. ® Signs must be lighted with continuous light sources. Following are definitions and examples of These signs complement the building form creating the different types of allowable signs. a more orderly appearance. Illustrations are provided to stimulate ideas. Review of Approved Proiects and Downtown Specific Plan Code Requirements Approved A2proved Approved Approved Planning/Code Issue(s)/ D.S.P. Code Front Yard 2" Floor Balcony Public Open DSP Code Project Address & Name Requirement Setback Build to Encroachment Space Main Street Main Street Line r mtl+a � •?wsr a ��, r n n ,� 101 Main Street 5 ft. build to 7 ft�etl ack ' a4 x None 10 % net site � area Oceanview Promenade 5 ft. setback pywd 300 PCH 5 ft. build to Main St. 10 ft. to None 10%of net site 26.8% of net w Pierside Pavilion 5 ft. setback facade; comm. area site area Plaza area at 5 ft. X 126 Main Street 5 ft. build to 5 ft. build to None 10 % of net site 10 % of net Standard Market 5 ft. setback 5 ft. setback area site area+ 200 Main Street 5 ft. build to 6 ft**. to building None 10% net site 11.3 % net Main Promenade 5 ft. setback w/open comm./ area site area arcade to within 5 ft. 201-221 Main Street 5 ft. build toS r . Demonstration Block 5 ft. setback ry 301 Main Street 5 ft. build to 6=ftq 1t�c easy None Spc�caPerntI elan :k Plaza Almeria 5 ft. setback a1k, >> a -"" Notes: Denotes a Special Permit was requested and approved '�* Denotes no Special Permit was requested or required, but the projection was approved. I I I hrpn I I ' I - r 0 I I ' I I I / 1 I I I I I I I I ' \ I I I I I I I 11. I rUU / I V l 1 KEITH B. BOHR P R I N C I P A L ASSOCIATES 'R E A L E S T A T E 7 1 4 9 6 0 • 7 2 8 6 415 TONS OUARE LN. STE 219 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 EMAIL•KBB 1 230AOL.COM JEFF BERGSMA, A/A A R C H I T E C T SAW D • E • S • I •G • N 7 1 4 5 3 6 • 5 8 8 8 221 MAIN STREET SUITE H HUNTINGTON BEACH.CA 92648 FAX • 7 1 4 • 9 6 0 • 3 3 5 0 i;ECEIVED FROM AND MADE A PART OF THA1; COFDATTHE 1 • COUNCIL MEETING OF. �A OFFICE OF T.`:c.CITY CLERK ll V �7 OF HUTINGTON BEACHCONNIE BRUCKvvAY,CITY CLERK CITY N Inter-Department Communication TO: HONORABLE MAYOR GAROFALO AND CITY COUNCILMEMBERS FROM: GAIL HUTTON,CITY ATTORNEY SUBJECT: CONFLICT OF INTEREST=AGENDA ITEM D-3,APPEAL OF CUP : 98-371, CDP 98-121,SPECIAL PERMITS 99-2,99-11 CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 22,2000 - DATE: FEBRUARY 22, 2000 This memorandum is a brief clarification of the conflict of interest issues presented by the above referenced agenda item. We do not believe that any conflict of interest is present as-to the real - property interests owned by Mayor Garofalo, Councilmember Julien, or Councilmember Bauer, - related to voting on the above referenced item. Councilmember Bauer: Councilmember Bauer owns a multi-unit apartment complex located at 220 121h Street,which is within.2500 feet of the proposed project. Based upon the opinion rendered by appraiser Michael F. Waldron, MAI, dated February 15, 2000, a copy of which is . attached hereto as Exhibit"A,"there is no measurable influence upon the fair market value of Councilmember Bauer's property as a result of its proximity to the proposed project. Therefore, Councilmember Bauer may participate in the decision on the project. Mayor Garofalo: Mayor Garofalo owns the single family residence located at 630 Main Street, which is within 2500 feet of the proposed project. Based upon the opinion rendered by appraiser Ronald P. Laurain,MAI, dated May 3, 1999, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit`B," development of Blocks 104 and 105 will not have a reasonably foreseeable financial effect on the market or rental value of Mayor Garofalo's property in the threshold amounts required to trigger a conflict of interest. Therefore,Mayor Garofalo may participate in the decision on the proj ect. - - Councilmember Julien: Councilmember Julien owns-the single family residence located at 1917 Pine Street,which is over 2500 feet from the proposed project. Since Mr. Laurain's opinion is that Mayor Garofalo's property will not be affected by the development of Blocks 104-.105, and since Councilmember Julien's property is even farther from the proposed project than Mayor Garofalo's property,we believe that Councilmember Julien does not have a conflict of interest. Therefore, Councilmember Julien may participate in the decision on the project. _.. Additionally, an appraisal was recently performed regarding-the effect of this projecfon Planning Commissioner Mandic's property located on Main Street. Commissioner Mandic's property is g:4:2000memos:conf0222 s. 77�V-r much closer in proximity to the proposed project than any of the properties owned by the three Councilmembers discussed above. The appraiser,Mr. Laurain,MAI, concluded that Commissioner Mandic did not have a conflict of interest as to this project, and she was allowed to participate in the decision on the project at the Planning Commission level. This opinion further supports our view that none of the Councilmembers discussed herein have a conflict as to the project. Please contact me if you have any further questions. a - Lr GALL HUTTON City Attorney c: Ray Silver,City Administrator Melanie Fallon, Asst. City Administrator g*2000memos:confO222 EsX IB�Irr 2-15-2000 11 :57AM FROM WALDRON AND ASSOCS 714 771 1120 P. 2 WALDRON & ASSOCIATES, INC. REAL. ESTATE APPRAISERS AND CONSULTANTS t� 1 F-D 15 P1 12: 22 205 SOUTH ORANGE STREET 7.7 `!.= L MICHAEL F. WALDRON. MAI SUITE 100 CITY Al iT0':` � ORANGE, CALIFORNIA 92866 _ _ .JANICE K. WALDRON TELEPHONE (714) 771-1100 r'L N I I �G I `��+ C PET0.OS BERHANE FACSIMILE (714) 771-1120 CHRISTER FIFCE-KOLLMANN - February 15, 2000 Mr. Scott Field Assistant City Attorney City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California 92648 RE: Consulting — Financial Interest Study, Council Member Dr. Ralph Bauer Property, Apartment Property at 220 12(h Street, Huntington Beach, California; Job No. 00-925 Dear Mr. field: The purpose of this study is to determine the reasonably foreseeable effect upon the above-referenced property which may be influenced by the decisions of Council Member Dr. Ralph Bauer regarding CUP No. 98-37 and other related permits covering the properties addressed as 117, 119, 121 and 123 Main Street, pursuant to provisions contained within Title 2, Division 6 of the California Code of Regulations of the Fair Political Practices Commission. Generally, the regulations set forth the parameters of the materiality standard for economic interests in real property. As understood, Dr.. Bauer's property is located outside of a 300-foot radius of the project boundaries of the CUP, however, within a 2,500-foot radius of the project boundaries covered by the CUP. If the decision before the Agency will have a reasonably foreseeable effect' of; (i) ten thousand dollars ($10,000) or more on-the fair market value of the real property in which the official has .an interest; or (ii) will affect the rental value of the property by $1,000 or more per 12 month period, the decision is deemed material. i FEB-15-2000 12:09 714 771 1120 99% P•02 . 