Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Block 104 Pacific Coast Highway/Fifth/Walnut/Main - Block 10
{ f Ij 1 {r a :•` / r 4� 4 ig / j r Ir t t r� I i ti Rya ,1 ,�9 � �aa r rip j+ tttt i � P, _ w�—f Council/Agency Meeting Held: � 3 Deferred/Continued to: ❑ Appr ved onditionally Ap r�e ❑ Denied 'bEPv? Clerk's Signature Ct—Council Meeting Date: May 3, 1999 ' Department ID Number: ED 99-26 000Pto CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 6-0-1 -o-/ Nlu��nun ads EQUEST FOR REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ACTION s,�.� z SUBMITTED TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENQY MEMBERS "` n z� SUBMITTED BY: RAY SILVER, Executive Directnj fr __J PREPARED BY: DAVID C. BIGGS, Economic Development Director SUBJECT: Approve Replacement Housing Plan for Blocks 104/105 A Fstatement of Issue,Funding Source,Recommended Action,Alternative Action(s),Analysis,Environmental Status,Attachment(s) Statement of Issue: Under redevelopment law, the Agency must approve a replacement housing plan prior to the approval of any redevelopment project where low- and moderate- income housing will (or could be) removed. Funding Source: Not applicable. Recommended Action: Motion to: 1. Adopt Agency-Resolution No.op I-) Approving a replacement housing plan for the redevelopment of Blocks 104/105 of the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Project. Alternative Action(s): Approve with modifications. Analysis: The Redevelopment Agency may consider approval of a Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) with CIM for the redevelopment of Blocks 104/105 as early as June 7, 1999. Redevelopment Law requires that a replacement housing plan be adopted by resolution not less than 30 days prior to the execution of any legal agreement where very- low, low-, and moderate-income units may be removed (Health and Safety Code Section 33413.5). The replacement housing plan must identify the location of the units (and number of bedrooms) that may be removed or demolished, the estimated number of households that may be displaced and the estimate of the income levels of those households. Further, the plan must also identify the actual (or proposed) replacement units by address. r REQUEST R REDEVELOPMENT AGERY ACTION MEETING DATE: May 3, 1999 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: ED 99-26 Redevelopment Law also requires that a draft of the plan be made available to the Project Area Committee (PAC) and the general public. A copy of the draft plan has been distributed to the PAC and it is listed as an informational item on the agenda for PAC's first meeting on April 28, 1999. A notice of availablity of the draft plan was also posted at the Civic Center. Currently, the Agency has a surplus of replacement units that have been produced through affordable housing programs. The draft replacement plan also identifies future projects that may be used as replacement units for this project. Environmental Status: Not Applicable. Attachment(s): City Clerk's Page Number No. Description 1. Agency Resolution No. 98 2. Re lacement Housing Plan RCA Author: G. Brown, ext. 8831 RAA.DOC -2- 04/26/99 2:55 PM Agency Resolution ATTACHMENT # 1 RESOLUTION NO. 298 A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH APPROVING A REPLACEMENT HOUSING PLAN FOR THE REDEVELOPMENT OF BLOCK 104-105 OF THE HUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT The Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach hereby finds, determines, resolves and orders as follows: Section 1. The Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach ("Agency") will soon consider the approval of a Disposition and Development Agreement for Blocks 104- 105 of the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Project which would lead to the demolition of nine residential rental units that are believed to be occupied by low and moderate income households. Section 2. As the result of such demolition, the Redevelopment Agency is required under California Health and Safety Code Section 33413 to cause to be developed nine suitable replacement housing units. Section 3. The Agency has prepared a draft Replacement Housing Plan pursuant to California Health and Safety Code Sections 33413 and 33413.5, which has been presented to this Agency by the Executive Director, and has made a draft available to the public and the Project Area Committee a reasonable time prior to this meeting. Section 4. The Replacement Housing Plan includes the following information: (a) A description of the Project; (b) the location on a map of dwelling units by size(number of bedrooms) that will be demolished; (c) the total number of bedrooms that will be provided through replacement housing units; (d) the source of funding and a time schedule for the provision of replacement units; and (e) all other findings and information as required by law. Section 5. The Redevelopment Agency hereby approves and adopts the Replacement Housing Plan in the form presented by the Executive Director. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach at a regular meeting thereof held on the 17th day May , 1999. Chairman AT EE � �'j'f APPROVED AS TO FORM 1/2 Agency Clerk znv C� el REVIEWED AND APPROVED: INI T D-- APPRO D: Executive Mirector Director of Economic Developmen SF-99Reso1uions:BIk104-5 RLS 99-281 n- 1-- u) -Res. No. 298 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ) I, CONNIE BROCKWAY, Clerk of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach, California, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was duly adopted by the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach at a regular meeting of said Redevelopment Agency held on the 171' day of May, 1999 and that it was so adopted by the following vote: AYES: Julien, Bauer, Garofalo, Green, Dettloff, Sullivan NOES: ABSENT: Harman ABSTAIN: �.i�,csct.G L�P.�•��fr' —o Clerk of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach, Ca. Replacement Housing Plan Conditions 17 & 18 from Conditional Use Permit by the Participant at an average rate of Sixty-five Thousand Dollars ($65, 000) per month with an annual cap of Seven Hundred Eighty Thousand Dollars ( $780, 000) and for a tal amount not to exceed One Million Five rs ($1, 0, 000) . The time of eligiblp business interr �t�s �ll be from December 11, 1990, u the ea (i ) the time designated on the Schedule of Performance for completion of co ion ( ate the same may be extended y_ mutual agreement of the parties or pursuant to Section 503 ) ; or ( ii ) issuance of certificate of occu ancy for the commercia /retail portion Qf the Project. The amount shall be determined by a comparison to the prior three years of net business operation proceeds for Jack' s Surf Shop and the net income from the commercial and residential rental units located in the existing building( s) on the Partici. t_ parcels, less ( i ) available business--interruption insurance proceeds . and ( ii ) net income received from temporary facility operations (the "Net Business Interruption Losses" ) . Subject to availability, the Agency shall. provide trailers for a temporary retail facility during the construction period within a thousand foot radius of the Site. Participant shall pay all operating costs for the trailers. Participant shall be entitled to periodic payments of accrued Net Business. Interruption Losses by making. written request to Agency, with appropriate verification of losses, not more frequently than quarterly. Payment of accrued Net Business Interruption Losses shall be due within sixty ( 60) days of the approval of the Agency of the documentation, including Internal Revenue Service statements, provided by the Participant to support the claimed amount due. Participant shall cooperate with Agency with respect to the recovery of available insurance proceeds. At Agency's request, Participant shall assign to Agency Participant' s right to recover such insurance proceeds. Participant' s actual and reasonable costs incurred in attempting to recover insurance proceeds ( including without limitation payments to Participant' s public adjuster and attorney' s fees) shall be considered part of Participant' s business interruption losses. 6. Excess Parking Costs and Provision of Parking Spaces. Agency shall pay any costs necessary to provide offsite parking for the Project in excess of the roposed twelve surface onsite s aces ( "Excess Parking Costs" ) . The determination of the necessity for and location of additional offsite parking for any commercial uses on the Site shall be at the sole discretion of the Agency and the City. In the event, V however, that Agency authorizes upper-story 05/13/91 5127u/2460/009 -9- residential uses on the Site, Agency shall be responsible. for providing full code-required parking for all residential units on the Site, with the parking spaces to be located off of the Site and within the block bounded by Main Street, Pacific Coast Highway, Fifth Street, and Walnut Avenue . Such parking spaces shall be reserved for the free and exclusive use of the occupants of the residential units on the Site. Such obligation shall run in perpetuity and shall be evidenced by a recorded covenant or other document reasonably satisfactory to Participant which runs with the land and benefits the Site and burdens the parcel ( s) on which the parking is to be located. Such covenant or other similar document may provide for Participant and the Site to bear the cost of maintaining and repairing the reserved parking for the Site after the initial completion of construction, provided that the coF`. to Participant shall not exceed the reasonable cost of maintaining and repairing at-grade surface parking spaces . 7 . Offsite Improvement _Costs. Within the time set out in the Schedule of Performance (Attachment No . 7 ) , Agency shall pay for and construct or cause to be constructed all off-site improvements as defined in the Scope of. Development (Attachment No. 4) including sidewalks, the plaza, and any required off-site utilities (the "Offsite Improvement costs" ) . 8 . Differential Kent Payment . In the event City or Agency requires upper-floor commercial use, the Agency will pay the difference, if any, between tbp rent that Participant epiT%X achieves for the upper-floor c- G4"�' units and the "Guaranteed Rental Rate" , defined on a triple net basis as One Dollar and Fifty-five Cents ( $1 . 55) per square foot as adjusted on an annual basis by the Consumer Price Index or "CPI " as defined herein (the "Differential Rent Payment" ) . CPI shall mean the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and clerical Workers, Los Angeles-Anaheim- Riverside Average, Sub-Group, "All Items" ( 1982/84=100) . As an alternative to the CPI adjustment, at the sole discretion of the Agency, the Agency may require that the Guaranteed Rental Rate be determined utilizing the appraisal method set out in Attachment No. 12 attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. In no event shall the Guaranteed Rental Rate beldecreased below the Guaranteed Rental Rate then in effect as a result of the appraisal or appraisals conducted pursuant to Attachment No. 12 . In the event that the Guaranteed Rental Rate is established by an appraisal or . appraisals conducted pursuant to Attachement No. 12, such Guaranteed Rental Rate shall remain in effect for a period of three (3 ) year period, and the 05/13/91 5127u/2460/009 -10- Conditions 17 & 18 from Conditional Use Permit 16. The 10 foot public access easement shall be maintained by the applicant/property owner through Convents, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) and which shall be approved as to form and content by the City Attorney's Office. 17. Prior to issuance of building. permits, a. parking :plan depicting the temporary and permanent location .of ' all 'required parking and loading spaces shall be submitted for review and approval *by the Director. 18. Prior to issuance of Certificates of Occupancy all code required parking and loading spaces shall be constructed and available for the project. The spaces shall be available either within a Main-Pier Phase II parking structure in .a combination of a 65 space temporary parking lot and off-site parking spaces within 350 feet. 19 The development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Ordinance Code, Building Division, and Fire Department. 20. 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. 21. Installation of required landscaping and irrigation systems shall be completed prior to final inspection/within twelve (12) months . 22. During construction, the applicant shall: . 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. 23 . Construction shall be limited to Monday - Saturday 7:00 AM to 8:00 PM. Construction shall be prohibited Sundays and Federal holidays. 24 . Prior to final building "permit approval or issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the following shall be completed: a. All improvements (including landscaping) to the property shall be completed in accordance with the approved plans and conditions of approval specified herein. Staff Report - 11/19/91 -22- (1418d) RCA dated December '/, 1993 ATTACHMENT S ............. REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION r Date December 7, 1992 Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members Submitted by: Michael T. Uberuaga, City AdministratoraQ� Prepared by: Michael .Adams, : Director. of Community Developmi , Subject: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL SUBMITTED FOR CONDITION NOS 17 . AND 18 OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 91-39 AND ASSOCIATED ENTI' LM24 NTS Consistent with Council Policy? [ ] Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception Statement of Issue, Recommendation,Analysis, Funding Source,Alternative Actions,Attachments: STATEMENT OF ISSUE: Transmitted for City Council consideration is a parking plan submitted by the Redevelopment Agency for the four (4) story commercial/office building at the northwest corner of Main Street at Pacific Coast Highway (Abdelmuti) . Conditions of approval require that a parking plan be approved by the Planning Commission and City Council identifying the permanent code required parking spaces for the project prior to the issuance of building permits. The Planning Commission on November 17, '1992 amended and approved the temporary and permanent location 'of the code required parking for the project as outlined in the attached Redevelopment Agency letter dated November 13, 1992 (Attachment No. 2) . The Planning Commission amended the parking. plan to require diagonal parking along Fifth Street between Pacific Coast Highway and Olive Avenue. RECOMMENDATION• Planning Commission and Staff Recommendation: "Deem the Redevelopment Agency Parking Plan for Conditional Use Permit No. 91-3iand associated entitlements as amended adequate to meet Conditions of Approval No. 17 and 18" . Planning Commission Action on November 17 1992 • A motion was made by Newman, second by Leipzig to approve the Redevelopment Agency Parking Plan for Conditional Use Permit No. 91-39 and associated entitlements as amended adequate to meet Conditions of Approval No. 17 and 18 by the following vote: 1 P10 5/85 AYES: Inglee, Richardson, Shomaker, Dettloff, Newman, Leipzig ' NOES: None ABSENT: Bourguignon ABSTAIN: None MOTION TO APPROVE PASSED ANALYSIS: Background: Conditional Use Permit No. 91-39 and associated entitlements was approved by the City Council on January 21, 1992 to construct a four . (4) story commercial/office building. The request included Conditional Exception (Variance) No. 91-45 which is to permit a 227 parking space variance. The Downtown Specific Plan stipulates that required parking be provided on-site to the maximum extent feasible, and that 'the balance be provided in a public parking structure within 350 feet. The approved project included the following uses by square footage with resulting parking requirements: Use Square Required Footage Parking Retail 14,110 sq. ft. . 71 spaces Restaurant 3,303 sq. ft. 31- spaces Office 30.920 sq. ft, ,.spaces Total 48,333 sq. ft. 227 spaces However, the working drawing describe a slightly modified project as follows : Use Square Required Footage Parking Retail 13,953 sq. ft. 70 spaces Restaurant 2,798 sq. ft. 28 spaces Offige 0.299 sq. ft. JU spaces* Total 47,050 sq. ft. 219 spaces. :. The code required 219 parking spaces for the project is further. reduced by a credit of 86 spaces, due to the amount of retail space which existed on-site prior to demolition. As a policy, downtown redevelopment projects have been grandfathered for the number of parking spaces which would have been required for previously existing square footages. After subtracting the 86 parking spaces., the proposed project has a parking requirement of 133 spaces. RCA 12/7/92 -2- (5165d) Conditional Exception (variance) No. 91-45 was approved for the parking shortfall provided the required spaces to be supplied in some manner. Condition of Approval No. 17 was placed on the project to ensure that the required parking for -the .project be identified in a parking plan prior to issuance of building permits. The condition of approval reads as follows: 17. "Prior to issuance .of .building permits, .'a- parking plan depicting the temporary and permanent location of all required parking and loading spaces shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Council and Planning Commission." In addition, Condition of Approval No. 18 was placed on the project to ensure that the required parking for the project be constructed and available prior to issuance of Certificates of Occupancy. The condition of approval reads as follows: 18 . "Prior to issuance of Certificates of Occupancy all code required parking and loading spaces shall be constructed and available for the project. The spaces shall be available either within a Main-Pier Phase II parking structure or in combination with a 65 space temporary parking lot and off-site parking spaces within 350 feet. Certificate of Occupancy may be released as parking spaces become available. " Parking Plan: The Redevelopment Agency submitted a parking plan- (see Attachment No. 2) which proposes to provide the required parking for the project on a temporary and permanent basis. The Planning Commission amended the parking plan to indicate diagonal parking along Fifth Street between Pacific Coast Highway and Olive Avenue. The Agency has submitted an amended parking plan (see Attachment No. 3) which addresses the Planning Commission's recommendation and . indicates the code required temporary and permanent parking. Permanent Parking: The submitted permanent parking plan proposes to provide the required parking in three (3) locations. The first location -is along the current rights-of-way of Fifth Street between Olive. Avenue and Pacific Coast Highway. Prior to project approval there was a total of 41 public parking spaces. The City recently completed a change in the parking pattern from parallel spaces to diagonal spaces which increased parking to 77. This. provided a net increase of 36 parking spaces. RCA 12/7/92 -3- (5165d) The amended plan submitted by the. Agency indicates a net increase of � 25 spaces along the Fifth Street rights-of-way. This is a net decrease of eleven (11) spaces from the City's recently implemented restriping plan. This decrease is due to the requirement of curb cuts for access to parking spaces and the implementation of parallel parking along the Fifth Street rights-of-way adjacent to the Terry Buick temporary parking lot. The second location is behind. the project on '-the former Terry .Buick property. The site 'will -provide approximately- 50 parking spaces in the proposed layout. This parking layout .is consistent with the proposal currently pending approval submitted by Coultrup Development Company in conjunction with the Redevelopment Agency. The third location is on the remaining portion of the Main Pier Phase II site, identified as Block 105. This location will accommodate the remainder of the required parking for the project, approximately 58 spaces. The Redevelopment Agency's proposal calls for the spaces in location three to be for permanent use. This permanent parking would be replaced concurrent with any future development of the site. In addition, the parking spaces in location two on Fifth Street between Walnut Avenue and Pacific Coast Highway may be reconfigured at the time of future development on Block 105. This proposed permanent parking plan provides the majority of the required parking spaces (121 spaces) within the Main-Pier II project boundaries. The plan incorporates the Coultrup layout for the: Terry site and also utilizes a portion of Block 105. The Redevelopment Agency acknowledges that the" spaces located on Block 105 will have to be satisfactorily relocated prior to any development of Block 105 . The relocation of parking will be the responsibility of the Redevelopment Agency. Temporary Parking: The submitted temporary parking plan is an interim plan to satisfy the required parking for the Abdelmuti project pending final resolution of the Coultrup project. The plan calls for phased construction of these spaces and, therefore, will require a phasing plan. The spaces identified must be in place prior to the release of any occupancy permits. This plan identifies temporary parking in six (6) locations . The first location is along the current rights-of-way of Fifth Street between Olive Avenue and Pacific Coast Highway. Prior to Project approval there was a total of 41 public parking spaces . The City recently completed a change in the parking pattern from parallel spaces to diagonal spaces which increased parking to 77. This provided a net increase of 36 parking spaces . RCA 12/7/92 -4- (5165d) The amended plan submitted by the Agency indicates a net increase of- 25 spaces along the Fifth Street rights-of-way. This is a net decrease of -eleven (11) spaces from the City's recently implemented restriping plan. This decrease is due to the requirement of curb cuts for access to parking spaces and the implementation of parallel parking along the Fifth Street rights-of-way adjacent to the Terry Buick temporary parking lot. The second . location is' behind the, project. 'on the former. Terry,-_ Buick. property. -The site can..-accommodate approximately 75 parking in a temporary layout consistent with the temporary parking lot standards of the Huntington Beach ordinance Code. The third location is on a vacant lot (Agency owned) on the east side of Fifth Street between Walnut Avenue and' Olive Avenue. This lot can accommodate parking on an interim basis for the project, approximately thirteen (13) spaces. The fourth location is along . the current -rights-of-way of Walnut Avenue between Main Street and Fifth Street. The plan identifies a total of seven (7) parking spaces. The fifth location is on the Agency owned parcel at the southeast corner of Pacific Coast Highway and Fifth Street. This location, currently has a temporary trailer on-site which will be removed to provide temporary. parking. The lot will be restriped to provide a total of twelve (12) parking spaces. The sixth location is on .the Abdelmuti project site. . The plan calls. for the .conversion of one (1) loading space into one (1) parking space or reconfiguring the area at the rear of the- proposed building to provide one (1) parking space. This temporary parking plan does not incorporate the Coultrup parking layout for the Terry site, and does not require the use of Block 105 . ' However, this plan does use the lot at the southeast corner of Pacific Coast Highway and Fifth Street which is within the Coultrup project boundary. Planning staff feels this is a viable temporary alternative because it provideds a majority of the parking on-site and adjacent to the development (120 spaces) , but requires the Agency to construct thirteen (13) new parking spaces in the second .block rehabilitation project and twelve (12) spaces within the Coultrup project boundary. FUNDING SOURCE: Not Applicable. RCA 12/7/92 -5- (5165d) AT.'j'F NA IVE ACTION: The City .Council may take one of the following alternative actions: 1. Approve parking plan Alternative #2; or 2 . Continue this item for further information. ATTACHMENTS; . _ . 1. Area Map .. 2. Redevelopment Agency letter dated November 13, 1992 a. Permanent Parking Site Plan b. Temporary Parking Site Plan (Alternative #1) c. Parking Plan (Alternative #2) 3. Redevelopment Agency memo dated November 24, 1992 a. Temporary and Permanent Parking Site Plan 4 . . Planning Commission Staff Report dated November 17, 1992 MTU:MA:HF: lp 4 RCA 12/7/92 -6- (5165d) i cN. _� > w n /��/�/ ,,ti !1 �.,� l: I . '• .T. f�v� f1I .i Ji_. — , , ; Yc Nil vo P + ,r /7 • ti iDISTRI f J I NLM H-FP2 JU (n 1• a� o-: �---•mac I �/ 'O ln • •.(, a .q I 'av( � Q ,#�.F =0 L Q o� a '. ( 1► .` ;: 3LLLL ' y a.•rc Y Y 'RZ.ao-cz-FPz �� i8�` ` I ..t_ d �c•:w:.�:.�: : nz•ao•crrPz DOWNTOWN S.EQFIC Vl�d►l. I 11 •��,�'• iie1;: y�r*::::::A'' > C!' ,� ! .•rt = . •(fir �MIb� 4(i .