2-15-2000 11 :58AM FROM WALDRON AND ASSOCS 714771 1120 P. 3 Mr. Scott Field - 2 - February 15, 2000 Briefly, CUP No. 98-37 and the other related permits cover the properties addressed as 117, 119, 121 and 123 Main Street, all situated within the southwesterly corner of Main Street and Walnut Avenue in Huntington Beach, California. The request by the applicants at 117 Main Street includes: (1) Exterior and interior remodel of the I" floor and 2na floor; (2) Establish a restaurant/banquet facility with outdoor patio dining and alcohol service on the 2Id floor; and at 119 Main Street includes: (1) Exterior and interior remodel of the I" floor; (2) Construct a new 2"d floor for retail or office use; (3) Abandonment of three (3) feet of alley on the west side; and at 121 Main Street includes: (1) Exterior and interior remodel of the I" floor; (2) Construct a new 2'd floor for office use; and at 123 Main Street includes: (1) Demolish the existing building and construct a new two-story building with retail on the I" floor and office on the 2°d floor. Additionally, a Special Permit is requested to allow the 2"d floor balcony to all four (4) buildings at a setback of two (2) feet in lieu of the five (5) feet build-to-line required along Main Street The request also includes a Special Permit to allow a staff recommendation of seven (7) feet build-to-line in lieu of the required five (5) feet along Main Street. The proposed project is described in greater detail in the Conditional Use Permit Staff Report of December 14, 1999 and January 11, 2000 as well as the Notice of Action on Conditional Use Permit dated January 14.,2000. Dr. Bauer owns a property located within a 2,500-foot radius of the boundaries of the proposed project covered by the CUP. The property, known as the Royal Hawaiian Apartments, is addressed as 220`h 12`h Street and identified by the Orange County Assessor as A.P. No. 024-034-02. The site contains 17,625 square feet and is zoned RMH-A (Residential, Medium-High Density). This zone is consistent with the General Plan, which allows for a maximum development density of 25 units per acre. The site is improved with a two (2) story apartment building containing twenty (20) units. There are six (6) one-bedroom units and fourteen (14) two-bedroom units. Rentals range from $725 to $775 per month for the one-bedroom units and $885 to $1,000 per month for the two-bedroom units. Amenities include a pool, laundry and twenty (20) total parking spaces; six (6) tuck-under spaces and fourteen (14) single garage spaces. The building was constructed around 1964 and appears to be in fair to average condition. This study includes conducting the following investigations and reviewing the following documents: A review of Title 2, Division 6 of the California Code of Regulations, Regulations of the Fair Political Practices Commission, specifically §18705.2 Materiality Standard: Economic Interests in Real Property. . •: An exterior inspection on February 9, 2000 of the property owned by Dr. Bauer within the 2,500—foot radius of the project boundaries. ❖ A review of two (2) years of operating history and current rent roll for Dr. Bauer's property located within the 2,500-foot radius of the project boundaries. WAL,DRON & ASSOCIATES, INC. FEB-15-2000 12:09 714 771 1120 99% P.03 2-15-2000 11 :58AM FROM WALDRON AND ASSOCS 714 771 1120 P. a Mr. Scott Field - 3 - February 15, 2000 •: An apartment building sales and rental survey from 1996 to current within the vicinity of the downtown core, Huntington Beach and Orange County. ❖ Apartment building sales trend studies from 1996 to current within the downtown core, Huntington Beach and Orange County. ❖ Paired-data studies for apartment building sales and rentals within Huntington Beach's downtown core and beyond the 2,500-foot radius of the downtown core. ' Owner Participation Agreement (OPA) between the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach and Mola Development Corporation for the redevelopment of 89-unit condominium project called Town Square located between Main Street, Orange Avenue and Sixth Street, dated July 25, 1988. ❖ DDA between the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach and California Resorts for the redevelopment of the Pierside Pavilion located on the southeast corner of PCH and Main Street, dated August 26, 1988. ❖ OPA between the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach and Robert Koury for the redevelopment of Ocean View Promenade a public parking- structure and retail shops on the bottom of Main Street and Walnut Avenue, dated December 21, 1988. ❖ The Main Pier Redevelopment Area and Information Summary. •: Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach Biennial Report 1991-1993. •: OPA between the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach and Abdelmuti Development Company related to the redevelopment of the Oceanview Promenade, dated September 5, 1991. ❖ DDA between the.Coultrup Company and the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach dated July 6, 1993. This project, which partially covers the same properties described in the proposed CUP, was never implemented. Resolution No. 6646, dated November 7, 1994, adopting the Downtown Specific Plan which is the planning and zoning document controlling the development of the Downtown area. Adopted Redevelopment Plans, dated October 1996. ❖ OPA between the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach and Zeldan, dated July 17, 1997, a project now under construction at the corner of Main Street and Walnut. WALDRON & A.ssOCIATES, INC. FEB-15-2000 12:09 714 771 1120 P.04 '2-15-2000 11 :59AM FROM WALDRON AND ASSOCS . 