% J a( DISTRICT•6o,, ,•' R2•PO-C2•FP2 04•4 • `�+�`�.« R2"PO'CZ'fP2 Rz•PO-c2=Xri '` / •: {}� Ct. J��n' .ai+ R2-DIM-FP2 :S R2-PD•Cj':� oti i=S -•�MH`r.Z'FP2 .x!Cr.T: '•N�::i»�ur�.. ♦4Ct,.` ,yj•Oa+ n (' •R2-PO-CZ'FPf '•"°Vv�lto- %/ .,; t \Aa �GG/�,-0 DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN_ >I r �'►- DIST r ee-FPz A• `w1. //nw I 1 CUP• 91 -39 w/Special Permits rn CE 91 -45 , CDP 91 -2 .1 T -289-6 PM 91 35 , ElR (� NUNTINGTON tEACN • HUNTINGTON MACH PLANNING DIVISIONAMEL Book _ -1• �� - �� Y =" City of Huntington Beach . 2000 MAIN STREET CALIFORNIA 92648 DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Office of the Director 536-5582 Housing 536.5542 Re6velopme_nt 536.5582 , Faz •November 13, 1992 (714)375-5087 r V tl � Chairperson and Planning Commission Members City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California 92648 SUBJECT: Review of Parking 111an for CUP No. 9I-39 On November 4, 1992, the Redevelopment Agency and the Abdelmuti Development Company presented a request to approve Conditions of Approval Nos. 17 & 18 of Conditional Use Permit No. 91-39. The Planning Commission deferred the issue until November 17, 1992. To summarize our response to Condition's 17 & 18, we propose as follows. The permanent location of all required parking shall be provided as follows: a) Provide 21 additional parking spaces along Fifth Street (public right of way) by changing from parallel parking to diagonal parking. b) Develop 50 parking spaces on-the former Terry Buick site, now,owned by the Agency. c) Develop 65 parking spaces on Block 105 owned by the Agency for either temporary or permanent use. The temporary location of all required parking shall be provided through Alternative 1: a) Provide 87 spaces on the former Terry Buick site. b) Provide 36 new spaces on Fifth Street. -- c) Develop 10 spaces on the Agency-owned parcel in the 200 block of Fifth Street. Chairman and Planning Commissioners November 13, 1992 Page Two Both-these:proposals meet the requirement to provide 133 parking spaces for the Abdelmuti project. To further expand on this information, the Agency is co-applicant for projects with Abdelmuti Development Company (Phase I - Main-Pier), and the Coultrup Company. (Phase II - Main-Pier). The Abdelmuti DDA has been executed, and the Agency has an obligation to identify parking by December 8, 1992, when the Abdelmuti Development Company plans to pull building permits. The Coultrup project's DDA.has not been executed. However, their DDA stipulates that unless the Downtown Parking Master Plan is approved by the Coastal Commission in the spring of 1993, their project will not proceed. .(See attachment Section of DDA). Whether the Abdelmuti parking plan, as proposed, is approved or not, will have no bearing on the Coultrup project. The Agency will provide Abdelmuti with 65 parking spares on time Agency-owned Block 105. The Coultrup project requires.425 spaces. The 425 spaces can only be mitigated through adoption of the Downtown Parking Master Plan. Attached are letters from .Mike Abdelmuti's representative and Jon Coultrup in support of the Agency's proposed parking plan. Because of the need to continue construction of the Abdelmuti project, if the Planning Commission cannot support the proposed parking plan, we respectfully'request denial of the plan and forwarding to the City Council. Sincerely, Barbara A. Kaiser, Redevelopment Director BAK:ls Attachments xc: Michael T. Uberuaga, Executive Director Ray Silver, Assistant City Administrator 00 Wintry _1r'�`Palm'1'rees rtccaat. wiicictc to mat Sth Street � Potential Parking Lot Lighting Monument d o G ,, o v o e rofiiatctr-Main 5�treet Theme - r� Main Street Theme Traffic Stnptn� Tram PArkina Decorative paving ' to match 3 — Main Street Theme Street Tr--... wch aq: Indian Laurel f-P, - U U ^ C Existing Buildings 3 Ca Planter (4'.x 4' 6 Handicap Parking (12'x 19') N 51 �-Existing Buildings �-- Parking Lot Tree, sti Is ; v, Eucalyptus ficifolia - Red Flowering Gum Preliminary Site Plan Scale I " = 20' The Executive Director shall reasonably approve or disapprove- the Developer' s evidence of construction financing within fifteen (15) days after the Developer' s request for such approval is accepted as complete. If the Executive Director disapproves any such evidence of financing, written notice shall be provided to the Developer stating the reasons for such disapproval. 6. Project Design; Design and Construction Costs; Agency Assistance . Subject to the costs to be incurred by the Agency pursuant to this Agreement', Developer shall, at his sole cost and expense, design and construct the. Project pursuant to the Scope of Development. (Attachment No. 3 ) , as an approximately 80 to 90 unit residential condominium building on Block 105 and a up to three-story commercial office/retail buildings totaling approximately 47 , 500 . square feet on Block 104. Exact number of units and conditions on Project may be subject to change during the entitlement. process with the City. Plan application by Developer shall be submitted to and accepted by the City planning department as complete within ninety (90) days of the .execution of this Agreement. The Developer shall select, oversee and coordinate either a single general contractor for all of the work. . proposed for Block. 104 and Block .105 or. one for each. Construction . shall be initiated on .Block 104 by September 15, 1994. The Developer and the Agency shall provide dedications necessary to construct the Project from their respective Parcels at their expense . Developer shall be responsible for obtaining any such necessary dedications from the Property Owners Parcels. 7 . Soils Remediation. Parties understanding with respect to soils remediation and obligations is set out in Section 209 below. 8 . Parking. Agency shall provide non-exclusive public ground level parking spaces located in Block -1.04. Any charges for use ( i . e._, meter costs, - etc.. ) made to the general public shall be ' equally applicable to the property owners. Both parties understand that it is the intent of the City to amend its Downtown Specific Plan to allow the proposed commercial uses on Block 104 to be sufficiently parked by existing parking in the downtown area and the ground level spaces planned for the Agency owned parcel on Block 104. Both parties also understand that such an amendment to the Downtown Specific Plan requires approval by the Coastal Commission. In the event the City is- not successful in amending the Downtown Specific Plan to 11/11/92 6449u/2460/009 -14- allow for the proposed commercial project to be fully ' parked without the need for spaces aside -from the ground level spaces shown on *CUP No. ' 92-17, then the Agency shall have the right. to terminate this Agreement. Developer shall provide all parking required by the City for the Block 105 Improvements and shall pay all costs associated with .the ' construction. of ,such. parking .facilities: . _ 9. -Public Improvements. Developer shall pay for all of the Block 105 onsite and offsite improvements as described in the Scope of Development (Attachment No. 3 ) with the -exception of those curb, gutter and' street improvements fronting the Worthy Parcel . Agency payment toward the Worthy- Parcel shall not include sewer, utility, storm. drain, traffic impact, or fees associated with the street improvements.' The Agency shall either initiate. the -construction of the Block 104 offsite improvements as described in the Scope of, Development (Attachment No. 3 ) within thirty (30) days of issuance of the first building permit for Block 104 or shall reimburse the Developer after review and. written approval by Public Works Director of City of: (i ) three bids, (ii ) all contracts, (iii ) detailed invoices, and (iv) proof of lien releases from subcontractors for 'those verified costs. Developer shall be responsible for construction and payment of all onsite improvements -to Block 104. Agency shall provide utility hook-up to each parcel of Block 104. Agency shall provide costs for construction work necessary for any on-site publicly owned right-of-ways . 10. Relocation.. Agency shall pay towards relocation expenses, inclusive of any claim for goodwill or costs associated with relocation of residential tenants, of the Property Owners' Three Hundred and Eighty Thousand Dollars ($380, 000) . Agency shall provide counseling and relocation assistance to tenants, said costs to be deducted from the Three Hundred and Eighty Thousand Dollars ( $380,000) prior to payments to Property _Owners . Remaining amounts shall be distributed according to .the following schedule : one-third ( 1/3 ) upon pulling demolition permit; one-third (1/3 ) upon obtaining framing check off approval by building official; and the final one-third (1/3 ) upon issuance of certificate of occupancy. Amounts to be distributed shall be based in proportion to the amounts set out in the Property Owners Partnership Agreement (Attachment No. 11) . Any additional amounts shall be paid by Developer. In addition the Agency shall provide counseling and relocation assistance to 11/11/92 6449u/2460/009 -15- RUTAN 5t TUCKER 1 ATTOANCYS AT LAW 1. A PAATN[AON(P 1NGL\,OIwC PAO►C6AIONAL COA►ONAT'IONt. ' Arlt •.Noowt• raaa• a..ow1TTN 1•AAA OP TNC wtiT. lutTe 1400 K1{A6 t7h L.RA RNA .\'\iw{O/NIC NA•a WILLIAM U.NAAT.COAt NA aCan♦A OVNN ►A 4lLA aOlta't t\\..4 A,619E JA..ea L.NOAw1• Olt wNTON OOVL OAWO V.YOC4NTR CYAAD Jwwea A.acute, . C..Aft A.CYAN UT7 ANN,NCL{ON LA.PNAA CAROL J.OCN4a CO e COti it.PINIOM[ 6TawAwi iatii4A•1 N.ae A.1/ANP1L w11:1A...0.CA.LAN COSTA MCBA. CAUFOANIA Baaad-aOTae MARK 8NITN rLTNN PATAICR e.•1tc•aaA . a.NVaI■YI,Jw. MI.-RAI\ V.P40-MAR JAMt6 V./INtwT ••l\W.1144CLL :aNltt L.C1,1071. R•Challe a•.OWCLL ./0.0 W.OANL,Ja. AN,L!� a,pan. OIA CC: ALL MAIL TO: P. O. OOX IOl O NAT11T rOROATN ISIAMANI A,AAIAICA 4VAOZ 1-•iiOAl 1.WALIAt� J.! JAfa O aV.Caat.O - a--• 0.C681ROV6 ■VSAN It.v9.1% Al- e.TNOMPtiN• eNCILA A VAf .t•+:i I./�AAINO':iw _ a•CVC.A NICw OLa COSTA MC9A, CAL1rORN1A 92628-1050 - JAVVC TAVLew 0♦ CA 0'Ct i•t..••• 1,N1 TAON Ai O `VOG•WOt6N C LEECH a.tAITAILC M.•/..Aaa V,it+wL••••.' Wlaa•wN w,anND[w 79LCPTTdNC 1714 NANa VAN LIeOIN CAANa w Ow11w1N .oat•i C uwuN tVMOUI 1v Cwll OALLAt 1 951.0100 MATTNtw>4 Rou CARAIe o rnct+w. gaol•w.CAAFLL- RANDALL le,tA6aV61• 1*131 42e•7966 ITtrntN A,[Lela URL140A 9.RAN- ({w••O,O meat..•. r •flat r.�AtIM - Jt.rrAtT wtitTNCINtA 4a11M A. TMOr1►OA AOttRT 0.OMCM J44t6 O..A. •.O•H 7.iALINCta•' PMlal/M:-IAINCt - - TCLCCOP,Cw 1T141 040.90a6... AeA4 N.voLRewT ae6o11aN L .ut♦+cecwf %AAat N• .iVO VAA A CAAAa . . . . 417rok"A.OOLOrARe ►/•VL J.61mils t.••C10 a.PAICOa N. Ja NM L:F9LLOWI Y,1 tAN(IAP /NATO RARCN 6 V.NNI\0 P,t+At.O.AVeIN w4. a.'AatlCw a >..ay..,f1660.167t1 ' W.I&XV111 tAAtIL X.aANICI 0441171.t I. • •N,N• • ".T. 4001V6 •IANt{ a •�t•t\,tA.(1668.1020 LATNt t.ta[•4.OOtwNAN• N'a AtwtwlN6 JCN16M Ni•la0ta• 6ar„ i M.MtLttA INACAVINARA i,MLSOIN VII Jeta•..6,tAAAVTN :VAC �.WANLOV16T 6A.11616•i6a01 4 tAl NLAA1{ON tNA wMlt aMV 1".. . IT• a.CIAwO a Nor awe.• w.we061a.f.e..wllt-166J11 t1.N tLwi ew •Pal.. 1 OOW t. aOAI 6AANaw suit" - 1.•a J µ9 1AC _ tANtii W waA/Ia.11• • r� •A AAOPIAA.OrAa 4*k"—*Or November 13 , 19 9 2 aaRVIN T.C4ALLLN61116 i\ owlno J.oARltAlel.•... . Of COVNAtI Chairperson Dan Shomaker and Members .of the Planning Commission City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 • Re: Review of Parking Piar. for. Abdelmuti Development Company Project at 113 Main Street (Conditional Use Permit No. 91-39 , Condition •Nos . 17 and 18) Dear Chairperson Shomaker and ;;.embers of the Planning Commission: The law firm of Rutan & Tucker represents Mite Abdelmuti and the Abdelmuti Development Company. On behalf of ;•ir . Abdelmuti, I am writing to expreee support for the staff recommendation for approval of a Parking Plan for the project pursuant to Condition. Nos . 17 and 18 of CUP No. 91-39. It is my understanding that you will be discussing this item at your November 17 , 1992 , Commission meeting . It is extramely important to Mr . Abdelmuti that the Planning Commission make a final recommendation (hopefully one of approval) at that time, Action by the Planning Commission on November 17th is needed in order to enable the City Council to take final action at its December 7 , 1992 , meeting. Mr. Abdelmuti is prepared to pull a building permit no later than December 8 . I am told that unless the Parking Plan is approved " by the Council, issuance of the building permit may be delayed. As stated in Barbara Raiser's October 22 , 1992 , memorandum (a copy of which is included in your staff report) , the Owner Participation Agreement between the Redevelopment Agency and Abdelmuti Development Company "obligates the Redevelopment Agency to provide all parking required for the project. " If construction of the project is delayed for even a short period of time duo to' the failure to approve the Parking Plan,. Mr. Abdelmuti will suffer 1� - e FS211121014820-000112021907, 11113M ATTORNCY6 AT LAW. - - 4.A.I*CA.Mj.IMCIVO,/.O.C])IOMAC COC.O.ATIOM. Chairperson Dan Shomaker and Members- of the Planning Commission . November 13 , 1992 Page 2 significant damages. He has already entered into a construction contract and the contractor is diligently working on the site (pursuant to excavation and grading permits) . Approximately i $300, 000 has already been paid for steel that has been fabricated for the building and an additional payment .of about the same amount is due within - the next few days . The contractor is working under f a very tight time schedule in order to enable Mr. Abdelmuti to open the retail businesses on the ground floor of the new building next ' Summer. Mr. Abdelmuti does not insist that one plan be preferred over another, particularly insofar as alternatives may involve parking on properties outside Block 103 .(bounded by PCH, Main Street, Walnut, and Fifth) . Mr. . Abdelmuti' s main concern is simply that the Planning Commission approve soma plan quickly. Thank you for your consideration. Very truly yours , RUTAN & TUCKER effre M. Oder man JMO; jd cc; Mike Abdelmuti pee\i lz\0tea20.0001\2021907. I lei 3/92 November 13, 1992 Chairperson and Planning Commission Members City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California 92648 RE: Review of Parking Plan for Abdebnuti Development Company Project at 113 Main Street (Conditional Use Pennit No. 91-39, Conditions 17 & 18) On behalf of Coultrup Companies and Birtcher Real Estate Limited, I am writing to_ . express support for the staff recommendation for approval of a Parking Plan for the Abdelmuti project pursuant to Conditions 17 & 18 of CUP No. 91-39. It is my understanding that you will be discussing this item at your Commission meeting of November 17, 1992. The Owner Participation Agreement between the Redevelopment Agency.and Abdelmuti Development Company, as previously* approved, obligates the Redevelopment Agency to provide all parking required for the project. We undeistand that the parking on Block 105 must be replaced prior to development of the site as part of the Coultrup project. According to our Disposition and Development Agreement with the Agency, the. Block 104 and Block 105 project will not proceed unless a Downtown Parking Master Plan is approved by the Coastal Commission. . We have agreed to abide by this requirement. We, therefore, request your approval of the Parking Plan as recommended by staff. . Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, rl) i 3RD BLOCK WEST OL:vE STREET MAIN PROMENADE W=_NUT STREET i �.rP Theater Terry Buick MP Lot Par1+.ing Lot i5 spaces Per RBF Plan F Includes 5TH St. W 1 Li W i ti H PIERSIDE PAvILLION z { I JACK'S (: PERMr'"NENT PARKING PLAN SHOP PACIFIC COAST HIGHUAY A. Ter-y Bu:ck Lot Per Per Coultrup Des;gn = 50 spaces B. 5th Street, PCH to Walnut 21 spaces C. Sur-7 Then#er MP \ Por;,ng Lot 65 spaces Vol '. +' u �{/� Total Spaces: 1.33 spaces 4 3RD BLOCK WtST OLIVE STREET LOT MAIN PROMENADE E WALNUT STREET' Terry Buck Parking Lot Per RBF Plan Includes 5TH St. w W L.J N PIEP.SIDE. PAVILLION _ z (TEMPORARY) JACKS SURF ALTERNATIVE- NUMBER 1: SHOP PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY A. Terry Buck Lot Per Per RBF plan , 87 spaces B. 5th Street, ` PCH to Olive = 36 spaces ` C. Lot = 10 spaces \ Total Spaces, 133 spaces �'`�~ 3rd .Block %test Parking Level / Number 1, 192 spaces iI OLIVE STREET I I - i MAIN PPOMENADE i i i WALNUT STREET I I 'Terry Buick ! Parking Lot 56 Parking spaces �- W w I W r,[ERSIDE PAVILLION H Z N I� 1: I I{ . JACK'S A SHOP PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY ALTERNATIVE NUMBER 2 A. Terry Buck Lot Per Coultrup Design 56 spaces B. 5th Street, a j Olive to Walnut 15 spaces C. 3rd-.Btoc} West, j \ Perking Level No.1 192 spaces �•" • Total Spaces, 263 spaces �• J� CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HU►1 WWON BEACH TO: MikeAdams, Director of.Community Development eve FROM: Barbara A. Kaiser, Deputy City Administrator/Economi Development SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit 91-39 DATE: November 24, 1992 ''1 2 "t 112 On November 17, 1992 the Planning Commission approved with conditions the Agency's parking plans as.required to meet condition Noss 17 and 18 of approval for C.U.P. 91-39 (Abdelmuti Project) . The temporary location been revised to meet the Planning Commission's request that there be no perpendicular parking on 5th Street. The required 133 parking spaces will be constructed in phases as needed in the following respective order: 1. 1 space Abdelmuti Parcel 2. 12 net spaces 5th Street (200 Block) 3. 13 net spaces 5th Street (100 Block) 4. 75 spaces Agency Parcel (Former Terry Buick) 5. 7 spaces Walnut Avenue (400 Block) 6. 12 spaces Agency Parcel (404 PCH) _ 7. 13 spaces Agency Parcel (214 5th Street) 133 Total Net Spaces . � 1 The permanent location of all required parking shall be as follows: 1. 12 net new spaces 5th Street (200 Block) 2. 13.net new spaces 5th Street(100 Block) 3. 50 spaces Agency Parcel (Former Terry Buick) 4. 58 spaces Agency Parcel (Block 105) 133 spaces Total Net Spaces I hope these plans meet all parties concerns. If you have any questions please call me. Thank you for your assistance. KBB:jar 183j xc: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrator Ray Silver, Assistant City Administrator Jim Otterson, Traffic Engineer Keith-B..Bohr, Assistant.Project Manager. Herb Fauland, Associate Planner sm xrprzr SO PA.WXAN SAWCC! r � r � � F � l I• � �1 f 17 I FJ?puarJAn S/•ACES I I ( I I I I I I --� � � I II � I it II• II _ I� • I \ I I I I I 10 it�ioYlM►.dR.Cl7 i i � �I� J ` ALLEY SI TE PL. Zair PARKING •.t•t•�•t•■ irtc AM7 _ �,� � M,•�v, .?TN STREET W ............ CJTY OF ,,.....r..n.. tro nit: uvrrAC TOVv SEACH CA sm irwor ' .i6 PA/D�JAW SPACCS .. I N N it L 1 I I �• SI TE PL An PARWAVS TEAM RAO BLOCK � � � ► � � 5rH smear � : �• . Cl rr OF . ►►m•ua�.0 • so pm awn•••• cwrinic ron+ ��w►w�w w BEArH r t huntington beach department of community development STA'ff REpOR EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NOVEMBER 17, 1992 REVIEW OF PARKING PLAN FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0, 91-39 WITH SPECIAL PERMITS/ COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 91-21/ CONDITIONAL .EXCEPTION (VARIANCE) NO. 91-45/ TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO, 91-235/ ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 8.9-6 (CONTINUED FROM THE NOVEMBER 4 . 1992 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING) (10l .Main Street) This is a request to review, approve and forward to the City Council a parking plan -for .the four (4) story commercial/office building at the northwest corner of Main Street and Pacific Coast Highway. A condition of approval for the project requires that a parking plan be approved by the Planning Commission and forwarded to the City Council identifying the code required spaces for the project prior to issuance of building permits . .The Planning Commission continued the review of the parking plan in order to allow staff and the applicant additional time to clarify .and address concerns raised by the Commission. These concerns centered on temporary versus permanent parking, the downtown shared parking concept and the Coultrup phase of Main Pier Phase II . No new information has been received from the applicant/Agency regarding the issues raised by the Commission. Planning staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the Parking Plan, as outlined in the November 4 , 1992 Planning Commission staff report, with the added condition to indicate the permanent location of any displaced parking and forward to the City Council . A-PL-FM-zio ,y TO: Planning Commission FROM: Community Development DATE: November 17, 1992 SUBJECT; CONDITIONS. OF APPROVAL SUBMITTAL"ON CONDITION NOS. 11 AND. 18 OF -CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT -NO. 91-39 APPLICANT: City of Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency PROPERTY OWNER: City of Huntington Beach Redevelopment-Agency/ Abdelmuti Development Company, 113 Main Street, Huntington Beach, CA 92648 REQUEST: Review of parking - plan for the four (4) story commercial/office building. LOCATION: • 101• Main* Street (northwest corner of Main Street at Pacific .Coast Highway) DATE ACCEPTED: October 20, 1992 ZONE: Downtown Specific Plan, District No. 3 (Visitor Serving- Commercial) EXISTING USE: Vacant ACREAGE: .56 gross acres 1 . 0 SUGGESTED ACTION: Motion to: "Deem the Redevelopment Agency Parking Plan for Conditional Use Permit No. 91-39 as adequate to meet Conditions of Approval No. 17 and .18 with one (1) added condition and forward to the City Council for their consideration. " . 2 . 0 GENERAL- INFORMATION: Conditional Use Permit No . 91-39 and associated entitlements was approved by the City Council on January 21, 1992 to construct a four (4) story commercial/office building. The request included Conditional Exception (variance) No. 91-45 which is to permit a 227 parking space variance. The Planning Commission continued the review of the parking plan for the four . (4) story commercial/office building from their November 4, 1992 meeting. This allowed staff additional time to clarify and address issues raised by the Commission regarding temporary versus permanent parking, the downtown shared parking concept and the Coultrup phase .of Main Pier _ ^.` Phase II . V 3 . 0 ISSUES AND ANALYSIS: Parking The Planning Commission raised a concern regarding the issue of temporary versus permanent parking satisfying. the requirement for the Abdelmuti project. . .As •outlined in the Agency*s' parking plan.:.. :. recommended for approval, 65 spaces .are called for bn Block 105. This is a temporary or interim solution only if the Coultrup phase is approved and constructed. These spaces shall be required' to be replaced in a manner consistent with the Downtown Specific Plan or any future downtown master parking plan. Also. please note the Coultrup phase, if approved, will be contingent on the Downtown Parking Master Plan being .approved by the Coastal Commission. The Master Plan concept will be discussed further in this report. In the event that Coultrup is not approved and/or the- Downtown Parking Master Plan is not approved by the Coastal Commission, the 65 spaces on Block 105 will be designated for credit towards the Abdelmuti project and allow the. proj.ect to move forward. The Agency acknowledges the responsibility that any development on Block 105 will require that the 65 spaces be relocated in a consistent manner with the Downtown Specific Plan. To verify proper and permanent parking compliance should Block 105 be developed, staff recommends that a condition of approval be. added to the Abdelmuti project which states the following: In the event that the 65 parking spaces credited and located on Block 105 are displaced, the applicant/Agency shall submit a parking plan which designates the location of the displaced and permanent parking spaces in a consistent manner with the Downtown Specific Plan. This plan shall be approved by the Planning Commission. Parking Master Plan The Planning Commission expressed a concern about the shared parking concept for the downtown and its effect on the Main Pier Phase II projects . The Downtown Parking Plan is based on the concept of shared parking. Shared parking in effect allows one parking space to serve two or more individual land uses without conflict. . Shared parking relies on the variations in the peak parking demand for. various uses due to dif f erent 'activity patterns' of adjacent uses by hour, day and season. The Plan also recognizes interrelationships among different uses and activities which result in an attraction to two or more vendors on a single auto trip. Therefore, a single parking space can be used to serve more than one destination within, the downtown area. The shared parking concept is currently under consideration by the City. and will ultimately be forwarded to the Coastal Commission for their review. In the event the Coastal Commission does not allow this shared parking concept, the Coultrup project does not move forward and the parking on Block 105 remains credited for the Abdelmuti project. Staff Report - 11/17/92 -2- (5072d) Coultrup Project The Planning Commission raised a concern regarding the effect the Coultrup project would have on the proposed parking plan. This. project is currently under consideration by the City 6ouncil with a projected parking shortfall of. approximately 400 spaces. :. These spaces must. also. be located. it -the project is approved.. -n. .order. to . permit the project' to :move forward, the shared parking concept must be approved, in place and the 65 spaces displaced on Block 105 must be relocated. .If the shared parking concept is not approved, the Coultrup project 'cannot be developed. 