714 771 1120 P. 5 Mr. Scott Field -4 - February 15, 2000 DDA between the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach and the Mayer Corporation for the development of the Hilton Waterfront Hotel, dated August 15, 1988 and Amended September 14, 1998. DDA between the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach and the Mayer Corporation for the development of the Hilton Grand Resort and Conference Center, dated September 21, 1998. •: DDA between the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach and the Y CIM Group, dated June 17, 1999. . •: Conditional Use Permit Staff Report of December 14, 1999, to the Planning Commission encompassin; the project proposed by the owners of 117 to 123 Main Street and affected by the CUP. Conditional Use Permit Staff Report of January 11, 2000, to the Planning Commission encompassing a project proposed by the owners of 117 to 123 Main Street and affected by the CUP. •: Notice of Action on Conditional Use Permit dated January 14, 2000, encompassing a project proposed by the owners of 117 to 123 Main Street and affected by the C[JP. The foregoing historical redevelopment project activity has been studied. Much of this activity occurs within the downtown core and occurs in the vicinity of Pacific Coast Highway and Main Street. The historical redevelopment project activity is considered representative of a base from which to compare. Paired-data sets have been employed to assist in determining the affects, if any, on locational influences related to these historical projects. Paired-data sets involve the utilization of market data, which is similar in all respects except for one factor. The paired study solves for the single factor of locational proximity, in essence the impact, if any, of being within 2,500 feet of a prospective project as compared to being beyond the 2500 feet of the prospective project. Additionally, trend studies, paired-data sets for comparable apartment building sales and rentals and other economic data have been reviewed in order to determine the impact, if any, upon apartment properties situated near (within 2,500 feet of various redevelopment project boundaries) as compared to those apartment properties with similar characteristics which were situated distant (beyond. 2,500 feet of various redevelopment project boundaries). The proposed project has been reviewed with respect to amenities, which may have a positive influence on the fair market value of Dr. Bauer's specific property located within the 2,500-foot sphere. In conclusion, sale prices and rent levels are more directly influenced by supply and demand characteristics associated with comparable and competitive product. Rent levels and sale prices for properties comparable to Dr. Bauer's apartment property are WALDRON & ASSOCIATES, INC. FEB-15-2000 12: 10 714 771 1120 P.OS 2-15-2000 12:00PM FROM WALDRON AND ASSOCS 714 771 1120 P. 6 Mr. Scott Ficld - 5 - February 15, 2000 consistent within and beyond the 2,500-foot radius of numerous historical redevelopment projects within the downtown core. Based upon these studies and comparisons, it is readily apparent that there is no measurable influence upon the fair market value of Dr. Bauer's property as a result of the proximity between the limits of a 300-foot to 2,500-foot radius of the proposed project boundaries. Respectfully submitted, WALDRON & ASSOC ES, INC. Michael F. Waldron, MAI Senior Consultant WALDRON & ASSOCIATES. INC. FEB-15-2000 12: 10 714 771 1120 99% P.06 gxsI �� I X • • R P . L A U R A I N 8c AS S O CIATE S IN CO R PO RATED 3353 LINDEN AVENUE, SUITE 200 LONG BEACH, CA 90807-4503 TELEPHONE (562) 426-0477 FACSIMILE (562) 988-2927 May 3, 1999 Gail Hutton City Attorney City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street _ Huntington Beach, California 92648 Subject: California Code of Regulations; _ = Fair Political Practices - =- Opinion letter regarding the effect of the Development of Blocks 104 and 105 of the Downtown Redevelopment Project on the value of property vested with == Councilmember David P. Garofalo at 630 Main Street Huntington Beach, California Dear Ms. Hutton: In accordance .with your request, I have reviewed Section 18702.3 of the California Code of Regulations as it pertains to conflict of interest. This letter is written to provide my independent opinion, as a professional real estate appraiser, of the reasonably foreseeable financial effect on the property of Councilmember David P. Garofalo by the upcoming decision to approve, amend or reject the proposed redevelopment of Blocks 104 and 105 of the Downtown Redevelopment Project. The redevelopment of Blocks 104 and 105 will include mixed use facilities (commercial and residential), within multi-story buildings. The redevelopment is a continuation of the Downtown Redevelopment Plan and is located within the boundaries of the original plan. The residence property of Councilmember David P. Garofalo is located approximately 2,000 feet, in a direct line,..northerly of Blocks 104 and 105; as measured along Main Street, the Councilmember's residence is approxi- mately 2,150 feet northerly of the proposed development. APPRAISERS ANALYSTS Gail Hutton City Attorney City of Huntington Beach May 3, 1999 Page 2 The residence property of Councilmember Garofalo is known as 630 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California. The site has 25 feet of frontage on Main Street, and a uniform depth of 117.50 feet. The single family dwelling is two stories, of wood frame construction, and was built within the past year. The subject property was part of a larger development of similar homes fronting on Main Street and Lake Street, within the block bounded on the north by Palm Avenue, and Frankfort Avenue on the south. The general value range of the single family residential properties is $300,000 to $400,000. The objective of this study is the estimation of (1) whether it is reasonably foreseeable that the approval, amendment, or rejection of the redevelopment of Blocks 104 and 105 would have a material financial effect on the City Official, or on a member of the Official's immediate family, and (2) whether the "material financial effect," if any, is distinguishable from the effect on the public generally. Portions of the Regulations of the Fair Political Practices Commis- sion, Title 2, Division 6 of the California Code of Regulations, Rule 18702.3, and, in particular, Subsection (d) are as follows, and have been considered in arriving at my opinions expressed herein. "Material Financial Effect: Ownership Interest in Real Property Indirectly Involved in the Decision (a) The effect of a decision is material as to real property in which an official has a direct, indirect or beneficial ownership interest (not including a leasehold interest), if any of the following applies: (1) The real property in which the official has an interest, or any part of that real property, is located within a 300 foot radius of the boundaries (or the proposed boundaries) of the property which is the subject of the decision, unless the decision will have no financial effect upon the official's real property interest. (2) The decision involves construction of, or improvements to, streets, water, sewer, storm drainage or similar facilities, and the real property in which the official has an interest will receive new or substantially improved services. (3) The real property in which the official has an interest is located outside a radius of 300 