4 .0 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that .the Planning Commission approve the Parking Plan as submitted by the Redevelopment Agency satisfying Conditions of Approval No. 17 and 18 for Conditional Use Permit No. 91-39 and forward to the City Council for their consideration with the following condition of . approval: Ih the event that the 65 parking spaces credited and .located on Block 105 are displaced, the applicant/Agency shall submit a parking plan which designates the location of the displaced and permanent parking spaces in a consistent manner with the Downtown Specific Plan. This plan shall be approved by the Planning Commission. 5 . 0, ALTERNATIVE ACTION: The Planning Commission may take one of the. following alternative actions: 1. Approve Parking Plan Alternative No. 1 and forward to the City Council . 2 . Continue this item for further information. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Planning Commission Staff Report dated November 4, 1992 SH:HF:kjl Staff Report - 11/17/92 -3- (5072d) huntington beach department of community development STAf REPORT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NOVEMBER 4 . 1992 .. 1992 REVIEW OF PARKING PLAN VOR S'ONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO 91-39 WITH SPECIAL. PERMITS/ !COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO, 91-21/ CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION (VARIANCE) NO. 91-45/ TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO, 91-235/ ENVIRONMENTAL -IMPACT REPORT NO. 89-6 (101 Main Street) This is a request to . reyiew, approve and forward to the City Council a parking. plan for the four (4) story commercial/off ice building at the northwest corner of Main Street and Pacific Coast Highway. A condition of ' approvalfor the project. requires that a parking plan be approved by .the Planning Commission and forwarded to the City Council identifying the code required spaces for the project prior to issuance of buiding permits . Planning staff recommends that the Planning Commission .approve the Parking Plan and forward to the City Council. . f A-?L-FM-230 err i { :� ! _ ' : -: - • ��u� i 17 � LJL . I Lj + '♦ , , .,• �� • - • ram•- I -A - I U) c M H-FP2 I c � a � 1� 1 Yt■tF 1 � Zc r ( u b rQrR ti fir♦ _•c•GQ��F�p I At-►O•CS-iR' to 4 •� �+ \t p.•1•uOw( �v( ;� A :7;. -FPZ C ; tiln r NN N [ � �; • ATLAH A i' �QS ., c �'�'•. '� .. ,�� 1 ••oa•rc.""4` ;Y 'R2-?OCZ-FV2 ,rry,p tir ��.' dp♦ d+i''r ��l ,..: g �s _l+!+RY.:a�:. �' 1 f8�,c .� 1'I°C i d Vic'!! ::.7► �; 012•PO-CrFP2 /N osr OOYKHTOwN SDEOFIC Pei?. R� 'o' of 4 ♦♦1P r f +a = w .� ��S [;' R2-PO-CZ'FP2 u p01STRIC7.6°, , .o "W •+ .i. : .0•, G ��� :..^W�:'. Wit...:. •\ ���,I,♦ =,a�� '.t �.° ��°p �, R2•PO-Q•fP2 R2-PO-CZ.x'P? Cie /yam. �j. ..... R2-Po- ipt •� r4 C:t• •. ' MH-CZ-FP?' i�_...... w Gol s ". y����♦ y�mast F� 1 R2-Po{tFP2•`'.._.a .-0 DOMTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN, \ '�'►. GIST •Bb-FPZ A. CUP 91 -39 w/Special Permits CE 91 -45 ; CDP 91 -21 , • TPM 91 -235 , EIR 89-6 HLINTWGTON LEACH HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING DIVISION TO: Planning Commission FROM: Community Development DATE: November 4 , 1992 SUBJECT: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL SUBMITTAL ON CONDITION NOS. 17 AND 18. .OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 91-39 .... APPLICANT: City -of Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency PROPERTY OWNER: City of Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency/ Abdelmuti Development Company, 113 Main Street, Huntington Beach, CA 92648 REQUEST: Review of parking plan for the four (4) story commercial/office building. LOCATION: l-bl Main Street (northwest corner ' of Main Street at Pacific Coast Highway) DATE ACCEPTED: October 20, 1992 ZONE: Downtown Specific Plan, District No. 3 (Visitor t Serving Commercial) EXISTING USE: Vacant ACREAGE: .56 gross acres 1 . 0 SUGGESTED ACTION: Motion to: "Deem the Redevelopment. Agency Parking Plan for Conditional Use Permit No. 91-39 as adequate to meet Conditions of Approval No. 17 and 18 and forward to the City Council for their consideration. " 2 . 0 GENERAL INFORMATION: . Conditional Use Permit No. 91-39 and associated entitlements .was approved by the City Council on January 21, 1992 to construct a-four (4) story commercial/office building. The request included Conditional Exception. .(Variance) No. 91-45 which is to permit a 227 parking space variance. - �A The Downtown Specific Plan stipulates that required parking be provided on-site- to the maximum extent feasible, - and that the balance be provided in a public parking structure within 350 feet. The approved project included the following uses by square footage with resulting parking requirements: Required Pa, rkind Retail 14, 110 sq. ft. 71 spaces Restaurant 3,303 sq. ft. 31 spaces Office 30, 920 . sq. ft. 1,U spaces Total 48,333 sq. ft. 227 spaces However, the working drawing describe a slightly modified project as follows : Required Parking Retail 13 , 953 sq. ft. 70 spaces Restaurant 2,798 sq. ft. . 28 spaces Office 30 , 299 sq. ft. I_U spaces Total 47,050 sq. ft . 219 spaces The code -required 219 parking spaces for the project is further .: . reduced by a credit of 86 spaces, due to the amount of retail space which existed on-site prior to demolition. As a policy, downtown redevelgpment projects have been grandfathered for the number of parking spaces which would have been required for previously existing square f ootages . After subtracting the 86 parking spaces, the proposed project has a parking requirement of 133 spaces . Conditional Exception (variance) No. 91-45 was approved for the parking shrotf all provided the required spaces to be supplied in some manner . Condition of Approval No. 17 was placed on the project to ensure that the required parking for the project be identified in a -parking plan prior to issuance of building permits.. The condition of approval reads as follows : 17 . "Prior to issuance of building permits, a parking plan depicting the temporary and permanent location of all required parking and loading spaces shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Council and Planning Commission. " t' t`` Staff Report - 10/20/92 -2- (4843d) In addition, Condition of Approval No. 18 was placed on the project to ensure that the required parking for the project be constructed and available prior to issuance of Certificates of Occupancy. The condition of approval reads as follows: 18 . "Prior to issuance of Certificates of Occupancy all code required parking and loading spaces shall be constructed . and. available for the project. ' The spaces shall be. available either within. a Main-Pier Phase II parking structure. or. in combination with a 65 space temporary parking *lot, and off-site parking spaces wtihin 350 feet. Certificate ofOccupancy may be released as parking spaces become available. " 3 . 0 ISSUES AND ANANLYSIS: The Redevelopment Agency has submitted a parking. plan which proposes to provide the required parking for the project in three (3) locations . The first location is along the current rights-of-way of Fifth Street between Walnut Avenue and Pacific Coast Highway. Piior to project approval there was a total of 17 public parking spaces . The City recently completed a change in the parking pattern from parallel spaces to diagonal spaces, which increased parking to 38 . This provided a net increase of 21 parking spaces . The second location is behind the project on the former Terry Buick property. The site will accommodate approximately 50 parking spaces in the proposed layout . This parking layout is consistent with the proposal currently pending approval submitted by Coultrup development Company in conjunction with the Redevelopment Agency. The third location is on the remaining portion of the Main-Pier II site, identified as Block 105 . This location will accomodate the remainder of the required parking for the project, approximately 65 spaces . The Redevelopment Agency' s proposal calls for the spaces in location three to be for temporary use and would be replaced concurrent with any future development of the site. In addition, the parking spaces in location two on Fifth Street between Walnut Avenue and Pacific Coast Highway may be reconfigured at the time of future development on Block 105 . This proposed parking plan satifies the required parking spaces within the Main--Pier II project boundaries . The plan incorporates the Coultrup layout for the Terry site and also utilizes a portion of B1ock '105 . The Redevelopment Agency acknowledges 'that the spaces located on Block 105 will have to be satisfactorily relocated prior to development of Block 105 . The relocation of parking will be the responsibility of the Redevelopment Agency. Staff Report - 10/20/92 -3- (4843d) Staff recommends approval of this plan, the scenario meets•. the strict intent of the project conditions of approval with. regard-to parking. The parking will be provided on-site and : in close . proximity to the project . The plan further identifies two alternatives for consideration. Alternative 1 The plan calls for the allocation of parking in. the follo4ing manner: 87 spaces Former Terry Buick site on -F3. Street 36 . Fifth Street new spaces (two blocks deep) . 10 200 Block Fifth Street (new parking lot) 133. spaces Total This plan does not incorporate the Coultrup parking layout for the Terry site, but does not require the use of Block 105 . Planning staff feels this is a viable alternative because it provideds a majority of the parking on-site and adjacent to the development, but requires the Agency to construct ten (10) new parking spaces in the second block rehabilitation project. Alternative 2 The plan calls for the allocation. of parking in the, following• manner 50 spaces Former Terry Buick Site (Coultrup Design) ; 21 Fifth Street new spaces 13_2 Third Block West (add one level of subterrian parking) 263 spaces Total This plan far exceeds the requirement of 133 spaces but is the least favorable of the alternatives . Planning staff does not support this request because it will require an amendment to the approved conditional use permit for the Third Block West project, and therefore, triggers a new public hearing. Also, the location is beyond a reasonable walking distance of project in orderto receive credit for the parking requirement. In addition, the amended conditional use permit will be required prior to the approval of .this alternative, therefore, processing time should be .a consideration. 4_. Q RECOMMENDATION: $taff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the Parking Plan as submitted by the Redevelopment Agency satisfying -Conditions of Approval No . 17 and 18 for Conditional Use Permit No. 91-39 and forward to. the City Council for their consideration. Staff Report - 10/20/92 -4- (4843d) ALTERNATIVE ACTION: The Planning Commission may take 'one of' the following alternative actions: 1 . Approve Parking Plan Alternative No. 1 and forward to the City Council . 2 : Continue this. item for.. further information. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Project Parking Plan dated October `22' 1992 2. Memo dated October 20, . 199?2 from Public Works SH:HF:kj Staff Report - 10/20/92 -5- (4843d) ( A > CITY OF HUNTINGTONf BEACH - I� TO: Mike Adams, Director of Community Development C,02 FROM: Barbara A. Kaiser, Redevelopment Director°"" SUBJECT: Abdelmuti Development Company Project (PCH & Main Street) Conditional Use Permit 91-39 - Conditioner of Approval #{17 (Parking Plan Review) DATE: October 22, 1992 On November 19, 1991 the Planning Commission approved Conditional Use Permit 91-39, and on appeal the City Council upheld the C.U.P. on January 21, 1992 for the Abdelmuti Project. This C.U.P. allows for the construction of a four-story structure consisting of approximately 18,000 sf of commercial/retail on the ground floor and 30,000 sf of office space combined on the second, third and fourth floors. As approved and based on working drawings which show a decrease in floor area, this project is required to provide 133 parking spaces on-site or within 350' of the project. Condition of Approval #17 reads as follows: 17. Prior to the issuance of building permits, a parking plan depicting the temporary and permanent location of all required parking and loading spaces shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Council and Planning Commission. On May 18, 1991 the Redevelopment Agency entered into an Owner Participation Agreement (OPA) with Abdelmuti Development Company for the development of the above described project entitled by C.-U.P. 91-39. The Council/Agency further amended this OPA on November 4, 1991 and August 31, 1992. The OPA obligates the Redevelopment Agency to provide all parking required for the project. The report to the Council on the C.U.P. stated, The approval of the parking variance . is based on conditions for the ultimate provision of required parking prior to issuances of Certificate of Occupancy and upon. the provision of a parking plan prior to issuance of building permits. To-accomplish the provision of code required parking-for the project, the parking plan will credit the grandfathered parking spaces, provide 65 ' temporary parking spaces and identify the remaining spaces through the restriping of the existing on-street parking spaces within 350 feet of the project area." The restriping plan did not identify sufficient on-street parking spaces within 350 feet and therefore an alternative plan is necessary. Community Development staff has proposed a Downtown.Parking Plan.to be reviewed. and considered by the Planning Commission and City Council. The Downtown Parking Plan is based on the concept of shared parking. Shared parking in effect allows one parking space to serve two or more individual land uses without conflict. Shared parking relies on the variations in the peak parking demand for various uses; due to different activity patterns of adjacent uses by hour, day and season. The Plan also recognizes interrelationships among different uses and activities which result in an attraction to two or more. vendors on a single auto trip. Therefore, a single parking space can be used to serve more than one destination within the downtown area. Public parking for Downtown patrons will be provided by an expanded number of on- street, off-street locations in addition to the municipal parking structure in the second block. Parking controls will be developed and rates adjusted to maintain an adequate supply of available parking for shoppers and employees of the downtown area. It is intended that the Downtown Parking Plan when adopted will apply to the Abdelmuti project and that sufficient existing parking will be...available to meet demand. As an interim measure and to comply with the C.U.P. requirements and current code requirements, we recommend the following parking plan for consideration by the Planning Commission and City Council. The plan provides for the Terry Buick site and 5th Street to be developed consistent with the design of the proposed Coultrup project. In addition, the block between 5th and 6th Streets will be limited to temporary surface parking. Staff recommends this alternative with the understanding that the 6 scommercial spaces will need to be relocated prior to development of Block 105. This plan for parking as well as the alternatives propose that all parking will be public parking spaces. 2 Project Parking Obligation: 133 spaces (site plans attached t 50 spaces Former Terry Buick Site (Coultrup Design) 21 5th Street new spaces .65 Block 105. Surface Parking (former, Surf Theater) .136 spaces Total In addition the following alternatives may be considered: Alternative 1: 87 spaces Former Terry Buick Site on 5th Street 36 5th Street new spaces to 200 Block 5th Street . 133 spaces Total Alternative 2: 50 spaces Former Terry Buick Site (Coultrup Design) 21 5th Street new spaces 192 Third Block West 263 spaces Total Alternative 1 provides for the Terry Buick site to maximize parking but is not consistent with the proposed Coultrup design for the lot and may have future impact on the design of Block 105 between 5th and 6th Streets. A vacant lot owned by the Agency will provide at least 10 additional spaces. Alternative 2 allows the Abdelmuti project to proceed, develops the Terry Buick site with its intended use as public parking and is consistent with the proposed Coultrup design of the lot providing additional open space, provides for the addition of 21 new spaces on 5th Street due to restriping and develops additional parking to serve the entire downtown core by adding 192 parking spaces on the Third Block of Main Street. Subject to adoption of the Downtown Parking Plan, the Agency realizes that any parking displaced by future development on Block 105 will be replaced on a one for one basis concurrent with new development. In addition, the Agency further assures that the project will comply with'Condition of Approval No. 18, which requires that the required parking be constructed and available prior to issuance of certificates of occupancy. �. 3 Thank you for your assistance. Please call me at ext. 5582 if you have any questions or would like to further discuss these alternatives. w ' r BAK Jar s; 113j Attachment: Site Plan xc: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrator Ray Silver, Deputy City Administrator Howard Zelefsky, Director of Planning Louis Sandoval, Director of Public Works Jim Otterson, Traffic Engineer , Herb Fauland, Associate Planner Keith B. Bohr, Assistant Project Manager t a 4 ' 1 ' 1 , 1 i 111 1VI FI I , • I 1 1 , r•-•I n.1 1rr:. i WAI 11111 '.IFo `:url Itu n'• , Ire , y i<<r.t I• MPI t,t Igor I•alu tut j 66 �,lrnc r 1'r F'Nf f'lon i r Inr-iuCtVS 5111 ` i. i•� l r.r i.r III NSIDI PAVIIA.111N IN (JAICKS(1l. IL.(�N1111V(:: NUMBER 1 Hn c�Aclrlc COAST 1IIc�tIWAY A. I erry Duck lot Per Per Coultrup Design 56 spoces I). 'tith Street, i� "I've to 1Jo)nut 15 spoces C� C. Surf Theo tee- MP P Pork;ng lot t 66 spoces Toiot Spoces: 137 spoces I ! 1 t . i tl�•:• 'ill 1:=-►'• vl '.1 � � _ ( 1 i I 1 j • t. I . 1 I Witt 1:1 11 11•'I 1 �%t f �� 1•if ~'ti�lll + �•'�It 1 I;lll Z. ltil I I I`i�n 1 I V1 NUM131.1� PACIFIC cnns�t 141G14unY A. It-try tiulck lot 1'rr SI IIJI 1•t!r U111' IAnn 100 !cpocQS •-� H. :i U•t S•lrc>c 1, tJUvr! to walnut = 15 spaces (;. Lo-L 10 spaces To tot ,Sjnoces: 133 spaces ,• . r I , I1 1 ,•v.•I r- 1 • 1 1 � I � 1 I •../%.I Ill l: hl'•1 1 i J • I 1 1 I i 1 'I1•I . I11 I.1 1• - 1 I�1 1 1 I••1..• I r l t 1.1 ' I 1 � 1 11_ 161`,1111 1'/,bli I !'.Jf: 4!I in •, 1 .JACK• r�r•�n I I vi tvi �M Isl• I..) S St1ti;i PACII It. L11AS 1 111GHWAY �1•li i i sllrlr� /, 11•r , y n,/,r 1• 1 r,l (`r•r Luullrull 111...pr1n 'If, •.Ix/f (••. tlt;v/r to Waloul 11.i •.Pucl:'S �.. :1rtJ IlloCl: Wlf�t, 1lorking Levr+t No.1 192 Spaces To•lat Spaces.. 263 SpoteS u I C I I. tl i re.,r c,. + I •r��a• Parkhg Level- h*k FAiNg 1e2 eu. . Newcomb/Tl lots -hird BInck WPrt City of Huntington Beach Inter-Department Communication f . F To: Steve May, Principal Engineer, Engineering Services Division From: . Jim Otterson ' Traffic_Engineer Subject: Fifth Street Parking Date: October 20, 1992 In May and June of 1992, Robert Bein, William Frost and Associates (RBF) performed'a survey of existing parking spaces on public streets in the Downtown Specific Plan Area. Fifth Street was restriped on Wednesday, September 9, 1992, per the striping plan prepared by ASL_ Consulting Engineers (dated November 20, 1991 ). Prior to installation of the striping plan on September 9th, Fifth Street had the following number of'parking spaces: Fifth Strect, PC14 to Walnut Avenue: 17 spaces Fifth Street, Walnut Avenue to Olive Avenue: .24 spaces Fifth Street, Olive Avenue to Orange Avenue: 27 spaces .r Fifth Street, Total Parking: 68 spaces (Prior to September 9, 1992) The parking survey performed by RBF counted the spaces on Fifth Street as though the ASL striping plan was in place at the time of the survey. Following the implementation of the ASL striping plan, the following parking spaces exist on Fifth Street (which is reflected in the RBF survey as "existing parking"): "Fifth Street, PCH to Walnut Avenue: 38 spaces I=ifth Street, Walnut Avenue to Olive Avenue: 39 spaces Fifth Street, Olive Avenue to Orange Avenue: 39 spaces Fifth Street, Total Parking: 116 spaces (After September 9, 1992) Should you have any questions regarding this subject, please see me at your convenience. cc: Ray Silver, Assistant City Administrator rara Kaiser, Director, Economic Development Department e Adams, Director, Community Development Department Louis F. Sandoval, Director, Public Works Department - J== Robert Eichblatt, City Engineer } RCA ROUTING SHEET INITIATING DEPARTMENT: Economic Development SUBJECT: Block 104 & 105 Owner Participant Selection COUNCIL MEETING DATE: Aril 6, 1998 ...........__...._ ... ............................. ............._........................................................... ...................._......................... ........._..................................... . _....... . ... RCA ATTACHMENTS S aT S 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 Not Applicable 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) Not Applicable Commission, Board or Committee Report (If applicable) Not Applicable Findings/Conditions for Approval and/or.Denial Not Applicable _.. ._ ._. -- _.... _............................................................................................................................................................ . .... ........._ . ... ..................._............................................................................................. T1 �:FORMI SING TV. . _ . . . . . .... ...... .. . ._............._..__....._....._......_.........................................__.......... ............ ....._.......... . ._............ ...............................__ .._......_. REVIEWED RETURNED: . . FORWARDED ... _. ... .... ... ... . .. _ _. .... . Administrative Staff Assistant City Administrator Initial City Administrator Initial City Clerk ... .............................................. .........................._... .......... ......._-_.. ..........._.._..... ......... _. ......... ........ ......... ._....... EXPLANATION FOR RETURN O:F ITEM: Only)(Below Space For City Clerk's Use RCA Author: D. Biggs X 5909 A� RECEIVED, . • i Z AND MADE A P;-,RT O-THE RECORD AT THE COUNCIL MEETING 9s OFFICE 0:=THE is it Y CLERK CONNIE BROCKWAY,CITY CLERK Block 104/Block (l 0 City Council Study Session April 6,1998 Si0.a History of the Prod' �: June Workshop »s:: > .. Basic Strategy ......<`, • June Workshop to discern._ • Block 104- possible strategies for the sites —Separate Block 104&105 • Block 105- -Block 105 being pre-entitled —Solicit Block 105 Developer proposals in future Slid.3 SU.4 June Workshop::.;:::;;;:> June Workshop::;:;;::; { Block 104 Block 104 Alternative Development Strategy Options Alternative Development Strategy Options • Eventual rehab by current property owners/ no Agency involvement • Agency acquisition of Main Street with a new developer • Agency facilitate reconstruction with current owners sua s sua e 1 T=!f T _ 3 1 :..y-r�` i`'i Si.._'+• ' i --"2 bi F' ��-•z '�.�`4 ' f6fl`}) i.-j '..t^_^T^5i+. `�1 --�.-.c f i•'.``"^ ' #-.• }�t It`a 4 oz Ll ti t , �.d��a, bra — --r• .,��, ,�% � Ili PAPA JOE*S PIZZA cSI j J=LL o.a.+....D��� 3„ �g ,�..���k..-�..,•r ,.,,�y,ae .. ;�, G' r� L" w.N-�ra_asil 2`k a t 1 4 sx � z�l 1 Y F ll; t OELIlERY t°... SPFGHUTI •; PHiI t 5tr kteC.iJ � � 'I"N - .n ;u , r n t I 11 CS" '� `•' -0�t� z `ItA'tl� -n. 11 j t1 > NI ♦ Y V°'Lh1r4 VJ f"r r x, `LKu t?'t- 7`•/ - ty s,?`u'.,F � ! ,+ . �:, wP,�" -*��4+�ra'��w FS�,i-s a�:S`t b 'X�^4 7^,!� 4'H �✓ :c,'�`�r �t�c S. f,� . 7� Ci a n ,5 s ,�a.. "t{', ' �72Y1 �;:. r� t t { 1 r �`�' ir`� rt h��q�1 e ,�t >'ys 14�`,v,,i v /''✓ `�'r/ •., .t - �� a .o �3L { `' 'y'SI i d- '�S z�4 �t x r+ Y`+ nt��L��'�� !'tn Vy�� +p,+3",,t Vt,.{ ,✓ a i aF l� I tr 4 b �:. i k�`;Z: - "'2 ats�� y � ° ti'.,•,>ac�`',A'¢,�w ".'c w,-"s .�'r'1 ` -s�f. '".s� `ax r�`'�C� v ,� �.l ;�` T''J•r `i' ri$. .3' t: '�° fr't" � � "°✓r �wir ..+�'F`, � S.t'�. {er i r..�°+'�i. -.,a'z 1 .�.tt� ftif ¢+a ?.-r> 7s• .cc'J a.,wn .a�, ,u.. �r + e#'rh.,,"1S}«4{J C""t'n'�%{. - x n, �,• .