feet and any part of the real property is located within a radius of 2,500 feet of the R . P. LAU RA I N & AS S O CIATE.S .co.ro..no Gail Hutton City Attorney City of Huntington Beach May 3, 1999 Page 3 boundaries (or the proposed boundaries) of the property which is the subject of the decision and the decision will have a reasonably foreseeable financial effect of: (A) Ten thousand dollars ($10,000) or more on the fair market value of the real property in which the official has an interest; or (B) Will affect the rental value of the property by $1,000 or more per 12 month period. (b) The reasonably foreseeable effect of a decision is not con- sidered material as to real property in which an official has a direct, or indirect or beneficial interest (not including a leasehold interest), if the real property in which the official has an interest is located entirely beyond a 2,500 foot radius of the boundaries (or the proposed boundaries) of the property which is the subject of the decision, unless: (1) There are specific circumstances regarding the decision, its effect, and the nature of the real property in which the official has an interest, which make it reasonably foreseeable that the fair market value or the rental value of the real prop- erty in which the official has an interest will be affected by the amounts set forth in subdivision (a) (3) (A) or (a) (3) (B) . . ." Additional excerpts pertaining to Rule 18702.3, Subsection (d), are as follows: "(1) The proximity of the property which is the subject of the decision and the magnitude of the proposed project or change in use in relationship to the property in which the official has an interest. (2) Whether it is reasonably foreseeable that the decision will affect the development potential or income producing potential of the property. (3) In addition to the foregoing, in the case of residential property, whether it is reasonably foreseeable that the decision will result in a change to the character of the neighborhood including, but not limited to, effect on traffic, view, privacy, intensity of use, noise levels,air emissions, or similar traits of the neighborhood." R . P. LAURAIN & AS S O,CIATES Gail Hutton City Attorney City of Huntington Beach May 3, 1999 Page 4 The residence property of Councilmember Garofalo is outside a radius of 300 feet from Blocks 104 and 105, but, as stated, within a radius of 2,500 feet of said proposed development. Thus, Section 18702.3 is applicable. While Main Street is the primary north-south corridor within the Downtown Redevelopment Project, and the City Official's property fronts on Main Street, the angular street pattern precludes a view of Blocks 104 and 105 from the City Official's property, and vice versa. Further, the proposed project will not result in a change to the character of the immediate neighborhood of the City Official's property, which is effectively fully developed for residential use. In summary, the character of development in the immediate neighborhood of the City Official's property will remain unchanged, along with the existing level of privacy, desirability as a residential area, intensity of use, noise levels, and volume of vehicular traffic, as well as pedestrian traffic. A decision on the development of Blocks 104 and 105 will not have a reasonably foreseeable financial effect of $10,000 or more on the market value, or $1,000 or more per 12-month period on the rental value of the prop- erty owned by Councilmember Garofalo. If you require any additional information regarding my review of this matter, or the opinions expressed herein, it would be appreciated if you would contact meat your convenience. Very truly yours, �:a LAURAIN &ASS I C. d P. Laurai , ASA, SR RPL:II cc: Gus A. Duran Housing and Redevelopment Manager City of Huntington Beach R . P. L A U R A I N 8. ASSOCIATES .� .r • �I CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH Inter-Department Communication !iwD FROM .: MADE A PART OF THE CORD AT T ,t7� -T TO: Council Member Ralph Bauer COUNCIL MEETING OF �� OFFICE OF THE C'' L_F_ FROM: Gail Hutton, City Attorney CONNIE BROCKVI' _` Y CLERK 0�3 DATE: February 22, 2000 SUBJECT: Finding of no conflict of interest in connection with voting on CUP 98-37, nor Block 104-105 Redevelopment INDEX: Internal Organization Operation; Conflict of Interest; General; Political Reform Act; Police Power; Land Use; Planning; Redevelopment Background: Council Member Ralph Bauer owns apartment buildings at 220 12th Street'and 303 Walnut Avenue in Huntington Beach. Question No. 1: Both of Council Member Bauer's properties lie within 2,500 feet, but more than 300 feet of the Block 104/105 redevelopment project (CIM Project). May Council Member Bauer vote on matters concerning this project or does he have a conflict of interest? Answer No. 1: Council Member Bauer may vote on matters concerning the Block 104/105 project because he has no conflict of interest. Question No. 2. Council Member Bauer's property at 220 121h Street lies within 2,500 feet, but more than 300 feet of 117, 119, 121 and 123 Main Street, which are collectively applying for in CUP No. 98-37. May Council Member Bauer vote on matters concerning this conditional use permit, or does he have a conflict of interest? Answer No. 2: Council Member Bauer may vote on matters concerning CUP No. 98-37 because he has no conflict of interest. t SF/s:SF 2000 Memos:Conflict of Interest—Bauer—2-17 2/22/00-#I Discussion: The California Political Reform Act (PRA) generally bars state and local public officials from making, participating in, or attempting to influence any governmental decision in which they have a financial interest. The PRA and its implementing administrative regulations, specify that officials have a financial interest when it is"reasonably foreseeable the decision will have a material financial effect" on: (i) a business in which the official has an investment valued at more than $1,000; (ii) real property in which the official's interest exceeds $1,000; (iii) any source of income, other than loans from commercial lending institutions, that totals $250 or more in the 12 months preceding the decision; (iv) any donor gifts valued at $300 or more in the prior 12 months; or(v) any business entity in which the official serves as a director, officer or employee. The Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC)has adopted special regulations to address when a governmental decision will have a"material financial effect" on an official's real property interest. Specifically, if a pubic official owns property outside of a 300 foot radius of the boundaries of the project for which he is to vote,but within a 2,500 foot radius of the project boundaries, then the official will have a conflict of interest if