+ +�.. fe 1 f �3,+�C���.4 a:.{�Jv L�G'.�S d� vms5,(S°k � Ji-y v� +r"rS.ti�iY+Y�r> ^'` S I C �ti SY • e �� �� � � � ;(•.• ice` �. �1 YS#x'''F z!��s, $ •"+ �y„�5.� pit �' � "3"'E r���tt'7�"`+�{ Sit!' �6I; d� LL t i � � � I.• if_��:�.. .� :]_:�.. d _.,y �f �,� � Gal. _ j1) Brach i Bettli _ r Xi id .da MOM 1 { � � r Gny I LC--'`+F�.--fi .. .• ,�i L.�eAt � � f��.4;�''. 77 --Yocum—��--`` a ,r.r S l ■-• e t�2 �+:. '-� ""' � I' :.vxu�a� 11l'�"C�i �l Car��: �. �'rt$": rv'°r' '. tt li �_'�'�p'*."•�=�==�.-�«yfil 4'�1"lk��p . � �d v3y�q. `c.- A+iti+.. (� S ,,+-y ��`of`t,�.rt-•r riz�rr��+ q,�y^,tt, 'rc 9 It � 3 � -�, t✓. x�: �I `" � wc.tiy"��"tS-S""3�_.'��: S�1 IS`r`ik�t' 4 t . � �'ti��l � � ,� r r r` #__,--� t y�' �,s t�}, �� `•__.._�.�, `1 t`�t3r�tk �r�t��;� ,+{�-e!r, ^ r� i<rt�"��ta�anaoc�,taC ✓'..�a f*' � r<... Lr®o( 1 M WIN 2.iutj't'' -117,511m M. 01 n ctk+ed+p_t �. ( 1 t (� tl3t Inin��eJ�„}ice '�1 ,n n �i _fit i ,ei et n° `ni �i�y etl•w,i;, .4 Al ® 1011•g111111��I01 IU� ,tC -- !�� E �'71'�t��l..: �wt �f�y�;��G 1'���.4'u•i�'� �ai]1�ni♦�y��11�1'.;,4�.�t ��� gyp' � r y +°'+Ir•Y�'f � ` 1 �i �� ;� A �'41^.(w.ui /i.�t� 'Sy_• , x•6 i� r�s.� �- 1 , '� t;(.. icy L y�j,r ',.rs r.�y 'y311• ..�@.. 6;l f"'�,,t1.��: _ s�'�.d�.ai+cs ,�'�'••,.�((i�t� i,�,l :..r'` J.d.: ��°��It�l � 1L:`� + I% 0.4 y,Y87t t��, ® s. r E► ;_' a p ��\\�\ x r''1�1., Qi y � r.111 , 4T�iI ? \�it �rto 4PIS 'i11/�`>/ � 105 i d~ r i` FREE CELIYERY i r £ ° r� y ij + �3 Gr '�' +ir SPALHETTi _�/G 4 j LASTGh0. LH! t v �,� y a �fi fr sri� �✓ �TZ� T'f � /�f� y[ i {'C`t P224, ,1�.. ° 1'N t + h .1J y?a} 'e fJ�X6+ 'v�J l�%`Cr✓1 � r ` �+ iL �;t^',.� '�� !rr ?rA .-S'`v Y S/M/ ,�f�l aW'��� �{' / , �'� f ;} t�s zY ri C �aM�t«Frs�'�.x,,ir t��\tr✓.\a /'..r`'�l'��r'n��,+'�✓_1 _ jt_ �.�' d �' v � ,ca y� �r F ��-r � s ica�:!u�w}a�#���.K�'�lr�, �✓.�/-/.'vr a ,-"e' rrt ��'w alit' Y'4� 'tt I�t �r+� h,_ �s jrr✓Q`�,�,Pe RY,a,r ��# 1Fx,,4a4r t;c 4 r, �: T i i,t Y ♦y.l r y j(t+i t ra i r'f.p, ,f•r-t�wj,�t+�'S��' -�lt y,a ZJ�T:��."* 2L,j 1, ', ;I 2 '�` ��, �Ii}''4•/ �".i �.t J r Y vy t S �'+ J���r�'C.�''t�t'c `�eE �'�I l4 2 ��/ � L. �� \ \ -,�L,t3:%1.w+,r.._..l;:.n,3...Fa+�.r M yua>��•r�nYa�,L^B i,Xyr„f,"�,✓'d' r.k:�.�%�� r Lai ji I 1' n14 `r",k I1I11I1 ®® III 11 I, 111I I11111 i111 - Ill� llll�lll � ll CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency REPLACEMENT HOUSING PLAN For Block 104-105 April 23, 1999 REPLACEMENT HOUSING PLAN BLOCK 104-105 Statement of Purpose and Objective This Replacement Housing Plan is prepared in accordance with California Health and Safety Code Section 33413 and 33413.5. The project consists of the acquisition and demolition of nine occupiable units. The City of Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency (Agency) would replace all occupied and vacant occupiable low- or moderate- income dwelling units demolished or converted to a use other than as low- or moderate-income housing in connection with the redevelopment of Block 104-105, located in the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Project, Main-Pier subarea. The properties that may be acquired includes nine rental units. Included in said structures are seven one-bedroom units and two, two-bedroom units. These units are subject to replacement in accordance with the legal requirement of the California Community Redevelopment Law (Health and Safety Code Section 33413 et seq.). All replacement housing will be provided within four years of commencement of demolition. Currently, the Agency is carrying a surplus of replacement units for all low and moderate income categories. The needed replacement units are currently available with the required number of bedrooms. Further, the Agency anticipates that approximately ten to thirty-five units will be produced in the next six to twelve months and that those units could also be counted as replacement units. Project Property Description The project property location is delineated in a map (Exhibit 1) attached. Each property is listed by address with the parcel number and number of bedrooms (Exhibit 2). Pursuant to the California Community Redevelopment Law (Health and Safety Code Section 33413 et seq.), all occupied and vacant occupiable units will be replaced with replacement housing units. Replacement Housinp,Units Exhibit 3 delineates the location (and number of bedrooms) where the replacement units are located. It is anticipated that the Agency's current surplus of replacement units will be utilized for the nine replacement housing units. Exhibit 4 is a list of anticipated projects that are expected to add additional replacement units to the current inventory of replacement housing. Income Level of Replacement Units Over eighty percent of the replacement dwelling units will be affordable to and occupied exclusively by very-low-income tenants. This exceeds the requirement that seventy-five percent of the replacement units must be available at affordable housing cost to persons in the same income level as the persons displace from the dwelling units that are being removed from the low- or moderate-income housing market. Fundiniz Source The Agency has committed(or has available to commit) sufficient housing funds, in addition to the surplus of replacement units noted above, to finance the acquisition and rehabilitation of the required replacement housing units. Low/Moderate Income Assurance All agreements related to replacement housing units will contain a covenant guaranteeing 30 years of low and moderate income affordability, as required by the state Health and Safety Code. Article 34 Compliance The replacement housing to be provided pursuant to this Replacement Housing Plan does not require the approval of the voters pursuant to Article 34 of the California Constitution, in that all of the replacement housing units fall within exceptions to the definition of"low-rent housing projects" in California Health and Safety Code 37001. The assisted units consist of the acquisition and rehabilitation of existing units or those previously occupied by low-income households. Further, an Article 34 election was held and approved by voters on June 3, 1980. Measure "L" allowed for the construction of very low income housing projects as defined by Article 34. Availability of Plan In accordance with Community Redevelopment Law, a copy of the Replacement Housing Plan will be available for review and comment by the general public at the City of Huntington Beach City Hall, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California, in the office of the City Clerk located on the second floor. 2 of 2 G:\BROWN\REDEV\104105\REP Project Map "�,fi -_ '� zf -. � � � �5` _•� � � �m� �s- 5,�� --_�3% 5 �s�� ter-"��'�.[ x"� -#'��._':` Site Map WALNUT to7S• ............ :; tY7s• n 28 27 26 21 _: {--— 16 `22 21 17 ups• 18 ----- c--•— �-_ 2� W —•• ;�, 12 jt n —12 :11 107�W.— �[ ' . 10 4. s ' 8=1 z1 - :'� is•` �. s� zs• sj'_ .i ¢I 3�2 I 1 J. BEA 508 PCH 470 PCH' PACIFIC COAST HIGPiWAY 16 i Description of Units Removed 'i ' _ -__ "'x.a- _.w aF - x" ` t.,. r 4: R x r,s —+� r°-r' a - .3 r - n i �ra �`{--..5• �a�u.....: UNITS TO BE DEMOLISHED AND REPLACED BLOCK 104-105 Address Households Units/Bedrooms 470 Pacific Coast Highway 12 6 (1 br. or studio) 2 (2 br.) 508 Pacific Coast Highway 1 1 (1 br.) Note: Exact number of units, bedrooms and households subject to further verification by Agency staff. Replacement Unit Information i 03/25/1999 17:04 213622520/0 KEYSER MARSTON L* PAGE 25 TABLE 1 B EXISTING REPLACEMENT HOUSING UNITS OBLIGATION/UNITS PROVIDED AFFORDABLE HOUSING STRATEGY CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH Very-Low Lower Moderate Income Income Income . I. Obllgation as of 9/30/98' 1-6drm Units 63 37 10 2-Bdrm Units 68 16 17 3-Bdrm Units. 6 4 7 Total Obllgation as of 9/30198 137 57 34 11. Units Provided as of 9/30/982 w 1-Bdrm Units 127 2 22 2-6drm Units 39 68 39 3-13drm Units 3 4 10 Total Completed Units as of 9130198 169 74 71 Ill. Surplus/(Shortfall) 1-Bdrm Units 64 (35) 12 2-13drm Units (29) 52 22 3-Bdrm Units (3) 0 3 IV.1 Total Sur lus/ Shortfall; 32 17 37 See Appendix e-Table to for project listing See Appendix 8-Table 2A for project listing PREPARED BY:KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIATES,INC. FILE NAME-Hsgatrat;REPHSG;U24109 MAR-25-1999 17119 213G225204 98% P.25 03/25/1999 17:04 2136225200 KEYSER MARSTON Lo PAGE 26 TABLE 2A REPLACEMENT HOUSING PRODUCTION AFFORDABLE HOUSING STRATEGY CITY OF 14UNTINGTON BEACH Units Produced as of 9/30198 1-Bdrm 2-Bdrm 3-B rm Total I'. Very-Low Income Emerald Cove 90 0 0. 90 313 11 th Street- 5 4 0 g Barton 7812 0 4 0 4 Five Points Senior Villas 32 0 0 32 Keelson 17372 0 2 2 d Keelson 17382. 0 3 1 4 Koledo 17361 0 5 0 5 Koledo 17371 0 5 0 5 Queens 1742Z'. 0 4 0 4 Queens 17432 0 4 0 4 Koledo 17291` 0 4 0 4 Koledo 17351 0 4 0 4 Total 127 39 3 169 II. _Lower Income Ocean View Estates 0 24 0 24 Brisas del Mar 2 8 4 14 Utica Avenue 725-731-- 0 36 0 36 Total 2 68 4 74 III. Moderate Income• Brisas del Mar 6 14 10 30 Five Points Senior Villas. 16 0 0 16 Park Pacific Villas 0 25 0 25 Total 22 39 10 71 PREPARED BY:KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIATES,INC. FILE NAME:Hsgstat:PRODCTN:3124100 63/25/1999 17:04 213622520* KEYSER MARSTON LA. PAGE 27 TABLE 2B PROJECTED FUTURE REPLACEMENT HOUSING OBLIGATION/UNITS PROVIDED AFFORDABLE HOUSING STRATEGY CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH Very-Low Lower Moderate Income Income Income I. Existing Surplus/(Shortfall)' 1-8drm Units 64 (35) 12 2-Bdrm Units (29) 52 22 3-Bdrm Units (3) 0 3 Total Existing Surplus/(Shortfall) 32 17 37 11. Projected Future Obligation` 1-8drm Units 11 1 0 2-Bdrm Units 78 7 5 3-Bdrm Units 7 3 2 Total Projected Obligation 96 11 7 III. Projected Surplus/(Shortfall) 1-Bdrm Units 53 (36), 12 2-Bdrm Units (107) 45 17 3-Bdrm Units (10) (3) 1 lV.Total Projected Sur l"usl Shortfall 64 . 6 30 See Appendix B-Table 1A and 2A for pmJett nsting ` See Appendix B-Table to for project Asting PREPARED BY:KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIATES,INC. FILE NAME:Hsgstmt:REPHSG:3125/09 63/25/1999 17:04 21362252010 KEYSER MARSTON LA• PAGE 28 TABLE 3 OUTSTANDING REPLACEMENT OBLIGATION AS OF 9/30/98 AFFORDABLE HOUSING STRATEGY CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 1-13drm 2-Bdrm 3-Bdrm I. Very-Low Income Current Obligation' (63) (68) (6) Units Provided as of 9/30/98 127 39: 3 Total Existing.Surplus/(Shortfall)` 64 (29) (3) It. Lower Income Current Obligation` (37) (16) (4) Units Provided as of 9/30/98` 2 68 4. Total Existing Surplus/(Shortfall) (35) 52 0 d Ill. Moderate Income Current Obligation' (10) (17) (7) Units Provided as of 9/30/981' 22 39 10. Total Existing Surplus/(Shortfall) 12 22 3 IV.Outstandlng (Obligation) Reallocation' Very-Low Income 29 (29) (3) Low Income 0 52 0 Moderate Income 12 22 3 See Appendix B-Table 1A See Appendix B-Table 2A ' Units have been reallocated to maximize replacement housing obligation fulfillment: PREPARED BY:KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIATES.INC. FILE NAME:Hsgslrxl;PROOCTN.3/25M -14-7c^,-Jc-n A 00., o '70 Future Agency Replacement Units IBM - ..' £ _ z;. x __v" --:�� � 0 Future Agency Housing Projects Project Type Units/(Bedrooms) Income 1111 Ash Street Acq-Rehab 6 (3 2 br.) Very low (3 3 br.) Oakview Rentals Acq-Rehab 4 to 12 (2 br.) Very low/Low Habitat for Humanity New Const. 3 (2 br.) Very low Bowen Court Seniors New Consfi. 21 (1 br.) Very low Current Project Not Included In "Current" Replacement List: 11111 Sher Lane Acq./Rehab 33 (17 1 br.)• Very low (16 2 br.) • • RCA ROUTING SHEET INITIATING DEPARTMENT: Economic Development SUBJECT: Replacement Housing Plan COUNCIL MEETING DATE: May 1999 RCA ATTACHMENTS STATUS Ordinance (w/exhibits & legislative draft if applicable) Not Applicable Resolution (w/exhibits & legislative draft if applicable) Attached Tract Map, Location Map and/or other Exhibits Not Applicable 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 Cit Attorne Not Applicable Financial Impact Statement Unbud et, over $5,000 Not Applicable Bonds If applicable) Not Applicable Staff Report If applicable) Attached Commission, Board or Committee Report If applicable) Not Applicable Find in s/Conditions for Approval and/or Denial Not Applicable EXPLANATION FOR MISSING ATTACHMENTS REVIEWED RETURNED FORWARDED Administrative Staff Assistant City Administrator Initial City Administrator Initial City Clerk EXPLANATION FOR RETURN OF ITEM: SpaceOnly) RCA Author: RECEIVE; CITY CLERK CITY OF NUP TlPfG+'ca d Br_ EACH..CA 1994 I1AY -3 F 4: Zt, Honorable Mayor, Dr. Peter Green City of Huntington Beach Members, Huntington Beach Redevelopment agency May 3, 1999 Dear Mayor Green: After our first official meeting as the newly elected project Area Committee for the Main Pier/Downtown Redevelopment area, several things concern the PAC committee in general. The main issue is the lack of time allowed for the Committee to see and review certain documents regarding the scope of the plan for downtown and specifically blocks 104 and 105. What is the plan the agency has in mind for these two blocks as well as the entire downtown area? The committee has requested additional information from staff, trying to understand the direction the Council/Redevelopment agency is moving. What happened to the "Village Concept" for downtown? The project that we hear about, in rumors only, appears to have little or no relationship to the Main pier/Downtown specific Plan. The Replacement Housing Plan that was presented to the PAC Committee was full of numbers and figures that meant little to the group. Given the history of poor treatment of low income residential tenants in the downtown, this document needs to be more specific in the treatment of low-income tenants. What are the City of Huntington Beachs' real plans for these people? It's not good enough to simply say that there is enough housing stock for these people when we all know what the true rental market is like in terms of vacancy factors. The Replacement Housing Plan appears short in certain areas of low-income housing replacement. If the committee is truely to make an intelligent decision regarding the use of eminent domain that effects the lives of hundreds of low- income tenants and residential property owners of single family homes then the committee needs more.time in the process. The worse mistake the Redevelopment Agency could make at this time, in an attempt to "steamroll" this project, would not allow the committee time for evaluation and reviewing all of the requested documents. The "Replacement Housing Plan" needs further study and revisions to make it fair and reasonable to those people of limited income and means. In general, the PAC has major issues and concerns that need to be addressed. For example: the PAC is not in agreement with staff on the negative declaration prepared for this admendment. Before the Redevelopment Agency takes any official action or approves and documents that affects the Main Pier/Downtown Specific Plan they must be reviewed and approved by the Project Area Committee. The PAC requests an additional 30 days so that all members may review and ask questions of Staff. Sincerely, Robert Bolen, Chairman Project Area Committee Copies: Eldon Bagstad, Vice Chairman Gary Haas David Castenholz James Lane Bjorn Joffee David Biggs CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH InterOffice Communication Economic Development Department c TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers VIA: RaySilver, City Administrator Y , c--,-•�, FROM: David C. Biggs, Economic Development Direct o s DATE: May 3, 1999 C., SUBJECT: BLOCKS 104 & 105 AFFORDABLE HOUSING PLAN (AGENDA ITEM E-11) On Wednesday, April 28, 1999, the Project Area Committee (PAC) had its initial meeting. On the PAC Agenda for review and comment was the proposed Replacement Housing Plan for Blocks 104 & 105. The proposed.Replacement Housing Plan is on the Agency agenda as item E-11 for Monday's Council/Agency meeting. The PAC opted to request that the Redevelopment Agency defer its consideration of this item to a future date. A deferral of the Replacement Housing Plan would allow the PAC to have the proposed Replacement Housing Plan on the PAC agenda for its next scheduled meeting of May 12, 1999. State Law requires that a Replacement Housing Plan be approved at least 30 days prior to the execution of a Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA). The proposed DDA with CIM for Blocks 104 & 105 is scheduled for consideration on June 7, 1999. As such, if the Redevelopment Agency desired to defer action on the proposed Replacement Housing Plan to its next regular meeting of May 17, 1999, the Joint Public Hearing to consider the CIM DDA could still be held on June 7, 1999. However, in the event the DDA were approved on June 7, 1999, it could not be executed until June 16, 1999, or nine days after the approval date. This nine-day period would be slightly longer than the normal period it takes the Agency to execute a document after approval. However, such procedure would apply with applicable legal requirements. It should be noted that the PAC is not required to approve or disapprove the Replacement Housing Plan. Any specific comments on the Replacement Housing Plan by the PAC will, in any event, be forwarded to the Redevelopment Agency for your information in considering the Replacement Housing Plan. 0 A ;rizi Aa; The Replacement Housing Plan is necessary to demonstrate the Agency has a plan to provide the required replacement housing within four years of when existing affordable housing units are demolished. It is a reconciliation of the number and type of units needed and provided, it is not a relocation plan which outlines where specific relocatees would be relocated nor the types of benefits which would be provided if displacement occurs. Please feel free to call upon me if I can answer any questions. xc: Project Area Committee Murray Kane, Agency Special Council Gus Duran, Housing &Redevelopment Manager Stephen Kohler, Project Manager Jim Simon,RSG OA CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH InterOffice Communication Economic Development Department TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members VIA: Ray Silver, City Administrator FROM: David C. Biggs, Director of Economic Development DATE: May 17, 1999 SUBJECT: Project Area Committee/Blocks 1041105 Replacement Housing Plan The Project Area Committee (PAC) had requested that the Council/Agency continue its consideration of the Replacement Housing Plan (Plan) for Blocks 104/105. On May 3, 1999, the Council/Agency continued its consideration of the Plan to May 17, 1999. On May 12, 1999, the Plan was on the PAC agenda for its subsequent review. The PAC chose to take no position on the Plan. Comments by PAC Memberabc su ed more on the need for a specific relocation plan and its operational elements for:3lcicks 104 and 105 rather than the more technical Replacement Housing Plan. (Copiesr of-tle. Meeting Notes for these PAC meetings are attached). A number of suggestions were made regarding ways to better present the information in the Plan. As such, staff la 'rs; u, developed the attached summary of.the current status regarding replacement housing including projects now underway. =` J Staff will be prepared to answer questions at the Council/Agency meeting. DCB:ls Attachments `= n�r Ir� _.• c� r � wr ***EXCERPT FROM*** eating Note PROJECT AREA COMMITTEE WEDNESDAY, MAY 12, 1999 6:30 PM CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS In attendance: Eldon Bagstad, Bob Bolen, David Castenholz, Gary Haas, Bjorn Joffee, Jim Lane, David Biggs, Gus Duran, Stephen Kohler,Herb Fauland,John Cutler,Murray Kane,Jim Simon, Linda Suraci I. Call to Order: Bagstad, Bolen, Castenholz, Haas, Joffee, Lane Present Bagstad,Bolen, Castenholz,Haas, Lane, Joffee (arrived at 6:50 PM) 2. Public Comments 3. Approval of PAC Meeting Notes 4. Conflict of Interest Legal Opinion - Murray Kane 5. Downtown Specific Plan and Zoning Overview - Fauland 6. Replacement Housing Plan - Biggs The City Council delayed its recommendation by two weeks. Committee Members reviewed the list of Section 8 Affordable Housing units and rental ranges. Staff was asked to include the current availability status on the list by the next PAC meeting. Upon review of the list, Joffe noted that the only affordable units within close proximity to the area being discussed were Via Corsica, with higher rental rates than the rest listed. Staff noted that when currently proposed projects were included, that a surplus exists in the potentially impacted categories. It was requested that the Replacement Housing table be updated to incorporate the currently proposed projects. Biggs indicated that the Committee's concerns would be clarified further and presented to the City Council. It was noted that the Disposition and Development Agreement for Blocks 104/105 would be considered during a public hearing at the Council meeting of June 70. Lane asked for a presentation on the CIM project at a future PAC meeting. Biggs stated that if the group wanted to provide a formal review of the Replacement Housing Plan a motion was required, otherwise draft Meeting notes from this meeting would be provided to Council. No action was taken. 7. Why Eminent Domain? - Biggs 8. Overview of Eminent Domain - Jim Simon & John Cutler 9. Adjournment to May 26, 1999 @ 6:30 PM in Meeting Room B-6 sting Notee s PROJECT AREA COMMITTEE WEDNESDAY, APRIL 289 1999 6:30 PM CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS In attendance: Eldon Bagstad, Bob Bolen, Bjorn Joffee, Jim Lane, David Biggs, Gus Duran, Stephen Kohler, Greg Brown,Murray Kane,Jim Simon,Linda Suraci 1. Call to Order: Bagstad, Bolen, Castenholz, Haas, Joffee, Lane Absent: Castenholz and Haas 2. Opening Remarks — David Biggs Biggs welcomed Committee Members and described the process to elect a Chairman and Vice Chairman and a brief overview of the overall agenda. 3. Election of Officers — David Biggs Chairman: Lane made a motion to nominate Bob Bolen; the motion was seconded by Bagstad; (VOTE: 4-0) -Bob Bolen was elected Chairman of PAC. Vice Chairman: Lane made a motion to nominate Eldon Bagstad; the motion was seconded by Bolen; (VOTE: 4-0)-Eldon Bagstad was elected Vice Chairman of PAC. 4. Meeting Notes — David Biggs Biggs indicated that beginning with tonight's meeting, Action Minutes would be taken and distributed with the packets preceding future meetings. It was mentioned that Gary Haas may have since decided not to participate in the Project Area Committee, and staff will contact him for verification. Bagstad asked Biggs if legal counsel for the City would be the only legal representation at the meetings. Biggs responded that Murray Kane is available as Agency Special Counsel, however, it might be feasible that the City Attorney's office assigns a staff representative, if needed. Bagstad asked if it was legally admissible to tape record future meetings and Biggs indicated affirmatively. 5. Summary of Brown Act — David Biggs and Murray Kane The Brown Act applies to Local Government and addresses the quorum restrictions of elected bodies. With a six-person Committee, four persons would designate a quorum for the PAC. Biggs also stated that no serial meetings were permissible by the Brown Act (e.g., two members discuss an issue, and then two other members discuss,etc.). .• Bolen asked Kane about the effect on the Committee if, in fact, the position held by Haas were vacated. Kane responded that there are no Bylaws adopted by the PAC, and therefore, if the Committee stands with a total of five members—three members would constitute a quorum. Meeting agendas are required to be posted in compliance with the Brown Act, for public review 72 hours in advance of the meeting. It was determined that PAC meeting agendas will be posted by 5:00 PM on the Friday preceding the Wednesday evening meetings. 6. Financial Disclosure Requirements — Biggs and Kane Must be completed within thirty days of the Council action approving the PAC. Conflict of Interest Form 700 is due to the City Clerk's office by May 19, 1999. Biggs offered Committee Members who need assistance to complete the Forms to contact Stephen Kohler at City Hall. It was mentioned that Haas might have believed he had a potential city conflict by participating on the PAC. Kane stated that he is preparing a legal opinion that would assure committee members as to the Fair Political Practice Commission that would allow for a good-faith reliance exception for any potential violation. 7. Proposed Amendment — David Biggs and Jim Simon Biggs referred to the Redevelopment Agency Action approved by the Agency on April 191h that referred the proposed 1999 Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan to the Planning Commission and PAC. Jim Simon, of Rosenow Spevacek Group, City consultant that prepared the Plan Amendment, gave a brief overview of the document and noted the redlined version that easily highlighted the language changes to the Plan. Historical discussion ensued on the previously elected PAC in the early 1980's and Biggs stated that the PAC is asked to use this document as its base point for language and make its recommendations, accordingly. Biggs hopes to get into detailed discussion regarding eminent domain, area by area,to reduce the area if possible. Bolen requested copies of the Redevelopment Plan and staff provided bound copies. Copy of Eminent Domain Law and Procedures was requested and staff will mail by Friday of this week to all Committee Members. 8. Blocks 104/105 Replacement Housing Plan — David Biggs Biggs reported that thirty days prior to approval of a Disposition and Development Agreement, the Agency has to consider the approval of a Replacement Housing Plan. The DDA for Blocks 104/105 is scheduled for Agency consideration on June 7 h, and therefore,on May P, the Council will be asked to approve a Housing Replacement Plan, as required. As such, the proposed Replacement Housing Plan is being provided to the PAC for review and comment. Biggs outlined the purpose of a Replacement Housing Plan as being a numerical reconciliation on the Agency's ability to meet is replacement housing requirements over a four-year period. It is not a specific relocation plan or program for persons who may be displaced. Biggs also pointed out that the Replacement Housing Plan does not specifically relate to the broader issue of the proposed Plan Amendment. PAC Members believe it is premature at this time to make recommen-dations/conclusions or an endorsement on this Replacement Housing Plan. Biggs reiterated the parameters of the Project Area Committee as an advisory body to (1) make recommendations on proposed Plan Amendment and (2) to be charged with identifying impacts on low-moderate income residents. Consensus of PAC membership concerns was expressed as follows: • Too little time to review and make recommendation/endorsement to Council by Monday night—May 3rd; • How does this affect rest of area. Biggs and Kane stated the need for PAC to separate the process of the Replacement Housing Plan from the Plan Amendment process. These are two separate issues e.g., this Replacement Housing Plan does not impact the PAC's decision on any the proposed Plan Amendment. A lengthy discussion ensued regarding Agency relocation obligations for displaced tenants and business owners. It was noted that this would be a topic for future discussion. 9. Public Comments David Winn(property owner on 2nd Street) • Believes that a trend is being established by Blocks 104/105; • Inquired how to obtain a Certificate of Compliance to protect him from eminent domain. (Biggs directed those interested to the Economic Development Department). Frank Cracchiolo(property owner) • Asked for name of originating author of AB 1290; • Asked for a current list of properties now available for affordable housing and corresponding rental rates; • Asked how environmental determination will be made on parking for Blocks 104/105? How could this committee make recommendation? (Biggs responded that the entitlements for Blocks 104/105 would trigger the Planning Department to prepare environmental document to the Planning Commission for its consideration in the fall. The proposed Negative Declaration for the proposed Plan Amendment is on the Amendment only. Dewey Davide(property owner) • What timeframe is included within a Certificate of Compliance process? (Kane responded a 3-6 month process; noting that single-family homes are different from commercial development). • Who makes final decision on granting a Certificate of Compliance? (Staff s response: City Council does;new projects are excluded from area). Ralph Peck (Block 101 property owner) • He has tenants who could afford to pay higher rent who choose to live in his building. • Why is trash allowed to buildup on property next door to his building, constituting blight conditions downtown? Lane expressed concern regarding the"shrinking"PAC, and Biggs assured all that his staff would verify intentions of Committee Members not present. Motion by Lane to compose a letter to the City Council requesting additional time for PAC review of Replacement Housing Plan; Motion seconded by Bagstad. VOTE: 4-0. Committee Members should forward agenda items to Economic Development staff for incorporation into Meeting Agendas by Thursday, preceding the required Friday deadline for Brown Act compliance/posting. Motion by Bagstad to adjourn the meeting; Motion seconded by Lane. VOTE: 4-0. Meeting adjourned at 9:30 PM. Next meeting is scheduled for May 12''at 6:30 PM. xc: Mayor and City Council Members Project Area Committee Members Economic Development Staff • 03/25/1999 17:04 213622520� KEYSER MARSTON I * PAGE 25 TABLE I EXISTING REPLACEMENT HOUSING UNITS OBLIGATION/UNITS PROVIDED AFFORDABLE HOUSING STRATEGY CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH Very-Low Lower Moderate Income Income Income I. Obllgetion as of 9/30193' 1-Bdrm Units 63 37 10 2-edrm Units 68 16 17 3-Bdrm Units 6 4 7 Total Obllgation as of 9/30198 137 57 34 11. Units Provided as of W30/982 1-6drm Units + 3�' 127 = (6S 2 22 2-6drm Units 4- 31 39 70 3.68 39 3-6drm Units 3 3 (0 4 10 Total Completed Units as of 9/30198 169 % 2q( 74 71 111, Surplusl(Shortfall) 1-Bdrm Units 64 (35) 12 2-Bdrm Units (29) 17, 4,3 52 s s f 22 3-Bdrm Units (3) 0 3 1V.Totat Surplus/(Shortfall): 32 17 20 37 1 �1 i' See Appendix 8•Table 1A for project listing See Appendix B-Table 7A for project listing PREPARED BY:KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIATES,INC. FILE NAME-1-1593trat:REPHSG:3124/99 MAR-25-1999 17=19 2136225204 997 P.25 Future Agency Housing Projects Proliect Type Units/(Bedrooms) Income 1111 Ash Street Acq-Rehab 6 (3 2 br.) Very low (3 3 br.) Oakview Rentals Acq-Rehab 4 to 12 (2 br.) Very low/Low Habitat for Humanity New Const. 3 (2 br.) Very low Bowen Court Seniors New Const. 21 (1 br.) Very low Current Project Not Included In "Current' Replacement List: 11111 Sher Lane Acq./Rehab 33 (17 1 br.) Very low (16 2 br.) 3 3 el 3 3 21 �: tG ( � Redevelopment Law Requirement City of Huntington Beach Replacement Housing Plan Redevelopment Law Requires a Replacement Housing Plan: f - —When low and moderate income housing units are Blocks 104 & 105 expected to be demolished as part of a redevelopment project City Council Meeting •Units must be replaced with like units according to income and number of bedrooms May 17, 1999 (F-4) —Plan must be approved by Agency Board not less than 30 days prior to the execution of the DDA 5/17/99 2 Units to be Removed Replacement:Units • Redevelopment Law Requires=the • The Plan Identifies An Estimated Number Replacement of Units: of Units to be Removed and the Number of —At least 75%of RDA's total replacement Households for Blocks 104\105: obligation must be at same income level and —Nine Rental Units they must be replaced within four years. • Seven are 1 Bedroom&Two 2 Bedroom —Agency currently has surplus of replacement units —Estimated Thirteen Households(Renters) •34 units now being rehabilitated or constructed in •All are Presumed to be Very Low&Low Income housing projects sponsored by the Redevelopment residents. Agency. 511799 3 511799 r -a -Q J --C err Replacement Housing-Plan • Is Not A Relocation Plan Any Questions? � T • PAC Review is Required;but PAC does Not Have to Approve or Disapprove of Plan •Updated Table 1 B,Minutes with Comments • Is A Reconciliation of Number&Type of Units Needed Vs.Units Provided S1119B 5 S/t799 9 1 �i66s Council/Agency Meeting Held: �o � R �oE� E,vr (aq Deferred/Continued to:jE,4gL1i67- j0hss/Rt.E )A7-9 Approved ❑ C nditionall Approved ,❑ enied D&RaW ty Clerk's Signature Council Meeting Date: April 6, 1998 Department ID Number: ED 98-09 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH REQUEST FOR REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ACTION SUBMITTED TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN & REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEMBERS SUBMITTED BY: RAY SILVER, Executive Director&W PREPARED BY: DAVID C. BIGGS, Director of Economic Development MELANIE FALLON, Director of Community Development'-4 ;?,� . SUBJECT: Blocks 104 & 105 Owner Participant Selection Statement 4Issue,Funding Source,Recommended Action,Alternative Action(s),Analysis,Environmental Status,Attachment(s) Statement of Issue: There is not currently in place a development strategy for Blocks 104 & 105. The Agency has received seven Owner-Participant proposals which have been evaluated. Approval of a development strategy with the selection of an Owner-Participant will allow for redevelopment of the site. Funding Source: N/A as a result of this action. Recommended Action: Motion to: 1) Approve.a Development Strategy for Blocks 104 & 105 that seeks joint development of the two blocks and utilize a traditional redevelopment approach including property acquisition of the Main Street properties and new construction with an Owner- Participant developer; and 2) Direct Staff to prepare a 120 Day Exclusive Negotiating Agreement (ENA) with CIM/Federal Realty and return to the Redevelopment Agency for approval of the ENA at the earliest possible date. Alternative Action(s): Alternatives for Proceeding with Blocks 104 & 105 are outlined in Attachment 1, Exhibit 1. REQUEST FOR REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ACTION MEETING DATE: April 6, 1998 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: ED 98-09 Analysis: On January 26, 1998, the Redevelopment Agency conducted a workshop regarding Owner-Participant Proposals for Blocks 104 & 105. At this meeting, staff was asked to prepare additional information and return to the Agency with a recommendation within 60-90 days. In addition, Council Member Harmon provided staff with additional written questions in a memorandum dated February 3, 1998 (Attachment 2), to which staff has responded as part of this analysis. In response to the questions raised by Agency Members, staff solicited additional information in the form of a preliminary development proformas from those Owner Participants proposing to acquire Redevelopment Agency-owned properties (Abdelmuti, Bagstad, CIM/Federal, and Grand Pacific Resorts). Two of the four (CIM/Federal and Grand Pacific Resorts) responded with the requested information. Of the other two, one opted to not update a previously provided proforma (Bagstad). The other sent a letter (Abdelmuti) proposing, in effect, that the Agency proceed with the development strategy alternative that would defer development of Block 105, and expressed a desire to propose development at a later date. In addition, staff has update the Proposal Critique (Attachment 3). Economic Impact & Property Value The information received was added to the initial submittals to develop a comparison of project scope and the estimated economic benefits for the Redevelopment Agency and City from the proposed projects. This information is summarized in the attached Economic Benefit Matrix. (Attachment 4) The CIM/Federal proposal provides the highest estimated levels of property tax increment, sales tax, and transient occupancy tax. The Grand Pacific Resorts proposal provides the next highest levels, though in a different mix. Cumulatively, the other proposals (Mulligan, Draper, Mase; Lane, and Bagstad) provide roughly one-quarter the tax revenues. The Grand Pacific Resorts proposal would provide for the highest land sales proceeds to the Agency with an initial estimate of $800,000. The Bagstad proposal purchase price for a small portion of the Agency's holdings is more than offset by the assistance requested. While the CIM/Federal proposal suggests there would be no land sales proceeds for the Agency's holdings, CIM/Federal does propose to acquire the Main Street properties at an estimated cost of approximately $3.5 million. Should CIM/Federal be unable to acquire the properties on a voluntary basis, they have committed to advance the funds necessary to allow the Agency to acquire the properties using its eminent domain authority (if necessary). Any estimates of land value/assistance will ultimately have to be negotiated and will reflect the reuse value of the property as required by State Redevelopment Law. A key variable that may impact land value with either the CIM/Federal proposal or the Grand Pacific Resorts will be the need to provide parking for Oceanview Promenade above that needed for the new development. The Redevelopment Agency's obligation to provide parking is outlined more fully in Attachment 5. RCA98-09.DOC -2- 03/30/98 1:52 PM REQUEST FOR REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ACTION MEETING DATE: April 6, 1998 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: ED 98-09 In order to assist the Agency Board in comparing the proposals, set forth below is a table which provides an order of magnitude estimate of total economic benefit, over a 20 year period. These estimates include land sales proceeds and all other direct public revenues, less any Agency assistance requested. Any land conveyed from the Agency has been valued at $15.00 per square foot, and this amount less, any land sales proceeds, has been included in the estimated total cost of Agency assistance. .................................................................................................................................................................................................. ................................................................................................................-....................................................................... ......... ..............- - - - ..... . ........- --...... ... . ..... ...-..... ..... .. - ... . ........... _::PROP SAL: .. NETPU ................... .._.................................._.... . ................................ ............_... .........._........................_................................. ............. . _......._..........._.....__............... ... __..............._..................._._.. .......... ...... Grand Pacific Resorts $ 9,559,000 Bagstad 928,000 Alfonso 312,000 CIM/Federal 10,956,000 TC Management (Mulligan, Draper, Mase) 793,000 Rutan & Tucker (Abdelmuti) unable to determine Lane 255,000 Land Use & Site Assembly Issues From a land use perspective, staff believes that the CIM/Federal proposal is the superior proposal. In reviewing the conceptual development proposal for the two blocks, the proposal most closely carries out the anticipated land use scenario for District Three (Visitor-Serving Commercial) of the Downtown Specific Plan (DTSP). District Three is identified as the most appropriate location for higher intensity development. Such development should provide visitor-serving commercial uses such as retail, beach-related commercial, specialty shops, restaurants, and hotels. Development in this location should provide visitors and residents with numerous opportunities to view the beach activities and the beach environment. In addition, any development should provide structured parking to service not only the development, but also Main Street and pier activities. Because the CIM/Federal proposal conceptually provides the proper approach to the land use scenario identified in the DTSP, staff feels the proposal is the superior one. The entirety of one property (Bagstad) and the improved portion of another (Cracchiolo) can not involuntarily be included any the future CIM/Federal project. This is due to the fact that the Redevelopment Agency does not have eminent domain authority for property which includes residential uses. In order to add residential properties to the Agency's eminent domain authority, a plan amendment would need to be processed. This process would take a year or more and would involve the formation of a Project Area Committee and the preparation of an appropriate level of environmental review. This would be a fairly costly endeavor and would require the Agency to have a Project Area Committee on an ongoing basis. RCA98-09.DOC -3- 03/30/98 1:52 PM REQUEST FOR REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ACTION MEETING DATE: April 6, 1998 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: ED 98-09 While CIM/Federal Realty has expressed a willingness to incorporate these parcels and will endeavor to acquire them, in worst case a project can be designed to proceed around these two lots. The design of the project can be such as to set the stage for future integration of these properties, either under a single ownership or operationally. In the future the Agency may be in the position to offer some level of assistance to encourage the redevelopment or rehabilitation as appropriate of these properties. So while not the best solution, staff does not believe that the Agency should process a plan amendment, but rather, we should endeavor to address these properties remaining under separate ownership through project design which allows for their future integration. Parking Issues Concurrent with the development of the final scope of development for a project on this site, the Community Development staff will be undertaking a comprehensive update of the parking master plan. This will ensure that all future development in the Downtown is parked at a level needed to support the project given the existing supply of parking and the concept of shared parking. As with any development proposal in the downtown, careful analysis must be done to ensure adequate parking is provided in compliance with the Downtown Parking Master Plan (DTPMP). To that end, the CIM/Federal proposal is conceptually proposing to provide approximately 350-400 structured parking spaces. The provision of this amount of parking is the proponent's recommended attempt to provide parking to support the development proposal. However, staff must complete a detailed analysis based upon a specific development proposal to determine adequate parking is provided. Another important aspect of any development of the two blocks is the existing parking for the Oceanview Promenade (Abdelmuti) development. In 1992, the city approved a temporary and permanent parking plan for the project. Both plans addressed the code requirement of 133 parking spaces for the project. Specifically, the parking is located on- street (Walnut Avenue & Orange Street), and off-street at the Terry Buick lot (Block 104), and the Surf Theater site (Block 105). Any development that removes this parking must address the replacement of these parking spaces. Because the CIM/Federal proposal is a two-block proposal that proposes to remove on- and off-street parking, the parking spaces must be replaced. Additional details must be submitted by the proponent to adequately analyze the parking for the proposed project.. RCA98-09.DOC -4- 03/30/98 1:52 PM REQUEST FOR REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ACTION MEETING DATE: April 6, 1998 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: ED 98-09 Conclusion It is timely to adopt a comprehensive development strategy for Blocks 104 & 105. Both private and public investment in the Downtown have set the stage for a higher profile visitor serving development on this key site which has ocean views and Main Street frontage. In addition, the right mix of uses will also be attractive to local residents as well. In order to attract the financial capital and tenant interest needed for a high caliber project, there is a magnitude of scale necessary which can only be achieved by a multi-block development. Plus, a single property owner/ developer can ensure an appropriate mix of tenants, will manage and maintain the space at a high level (including uniform operating hours), and create space which meets the contemporary standards for tenants (size of tenancies, ceiling heights, etc.) The recommended development strategy which best meets these objectives continues to link Blocks 104 & 105 and involves a traditional redevelopment approach including property acquisition. This development strategy can only be achieved through the selection of one of the Owner-Participant proponents --the CIM/Federal Realty team. CIM/Federal Tenant has proposed the most innovative scope of development with a high level of economic benefit to the Agency and City. More critically, CIM/Federal possess the tenant relationships necessary to attract regional and national tenants to Downtown. This important fact is reinforced by Federal Realty's recent acquisition of Terranomics, one of the premier tenant representative leasing firms in the nation. Federal Realty is a publicly traded REIT with substantial capital available to undertake this project. Uniquely, Federal Realty is one of the few retail development REITs with an emphasis on Main Street retail. Three of the Main Street property owners (Mulligan, Draper, Mase), had a prior opportunity for owner-participation under the terms of the now terminated Main-Pier II Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA). Neither the scope of the development proposed by these property owners nor the Lane's achieves the objectives of the development strategy proposed. While Grand Pacific Resorts is a well-qualified niche timeshare developer, the scope of development proposed does not provide the same level of integration into the Downtown and is not as active of a visitor-serving use as the retail/restaurant/entertainment/ hospitality development proposed by CIM/Federal. The granting of a 120-day exclusive right to negotiate will enable the owner-participant developer and the Agency to reach an agreement on the final scope of development and business terms in a relatively short period. These business terms will ultimately be embodied in a Disposition and Development Agreement subject to approval by the Redevelopment Agency and City Council after a public hearing. The land use entitlements will follow the City's normal processes once a final scope of development is defined. RCA98-09.DOC -5- 03/30/98 1:52 PM REQUEST FOR REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ACTION MEETING DATE: April 6, 1998 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: ED 98-09 Environmental Status: N/A for this action. Attachment(s)• City Clerk's Page Number I No. Description 1. Alternatives for Proceeding. 2. Memorandum from Council Member Harmon dated February 3 1998. 3. Updated Proposal Critique. _...:»..... » 4. Economic Benefit Matrix. 5. Redevelopment Agency Parking Obligation. RCA Author: D. Biggs -ext. 5909 RCA98-09.DOC -6- 03/30/98 1:52 PM (15) 04/06/98 -Council/Agency Agenda - Page 15 F-2. (Redevelopment Agency) Blocks 104/105 Owner Participant Selection -(Main Streetl6th Street/5th Street/Walnut Avenue) -Approval Of Development Strategy - Authorize Staff To Prepare Exclusive Negotiating Agreement With CIM/Federal Realty For Agency Approval (410.20) Communication from the Employment Development Director and Community Development Director regarding the need for a development strategy to be in place for Blocks 104 and 105, and informing the Agency members that the seven Owner- Participant proposals received by the Redevelopment Agency have been evaluated. Approval of a development strategy with the selection of an Owner-Participant will allow for redevelopment of the site. Recommended Action: Motion to: 1. Approve a Development Strategy for Blocks 104 and 105 that seeks joint development of the two blocks and utilize a traditional redevelopment approach including property acquisition of the Main Street properties and new construction with an Owner-Participant developer; and 2. Direct Staff to prepare a 120 Day Exclusive Negotiating Agreement (ENA) with CIM/Federal Realty and return to the Redevelopment Agency for approval of the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement at the earliest possible date. [Approved 5-1 (Julien: Absent, Garofalo: No)] F-3. (City Council)Approve Agent's Contract For Naming Rights/Corporate Partnering Program - Pier Plaza Project&Approve Professional Liability Waiver (600.10) Communication from the Community Services Director, Acting Public Works Director and the Administrative Services Director regarding the need for the city to hire expert representation to develop and negotiate a naming rights/corporate partnering program for the Pier Plaza project. Recommended Action: Motion to: 1. Approve the attached contract with Schulte Sports Enterprises (SSE) for naming rights/corporate partnering, and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute - "Agreement Between The City Of Huntington Beach And Schulte Sports Enterprises For Appointment Of An Agent For The Negotiation And Procurement Of A Naming Rights Agreement To Pier Plaza." and 2. Approve an amendment to the Fiscal Year 97/98 Pier Plaza Fund budget to allocate $30,000 of contingency into the new Pier Plaza Fund for project startup costs; and 3. Authorize the expenditure of$30,000 from the Pier Plaza Project Contingency Fund for startup costs for print materials/brochures and agent's draw to be reimbursed to the Pier Plaza Fund from the commissions paid to Schulte Sports (15) Alternatives for Proceeding - _ _ _ .....................................................