the decision will have a reasonably foreseeable effect of at least: (i) $10,000 or more on the fair market value of the official's property; or(ii) will affect the rental value of the property by$1,000 or more per 12-month period. It is these standards that would trigger a conflict of interest that would preclude Councilman Bauer from voting on either the Block 104/105 Redevelopment Project or CUP No. 98-37. In order to analyze whether either project would have such a financial impact on Councilman Bauer's property interest, a real estate.appraisal was commissioned from Waldron & Associates. Attached are the real estate analyses dated February 11, 2000 (Block 104/105 Project) and February 15, 2000 (CUP No. 98-37). It is the conclusion of Mr. Waldron in both instances that sales prices and rent levels of apartment complexes are more directly influenced by supply and demand characteristics associated with comparable and competitive products. Rent levels and sale prices for properties comparable to Councilman Bauer's apartment property are consistent both within and beyond the 2500 foot radius of numerous historical redevelopment projects within the downtown core. Consequently, Mr. Waldron has concluded that redevelopment projects have no measurable influence upon the fair market value of rental properties between the limits of 300 feet to 2,500 feet of the downtown core. Consequently, since neither project will have a reasonably foreseeable financial effect on Councilman Bauer's properties, he has no conflict of interest and may vote on both projects. GAIL HUTTON City Attorney Attachments: (as noted above) c: Dave Garofalo, Mayor and Members of the City Council Ray Silver, City Administrator Howard Zelefsky, Planning Director David Biggs, Director of Economic Development 2 SF/s:SF 2000 Memos:Conflict of Interest—Bauer—2-17 2/22/00-#1 r WALDRON & ASSOCIATES, INC. REAL ESTATE APPRAISERS AND CONSULTANTS 205 SOUTH ORANGE STREET - MICHAEL F. WALDRON. MAI SUITE 100 .IANICE K. WALDRON ORANGE, CALIFORNIA 92866 TELEPHONE (714) 771-1100 PETROS BERHANE FACSIMILE (714) 771-1120 CHRISTER .FIEGE-KOLLMANN February 15, 2000 Mr. Scott Field Assistant City Attorney City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California 92648 RE: Consulting — Financial Interest Study, Council Member Dr. Ralph Bauer Property, Apartment Property at 220 12t' Street, Huntington Beach, California; Job No. 00-925 Dear Mr. Field: The purpose of this study is to determine the reasonably foreseeable effect upon the above-referenced property which may be influenced by the decisions of Council Member Dr. Ralph Bauer regarding CUP No. 98-37 and other related permits covering the properties addressed as 117, 119, 121 and 123 Main Street, pursuant to provisions contained within Title 2, Division 6 of the California Code of Regulations of the Fair Political Practices Commission. Generally, the regulations. set forth the parameters of the materiality standard for economic interests in real property. As understood, Dr. Bauer's property is located outside of a 300-foot radius of the project boundaries of the CUP, however, within a 2,500-foot radius of the project boundaries covered by the CUP. If the decision before the Agency will have a reasonably foreseeable effect of; (i) ten thousand dollars ($10,000) or more on the fair market value of the real property in which the official has an interest; or (ii) will affect.the rental value of the property by $1,000 or more per 12 month period, the decision is deemed material. Mr. Scott Field • - 2 - • February 15, 2000 Briefly, CUP No. 98-37 and the other related permits cover the properties addressed as 117, 119, 121 and 123 Main Street, all situated within the southwesterly corner of Main Street and Walnut Avenue in Huntington Beach, California. The request by the applicants at 117 Main Street includes: (1) Exterior and interior remodel of the I" floor and 2nd floor; (2) Establish a restaurant/banquet facility with outdoor patio dining and alcohol service on the 2nd floor; and at 119 Main Street includes: (1) Exterior and interior remodel of the 15t floor; (2) Construct a new 2nd floor for retail or office use; (3) Abandonment of three (3) feet of alley on the west side; and at 121 Main Street includes: (1) Exterior and interior remodel of the 1 St floor; (2) Construct a new 2nd floor for office use; and at 123 Main Street includes: (1) Demolish the existing building and construct a new two-story building with retail on the 1 St floor and office on the 2nd floor. Additionally, a Special Permit is requested to allow the 2nd floor balcony to all four (4) buildings at a setback of two (2) feet in lieu of the five (5) feet build-to-line required along Main Street The request also includes a Special Permit to allow a staff recommendation of seven (7) feet build-to-line in lieu of the required five (5) feet along Main Street. The proposed project is described in greater detail in the Conditional Use Permit Staff Report of December 14, 1999 and January 11, 2000 as well as the Notice of Action on Conditional Use Permit dated January 14, 2000. Dr. Bauer owns a property located within a 2,500-foot radius of the boundaries of the proposed project covered by the CUP. The property, known as the Royal Hawaiian Apartments, is addressed as 220th 12th Street and identified by the Orange County Assessor as A.P. No. 024-034-02. The site contains 17,625 square feet and is zoned RMH-A (Residential, Medium-High Density). This zone is consistent with the General Plan, which allows for a maximum development density of 25 units per acre. The site is improved with a two (2) story apartment building containing twenty (20) units. There are six (6) one-bedroom units and fourteen (14) two-bedroom units. Rentals range from $725 to $775 per month for the one-bedroom units and $885 to $1,000 per month for the two-bedroom units. Amenities include a pool, laundry and twenty (20) total parking spaces; six (6) tuck-under spaces and fourteen (14) single garage spaces. The building was constructed around 1964 and appears to be in fair to average condition. This study includes conducting the following investigations and reviewing the following documents: ❖ A review of Title 2, Division 6 of the California Code of Regulations, Regulations of the Fair Political Practices Commission, specifically §18705.2 Materiality Standard: Economic Interests in Real Property. ❖ An exterior inspection on February 9, 2000 of the property owned by Dr. Bauer within the 2,500—foot radius of the project boundaries. ❖ A review of two (2) years of operating history and current rent roll for Dr. Bauer's property located within the 2,500-foot radius of the project boundaries. WALDRON & ASSOCIATES, INC. Mr. Scott Field - 3 - February 15, 