__._........................................._........................................... . CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION Economic Development Department TO: Honorable Mayor and Council Members/Redevelopment Agency Members VIA: Ray Silver, Acting City Administrator/Executive Director BY: David C. Biggs,Director of Economic Development DATE: January 20, 1998 SUBJECT: Workshop Regarding Oivner Participant Proposals-Blocks 104& 105 On December 12, 1997, the Council's Economic Development Committee reviewed the seven proposals received in response to the Redevelopment Agency's Request for Qualifications from owner-participants in Blocks 104 & 105. The Committee members did have questions for those owner-participants present at the meeting. However, given the importance of the matter, the Committee did not make a recommendation to the Council, but rather, determined the proposals should be reviewed by the Council as a whole. However, at the meeting, it was determined that the Economic Development Committee should conduct a site visit to the CDffederal properties in Pasadena and Santa Monica. This site visit took place on December 30, 1998, as an Economic Development Committee meeting with Mayor Dettloff, Mayor Pro Tern Green, and Council Member Bauer ' attending. In addition, Community Development Director Melanie Fallon, Senior Planner Herb Fauland, and I participated in the site visit. Attached as Exhibit 1 is the memorandum dated December 110 1997, to the Economic Development Committee which presents the alternatives for proceeding with Blocks 104 & 105. Staff will be prepared to summarize the alternatives and proposals for the Council at the workshop. The workshop will also include an opportunity for a representative of each owner-participant to make a short presentation on their proposal. It is anticipated that based upon City Council/Agency discussion, following the staff and owner-participant presentations, that general direction will have been provided by the City Council/Agency. This will allow for a formal actiori on one of the identified alternatives to be placed on a future City Council/Redevelopment Agency agenda for action. Attachments: (Listed on Next Page) 1 mcmos/µTlsh126.doc /' , List ofAttachments e o . ndu dated: a r... X 7.......... >ounc eve o me .......:.........:::::::.::.......:::::. ........... ............. .. :<..e:.::: ».....1 2.. Attachment 1 Summary of RFQ's Received for Blocks 104 & IOS & Addendum. Site Plans: • Grand Pacific Resorts • Rutan&Tucker on Behalf Bagstad • No site plan submitted by Frank Alfonso • CIM Group w/Federal Realty • T.C. Management, Inc. • Abdelmuti • Jim&Victoria Lane 3. ....... Attachment Proposal Critique memos/wrksh126.doc �� " EXHIBIT'.1 - CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INTER-DEPARTMENT COA vfMCATION Economic Development Department TO: Council Economic Development Committee VIA: Ray Silver, Acting City Administrator BY: David C. Biggs,Director of Economic Development DATE: 1 ecember 11, 1997 SUBJECT: Alternatives for Proceeding With Blocks 104& 105 The Agency received seven responses to its Request for Qualifications from proposed Owner-Participants. These responses are summarized in the attached matrix(Attachment 1). The options available to the City/Agency at this point in time generally follow the three alternative development strategies presented to the City Council/Agency Board at a workshop in June. The basic strategy involved separating the development of Block 104 and Block 105 with Block 105 being pre-entitled to the greatest extent possible prior to the solicitation of developer proposals. Three alternative development strategy options under this basic strategy for Block 104 were: 1) Eventual rehabilitation by the current property owners on a market-driven basis with no-Redevelopment Agency involvement. 2) Redevelopment _Agency facilitated reconstruction with the current owners involving some level of financial assistance. 3) Redevelopment Agency acquisition of the Main Street properties and'new construction with a new"developer. At the conclusion of the_workshop, staff-was prepared to recommend a development strategy to the Agency -Board based on option 1 above. Subsequently, on September 2, 1997, the .Agency. ;Board authorized the issuance of a Request for Qualifications from proposed'Owner-Participants in order have better information upon which to base its ultimate decision regarding the development strategy options. With the additional information obtained through the RFQ process and given the specific proposals received,there remain three options available to the Agency; . } g:&b:projects:104105.edcalts.doc I h A. Do nothing based on the proposals submitted, and adopt the development strategy identified in June as the preferred strategy which has four elements: 1) Development of the two blocks should be de-linked and processed separately. 2) Block 105 should be"pre-entitled"for range of uses, including timeshare and this amendment to Subarea 3 of the Downtown Specific Plan should proceed concurrently with a similar application for the Morgan Stanley/Shea 31-acre site. 3) Any. solicitation of developer proposals for Block 105 should be deferred until 1998 when Pier Plaza is.nearing completion and other site issues such as parking are resolved. 4) The Block 104'property owners should be encouraged to proceed with the rehabilitation of their buildings on a market-driven basis with no Redevelopment Agency involvement. B. Pursue a mix of the proposals submitted which is based upon de-linking the two blocks. 1) For Block 104, do nothing or pick all or some of the proposals submitted (Bagstad;Mulligan,Draper,Mase;Lane). 2) For Block 105, do nothing or grant as Exclusive Right to Negotiate to the Cracchiolo team. C. Pursue a more traditional redevelopment approach and grant an Exclusive Right to Negotiate to CBffederal Realty for Blocks 104 and 105. In order to assist the Economic Development Committee in evaluating proposals, staff has prepared a*matrix (Attachment 2) which lists the pros and cons of each proposal. The Economic Development Committee has a number of ways it could proceed today: = 1) Review the proposals based on the written information submitted and make a recommendation to the City Council/Agency Board based thereon; 2) After reviewing the proposals based on the information today, invite aU or a selected number of respondents to participate in a future interview process, and then make a recommendation to the City Council/Agency Board; 3) Forward the proposals on the City Council/Agency Board for review and evaluation with no recommendation from the EDC. xc: Melanie Fallon, Community Development Director Les Jones,Public Works Director Ron Hagan, Community Services Director g:dcb:proj ects:104105:edcalts.doc -Yi•:::4o-i-- ...-:. -....r::::.}:...- -4::••::?}•�:{:}}}:- ..i,........ ..i....4..........,a{?.}} Y:4Y}}}}a;; ?..:}:->} ,.............. ..fi'h.3• s }.: ::::::.::.::.�:::::::<::::::::;:::::;;:'..':......,•:::-.,�:....:.,:....,,.}:,w.t.:::::Pik•::r?.«:•}.........}.)*.r...:r:.Y-rr:::}�:Y}}:.Y.........r...::.r..s...:..........:.. ..... 't4i•:k ..............................r............................... ......:r v.... n.ri.....�:•:::::.v w::.:...........{.....n;x:x:r::,4;.?:::::::::::::::... v.. k'i:•:4.tr: t A hh -V ............ {:••.v::::{::::.}}}:w::::::::p}:S4}};:::::.w::44}}'-}!•}1:'•{{:5::4'•:{::.;:: :. •.--::::.;.�v;i}. ................:...::::::........:..:......• r.�:.:.-:' 4xiv}}yW:::.:: ,,..vr::}}:::}'o:..... .. l:}:::a?r �:i;:;:;:.}:;j.......,.a.::wn• ... ::::::::.t•:.�:.:�:::.�:::.::::::::::::::::.��::::::::::::-::•.........:.::.::4}'•::::.>:-}}:•}};-.r..,:r....... :::n•:::::•:...:,........ .,..>..r...r::::::::::::::::...........r:....:..r:::::.::.a..:....}::r:::.,.::.}}::}:. :•:.E.:::::::.:::.:r ......................................................... :y4::::w:}k�::::`k}k}Y:}}}}}k::}r-::ii>:S::kt ..:...:..•:•i'.:.... :.:?..: v: i* nil: i .....n.:::::::::::::.�:::::::::Y::Y:.i:.Y}:.}:.}:::•i:?•i}Y}::::::::•}:::::::::::::::::.�.Y.......... ...:.•r{4...:. v Y..r..r.•::::!±•}}i: f n {. ...r:. t .{., .,.. ...... ...:....3....$ .v::a .. ....:...,. ......... :.: ..,•::.:: ..r.<.. ..v. ..}..... :. ..:Y•.•:.c::::::':5::%:;:. n::.6.,;;::?..v::::S::z:...::.::::.:..3{..: :.::::....;:.{..t.:<:::.t...:.}::. , ..Y:•r•,...,:. .r`.a ..:...t,..t...7, }......{.........:. .. .... ...:.:.::........v::::. :. ......... ....... .... ..f.::f•:::{.::::.t:...n.}�.,,..... {: ........ \•. r4}ish}:.}}}v;:.,:.}:..:i}Tay{kx{ti?}isv::rx!.}}:{Ya:}'v:{::.t:t+.}'t?{•}:n•n ... ::..n. n...£ ..v., {.........:....: .........v...... ..........:...:...... ... ....v. .../.: .u.v....hu....n.... ... .. .. ... .... ::: .;..,;., ^.:::::::.}vy:}:;•ri}}}}};i{.,;{},j•}:•}F.;}Yx•:•:•:�:}w:{:}?:•?}}}{•{{niY.}::vw:;::...,::•:::::::..};.T.::.:?;';'r'}Y#:. ...........r.....;....:::,;...v.;v•:.v....•:u;An t f:+nav-•:+v.T.v..................n.. .v.... .......:...x,.n.....t... .. r ..... Y .a t. ..r.. .....t.. .... v..... :. .:. .}: .:. .::. l . k.:: .Q.4:..:T. �S:Y•.?.}:{•}:}}:}:}:?.}::};.}::.:::..}?.::<.}:::.}:{a:}:}::?. •:.T•>:.::.:..>:.:::.:..............:.......:.�a:t:.}.k•:. .,.....{.;YF�•.:}:•:.,.r.T:.,<.....xn.:..... .:.t. . .. . .s..Recel. .ed...�(y.x::B oC ..�.... I...l.... t .. :.n•:•.:.v.;.......v.... .. :i:.:. .::...:.:...:::}::i::}:2:::ii:::a{{:}`:r}::?'�.:.:isi?:+�:SiYi:+.;....:i::iii?::::ii:?':i:::}:::i::}:':i:: :..':}:}:::ti:{::;;}:f}3:ii:!::.j::�':i:::�:};::;�:i:ti:t::i}}::{::isY:}....;::}}:i}}:::::}:i:,v,:•{'.:}}::i}`i:: 1 a �: e�► 1 e :o aSrt<: � :?:.:F.::........:..v.....:..... ..i� .'T.::}:.....::::n.:}::•.}:•:.}}:::t.;... .. . .:.O.n.Be3zdl,.b.. �•��:........... ...:.�°er................ .b1�..... . ..�...... 1. Polo Resorts/CR Properties, Cracchiolo Stephen J. Cloobeck Block 105 to be developed as 10,000 sf. LLC 702/261-1000 commerciallretail/restaurantand 84 ' (M.Roberts,&J. Coultrup) timeshare units. 162-parking space in one level subterranean and one level at grade behind retail edge. Three to four stories above grade. Resort amenities,including pool. .tif....n.�:•:,�::.,vv.v.. wnv'.:;::::v' -v ::•+'.:wv:x.:.w ;. .,Y{:i7•T-Y .,...}.hv.v.;.ri �x„xx..n., ............... v +}}:Sh•.'t',. .,:T .},tt .,}.tF.f•. ::S:..S:}•v a:.C•;t,.,}}. .::r:>..v:. - ;•}}G}}:i;;:: .}�:.. n.✓,. .� �'12ntan. �'u[cker�: .h�.. . . :..� :.: '• :.: :.:.t..{{.. ...v:rw•.+t'h.•.-:„ -::::•:•...w:;. .:::....:.: n n .v .hv\.... G�'�'�:� ....t. ..n. ..un.. C ...4v.....,.n ...... •f.•. hSi{\:::£X} .Y,C-}. ...�::+}- ::. .:.,{•{:{. a ..} uF r. a.,. .} ,a?}Y.•Y }•4•;•{.��?t� ' x?{'Y'r.,3.a vYv.......}.}: •::}.vf.;n},......}v{fn:•v-�:h\....::::€:v vf•{ik:i::::$:S}ik}+iYi4':\?n.4. :i+F.Lv}}•}.vF.;yv.�$S,;Yx.:}:}•,.:.nv rv:::: :v:{i:F•.:.ta:`£r'.+,,r•.:.`:}+,r:+}•,r.,h 4"x'�h,':?v�',';}t^.i,a R ti`;•rR{4•h}•..#):,it,•:,U.,.,.aa#/C.,v..Y.ai+,t'x`:u� '.�+Yf•.�+`�: •A'M��at•,•'{:r'.r'fi•••,vy,"•i 7"G•3.v„.',{k}.t Q^';t<5...•.;5::.�}�:k:'w�:.,,.;•',�•S,'{•.:•-•?:}}.}'.y?.�,'.^+..'.�;}'r.:rik�.y}r,+iY't:-.E�k.�v..::,:,+t.•{•t.?;:a•::.t' •.,..i:f.s{.•.A#t.fi4$••.:.n,t.:'r.r.v^•:T•S i}}vr`•\tF"h:{mo.v'yx{„..f.#-`{f..•a'+•u\:o...C•a.r.i x h'.;x,n,•.C{w'.'c,..:+}•}.:`,:YF,•R;,}c•:.{.?::•.,.�},v:�;.•-k.t.}}.n.x.h�.,r£3;',•.•,.rt:.x.•.S,ro°k c}Sa...,3:+2`�;`},"•�••;a#.'r•.t,}t.:^:'}h.t%Y•;St\.}.{Cv`::,'.S$.r•+}?S•.•.:}„;},::.:.;.vX`t,rSYtS,+:•>�.:};'t.,•zn;;c:a{.}cs�:•.}:�::k:••av4}•}5\a{.•�?:.}k n•;.y.c.•:'±ar.,}ti•:n}s*:.•F.4r.,a£.�'3?F^;:•{}>:Y:'.trxf'?y}.,?.{.`x•.}♦.:}:;<.::.:.}<x:.:{;'.}}.+',iO•i:.:�{;:}+:{�?aY:�c+ti?''::S'h}t::v:5:�:}S:a}::S:}�?+::.:•;p'h:#•,t,:.:iS:{k:x}}\};•:.,:.\:x:.J,+'xf.++.::}:•;5.^.'v:;:„t::..•{:r Y..::a`•:h:}�.v.,.nnn't•.,`:{.}..?}:r.••.::.i�JT.-.•..:.}:.::.:,n}::::a.:+:;£,^};.{.53�.;.�.{Gfj.G'.:...:•::...k}h:..:.}S::•n v.{..<},a.R•}-..:-Y.,,3:::0Y.:a.',:f•:+::{o:!}v}.+.'?:v•�vk;:fi'£r:ti'vx•n,}{Y a}:..•w:>,.`}::�..t+-Vva.,vvc{•C:}r.�:,},}.;}i`'+,:':SS.:$}}2}Y,{i:.,t,}:}{,.<•:�:.S fx:+#:.t:`;;}a.:+{}.•..r:::.'•V>.M}S•.:.::;:}}$:.;.::.::::�:::.¢+:.S:xta,..'+:i:�:�s'�2:;�1.:�%:.'i1{n:7�tti':T:�'�{•:.v:.+.?•r:'f{}'y.r.tS}aJ:,:.'Y+.�k:e?,..?}:.'RC\{..-}.x}l:av-l'i.�'.•ki:+.�.�t�C.;��f��r4v+tf''r S}..`::':..:.z.}•.:�,T.�fk:,t,•vC{vxrt.,:••yYT}e YYi+},�`,.•�c.'y+,1.'{C:'.'}•�fF4-'�..�a'��...sS.i,;�{F�„?-.f3f*-:•r�'.T�...Y r!� ::;Y ; k h* e,Wi.r',.••;.;•'.,q..,•.,.:.: h•Y,.Y{A.tA r. 4 u Sk 07 U 'r••Y'}7�.`x .vt•:fi•}}tia:,. n:::z:}...Y•�S',{,:n'v.? :..,.•'• .:• { �. V`C�{ , .,a, k.v .,{.,.0 r. 'Y„av:vnr�31;+{}•:.:{' `iu. h'.•:? .h a�•::•:•:.:.;.,,(:}xy:..i:;'.a:::,�'..n....`. i•Yn.34{:}i�{.}:•::vv..}h, -;�f..,n }};;. .}.�'•. :"}`.:}..v .as}• V}i,, t.:+.} 3:'}.JY+:y{ ?%'{}. ''}\ •L�. nix,v k-rim•'+f•}Yt} .,xC ,;.v;v .:ju{':v4x;.r^C}+}}S;�`�m:{thy?fY9r:':r':t4: ,�••t .ti ��t'�;;.X'. •£ I'a}., Y:•:.Rau}xi�:••{}?}}++��••::.;;;.•.h•..-•S}it:{;{�'k:#ra`.�-:.`£::xa,+::...x`•}#•}R.t.}^-}:'•} . )''a; }} .,.k;. t'%3x}.••'}t•. t•.t •:•:`�•'`�,' x�iy k-;'•rrC'�tSiSaY?ts tf...v.`}{ ?. J^.h.,`'y,{}Y-.;{:i..tr .T}- .:.?�::, \9},:tit•,. }?$}M1G+� .:.,t, •� ' �.}: �.i~•�: �}}::�::>>: � ryM:}.}.x.:.}....t.:�:� :;:� : .� �:mwmafel:..2���d.Q�.:s1a..o �u%l:>and.•• n; .. � �� .?x::•.:.. ::: }: '•.} : .' t3 •>S•fh. ::.£`:fi!:};•::,:,{{:. .?;£' ,,.r.::.h>: nrh.� •.k,.. �t,, -:..►... .;fv"h't'th.•�2:<S. •, .. '4. v }} :Y�{. .: T. :: ; :.}'Ak::.Jv::.vv.-; •:x:.•{::.,:.,.v}}n{{ttvv•.•.t:..{::}:+i.::n•v:1hSY•„ a+}•+:{3}v3}Tn.{�.. ..;h}'; .uh .A. uVJ}'S:•u. Y. �.r .{.t uu n::A'v: :vp}rx,x,•:.:.:{:>...v:x{.T,�•.u•:v}{u4:n tiF{y n.}'h ^i:?r:#:�Y :in•.•. { ...W.•t : ti� .•:'-Y a. ':'�'+ .h}a+rr:{•} ...a.•} T. ,trr.:'� �j�•2y'�k} . :}•„•h?�;.s.. . :.- .: t: ', ; }},, .ai.}, .. •y.'.. •;: :n.8.�k2t.i3.vr�. .....:S::a}:.{Y:S:A:`- +::r.. ••}?7r:. ..\. ntTtt.. )x .@.�': .t : , ,•n. ..:•. k, .J :'✓•:k•r.:+�.. , ........ :...3. ::•xr:;}:t•:::?:S;S: .v-} A.n.T... +:'{;^:•. .:•k'•. v } }}.. , r ..(3 .f,?•f .{-: .. .. r. ... u. .- n :n:x•:}..:....., :j4�#:i+.w:.. :vh a .vv:.f v X ;•yy}•:iay.}: tij:;?{#?:t,iiii:^:.. ..h.n. :.T.u r }r`.}n3. : •.�..•. }�' .vt� .: ....• f:, r.,.. .,..,,.. {r{,.,'.{UO..;:v+;}t:}:.p}Y.:-x4S:. t•:::+::n:.y,.p •:.'kr,'':$':':i: :Yi} v'"\ .{AU'^ .St: tom. Y�i•..,++'r<Fko., .} -::FW,:?•}rv:Y -:�S:o.•.:.:..�1AA3.�i'ii`:.. k•%t :xt+'• :+k�:•+:cc tT '•, r:}. •t:•-.,.. .):r :f(. : : r.. .,.%.vy .:•: :'+ rni.4:{•}:?w:..,... :::nua. •:.:.x:}}}:•}}:-::.T... :.;.t v: .�... .##?�'i'#:i}:•: +,,,�a /n .t .t .. t •:. .3}? .. ., nat •.x...,c .. ,. :...v..f .. .r ..T. .;{„•:.,;.;.,;:;:{.};;..}. :>:.�;•" nh-::.t•::}::::•;•�:�>•:}.t.....:•..t ..T•,. ,g •$:..; •{ rv..A,. +... r. f r. :.}.,•.:.,w t �...: S..v.'•S 3i»Y.}•'• •:.v'�5:;::,�:fi.•t a.i}c-•>.�+'t•+:}i:?tR•- .,a,.::;4;:�. .t kx... 3 t•: a v.: •r•. ..v +•::�v: •:•..t.. h:.}.x .::. ?,. .£ .•.x ,{. .. t...:::::•:.tv.,:•.{::.t•.,,.v:::::r;:}}:}:f•;..-:n-::f:.vth:•x.:::.. t r-f.t:.....,.4n. a�..:.. .,}\. .., hn}Y ..hu ...u ...v::• r .. n;...{:{:v' a,t :nA-.Y.;,: -.r?:.Y}n n}t• •E. •v.:::}{::.i }}:f+�,.a;..r.•'t:., h ,{{.t.!:::::. v:x.}::::.t•.t.v::{.,.,.{a;.v.,n'•. X+,t?}{.n.: Tx,.;?:.t+?:{y:•."r:+'q{•:•+{r.. .t:.R•}'3' .So.+G.!•r`') .aw. ..r!•. :'+v.. ..tv:.t..t.,.a.•. ':} t w...S}.:.:'T•}}:}:}:;.GSS ;:;S .r...v.:v....r. t�:. ,i.,Y++'•x•}.}t+n},.:.: - ...4.;. v::{.r 'x;. •h xr xfc z.... }t... S t+••:�}f ,,.�:}r .:.,.w.:. •:a^•}:::}•k c r� ..rh�•:r:•}..e:5x: .3 n:r .. '• rr.. ..+'r'.'•}:::} v.t;.;..:}}};•}Y.a:....a.t,ri}{:};i:•<.:^:b#'v#}Y}}:`;r;'Yii:i•S'•ni•'ria•}: ..i.4..r}:•:..S::r .}S,AS•!9ar::•• S}••:3 '::+SOin. .w:A •:°f8:•*.' n..{.k?..: :.}.. v;k,...ot•:f;C+r:7?•n} .:.3L•' :,, n..i., •.ir.,•.{,.t:•:u.,•:.t•: ..�$•Y .: C fF.. 3: ..h:+.3i x: .,.+/•:, r } }:}.... Y}xt .:•{}:;• - ',• :., -r:.,,,•: .. ,•.-. ••- .x. rt•. .tt..... ...r:rr.�•,•,. .:r::C' SrT..'v C .::':k•�{-:'2 '}{'}:}•r::•:•:n•Y::r 3:a ,+:}+.: },: ..R•:•-:•:::: :.rx,•};.%?.S}}}:;:}}}:o-v::'S SSS^;::iv�:::..::::::.... r:,...,�::..+Y-•n: }:•:a•:^:V:frx•Yr}:-;:S :n�i.:.::.t.ty:R•T.t :::T:•.t•..v::^}.a:::: .:.rS{At✓...rTn .. ..... ::..nr,.@. a.:.,. t 5,....a......:.............�i:2.t..{....C.�.t...:.......{:......}aF.ar....::..T..2..:..t......v:. ,.v {:.}.-ti: }. 'Y{ 3. Frank Alfonso Frank Alfonso Frank Alfonso Only if sale is not completed;two-story 119 Main Street. 818/702-0333 structure on entire parcel with proper setbacks. Aprozimately 5,000 sf•of. retail/restaurant n .................. ,Y•.c;;.f }.;:•,•fr v.,t:.t ., .., ..fi.. } :•.,.... ::... ..,..; •:rY:::w::x• ;{£ .k.{. v.n::u:..;;:.;..::..:..:;^w:;:;..�;.•:h:{i.}t:i2?}.;:.:'7:Y:S::x'?:Su} G •h'':•{a::x {.. { f`y,. :. .+.�1:• \v. _y`•rS' L :.''..fr,S;�' .} •} 4.....L•:::'::i •h}x•}S (,,y .•:tt. ,. K ?:rrx;;`+;: •.,•.{cf:wc. •.+}•: .,t:i''�iR �AV .,., Mi #W.t+J, t.. � .:•} .� ':'.:nnr: •. {;..,,../�a.,..;.; ..,}•���114::} .v:k•:+:A x�' �v .�Jk`..X.;h�:x•!kY;t; �}: .� vr�.,' ..i�1 •. ...{+.I.,.l. i'1'}}:zrtr•:.ty {aft.�i�y.�..1.I' s}•.�: `�iC ::� :J�?�.{�.�{�'si7 Y xa'}.r.. l� �, r, 4�.. •} '�x :}• •t{t r .,• .£. n.v'} :$::}}:•:a}}}Y{...v r ^A":.t ::Y..;.. :`.Y''}.:. 't 2. .�...r;. .f :• '' x,rr,++: •?6StS ra:,h•}}FtC•r,i•'f`•x.,.%aa;:.}»....✓.... :}:r:•:3Y:•{}t• ,.,•x•:. ..;,f......Y:a:•h...4..ttt•:}•:•�.}:•:f?+:9::•}:,x.t..JJ..kr. .{• .r.•r.. :..STffa: :}r' •..•'yap .'.'`r ,•;:• t .�.. ,, .' .o,:�Y .{,+:+.,, ac}3..< ~< }- } xY!.Gt;^tt+ah '+"n{'•3 5.. .\r .aA7v, �S}V,.. < S:Y} /� {;,;�?.v, .:,�?. .:t�,`'zT,�' :•�:{tug., f....,yf.■. Y3' a '`•�'•.` •' •y:•Y3'3ak:.S:•:•`:r.•a i;S.y.;.k,pr#+' ':kl/t a !:#; .y,•. ` .:. 'y „' . •.n.. � •� ' '••• ,,.,•• v i r �.+r,.S.1 .�l;.G»:j?�Q.T3�::f.+:.:a A1fQIL�tS inrld�il�``•<eYtcl�td�ri`::«:}_ :,,.y...,• :., . .r ..••:'.' ::. r{'k•:.:{"` ..r...;: .: ..., . .. �+•�,,+5.,.;.'y..r•:Ssx .:f.,E ..�.. �xa.: YtuA ,. } .w. ., d t,:n....{a+}::\T. `::}:•%x t,�{.3}x.>:n.:::... v .,,µ .... �•• }%h•.:\."::...v: ''3�:•}:• ;•}}%¢;:v{, <Y '• '4: , ::fir•:\••}..:.r'.t•�,r„>&'ks' •.T. }., r t,.;w...G:k+•:t'••.v:.,•:;.n ).,.,,.:a{•::r:.,..:.?•:•xt}:S•:{t',rtS;;i;:G;'.;:ii;C:c•:i ypf:Yr:,: }. c#.:., •{Ta•.,Y �c'a ••: r•:•Y .�.{,ay. w. ,,: •}}b. ,r :J.�}:•n }x,i,...;,:;3. .,,.::?,•;•'•.':•:+.{•:},k. ft{t,,,••x::}:.vt � ?aarY:.:y}°n :.T•} •.},`,,x�•.�3cxrta}'•``x �'`.\a{,•.:. kh�•. {{,,.}rt t.• i' S..k'c r.Si:'3 f3ti, .k.,.+:•..T:..aM}..:::::}::•t. +•.r•~:S'kh;S:<S:is}}}t SSn•::.:T::::::•: '`• a ,t ..+/. .} ..,:a.,.A,+;,�,.}v,....h' ::'hr•.}:5:,3,t :r$rr; :\ ..nY •r{#:}L'{•}:;:•j:5:'.nCn:{:i:n. :. ...}...:n.v.....v•}... .. kYtt t£}Y{.4:.'} •}.• a 5. wh... t,+t, Y......:} ...t?t.....n.: :,x. /.��• ■� �„ ::'f•'�>:rf... ':{' n}•. X y>y� ,v,}...^v., v„ri., ........h ?:�y.4{•}}}:;}v--. ::.iv::: vt{::n}}..,� , de�CIIUfE::an .fi ..r.�•nv„ v....:.. ..h. r.. L+},•n..... .}T Txtiri}:}{}::atv .n ..: is}t.;•i}:.0 x r [\�Y4Y1.'•MM{i +'�'} ... .,,...T,• .t .r.. r:.. . .tom.. . ....n .... `4.tr�: .:.....,..,..,....a :.T..t..{.,.:+n•:::+5+>+{:?SSC•::::;..•}\}:•.v v:.............T...., ...T....: f v.... .:.3:::,. ?Y,..,.,, .. ,.b............ .. .....f.:......+: t...........t.....,, .. T..T...tt•:::th•:.:.<:t'•}}'•;•:•a}':;'::�:::.;a,..c..::, t �:•.�+::.-: .{{+. tS ,,hht•Y,Y;./,... ..v ...xT............rt. ...iS:.{:. ,:.. .,:•:...;..:.}r.v::}::t::-:.:::.:• ........t. .ni..,. x}. a �......Ki.v:;. .u�....:::. �v.�..}+��: .-.• r. uv::Fi..Z:-., ..}, '� ..}...... .•},v}. :........ ... :..Q ...?r.:... \`ai ..�} ..Kit vT.: ..v .n• :•.:.v:•.r.......w::• ..vxw:nt.. •• .........::.:}:.v:.a.aT.;..v:v .a..v�� `?':'?v; A•.+.x\4?:'!;i+"rM•r.}\•... ..n ::..}....ti•...• .�:.... :.....v.....n}}::.u...........u..\x,.......n...v.......n...t.}.........uw :}�}ti�}: .hx•Y�.n ,t�Cv V"::: w�.;: }T,. •. : .;:k~{.f.•::rr•{{; r.r .r..:.yr. { nv M ..:. .... '{. �Av i..v.A..:;.v'y.. }}.n;.. , v........... ..:{;.. ii ..t ..}..vv:yuv. .vx:`:x:.:}•::. n.....t:.x... ..v ...{.... ..�•. v } ..%C N..,n::n:},n.}.v v.h•:x•]�i•::na rw to{•.r .:} :.:::...:f •:. .. t. v t r• ::- A : :r ,r}. ......,t•::.. x:•i}`>}}}:4:; .. ?Y. .. .{.}.r n: :Y x ... h... {•xv•.. ::f+. ..,x }••. ...•.:•vn::..{?w:r: •Av:�•.. ;:}. ''3}}:•}::•: {..}..::::.,.}<}:''r:iSay.....:.. ��{�}`�1:�-pp-��r ��p•/� �jy1■ ���•{ ..Sr afir. nrt nnx. .r}v. ..fin ..+'ry ...J,+:::y{.}}:.}:•:'.:{$:}:%:.};{:{{}•.•.::... ..}v•:rr:.;{':{ '.N.�iM.M�!•!M' :AN.•i�:•l[ :.rn+ v• '' •: :•: , ..:v n$':•S.?. :+..y, ...v YY ri}:.}:ha .}:if is}::?}:..:., :}.{:a;.:•y::::.w:..--}•r••:... , �LL]iLn�n� y�y� "•Li}�.''�.x: .. f., .:} .{nv LY. ?: w. .:. .r: �..A...n•x:.•:}::•v:r?'v...•:.w:}::f.•.v}f.:.:::}::+.Stint•. .v.:.;. ^�:•^}�5�..::..:J }•:>".:}:: ,•., fF.•..}�4hn,: r:.: f Aa.{{• .:.t.. ..T .... ..................... .....,.:}:a}.r'•.�X.tx•::- '.tk••.} t:.Y,a.. :.5:..,. p.:.l..n .r.?"rf.°•:. .., .... .aYrw .: .. ...r :..,..:..n. n ..x ?......:r ...Y......: .....,h,........rn.......... ..w{....: t:G}•:{:'tSS.::;:. ...........`•{r;:;•:vS•t.r.. ,n:•R,;:.., r t a ....,•.t•t: ::.t•:•}:}:?•:::••. .r:. t,t,,u,•-,,.r..:t •a:•.+••••:t:nnCc:£^°J''` •f. h E. •::T•::•:;:}::....n...t....v ..'++.}. +L:�'{?.. .S}�•}i�'�:•`':: .va';. •.{+:x}++ .;,•{ ''ti•a ..}: .}x•}:Y•.:•l r::^: }::• : ..YYr. •. ri''t:'C•r YS:{• r 3;c•4%#'t: :tt.. :}•. nk+• }.. tr`. k}}.•r•. WIN. ,•(- t:•.{;.•2•a>•}:: v..f v}ax+t•{::•}n}}:}•:.}••.::::::•:.v:•:.{:;.::. �•'}Y ;. :S/f•@ �.:. ... a},, .{., :i»+:a.•}}}.t}£+:s^:+4 r.. Y :,s„ , t t :,..N•},k.,,, {1 fi.. 5?,;,.. .,.,i, T.. +' . k..yry+....:.. ..... .2�.•..v:+.pa}'•h`:kw,;a�£tx,;;a av•,h:h:av::::+:v.vh::nt'Y}{%'?:a`;{ i,�j� �}}} ��}�� •.n. M1�v, f .r .r?h .. ..:✓... :T•.. ...,v}.. .i:....v........ ..n.Y u.}..y.::V.:..::4..::>.v,•;}}+.v:::..;;...n ...f.. .,A}.A fR!« .!+!:.�!.11., ..� •w�!f!+ r• f {•..;t ..;'/�pvx,T:a:n3,.., },vh•. -,+•:: ..\: ..a...{. ♦.. .. ::• +:n •.•:::v.v}.,.,Y...v{:....v....t. .{n :t{}:.x},.;;p;;•:..::n::•::, .;v?Sh:X • ..n:n}}v ..Frx x.i..nn ... .r' .. ..�. .n Y�r ..v .:3. r:.n t .))'}k..:. 'Y .}..x.. V.•f.•::•.vrS::::v'•:ri•'i .��L({.j .....v...:{. ..x.r.x. .... : n...rn.. . .� r .'T v .. ..`}.x.'.h ?..}...r..u.ur.:.v;v,.�v,v+�.....F.,.......n..::v: ^rY+}}•{;..;{++'' �((�•.., MEN a-.:n••, ......i.....'�'\.:... ..v...v...v .{. : ..... ..v .+rY. x. .} : .}....:. .. n: u x ..........u.... 3.. :..v+ t{f:y':v..•Q:,{}J.•.�•:,vr'F,•. +x}"':: ..a+C (r r.. S Y•..... a. S #•:T:x..t :Tw„v, S}Y$} t.9 rt #tf..: S•..a..3 .r.t........ r::::::r:•+::.t•::::.v::-:,t,..ti,, it,:�:•.:..A YQ �:•::.:-•::•••�R'tf..tt,•rv. n.f .... ., :.?,x'�{ .....rr.........tt.............J:..{. �}+,'.:?.}s.'•;:r.�>: ?•n�.:ravr..v.•'.,.% :.t..+::• ...:a,?•: >.:.}. •:r:..fr::}+} :. }.Av.-..:. ..J,.: ,x}9.tt.;...qq,, n.h.;�',,kt.::i••:.:{.,:.tv.t . .... :•:•::::.vnv:r.:::::::n•::.,:.:•'.•:,:.:t•.v.: : :• •that*�'..:i :•Tvn.•;..v; uv:3nY:.ai 3. ,.. NO. v.n•:}::•: .vv}taJT<.irj,'.>S•F,.?v? 4:..n n.h }:\:i{};a{+v ..v .....:.. ......tn . .v `S. ..v::::: •.^wrt .......;::::.........x.h•. h:•:c+... .: :v:Y ..t:.t•:•2+•:}::... :.t}•:: }: r. ... v..ai}.v .:fi... }ik .:} . •: :::'r rii. ..:-.... .,...,.-. , v..........r.41£••:•h v...'a.. v;.....; �'��. ., >i:##<:n o :<in:: �nsrot�'ma. F.. .. ...,•T•... ,...T•x .., .{:,.:.: nhh�t.r.•:::..}.v.T3}:::....,....... .� v1 :�•:.��iLM.:T� ..... .v hk{n.•.:... }n...':t..n .{.W. ... v:...:.:•{.•:v'� .:f•'.•.v.v., .v ...}.... ..n. ... .. \. F.......: .T n..t..u.+•: .x:•.v :•. ..{. u v vf,:.;}:v,.}:}.v}%.Yi�S:a:•:•.a::::w:}.:?•:... ..r T•vt? r h }....,v.... {.}x??: : .. .: ... ..'{'. ...t Qr`.........t•. ........ r .... ++'•.. ...3:•.::::r..v..t.n................ ........,v� ,;::{.;.}....}}'i{ ::.\,;•;a; v r.. .. r}Frkf. .r}...tvfk . .t ..:t. r:.. ,.:. t A,..+'h.,... .tt.:......... ..,::•:::::.v;`:::::.v. ,:. ,.v :. :...... T.......i• '-^;YhA'}:::: :S'�kfi•,}:'`::;;<ktt:S:•}::;{::Y}:}•}.}}::... tA.t...:�""+ �� ...:.t•........:. r.6:trrh:r: ,..:{., .Tk k .,. .vT:t::•�.,+:{•n•::::.vYt•\:..5�'kt•'.t...... ,.. •....,.......,.+:::........t...........t........t. ..t•}:,: .J? r,. f. .K:,:. n:•�:��}..:: . - .n .n.v........ .. t.T•nn,u?•. :Yna?C,.,....u.:. .......::n...T.u:•::::vv A•v:}rvh.T}i..}:..::.w:x;........ }....#.. v{}i^•iilvrk:::.\+ ....a..tau.J. .�.: .Y}}r ...T••.t,•.v.::..}}',G:+,a,r7.•'t•-::.,.....,... v..., ,{,r::.,•i+:tv.t„i,..,••x.:v:;•..r. t.:.... .. ..t.tr w, :?.;:::.t-:{.:>••}}}:•}}.:.;•;?},. �.. i4k} •r.x+:.S ': .`,?ait. u`-^¢,•. ,n .n..4 .F#.;, ::f.,..:::,f{;...} •.4 vv xn...:.. V+.u .::. `nA.a.::nvr-v:}:.•:nr.h::::h• •:al.:v tv+a}},};:}}y,x:C',.;;.,.vnv::...... :. n}}•}Y' .y. ..rY:.4.R '::.;,5}'t3:;rk„xc}�'.::.v .an.. T:t. 't;•..u: ..?v...n•::::::::v<;�` .f. •: vRf•�t. .t.}},�.t-::+:+:;•'.:}: .:.tx•::w... %-•..t .::•+..,}: fu+m:•Tx!:..v... n�v.:. ..A.::.r•: ii:}i}� .1,k{}. ,:.r.:.3...:..way..:.:{.i<i:>,{:v,,....r....:....... ..}.... �a.�. :gin , � .:F..n.... :+-tj...n :: .r.v. ....r....... ....t.w;.:.i}w::::f.•i}v.::::::.v.,.;:}:;.x:.v:f'.ii•}:•Ynnty:,,.. .r:.?....<,.{.}}{:+"w.:.,.?t..: .:.t::.n... ,�...:t:..:: ...t:...n.......,..ttn....�} .... ..:..v.�.:.f........,...::.n.........,..... ? axa-� t{�nd.:P.�er;... A ...v}. .... v{: ..n.v...n,n...v vv..Tv .... .. ..v.....n.rr• .v...v .:..w..nnn.n....... .. .t..............:::::::•},,•;...•;}..cat;:...... .:�\ �}�•:: .n..a.N..... ..... x.%•.ua.. .:, v;.. ;{+. ..ut:...v r r:.n.:.r...::+.•.......:,..v..v...................t.. .... ..+......vT,. .;i,.:??t •T ...rvn. n... .t .. 'v+' .x.xa\:: .u.n..nn ....n..n........v..... at...:�:v::::::.•.t........fw::.:::;.;{a•.+•. "•:S£v+wty;: "{4+v,u '••';]}}{. 