2000 ❖ An apartment building sales and rental survey from 1996 to current within the vicinity of the downtown core, Huntington Beach and Orange County. ❖ Apartment building sales trend studies from 1996 to current within the downtown core, Huntington Beach and Orange County. ❖ Paired-data studies for apartment building sales and rentals within Huntington Beach's downtown core and beyond the 2,500-foot radius of the downtown core. ❖ Owner Participation Agreement (OPA) between the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach and Mola Development Corporation for the redevelopment of 89-unit condominium project called Town Square located between Main Street, Orange Avenue and Sixth Street, dated July 25, 1988. ❖ DDA between the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach and California Resorts for the redevelopment of the Pierside Pavilion located on the southeast corner of PCH and Main Street, dated August 26, 1988. ❖ OPA between the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach and Robert Koury for the redevelopment of Ocean View Promenade a public parking structure and retail shops on the bottom of Main Street and Walnut Avenue, dated December 21, 1988. ❖ The Main Pier Redevelopment Area and Information Summary. ❖ Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach Biennial Report 1991-1993. ❖ OPA between the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach and Abdelmuti Development Company related to the redevelopment of the Oceanview Promenade, dated September 5, 1991. ❖ DDA between the Coultrup Company and the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach dated July 6, 1993. This project, which partially covers the same properties described in the proposed CUP, was never implemented. ❖ Resolution No. 6646, dated November 7, 1994, adopting the Downtown Specific Plan which is the planning and zoning document controlling the development of the Downtown area. ❖ Adopted Redevelopment Plans, dated October 1996. ❖ OPA between the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach and Zeldan, dated July 17, 1997, a project now under construction at the corner of Main Street and Walnut. WALDRON & ASSOCIATES, INC. • Mr. Scott Field -4 - February 15, 2000 ❖ DDA between the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach and the Mayer Corporation for the development of the Hilton Waterfront Hotel, dated August 15, 1988 and Amended September 14, 1998. ❖ DDA between the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach and the Mayer Corporation for the development of the Hilton Grand Resort and Conference Center, dated September 21, 1998. ❖ DDA between the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach and the CIM Group, dated June 17, 1999. ❖ Conditional Use Permit Staff Report of December 14, 1999, to the Planning Commission encompassing the project proposed by the owners of 117 to 1-23 Main Street and affected by the CUP. ❖ Conditional Use Permit Staff Report of January 11, 2000, to the Planning Commission encompassing a project proposed by the owners of 117 to 123 Main Street and affected by the CUP. ❖ Notice of Action on Conditional Use Permit dated January 14, 2000, encompassing a project proposed by the owners of 117 to 123 Main Street and affected by the CUP. The foregoing historical redevelopment project activity has been studied. Much of this activity occurs within the downtown core and occurs in the vicinity of Pacific Coast Highway and Main Street. The historical redevelopment project activity is considered representative of a base from which to compare. Paired-data sets have been employed to assist in determining the affects, if any, on locational influences related to these historical projects. Paired-data sets involve the utilization of market data, which is similar in all respects except for one factor. The paired study solves for the single factor of locational proximity, in essence the impact, if any, of being within 2,500 feet of a prospective project as compared to being beyond the 2,500 feet of the prospective project. Additionally, trend studies, paired-data sets for comparable apartment building sales and rentals and other economic data have been reviewed in order to determine the impact, if any, upon apartment properties situated near (within 2,500 feet of various redevelopment project boundaries) as compared to those apartment properties with similar characteristics which were situated distant (beyond 2,500 feet of various redevelopment project boundaries). The proposed project has been reviewed with respect to amenities, which may have a positive influence on the fair market value of Dr. Bauer's specific property located within the 2,500-foot sphere. In conclusion, sale prices and rent levels are more directly influenced by supply and demand characteristics associated with comparable and competitive product. Rent levels and sale prices for properties comparable to Dr. Bauer's apartment property are WALDRON & ASSOCIATES, INC. Mr. Scott Field - •5 February 15, 2000 consistent within and beyond the 2,500-foot radius of numerous historical redevelopment projects within the downtown core. Based upon these studies and comparisons, it is readily apparent that there is no measurable influence upon the fair market value of Dr. Bauer's property as a result of the proximity between the limits of a 300-foot to 2,500-foot radius of the proposed project boundaries. Respectfully submitted, WALDRON & ASSOC ES, INC. Michael F. Waldron, MAI Senior Consultant WALDRON & ASSOCIATES, INC. 2-11-2000 b:52PM FROM WALDRON AND ASSOCS .714 771 1120 P, 2 • • WALDRON & ASSOCIATES, INC. REAL ESTATE APPRAISERS AND CONSULTANTS 205 SOUTH ORANGE STREET _ MICHAEL F. WALDRON, MAI SU17E 100 ,JANICE K. WALCRON ORANGE, CALIFORNIA 92866 TELEPHONE (714) 7-71-1100 PETros BERNANE FACSIMILE (71a) 771-I120 CHRISTER FIEGE-KOLLMANN February 11,2000 Mr. Gustavo A. Duran Housing and Redevelopment Manager Department of Economic Development City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California 92648 RE: Consulting — Financial Interest Study, Council Member Dr. Ralph Bauer Property, Two (2) Apartment Properties at 220 12`h Street and 1303 'Walnut Avenue, Huntington Beach, California; Job No. 00-925 Dear Mr. Duran: The purpose of this study is to determine the reasonably foreseeable effect upon two (2) properties which may be influenced by the decisions of Council Member Dr. Ralph Bauer regarding the CIM Project, pursuant to provisions contained within Title 2, Division 6 of the California Code of Regulations of the Fair Political Practices Commission. Generally, the regulations set forth the parameters of the materiality standard for economic interests in real property. As understood, each of Dr. Bauer's properties is located outside of a 300-foot radius of the project boundaries, however, within a 2,500- foot radius of the project boundaries. If the decision before the Agency will have a reasonably foreseeable effect of; (i) ten thousand.dollars ($10,000) or more on the fair Market value of the real property in which the official has an interest; or (ii) will affect the rental value of the property by $1,00G or more per 12 month period, the decision is deemed material. Briefly, the CIM Project includes a new hotel containing approximately 130 guest rooms, 135,000 square feet of gross leaseable area of new retail and restaurant improvements, a public parking facility and other amenities, all situated within the two (2) city blocks bounded by Pacific Coast Highway, Main Street, Walnut Avenue and Sixth Street in Huntington Beach, California. The proposed project is described in greater detail in the Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) by and between the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach and CIM Croup, LLC, dated June 17, 1999. P FEB-11-2000 19:04 714 771 1120 99% P.02 2-11-2000 6:53PM FROM WALDRON AND ASSOCS 714 771 1120 P. 3 Mr. Gustavo A. Duran -2- February 11, 2000 Dr. Bauer owns two (2) properties located within a 2,500-foot radius of the boundaries of the CN Project. The first property, known as the Royal Hawaiian Apartments, is addressed as 2201h 12`h Street and identified by the Orange County Assessor as A.P. No. 024-034-02. The site contains 17,625 square feet and is zoned RMH-A (Residential, Medium-High Density). This Zone is consistent with the General Plan, which allows for a maximum development density of 25 units per acre. The site is improved with a two (2) story apartment building containing twenty (20) units. There are six (6) one-bedroom units and fourteen (14) two-bedroom units. Rentals range from $725 to $775 per month for the onc-bedroom units and $885 to $1,000 per month for the two-bedroom units. Amenities include a pool, laundry and twenty (20) total parking spaces; six (6) tuck- under spaces and fourteen (14) single garage spaces. The building was constructed around 1964 and appears to be in fair to average condition. The second property, known as the Franciscan Apartments, is addressed as 1303 Walnut Avenue and identified by the Orange County Assessor as A.P. No. 024-036704. The site contains 8,813 square feet and is zoned SP5, District 2 (Downtown Specific Plan). The General Plan designates this parcel as RH-30-D-SP, which allows for a maximum development density of 30 units per acre. The site is improved with a two (2) story apartment building containing eleven (11) units. There are four (4) one-bedroom units and seven (7) two-bedroom units. Rentals range from $725 to $750 per month for the one-bedroom units and $885 to $950 per month for the two-bedroom units. Amenities include eleven (11) single garage spaces. The building was constructed around 1964 and appears to be in fair to average condition. This study includes conducting the following investigations and reviewing the following documents: A review of Title 2, Division 6 of the California Code of Regulations, Regulations of the Fair Political Practices Commission, specifically §18705.2 Materiality Standard: Economic Interests in Real Property. An exterior inspection on February 9, 2000 of each property owned by Dr. Bauer within the 2,500—foot radius of the CIM Project boundaries. A review of two (2) years of operating history and current rent rolls for each of Dr. Bauer's properties located within the 2,500-foot radius of the CIM Project boundaries. An apartment building sales and rental survey from 1996 to current within the vicinity of the downtown core, Huntington Beach and Orange County. •:• Apartment building sales trend studies from 1996 to current within the downtown core, Huntington Beach and Orange County. WALDRON & ASSOCIATES. INC. FEB-11-2000 19:04 714 771 1120 99% P.03 2-f1-2000 6:53PM FROM6LDRON AND ASSOCS 714 771 1120 P. 4 Mr. Gustavo A. Duran -3- Fcbruary 11, 2000 ❖ Paired-data studies for apartment building sales and rentals within Huntington Beach's downtown core and beyond the 2,500-foot radius of the downtown core. Owner Participation Agreement (OPA) between the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach and Mola Development Corporation for the redevelopment of 89-unit condominium project called Town Square located between Main Street, Orange Avenue and Sixth Street, dated July 25, 1988. ❖ DDA between the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach and California Resorts for the redevelopment of the Pierside Pavilion located on the southeast corner of PCH and Main Street, dated August 26, 1988. ❖ OPA between the Redevelopment Agency of the city of Huntington Beach and Robert Koury for the redevelopment of Ocean View Promenade a public parking structure and retail shops on the bottom of Main Street and Walnut Avenue, dated December 21, 1988. ❖ The Main Pier Redevelopment Area and Information Summary. ❖ Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach Biennial Report 1991-1993. •: OPA between the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach and Abdelmuti Development Company related to the redevelopment of the Oceanview Promenade, dated September 5, 1991. ❖ DDA between the Coultrup Company and the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach dated July 6, 1993. This project, which covers the same properties as the CIM DDA, was never implemented. ❖ Resolution No. 6646, dated November 7, 1994, adopting the Downtown Specific Plan which is the planning and zoning document controlling the development of the Downtown area. ❖ Adopted Redevelopment Plans, dated October 1996. ❖ OPA between the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach and Zeldan, dated July 17, 1997, a project now under construction at the corner of Main Street and Walnut. WALDRON 63 ASSOCIATES. INC. FEB-11-2000 19:05 714 771 1120 99% P.04 2-1,1-2000 6:54PM FROM WALDRON AND ASSOCS 714 771 1120 P. 5 Mr. Gustavo A. Duran -4- February 11, 2000 ❖ DDA between the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach and the Mayer Corporation for the development of the Hilton Waterfront Motel, dated August 15, 1988 and Amended September 14, 1998. DDA between the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach and the ,Mayer Corporation for the development of the Hilton Grand Resort and Conference Center, dated September 21, 1998. DDA between the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach and the CW Group, dated June 17, 1999. ❖ Conditional Use Permit Staff Report of December 14, 1999, to the Planning Commission encompassing a project proposed by the owners of several buildings located on Main Street and affected