3t:•:�'} ':titE}"^ t :.•£`:,. •.,.`•.:•::++ .:.: .v.:: :+.......hox:nv;•.`•+:n......n........ T.... ,n......,}.. ..... ...}.. C),n / .}}:�::. :+�{..•••. ,},�;2Yn a..i: .f>.�T, .fvih; \.: �i' �•y v£%' •xv w:rr-::nh•:: : .:..v:?3:,r..........n. •.i::n v•f y n•{}:'v:?.;i :+::•.A,.:S.n:•.vv{v{•::..•rv:v..}:}::::r.?•::n:.::f.•:::::}hurt n ....v:•::::::::::S}:•SY}:,•:nK::::::n•+':r t X. {ix ,kv.. h n :}C R v.4 ..,,.}:.::^x?J•{,J..�•-:.v.}...}:x..n;;. ..,..,.,.b.{;:,hT•-.}:?•'i.A+.....:}'•.�•:r:.t+v:.::.v: .{.4.::•:::n ...r.x....u.w:••:::... ...:....::::. ...rY.. :.r � T ..r. r.:....n....•:r.,•. nh, h. v...t v........... ..n,..x.:Si:{{•}}:??h:?.}::.:'.w::nv:::::;::::.w:;;:::•.r:: •S.v:^:i+'vw. vA{n......:. .... ..} ,r. � \•::Y }r v..r:...:::x+rf-::xv:+vv: t ....:.. , .....: ... v}'+:`{•u{?•n: .;{.}:'•:::• .::K n.v.....:.....n..Mw.vT'^:{•}::.{..::::::::...•;..•w::;:{?.:•::.v:x.yt.}}}}}Y:{?•;;....:-}::F.i'r,'ry;:?,{:}:'.-.�a`•:'. +:: +}� �Jv: }....G '}Fv+:.... }it?:•..vv:: }....Y,tr•v.}•.•.a:�..::},}+. ::.. .n.....u........vv w:+....nvY...........,,::::..........::v•:r.n........+.v}}:•}:•},,v:?>:}•}:?{•.::nvi't#:# AWAR•: •'S .:.uv+itr.•: } :: •:'. .{•:n{ f•:rn......... •:. •1....•....... .-:}:.:..:::.r..;;....v:•.w:::v:� �k* nv......• rw:h•:.ahw::v:x•.::nv+::::::..-. .-Ci- MEN-- ...\ ?}::; n .:.}`r ..}.::r.::t•S:..,f}t,.,. x .n.x::.t...:.,•A•:::::::::.v:.v} : . : .. .r. } :'::v::a. x...+'t}.'.vv:r.•W r .n;v: ..vxr::.... : x.v ...4 f.: .}...::..-. ..:n.....v.............'•n � .a: r/ of n:.v3x.. •. ' ..t...: � .''.t.. .. .... ........... .. .....:.}:•.+}:h;{:p}:�:-}Yx• t{t;f'.: }' .+F, .nr.{•:V ., •:•.... .... ...: ,.. u ...n T...v:..... ..:w•.v......:.......x....t::}:•i}}}•::::::........:::::x• .;{.vr•p yr:::}:$.;:.:••xa y J.:•.'h.v::Fw::;.:.,.+ fi'C•v4.YA:x•]:G:!O / :M• }}.r' \';•vnv+•::.; .,,; /✓..,,.. .:......:..ih.}:)•+}:}•rr.v:::::::•.v.vh: '%•w:}xi::'•'.+t..v.nn.v{{vnv v.,C ..k n•N,•,{{nt xtv<'n. vita'•r. r.i�^{.: •.v{...;,rti••rff' ..+Jrn, ::f .a: :}3x+}n:w:}: �yyyt•.• : ,rr:.a}.v ''' •rw.v v:.vn ......yr ;:{..:.. w.•..: r.r..,.. :•f.h......fv.{?v:•+..}:ta}:h}:•}':?{:v.};•.... rx:ntt: t:.r.. rN Y: ::.{•v,f:% i• .J n { .,fx. :}:fvi}:}:4}}:a}:?•: }. •.:i.?•: .v..n }.;x..+r i.•..u�F"Y •+�'x ry... :.v:r. v.; ..... :.v...w:.:.f. F.;.;r..,..x:.•vn:w::nv::n•::.}:. x::n.::n ":h:....::... ..... ..: {r {.:.: ,:•••.,•:.. .... ft•S..+ ::••rkxt•?�}:}c•}}•n....... .t:.:.t::..t..rt. ,.:..:t;.Y.,{{::?:>:::::: ..f.r }. ,..far.. J. c•}�..� . :{+•.:. :N.�... (. J ...vr:: ... ..... .. n... r. :h ... ....:. - ... u� ...•!�:a�.1Y"i.. V.. .....{.:. x u..A .... u. .....:-.::x:::::xrw.. n..v......:.......v.:r}:.}}}:.}}::}::tvw::;;;......'' .ua}.., •v, ...n:, v..........f :+C.ix......: .x..{...:.v nnn3 p,..v•. .......:.W..{:..::t. ........x:........•:.v} Hutt:.'+::::f::•}'•.:x::•::...................::............vw:::;, v..x::::::;........ ......... ..n.....r....:.....v::;},•};^:::::::r::rvF ...{..n..A. .}�t.':T.. �:. S .5... .;..>., ,.h,.c-:.•.vt•:v.;}Y..:v}:::nr.. :..:...,,: {•.t•:::::..::}::::f.•ir:::::::::::::::. ................... ..... v::.•f.:•:+: ..h.. n.::A+{•:"rT•:.: Fitt.::+•::::::::: , ... 3„•.:::•.:{:». .5.... .:.r.....................::............. ::::.:{:....:.:::::F....::::.:.::::::.:....::::::::.... t. •:.A+. ,s.t;:.......;.. ..w� h}..}};\:kvr +.k}v. },, .,.t:..:.v.,..- .t.t.•;.,r. .. r.t..;},,,v::kG::r•r:.,.:::}:rvrv:::::n•:t.::::::.....•:: +t.....::T:•n?.t:{•::•:•::::n•:;;......,.:. .h.S. {../.+:., ,,.n�.h.,x.\}Y ..:. ..,� iCt �n h .. }A•:�t•..::r. fJ.:h, •J•,, ........ .... r.. 3n., w: +-::•:n...... t....... n;}-:•.{•}:hw:::::x::::::::;;::}}::::::n•::}:•}}::w::;. ....:. ..; . a }.t ..A.. :: ..nt..S;.%:{{.;•::r;{•};.;:•:::::::{.;;.;;..t:-:::::::::•:::•:::-:::::................::::.......... ..fr }. �•�... ..:.., : a:.r<..,..{. ..............:. ......:.....t..:....:::.:.:........ .:....... .:.market..330-4.00�: .. ...x.t}}•+i...} �. k:y'3...'4.. .. ....,.?h..,.,,A Cno, , : ''}u,r.,, ...t r..r...x.....:................... ... :.......................... ................................. ..A.... .�•� �`^r'�.'+��:;i ,v Jn :..:n•.::: ..v:,...,vA... n......:, .:.,.v;{•n.....:.,F•:..F.v....-f}':.:..w.:...yC�. /y� .\'•.,. .}.... F+•v. .::;v.• + $, to{.A•: ?+a: h,'+h..t}. ",V.f•}:J::3v �rn.. :•.:.v .. $$+'Cv.N.nr., SC •:r,n.. •:�-:h'•,v,.:,,•\u .. 3�: ../.....•.X.•}:a:{:{a}':::.......................... .:::::nw::}n•::.v:.v.:v:--:.:::::::v:v::.....i�. ..f••::• �.(J .v. n .T 'r yy,,,, , .h n.v .•.}vn..a :. ..,ai....S r. ....n. ...n...............n.....n.v r.... ...v............................... .. vv{;,:i,A xx v v }:4i:Y' {•:{:3:a:•:•S:•.\ •.: a A. ...::,••:::>�}. ,•.:.. rr.....ty ::.....:... .. ,...../...A..r..t.r� .....:........Y...................:.............,.................. '.}........r...h :Sw:;{:•{. :{t••, rr.v:•.a:...r:?•�r t..........n. ...:...n............. yy;?v.:v:.v.v: ..... .....v... :...:...:t4r'{ x,'h+'{, „SSas .;.A:}.v: •: ., :xY-...v:::•`,•.. „ry vvA+.-;,.}.: ,--}••:::.vn?v.:v.::::v,• �x .. ....,. ....t .: ::.... .:• ay.x .. f :..•�.,:::•.::::.................:.::::::::):.:..... ..,-:::.v::::.vv::n:;.n::.;,;lit:•i:•::}:3};:;::}::.`.•:•:•i:•:•:•:•:•:}i .; ':. .,r.}f:�ac..Y{}.;n:.,}..,. .t...Y' 4 h• .T ..:).... n+•�•T.x , nh. +� t:.. .. ..v .. } ... }h..JJ. r.. .... ., ,:v••}}::}•?• .....t....:. ••::•}:{.:a+>:•::•:;•}:•}:•{:.:::::::::n•nr:::::.,:•::::n:::•:.:•: .;y`„. .::/'��y��,� ,�yi :xo::. h\.h. .{Y.• .; ,..}{;\ :T},ra•."C� +^f.Sv....n..,.:. ..:u}•f .x...,•: .:{.�,.;.;.x;;......}v:•.v:v:}:::::.v.....n....:.v.r......:.........,}.}m:x:..::........................�.oll{.l �.�`�te�.�44.:��V�.�...} :•:n� . a. .4:..:,< .,.. .t .x .{.w ..::........,..x.�. ..... .. .:..,:.. .... :...t. ..............r......... ....,.................. �:x�'JIJn1S.•::�"0{�/�.o'Sa�:�::�:�: :...t A.v.. x� .: rn..i}•$:.},..w..nn ..h. .. ....v.. xr...T•i.h:}:......r..:n ..... ......................:.,.........,...........n.:.vy...}•:::• v:�v:::nv. ..... n�.. } �{ F .....A ..:..v{: i. .... .. v.r:.v. ...:. ........ .,. ..n..:.................}..:::.:::y.}•h'•}}.3:}::.}::•::.......:. ..vn •�Y::.}•.;{.Y':..{:;::.}v}Yn •. .. ..n`W v. .w tf..:..r........ r..... :.yr n ... :.......v rn....n.....,.................... .:..........,..............v.,n....... :�}Y±iY?}i}•:ikS:'i:"YG'.trx.r..JYa. /in.v.;.Yr.'h:,v ::•:h ...# �.} '$ .:/`S. ..:..v ..T..::•:-.v::;••+u• :::}..r.:... r,}.:••:::n; ..t r..+i.+. i::y}}:j;}:;:;:;}},:: v:,• ��pp.:\C-.:. .:.};}.;.... r.:....tt. f., :r,i}f:.,.,.n;{.,A{.:::.::. ... ...•:: .,••:::h•.v::.v:}: .. •.{v)x,•+.- .. rrF•. ...5.+{-x'+F' v..Y }x.}t-.3.. v. ...: ..,.�v ...n.xS:k nn r.h ........0:......u.....t.v.....a ...................:.n :•.-::?.}}:w:.v:xv,...:. ,�( +:•�•: }'f. : ..w. ...:.. :r v v}: ..... v .Tv....n.r.n n}'?'t........ .Y.n... }n.. .. .v.... ,.{...,............. :....................,....v S ........ `•.% Sar: .f?{•y}t;,:' .Y•}'•}'f '. :f•W::}m. .�.r.MT. .f.t:.i {... •, .'fy,��r 4?:.•. ..r::..,.:.;n;...t;•::,\.t.+:;;..;`}..: .. ..v.w;.nt...... " � :}:•:p:'y at(•vr .r. �?': ': n }'x v.. nv. A:.f. r v.:F. .t.:.tt n..n.r....f..n.... .... n{v:nx{:h}'h::.v.T{x}..Hutt}}.t{Vn}.....{ .\ µ,.�•x-a:M v,:,,n �F• ra. .,..t}.N .... `+nit {3c:t,.:YY.3}.v. ?n:...r ...r:�c:r: .•:...n. .......,...{.;.. ......::Y.:.....::�:::f•::.:..:.rv:..:..r....::::::. A.:;..:........{...,..,.::::-::}::?{ .:� tT. }t'Jh. v ...}t .....,.C.v.......ka,}'}T...^.}.`}.�..:.. ::::......}a<:{.x:...:.:,,.:n,*.,:{:::.,:,:;ra,.,•}.:n., .n}:..::..:.}.::.{?.:::::�..:::::.....:....:....:.,{:.:... ..::,..Y.........:....r:.::}nt•::::::}::::::T�:::::::::::.LQ.�i o ei}:�: '� h•.Y�t },:•...}:S• ...\} �T'r tt.3•:;w:y:':? '-i:dcb:prnjecb:104/105:rfprespn) 3au • MI ., 1 ' DevelopmentUe, Las Veps based privately held ►7 FV7,7- tiniesbare partnaing!�Resot%bm,asL,=dDmloper. Corporation,LeadDeveloperr. for !with loW property owner and DeveloM,Owner,and Operator 'Frank Cracchiolo: Property Omer, responsi development company. of two Las Vegas timeshare Owner/Operator of retail space. resorts. Ion Coultrup&Mike Roberts: 1. To the extent desircd�complete public improvements adjacent to the Worthy Frank Cracchlolo: Property Project Manages Owner, IL Domino Jon r , five residential condominium &Winton: Attorney 3. Relocation,down time,and goodwill profe= costs. Mike Roberts: Project Manager, 4. Affordable housing obligations Main-Pier Phan I and IYrd Block Wc;L Estimated annual tax increment 111 1 a €`'it's.��",,,, "¢x"r �`�wxi � 3r.� Y o A"T� s _•r ��. � � - .1•. ",s � �">' �"�' � " e�;s. h a."£`'>`��'�yxjF �a���'4?;��"$3`3 .,< ' y -1 �r �� 5� �- a� _�•Yv .J < y'1"' K+� 3 �y"¢��0 .✓ >3t5£ r f "� �K s p a_ v, Si "'S �xl-.'<'<xa�r a r'fi•6. 3£2 "aclo``+ ;,rs.-y,� ,s R: <F zS 's' ,.'J.r. 1 1 1 1 x, xxT �e` ysa "<yx", . -.�..: a"` " xy ,a.is� c� -`<:-r �;^>c :^•,� s,..C,. .s.�,.t•s,s.,a::a`$¢,�'.: r•{C > .1'•> .� ss,i": ;,<':z> s`..,<°x .'n�;"Yi ,�ax, s �,=� ¢��a tt '.s s --[ <3F`:fsD xx is - 3 �d?.a,E xr.^€. '�. �..,.�.a><.,x�-•f:#R.,. s.,."L`,wq�,x ,o- ..,.,rid. L ".x:�%_eZ,..�ey, y�.$i" "�.s :.¢¢°% ."y.,,. $,.5. '��?>,;.� .> �T ♦' ''�5�: •s.:, < .e., D«,• "Q'e. a3o t.„�R,{'*c3�.'�''': s A">.�,"'.";^: x" `.x n>�' Ai?. ,g.Ei.•.. »e Y S 'a<:^eF:, �." .axe.zF:.,,�;< ;s.�F'` 3.<-.c�Ae »$x � :� .a2 ,'F't�' g yo & ty3. <.<a. ¢: ..> £ .°��( � - "•Yz^�,x-__,� "���x�u>"xF��.� �>�� �� � yx��z. i. r•, •s�. �.s?:a r�u� ��af , ^zx�"°^ az- 'iae <`'c'' ,x't �: •'6"`z >e ,''.c. x z'h'? ^y � -) �" '„`r�' 'c a Lw:9��¢= z• � i � �a� 'r$ ,.���N<.?,�c�' .r a>.a-s, .. y >"�'4'L'a.x:"'�- �5'?'a:;,,s.<.�,.St•, '�".3<�':c:. s '1 > x>,::;r -�33. ,<s y r✓ x F- Y Y. x r ? �;r `$< �.. �,'�<C: ^.,w,K."�;yN`aya.,:a: _ , a .�,�< 'k, �� . w 3cw s rt s ar s•< `3 iL" £d' .b<'F f t,e' �,{� z a �':y,.! y.. .1 <,s�yW y.a° € $x> �e.� s a'�'..°^' �Y,s,� �; . u <�<"'A ¢• ':u,�. ka >„ :,.?3 b: ; .,„ 's< x'.� .7�q'r, �'�,'a"f,•rY;: 9�ss>� �' idx �'a�`.sa �~ y 1111--" M,�,' " ¢ 5 '. an— $�,^�"s<o�°i s"��"=+�` �abz�.L;.Y'#.,.c-s•c�-:;�zs'a .fi.„�c;',0 3.�,"3.n.:r "..>.,'ia � ..zc« k. ' E: .z, ?'�:�.1•' S. �r J3197 Yi, ...°{ t .;£�...':`Y:": 7. ..! >v : �o��• z.. 3 i c: ,;a. .' �: ((i�� s��.: 1' t „ik.`d y ]'s".ice�e. �o ,_ ;a.`t�".x.> u::�:.�v..,?�:..,...���s:..`�...�.r4a� ���� ..:�'..�" i:' ��e � ,n:.�., !a�.x..s�a.' ::.,s:.,. _.A.t�:.a::�.,.•,..•,d>:.,�,{r�.. ..,.S�a.`:�r'> .,a ,o <;��r�:-3;,�,0.�... �:.a,?2 :M.�..:.........:„„. � {:al.• " Im ,P{S. .}.".Y>.. , .a.. �y.: .::.:.aY.t£y",.."'+C4+C::'. :'� \ �'y{� :,,�,;..:...fF::.{':::::.sS.: .'2,.. �.'.......;:,. r . en ;Asisfdrtcd w vr:{ <:.>riranc�ial.:. orTlevef o .mid .. e i . evA cp.... ,,,�.:. ..��o:z::>. ^a s�C,,.y..,..... . . ...:c3a:. : .z. ='86'....:t tWr.o....-,.s.ta , , .. : . . `.:,.." " .A :.`:, c .c8 ..b> `.ac?'s'`�,•c.a: :�2{. £ .. ,. d.>:... '. .. '�.�' `� a >..et....�'�>�.'�'.n:}:.>,.:�L:..:::,>S�s:}��>�.c:z":>R�z�'6.�,s�a�>.•a'.:eo,.... .»*sv. .�..."{.�..:�,a..�&.;a:::n..u.a;<{:.:.�'>... , , 6. Long-term propertylbusiness owner Developer of Main-Pier Phase L Abdelmuti Development Company, None specified. No financial statements/ Letter from attorney who undertook Main-Pier Phase L Property Owner/Developer. No other information provided objecting to Mr. team members identified. Abdelmad not being provided with an opportunity to submit a proposal. u7:�4$ ng=leiritiope "�c�viiec" itie" Fairies"` �toi?aaLaii" Propety ames�YcfoiYa }'i[axdPropq �Agencpto resgonsibl`forttio cralstatertientf s , WM x. pat 'ner�temen 5 a : 4<: :. : � W 1►it�Ct:� � 2.: 'de a�fac�d�° 'S��G ,� ear: M a, r a P 's :£ w 13strma �annua`lstax nc�i+emeat€'a1't3�,�,�Q.: ...... J 1 (ffdcb:projeet-fprspnl) _..........................._ ... ._..................... . .. ......... ............................__......._._..._......................................__.......... ,. POLO RESORTS . Conceptual Development Site Plan 1 ` D L ,' , � � ' SerP,locdc-1YPicA1. —� ' I- --- '=a,x-YSEr�x ,eric �+c-�►jol. To if Ket�l�a¢CA cFtBy� 2,-� � ► _G�alGccfforty _ (�0,03�;�.F � i F--�--� &-N ,vw %vromo4 Piftu, Orp4 — - -=lo' wr+�s�r;NeE r'�uc � - - &too 1y1F f's-r ZHO 5TOeY ZS`MOO:Z)w9toIL`f SE1504-1K to sr►st ' lot ryas. eAAK �- . p ftv6.2N°SCcR`( I � 2�AP�011E Z"�r�(DR'l'SGr!'PGK � SITS: M(XK105 0 10 ZO 30 40 50 -- - — 17A�l FEc-COAST i y UTUM l 106 S;r -L-s I l i i i l i ` O {O ?O *W 40 SO F ALE soap Z D'} G�c1[ GrYN;��LinJeT ELk�11T=Y1' LOu+iKac $�� Z `F�KCINh -3 0' EHT►Y 1. eof -214 -►� TAMPZr I `' LL f �o / / ��� /�� '1 W� ►C t�Cl) - / "PAciF-z COST Hwy �P 7 + cl-vIf FILOO K b4(a O � WE c 7 i Ilk rA GLJ--._. _-- i 4v It - a r-I i l II � I M I I li i 10 r� i i IS ft ! MOM: 9 r a � 31 ;t d 3 7 Irtln 71 S1 Illjh '43 I I ;1 EcD LOGE 0 l0 Z✓7 '50 40 Sb a * man J Cf-'E:N TO CAP-O&J CCUV-T�FOOL-De-� m Y 0 8 _ o WAL-Ni_JT SJCRE�T To - 1 I � � I � — � EaK K aF tlalSE lot oo ' ! Loeey LU W �� w w }b N +41 Or � ll 5�-0'' 'Ft1a�a1clnerl 'PAG(FlG GOAT 14WY y O_10 to 30 40 SO `7CAL-5 - ......... ........ .. .-....... ......... ......... - ............................................................................................................................ ...................................._-_....._.._.._......._............................................................................................................................................................ ................................... . ....... ........................._..................__.............................................................................................................. 2 R utan & Tucker (Bagstad) Conceptual Development Site Plan MT011, ...... .......... ......... ... ... .....1._.._...40�0'.._--_---_.__..._—_-__ Oc Z A _ r f -3 Ir _ A W65TA P na: . FaOL•CswL . • w/+,�f 7i 110 � ' I aIMFS 1•%b t•IO � .��. If . � R[y.wuvs Vqio ?40 • I !V[Iya� 3521. 1.171. ... I -�: H 2: I _ ►I�Vrf►�RL i ��: I 59W"4* RIQ[7 oV.�I.tuwvRle M _ _4y' so'-Zy. .onvser 1��� bIB•g3 _�.,'. LILr— C141MAl t orn �r10 bra Fl esT f�.Do(z `:i5' HTO PCAUFMA `' �.A. -. ' Jib. � ,�• - .n. �!ii•�I �i�l � !i��l.l �! I Iln (IIII it i �._ _. UP n 415 WEtx Ir10 Nil - ALIFIG COAST NI4NWAY SMVA11Or1 CFFONT) ''LL A 7D'•I.o' w•c.;.VRex n - i [ i:. � l lj nT f i IMo , II I ..l m.l l II - - �i ,K Mu(E RnB( fb _ _ r�.n�.ti. --- — ,°°w,�",+.,1. 9D.BAc5'J4/G73 BiNSr �?•`. �1�IcA u *4wAcvFW Mid in""' r �rwe°stc �ii1 ihili� I'.I. I _ _.r.. �T� - . ExTatoR�tEVallo�f5 ' - 'IYN.DLLR.1LFl•1'�Nurd• .�. Il 0 '� I Q p p p •� p :J� D 14W 1PAL _ _ � -- - •. � - T. I:l _l . LIES —.._ lmv+n�o�:t-t---- -I----•• -.......... .-_ � --� �_� �IE�1�0. ?y' TI �;,d oil J?EPQ.EI.E1/ATION CFP�CESPA�W�1�1oT')_ . _.. i. 5`r1� sfR&EtE(�YatIDN (51yE)� U moo' 'a'•I I ......... ......... ......... .......... _......... _............ - ........ ...... - _. ............_...._........._._....................................................._.__......................%........_................................__...................................................... - .......... _..........................................................__.................._........................................_._................................................... _...................._.....__........_................_............._........._....................................................................._........__.............._._................................. ..............................._..._..............._................................................................................._.......__....._..................................... _.._...................._...............__....................._.................................._......................................._............................................... 3 ... an: Ir nso No Conceptual Development Site Plan Submitted ... . ...._... ... ._.............._...__.._..............._............._.......__.................................................................................. __...._........_...._._........................._............................................................................._....................... #4 CIM Group wlFederal Realt, Conceptual Development Site Plan J-1 I II I L ji, LL -- _- WALNUT AVENUE i NAP I _ II NEWS CAFE 3 4 al I'Sm + t— - POIENTM HM WI I 't I1IFAIERIHI F RETAL `_ 15.4W ASNN F I I I • RESfA RAM 5 A IWO _..-.., I I 4- •go NAP RESTAUZAM mom I :p0� _ ��- 7 , R6TAIRANf -- I j I— — — — -----------'----.— —..—..—..—.—..J I L..----..—..— P A C I F I C C 0 A S T H I G H W A Y DOWNTOWN HUNTINGTON BEACH LEVEL 2 PLAN BLOCKS 104& 105 URBAN MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT PACOC COAST HIGHWAY.HUNTINGTON BEACH.CA I I it I I II � I t WALNUT AVEME is i P.:y .IB00 5.005. I NAP I I BOOKSMM I.i Ju— I CAPE ,OUf LCNOQJG AR �'v.,. i PARYJNC ACCESS ,•/. AL 3 -I POTMIIAI lion LOW I jr MEATER IHIu . y 7,000 N t z 4� _.._..J �ECY�IJIYIMSi10E1 r I L..—.._ z1.500 I _.._..� REwa _ i r.._.._ I7.z0o NAP I I 7. I i �.aoo P A C I F I C C 0 A S T H I G H W A Y DOWNTOWN HUNTINGTON BEACH LEVEL 1 PLAN BLOCKS 104& 105 � • � � • URBAN MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT PACIRC COAST MGMAY.MM-Td1 BEAM CA J-j LL WALMIT AVMW I I III I PwIW WAW" jLp ul i10 I P NG i X i I I i 17 17 27 27 2, 37C I I i i P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y i DOWNTOWN HUNTINGTON BEACH PARKING PLAN BLOCKS 104& 105 URBAN MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT PACIFIC COAST pGNWAY.HLMINGION BEACH CA _..._....._........................................_..............._.............................._................._....._._.................................. .......................... _......_......................................_........._..................._.._......................................._..._.......................................... ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. ........... ..............._........__..........__....._......................__.............._._..............._.__........................................_.............................................. ................ .... _......... . ......................._.................._....................__._................................................................................... #5 T. C. Management, Inc. Conceptual Development Site Plan ` 1LA rr � �l r b ��-,.;S��sFC.t�'��'��f+r..�•ci ' �'�j?r��®��, �ZF`.»w "'�"�] 'r I ,�f f��. ��ry;l it�•.t .au����..� _ j i�rlrs+®11tyla =S Ya60G=^=�. t„ ,° ems• ocf f• � � � **s .c�•, , ..gin.-- t— � [� I _ ru .: ice; s� 'lot" I I PUBLIC PAfIKING 'ALL Cr /'a•scsr cs`-o• -aa•-o• - Js•-o• Js-o- _-sa o-- /.�•ocoru rfav ___�___ I /OOJTIOv I , J 1 /oowcss Pcsru JUNr Jrcr rG aFFrec a/rrc I I fJ) /SDofF - - SODS/ ti o a WI 1 L 1y.1 1,. Q !JI JJOOSF ?!Dorf lJOOSF SOOSF i �• ` e ` � I !J9 lJOOSF JJOOSF 1JOOS/ SOOJF EXISTING ABOELAJVTJ Z � Q � Q . ^I roriLs esoosF /JoasF JioosF !soar. 1 O � 1 J' /•-/vriicxNcc 117 119 121 123 R I •a-sroor ourcornvs 1.� s••J•scre/Cw �`I 1 .Gcss r.vf•surcornc Ncrslr •ILL PEOY/J/CC�SETS/CX5 •ILL P/!JM•r• G -SITC �ny O O O%O 1 I -- PEA.VIJTCR PIiDCfAtl PG/N ..: C I A�� oq�$� JJ'o•Or/rOOg9 OlNr p / M M LIAC Y EXIfr'O fly `J • `J FIFOEf JJ•-o•srncwiLX ABOEZNUTJ L IGN r0 EXISrfAO GLWB JP'M II bm MATH S TAEET �0 O ® 4 4 ® Frlvsr BL OGK ------------� �----• UNTTACT 1 � � '4r°O`er• BE/GI+C Cw P�90�OSE0 BLOCfI .104 ���••�•�••• LOTS 5, 7, 17 SI TE PLAN .41 ............ - ..................................._....... ..............__..........._._._..................................... ........................................................... ..._........_....._._... _.. _....... ..........._.... ..._ ............................_............._................._................_......_...........................--_._._....._....._........ ..... .. - ..... ...............__...._.........................................._..._._........................................_.................................... __......_... . ........_......... ................ .._...... .._. ..............................__.._.__...................._....................._........................_........ . ........_......... ................... .. ........................................_.........-............_............................................_......... _... - - _................. .. ............ ..... ......... ......... ...... .. - ......... ........ ....._.... ......... ..... .._.. --- - . ......... .......... 6 R i Tinker (Abde mut ) Conceptual Development Site Plan - Eiii�1w I = 1bum. 'r- �::ICI,�.�\ ��► ` - MINE ���•��II_-€i`��liiiiil?EI4II I � :�. ;: or■■■■ ,� �ir�■ ►`_tea 0f IZ / RIM • r'�IIIIIIIII�_ '�, _ _ _ I ` 'i C�"�gyp'= Y�7Y�r! '�• .— . �i ��� i � Illunu►— /� t��'7►/I-�/1�f'\\tom/� !_�vex■ _ �■.�•�* • . II IIDl1�= a..jF /j � i�,111 •ar 1. -i r ........ ................. ............................................................................._......._...... _........................._....._._................ ..................... ............ . ............. -............................_..................._................................_.... _.........................._................................................. _................._....................._.............................................._......_................................ _......................................................_.................................................. ....................................................._.__...._......_..._........_.................... .. . Vicki & Jim Lane ........................ _........ ....__ _................._............................. _ __....._ _ _ . .................._..... ................. __.........._......__............_.............................. __ _ _ __ __ ................. _........... . .......... ..__ _..............._ _ _ __ Conceptual Development Site Plan i • I I ` I ,'tom .�'w.�v - :�l•� .. ... .... .. ,; ... �'�3. .�.,'y.S::��S�i..�.c�t�.h-.'.� :r�. :�i.,Sr..��.-c.,�•.:.�lv., .� 3>.�• ;:+'('.,:Y�`.:;3�:,:;•:_e�. +.:�. 't�,=-� EKTEe e'e �levATi�ai REN C.Pfi"(... •;',.*a Y � � � Y�ERR.9�UtiF:-bl9'G_ ., - �t6C1 .I EF19I�1.96fI11Q �?w[ :�: =.1�4'..':'•:••;'�=i�::� ^••'• 't! �A�Ji!� `- ..?4�.:.,;-�._ Y�f!+�lr. �''.I�CT:/fA7 N.`STCIfT'.NQKTIMGT017 OF�CII�-•�•�•. �Ol�bt��P���ICFMMYU'•. .M/4!/ .. Q[�jt'/Sit 'Lv]:14YM,�i�,U+*�YY+tttl;:i�KsDLeiJvi4�Olif{A;x7.���.�.,.9:,�+ in, l I L II � _ ❑ �; nc�a����l�l.l.. I r t I I �tl �'•t^, 'A:I:,: •'cry';.-'"sr:,.�.�' `�=—'c�� � •fir^' r Z{ .. "��'1A'wl M` •5 e :. I WARREN C.,P17T' IN. Arch(tepture/Eng(nee ,�`'` ,'l1��M4q"4C'-�rwMTlgcial.OFrr1 i.�. ..- .:gm!+M�RNAwq.4G{ • �Y�NlIiY�Ptid.w�yr�.. iti_OY��. �. 's:����J.') � _f. ��)���� � ..Y. ... ..'. � � ... ...•. :.�:;: i R-ilfZ'n_ � 't-��6!5'••'�9.!'LNG.lrlim•J1(/���i �3's.a..�...�-"s�+��a�sti':�r�11�Jiw.....J:..Z'�l:'..r it Memorandum from Council Member Harmon dated 2/3/98 . . - __ _ _ _ _.. _...... __._........ .. __ .. _. . _ ... _......... _.......... __. _ ....... . _ .._ . ........................................................ ....... .. _. _ ..._._. .................. ..- _.. _.. . _ ...... _.. .......... . .. _ ......................._. ....... _.. . .. .. . _....... • CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH HUN"MGTONBEACH CITY COUNCIL MEMO TO: Ray Silver, Acting City Administrator FROM: Tom Harman, City Council Member DATE: February 3, 1998 SUBJECT: Block 104 and 105 At the conclusion of the recent workshop on Block 104 and 105, staff asked that the Council submit in writing any questions or comments they might have. Herewith are my questions. 1. The city does not have the right to condemn the Bagstad property because it has residential units on the second floor. Given this fact, please answer the following: a. Can a new ordinance be enacted that would give the city the right to condemn this property? b. If so, how long would it take to get such an ordinance on the books? C. What are the positive and negative aspects of proceeding with a new ordinance that would allow the city to condemn the Bagstad property? d. What is staffs recommendation about enacting such an ordinance? e. Would the city be wise to enact a new ordinance as a "back up"just in case negotiations with Bagstad don't work out? 2. If the Bagstad property is not condemned, what is staffs opinion on how his project and the CIM project would fit together? Can both of these projects be done with the property owners acting independently? 3. Will the CIM project be able to go ahead without control of the Bagstad property? Please explain. 