by the DDA. Conditional Use Permit Staff Report of January 11, 2000, to the Planning Commission encompassing a project proposed by the owners of several buildings located on Main Street and affected by the DDA. •: Notice of Action on Conditional Use Permit dated January 14, 2000, encompassing a project proposed by the owners of several buildings located on Main Street and affected by the subject DDA. The foregoing historical redevelopment project activity has been studied. Much of this activity occurs within the downtown core and oecurs in the vicinity of Pacific Coast Highway and Main Street. The historical redevelopment project activity is considered representative of a base from which to compare. Paired-data sets have been employed to assist in determining the affects, if any, on locational influences related to these historical projects. Paired-data sets involve the utilization of market data, which is similar in all respects except for one factor. The paired study solves for the single factor of locational proximity, in essence the impact, if any, of being within 2,500 feet of a prospective project as compared to being beyond the 2,500 feet of the prospective project. Additionally, trend studies, paired-data sets for comparable apartment building sales and rentals and other economic data have been reviewed in order to determine the impact, if any, upon apartment properties situated near (within 2,500 feet of various redevelopment project boundaries) as compared to those apartment properties with similar characteristics which were situated distant (beyond 2,500 feet of various redevelopment project boundaries). WALDRON 6 ASSOCIATES. INC. FEB-11-2000 19:05 714 771 1120 99% P.05 2-;11-2000 6:54PM FROM WALDRON AND ASSOCS 714 771 1120 P. 6 Mr. Gustavo A. Duran -5- February 11, 2000 The proposed CIM Project has been reviewed with respect to amenities, which may have a positive influence on the fair market value of Dr. Bauer's specific properties located within the 2,500-foot sphere. In,conclusion, sale prices and rent levels are more directly influenced by supply and demand characteristics associated with comparable and competitive product. Rent levels and sale prices for properties comparable to Dr. Bauer's two apartment properties were consistent within and beyond the 2,500-foot radius of numerous historical redevelopment projects within the downtown core. Based upon these studies and comparisons, it is readily apparent that there is no measurable influence upon the fair market value of Dr. Bauer's properties either singularly or in combination, as a result of the proximity between the limits of a 300 foot to 2,500-foot radius of the proposed CIM Project boundaries. Respectfully submitted, WALDRON & ASSOCIATES, C. ichael F. Waldron, MAI Senior Consultant WALDRON ASSOCIATES. INC. FES-11-2000 19:06 714 771 1120 99% P.06 117, 119, 121 , and 123cri � C-) Main Street Commercial Conditional Use Permit No . 98-37 � Coastal. Development Permit No . 98- 12 � Special Permit No . 99- 1 Special Permit No . 99-2 w Project Description 117 Main . Street: � • exterior and interior . remodel of the 1st and 2nd floor • establish a restaurant/banquet facility on the 2nd floor with outdoor patio � dining . and alcohol service ° Project Description 119 Main Street: � • exterior and interior remodel of the 1st floor • construction of a new 2nd floor for retail or office use � Project Description 121 Main Street: � • exterior and interior remodel of the 1st floor • construction of a new 2nd floor for office: use � Proj ect Description 123 Main. Street: � • demolish the existing one-story building .and construct a new two-story building with retail on the 1st floor and office on the 2nd: floor • :i Planning Commission • On January 11 ., 2000., Planning � Commission conditionally approved CUP No. 98-.37/CDP No. 98- 12/Special Permit No. 99-2 and denied Special Permit No. 99- 1 on a 5-2 vote after discussion and straw votes on • numerous issues. • Eight people spoke in support Appeal • Council Member Dave Sullivan appealed. � Planning Commission's action based on : The approval of the Special Permit for the 2nd f loor balcony encroachment of three feet along Main Street. -� The approval of the five feet build-to-line � for the 1st and 2nd stories in lieu of staffs recommendation of -seven feet to match the adjacent Oceanvie' w, Promenade project.. Appeal • Council Member. Dave Sullivan appealed � Planning Commission's action based on : --> The inaccessible public open space located at the. rear of the building and on the 2n.d story. The project's lack of architectural design • conformance to the Downtown Design Guidelines. Staff Recommendation . Deny CUP No. 98-37 with findings for � denial .. .. . Deny CDP No. 98- 12 with findings for denial .. • Staff Recommendation • Deny Special Permit No. 99- 1 to allow a � seven feet build-to-line in lieu of the required five feet for all four buildings • Deny Special Permit No. 99-2 to allow the 2nd floor balcony of all four � buildings at a setback of two feet in lieu of the required five - feet Alternatmive . Motmion 1 • Approve CUP No. 98-37 with findings i . and conditions and the following changes : The public open space shall be provided along Main Street in a central location on the ground floor. This open space must be � designed such that the public can access it without walking through any tenant space. Alternative Motion 1 • Approve CUP . No . 98737 , with findings � and conditions and the following changes.: —> Include Design Guidelines recommendations for . varied- and offset rooflines, pedestrian orientation by including a plaza or courtyard, enhanced facade � treatments at the street level by including greater architectural detail for visual interest, window treatments such as multi-paned windows with the borders, .and accented entries that are ornate and detailed. Alternative Motion 1 • Approve CUP No. 98-37 with findings • and conditions and the following changes : -� Historic plaques shall be incorporated and the material from the existing buildings shall be incorporated to the greatest event feasible. � - > The project shall be referred back to the Planning Director for final review in consultation with the City's Urban Design Consultant for compliance with the . Design Guidelines and the outlined recommendations. Alternative Motion 1 • Approve CDP , No. 98- 12 with findings and � conditions • Approve .Special Permit No. 99- 1 to allow a seven feet build-to-line in lieu of the required five feet for all four buildings with findings and conditions • Deny Special Permit No. 99-2 to allow the . J 2nd floor. balcony of all four buildings at a setback of two feet in lieu of the required five feet-with findings . and conditions End of Presentation •