4. If condemnation is required of any properties in the project area, where will the Agency get the money to buy the property? Please explain. a. If CIM is selected as the developer, will they "front" the money needed for condemnation? b. If so, has CIM informally agreed to do this, i.e., front the money. C. What is the staffs estimate of the approximate cost to condemn all of the non- Agency owned property on Block 104 and 105? Please itemize by lot description/name and show the total cost. d. Is CIM ready, willing, and able to pay this estimated cost of condemnation? e. What type of legally binding assurance can the City obtain from CIM that they will pay condemnation costs, and when in the timeline will the City receive this commitment? f. More exact financial information is needed from CIM concerning the amount of money they are willing to put into this project. Specifically, if CIM is selected as the developer, what will it cost the city and what will it cost CIM? 5. Please explain the details of Abdelmuti's request to be provided with 133 parking spaces on Block 105. a. I am concerned by the statement of Abdelmuti's attorney that he, Abdelmuti, "must be satisfied." Exactly what is required? b. How does the staff envision "satisfying" Abdelmuti with regard to the parking requirement? Does he have "veto" power over the CIM project. Please explain. C. If CIM is selected as the developer, where will Abdelmuti's parking be located, and who will pay for it? 6. Our consultant, Kathe Head, previously recommended timeshares for Block 105. Now, Polo Resorts wants to do timeshares on Block 105. On the other hand, CIM wants to do commercial on Block 105. Which one of these two alternatives does staff think will work the best? Please explain. TH:lp Updated Proposal Critique .............................................................................................................. ATTACHMENT #3 3/16/98 Updated Proposal Critique 1'ropnsal Pros Cons 1. Grand No linkage to Block 104. • Requires Local Coastal Plan Amendment Pacific . Involves sole remaining property owner for timeshare. Resorts with lower basis on a property with No significant retail component. limited ability for Agency to influence • More limited General Fund revenues. redevelopment. Limited linkages to Main Street/ • Alternative hospitality product which Greater Downtown. diversifies offerings. • Only proposal for solely Block 105,no • Proposes positive land sales price net of comparisons. obligations. . Original timeshare developer withdrew. • Highest project tax increment revenue. • Requires Agency to address large part of • Development limited to Agency-owmed parking provided for Abdelmuti. property. 2 Bagstad ;Redevelopment of highly visible •' Requesting higl level of Agency propeity ass�stace • Involvesproperty owner with a lower lopmag experience bans or►a property wiW iuntted abil.►ty Lnmrted scope atd scale for Agency to influence redevelopment Lintj increase un public revenues 3. Alfonso . Involves property owner with lower • Requesting Agency assistance. basis. • Not meeting City design/setback objectives. • Place holder. • Limited increase in public revenues. 4 CIM/Federal . ;Proposes to close'Ftfth Street • Possible controversy to proposed Fi&h Realty • `:Most comprehensive,mixed use Street closure proposal with best integration to: an. • Requves Agency to address entue Street and Downtown amount of parking required for • Possessretail tenant relationships. Abdelmuh • :Cnhcai;mass • May require site assembly by Agency • . Highestpotenttal for City General Eund • Lunite.opportt ntty to nncorporate revenues Bagstad/Craccliolo • 'Hrgh pro)..... tax increment May not result n i property sale revenues • Lumted'/No Agency assistance to Agency proposei] Tuneframe to actual developmCnt_may • Well funded REIT be longest • :Main Street retail emphass/highly; X. X. qualified developer • No local CoastalPlan Amendment requveX. 5 T.C.Mgmt. . Involves property owners-with lower • . Not meeting City design/setback (Mulligan, basis. objectives. Draper, • redevelopment of highly visible • Requesting Agency assistance. Mase) properties. • 'Limited increase in public revenues. • No impact on need to address Abdelmuti parking. LocA&veloper%propertp owner •:> Not a property owner in:defined Tucker •" :Would'address Abd emu t�parknng ' redevelopment site • No defined proposal 7. Lane • Involves property owner with lower • Requesting Agency assistance. basis. • Not meeting City design/setback • Redevelopment of a highly.visible requirements. properties. • Limited development experience. • No impact on need to address . Limited increase in public revenues. Abdelmuti parking. (g:dcb:projects:104105:proscons) Page 1 3/30198 .: ..:..: ....:..::............. . .::.. :......:.... . ..... oe ost Bene rt:Anal srs::.::.::..:..:..:::. :::. ..::: ::: Firm Development Team Proposed Project Agency Assistance Agency Annual Annual Annual Total Comments Property Tax Sales Tax Transient Agency/City Increment Occupancy Annual Tax Revenue 1 Grand Pacific Grand Pacific Resorts,Inc. .Eighty time share 1. To the extent desired,complete public $800,000 $393,000 $20,000 $85,000 $498,000 Resorts Developer units(90,000 square improvements adjacent to the Worthy parcel. Frank Cracchiolo: feet)hospitality/time RCI Consulting Property Owner, share 2. Complete hazardous materials remediation. Project Manager Owner/Operator ofretail space. .10,000 square feet of 3. Relocation,down time,and goodwill costs. commercial/ restaurant/retail 4. Affordable housing obligations. RPM Design,Architect . 5. The value of the agency land contribution is Nossaman,Gunther,Knox,& $201,250. Elliot,Attorneys `Total cost ofagency assistance is$401,250 1 Eldon Bagstad Bagstad Living Trust, •15,046squarefeet of 1. Contribute 10 foot wide alleyparcel. S42,533(+/-) S40,000 $30,812 N/A $70,812 commercial-retail. Long term business/property owner 2. Construct/install public improvements. in the downtown. 3. Complete hazardous materials remediation. Jcffrey Oderman,Rutan&Tucker, Attorney 4. Provide any required parking. No other team members 5. Affordable housing obligations 6. Provide Bagstad with 8250,000 for down time and loss ofgood will,plus relocation,down time and goodwill for tenants. 7. Provide an interest rate subsidy of not to exceed $115,000 8. Value of agency land contribution is$23.467 *Total estimated agency assistance is$488,467 (g:mike::rJprspnt) 3130198 o t 1 B os ene rt: Firm Development Team Proposed Project Agency Assistance Agency Annual Annual Annual Total Comments Property Tax Sales Tax Transient Agency/City Increment Occupancy Annual Tax Revenue 3 Frank Alfonso •Frank Afonso,Property Owner •5,550 square feet of 1. S 100,000 in assistance. N/A $12,000 $11,100 N/A' $23,100 This proposal Property owner commercial/reloil/ serves as a downtown .No other team members restaurant 2. Provide any required parking. placeholder. .specified. 11 is *Total estimated agency assistance is anticipated $150,000(+/-) this property will sell to CIM Group. 4 CIM Group •Street Retail West,LP,Property •Retail: Property Owner/Developer proposed to acquire Developer to $300,000 $200,000 S175,770 $626,000 Agency Owner/Developer 102,400 square feet privately held properties and Agency property for front cost of unable to Street Retail West, $3.5 million site assembly acquire on an LP,to consist of .Morley Buildings,Contractor •Restaurant: beyond involuntary CIM Group LLC 21,300 square feet Agency to be responsible for: agency basis the and Federal Realty owned land Bagstad •Kurtz Urban Planning Investment Trust a Consultants,Entitlements •Cinema: 1. Completion ofsite assembly. parcel nor publicly traded 22,400 square feet the non- REIT which has •Matt Fragner,Sonnenshein, 1. Development ofparking in excess ofamount parking developed or owns proposed portion o f Nath,&Rosenthal,Attorney •Hotel: 92 commercial 60,000 square jeer Cracchiolo properties,totaling .CSA Architects,Architect 3. Cost of extraordinary offstte public parcel. 13.7 million square improvements. feet. 4. Value ofagency land contribution is$1,364,070. `Total estimated agency assistance is S1,564,070. 5 T.C.Management- •T.C.Management,Developer •Rehabilitation of •Development pro formas submitted illustrate a N/A $26,000- $15,000 N/A 841,000- on behatfof, existing structures gross deficit for all three properties,including S43,000 $58,000 Gary Mulligan, .Team Design,Architect down time and loss rent totaling$367,000. George Draper, •New facade with Ron and Ann Mase .Engineering Concepts,Engineers unified architecture `Total estimated agency assistance is$367,000 •Team Construction,Contractor •No discussion ofany additional parking •Keith Bohr,Real Estate Broker required,if any. •Calvin House,Attorney •16,650 square feet of commerciallretail/ •David Reese,CPA restaurant (g:mtke::rfprspW) 3/30i98 :,.::..:::::..:. : BI. . .. :.:::...,:..; o : S Firm Development Team Proposed Project Agency Assistance Agency Annual Annual Annual Total Comments Property Tax Sales Tax Transient Agency/City Increment Occupancy Annual Tax Revenue 6 Abdelmuti •Abdelmuli Development •Project not defined None specified. N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A .Project not Development Company,Property defined Company Owner/Developer. f •Not able to Long-term • No other team members calculate property/business identified revenue owner developer of Main-Pier Phase I James and Vicki .James&Victoria Lane: •10,000 square feet of 1. Provide all.required parking. $3,950 $16,000 S20,000 N/A S36,000 7 Lane Property Owner/Developer retail/restaurant/ office 2. Provide afacade grant of$146,000. Long-term property .William Carlson,Attorney owner in the 3. Underground utilities. downtown. .Warren Pill,Architect 4. Remove Main Street parking and widen plaza •Conrad Clouse,Construction area. Supervisor •Total estimated agency assistance is 8465,000 (g:mike::rJprspnt) i Economic Benefit Matrix 3130198 Bl ock 10..... . .:Cost.Bene r[Anal s Firm Development Team Proposed Project Agency Assistance Agency Annual Annual Annual Total Comments Property Tax Sales Tax Transient Agency/City Increment Occupancy Annual Tax Revenue 1 Grand Pacific Grand Pacific Resorts,Inc. •90,000 square foot 1. To the extent desired,complete public $800,000 $393,000 S20,000 $85.000 S498,000 Resorts Developer hospitality/time.share improvements adjacent to the Worthy parcel. Frank Cracchiolo: RCI Consulting, Property Owner, •Eighty Timeshare 2. Complete hazardous materials remediation. Project Manager Owner/Operator of retail units space. 3. Relocation,down time,and goodwill costs. •10,000 square fee(of commercial/ 4. Affordable housing obligations. RPM Design,Architect restaurant/retail 5. The value ofthe agency land contribution is Nossarnan,Gunther,Knox,& .Eighty time share $201,250. Elliot,Attorneys units(90,000 square `Total cur(of agency assistance is 8401,250(t feet)hospitality/lime /-) share 2 Eldon Bagstad Bagstad Living Trust, •15,046 square fee(of 1. Contribute 10 foot wide alley parcel. $42,533(+/-) $40,000 $30,812 N/A $70,812 commercial-retail. Long term business/properly owner 2. Construct/install public improvements. in the downtown. 3. Complete hazardous materials remediation. Jeffrey Oderman,Rutan&Tucker, Attorney 4. Provide any required parking. No other team members 5. Affordable housing obligations 6. Provide Bagstad with S250,000for down time and loss ofgood will,plus relocation,down time and goodwill for tenants. 7. Provide an interest rate.subsidy of no(to exceed S115,000 8. Value ofagency land contribution is$23,467 `Total estimated agency assistance is S488,467 (g:.'iA—rfpc'pnt) 3130198 .: ...::::.:.::. .:::..::..::::>:... ;:..:::'.:;"::::;::;:€::;::.>:>.::::::::::::: :: oc 41 S;: ost: ene i[: nal su :::.:: ::::: y Firm Development Team Proposed Project Agency Assistance Agency Annual Annual Annual Total Comments Property Tax Sales Tax Transient Agency/City increment Occupancy Annual Tax Revenue 3 Frank Alfonso •Frank Afonso,Property Owner •5,550 square feel of 1. $100,000 in assistance. N/A S 12,000 $11,100 N/A - $23,100 This proposal Property owner commercial/retail/ serves as a downtown •No other team members restaurant 2. Provide any required parking. placeholder. specified. It is `Total estimated agency assistance is anticipated S150,000(+/-) this property will sell to CIM Group. 4 CIM Group •Street Retail West,LP,Property •Retail: Property Owner/Developer proposed to acquire Developer to $300,000 $200,000 $175,770 S626,000 Agency Owner/Developer 102,400 square feet privately held properties and Agency property for front cost of unable to Street Retail West, $3.5 million site assembly acquire on an LP,to consist of •Morley Buildings,Contractor •Restaurant: beyond involuntary CiM Group LLC 21,300 square feet Agency to be responsible for: agency basis the and Federal Realty .Kurtz Urban Planning owned land Bagstad Investment Trust a Consultants,Entitlements •Cinema: 1. Completion ofsite assembly. parcel nor publicly traded 22,400 square feet the non- REiT which has •44att I,iagner,Sonnenshein, 2. Development ofparking in excess ofamount parking developed or owns proposed. portion of Nath,&Rosenthal,Attorney •Hotel: - 92 commercial Cracchiolo 60,000 square feet properties,totaling .CSA Architects,Architect 3. Cost of extraordinary offsite public parcel. 13.7 million square improvements.' feet. 4. Value of agency land contribution is S1,364,070. .'Total estimated agency assistance is$1,564,070. 5 T.C.Management- •T C.Management,Developer •Rehabilitation of •Development pro formers submitted illustrate a N/A $26,000- $15,000 N/A S41,000- on behalf of, existing structures gross deficit for all three properties,including $43,000 $58,000 Gary Mulligan, .Team Design,Architect down time and loss rent totaling$367,000. George Draper, •New facade with Ron and Ann Mose •Engineering Concepts,Engineers unified architecture 'Total estimated agency assistance is$367,000 •Team Construction,Contractor •No discussion of any additional parking •Keith Bohr,Real Estate Broker required,ifany. •Calvin House,Attorney •16,650 square jeer of commercial/retail/ •David Reese,CPA restaurant (g:mik-rfprspnll 3130198 .::.::.:::::: .:: ;.::::::::::>:::.:::::.:..:......:.....::: :::.::: :..::::::.:Bloek l04/105 Cost B , na! Is.::.:...::::>.::... ":.'.:..'°.......:.:.:. ene rlA:. :Ys .:.:..:. ... .. Firm Development Team Proposed Project Agency Assistance Agency Annual Annual Annual Total Comments Property Tax Sales Tax Transient Agency/City Increment Occupancy Annual Tax Revenue 6 Abdelmuti •Abdelmuli Development •Project not defined None specified. NA N/A N/A NIA N/A •Project not Development Company,Property defined Company Owner/Developer. •Not able to Long-term . No other team members calculate property/business identified revenue owner developer of Main-Pier Phase L James and Vicki .James&Victoria Lane: •/0.000 square feet of 1. Provide all required parking. $3,950 $16,000 $20,000 N/A $36,000 7 Lane Property Owner/Developer retail/restaurand office 2. Provide a facade grant of S 146,000. Long-term property •William Carlson,Attorney owner in the 3. Underground utilities. downtown. •Warren Pitt,Architect 4. Remove Main Street parking and widen plaza •Conrad Clouse,Construction area. Supervisor Total estimated agency assistance is 5465,000(+/-) (g:mike::rfpmpnt) Redevelopment Agency Parking Obligation CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH InterOffice Communication EL a Economic Development Department TO: Ray Silver, Acting City Administrator FROM: David C. Biggs, Director of Economic Development DATE: March 12, 1998 SUBJECT: Agency Obligations Regarding Oceanview Promenade Parking The purpose of this memorandum is to clarify the Agency's obligations as to parking and the City's requirements for parking of the Oceanview Promenade project. During ongoing discussions about the appropriate development strategy for Blocks 104 & 105, Mr. Abdelmuti and his representatives have raised concerns about the possible loss.of the surface parking in the area which currently serves the Oceanview Promenade project on non-exclusive and fee based basis. The Agency's obligations are defined in two places. The contractual obligation the Agency has to Mr. Abdelmuti is set forth in the Owner Participation Agreement. The OPA provides that it is the Agency's responsibility to provide what ever off-site parking is required. However, the ..."necessity for and the location of additional offsite parking for any commercial uses shall be at the sole discretion of the Agency and City." As with the current spaces, they are to be non-exclusive and the Agency or City can charge for the spaces. -The OPA defines different obligations for the Agency in the event the Agency requires the conversion of the office space to residential. Residential parking must be on-site or within Block 104. These spaces must be for the exclusive use of the residential tenants and free, except that the Agency can charge Mr. Abdelmuti the costs to maintain and repair the spaces at a cost equal to maintaining and repairing at-grade parking spaces. The City's approvals and entitlements for the project define how much parking is to be provided and where. The Agency was the co-applicant for the CUP (991-39) for the project. The approved CUP of January 6, 1992, requires that 133 spaces be provided for the project. These spaces can be provided within a Main-Pier II parking structure or temporary parking lot and with off-site parking within 350 feet of the project (Condition of Approval 18). A related Condition of Approval, # 17, required that the Planning Commission and City Council approve any temporary or permanent parking plans which detailed how this parking was to be provided prior to a Certificate of Occupancy being issued. On December 7, 1992, the City Council, following Planning Commission action, approved both a temporary and permanent parking plans for the project. The temporary parking plan made use of the Terry Buick lot on Block 104, surface parking on Block 105, the creation of additional parking on Fifth Street, and 10 spaces on an Agency owned parcel in the second block of Fifth Street. This temporary plan was to be implemented on an as needed basis, and has been implemented except for the improvements needed to convert the parcel in the second block of Fifth to a parking lot. The Oceanview Promenade currently operates under the temporary parking plan approved by the City. The permanent parking plan which was approved was linked to the parking to be developed as part of the Main-Pier II project. This permanent plan utilized spaces which would result from the improvements planned for the Terry Buick lot, the on-street parking created on Fifth Street as part of the temporary parking plan, and the development of permanent spaces on Block 105. The permanent parking plan has not been implemented since Main-Pier II did not proceed. In relationship to the current discussion of development strategy options for Blocks 104 & 105, ultimately, the Agency would have to secure approval of a revised permanent parking plan to address the Oceanview Promenade parking requirement of 133 spaces. These spaces, as with the previously approved permanent parking plan, could be provided in a number of ways depending on the ultimate scope of any future Blocks 104 & 105 development. For example, the number of spaces provided on Fifth Street could still off- set the 133 required, or if the Terry Buick lot remained a surface parking lot, a lower number of spaces would need to be addressed. Conceptually, the Agency could apply for approval of a permanent parking plan which provided less spaces, assuming that it could be justified on the basis of documented parking demand or an overall update of the Downtown Parking Master Plan. However, assuming that the 133 spaces were needed to be provided as part of any future development, they would be non-exclusive spaces for which there could be a charge. Two factors could possibly mitigate this Agency obligation. First, to the extent that any future Block 104 & 105 developer proposed parking in excess of that required by the City for the new development, these spaces could satisfy the Oceanview Promenade requirement. Second, the City's requirements for any new development would reflect the Downtown Parking Master Plan and the shared parking concept. In addition, any new development would have a credit for the space in any existing buildings which exist on the site and are demolished. To the extent that the any future developer proposed to provide only or less than the City's required parking, additional spaces would have to be provided for the Oceanview Promenade. These spaces would be an additional cost imposed on the project and these costs would have to be addressed as part of any negotiations for the development of the site. This is one of the reasons that the Community Development Department is proposing to undertake a comprehensive update of the Downtown Parking Master Plan concurrently with any negotiations for the development of Blocks 104 & 105. While the downtown has 2 continued its redevelopment under the Downtown Parking Master Plan, the Block 104 & 105 development proposal is the first one to proceed to a point where it has mandated this needed update. Please feel free to contact me if I can answer any questions of provide any additional information. Attachments: 1. Excerpt from OPA 2. Conditions 17 & 18 from Conditional Use Permit 3. RCA dated December 7, 1992 (Approved Temporary and Permanent Parking Plans) xc: Melanie Fallon, Community Development Director Scott Field, Deputy City Attorney Herb Fauland, Senior Planner Mike Hennessey, Project Manager Howard Zelefsky, Planning Director (projects/104105/abdelprk.doc) 3 W. Request for Qual fcat r .32 ,.n. Request for Quat fcal v : . .. >< Av Seven responses were received:'""A • On September 2, 1997,the 1. Grand Pacific Resorts(substitute for Polo Resorts) Redevelopment Agency authorized 2. Rutan&Tucker/Bagstad issuance of Request for Qualifications 3. Frank Alfonso (RQ) 4. CIM Group/Federal Realty 5. T.C.Management,Inc. 6. Mike Abdelmuti 7. James&Victoria Lane sua.t su•.u January Agency Meet. Current Options ......>»><:: ' • Staff reviewed qualificatioti pop ) 1. Do nothing based upon proposals and • Owner Participant presentations adopt development strategy identified in June with four elements: • Redevelopment Agency requested further — De-link two blocks; staff analysis — Pre-entitle Block 105; — Solicit Block 105 proposals in future; — Encourage Block 104 market-based rehab. soa o sua.,a Current Current Options < ...................... ....... :r:»::::; 2. Pursue a mix of the proposals based 3. Pursue more traditional app roach y upon de-linking the two blocks: and grant Exclusive Negotiating —Block 104:Do nothing or pick all or Agreement(ENA)for Blocks 104& some 105 to CIM/Federal —Block 105:Do nothing or select Cracchiolo team 2 Staff Analysis _ StaffRecommendat'N' ............ ............. ......... • Staff requested supplemental information Staff recommends entering into an • Staff reviewed land use concept Exclusive Negotiating Agreement • Staff reviewed magnitude of scale for (ENA)with CRvff ederal for a period economic benefit of 120 days • Staff has reviewed the qualifications of all the respondents SNU.13 Md.14 Staff Recommendat&n-�,�-,> ::> . ............................ • CIM/Federal is the only respondent with a I Lofl, depth of experience in downtown retailing • CIM/Federal has access to capital as a REIT • The CIM/Federal Team has the tenant relationships needed to maximize the site's potential SH&15 3 Block 104/105 Agency Land Acquisition Cost Analysis: RECEIVED FROM \ •` �ch Prior Owner Agency Cost AND MADE A PART OF THE RE OR�AT T g y COUNCIL MEETING OF BIock105 Tharp $352,250 OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK CONNIE BROCKWAY,CITY 0I_1.R' Energy $1,766,500 Conley $352,500 Shupe $295,625 Omohundro $1,300,000 City $63,905 S/W/G• $1,035,000 $5,165,780 $4,130,780 Block 104 Terry $1,382,000 City $21,448 $1,403,448 Demo/Toxics/Relo. $573,500 Total Agency Acquisition Cost $6,107,7 88 Source: Keyser Marston Associates 33433 Report-Attached to June 5, 1995 Staff report"Determination of Agency Financial Abilitiy to Perform Obligations Under Coultrup DDA" Notes: These costs are actual and have not been adjusted for lost opportunitiy costs. S/W/G'-Was not noted in Source 33433 Report but was also an Agency Acquisition in block 105. Page 1 r i t l 1 Blocks 104/105 CIM/Federal Project Proposal Parking Analysis RETAIL RESTAURANT THEATER (1 per 250) (1 per 150) (1 per 5 seats) Level 1 21,500 SF 7,000 SF 14,000 2,000 17,200 1,800 5,300 5,300 1,500 3,500 6,500 z,600 86,200 345 spaces Level 2 13,000 3,500 15,400 1.500 10,000 14,500 2,500 58 spaces 16,000 22.400 403 spaces 107 spaces 261 spaces Total 769 spaces Total Spaces Required 769 Spaces Provided M Project Deficit 408 Abdelmulti Requirement M Total Deficit 541 In Lieu Parking Cost: 541 spaces x$12,000=$6,492,000 Pagel U4/Ub/Ub AIUA 1J:1J VAA 114 [VOUV.74 C R Companies LLC 12752 Valley View Street,Suite D Garden Grove,CA 92945 714/799-0062,Fax: 799-0054 April 61 1998 Clty Council Members,City of Huntingbon Beach Fax: 714/536-5233 374-1557 Re: Blocks 104 and 105 It is with grave concern I again realize that serious consideration is being given to close 5t'street and consider all commercial development on Blocks 104 and 105. Consider that for years we have worked on several development proposals with the city: A major factor we all agreed upon is that 51h street shall remain open...it may be used as a parking lot, it might have trees, but it shall not have buildings encroach into the 80'right of way. This is in order to preserve the view corridor down the street Now,for out of town people, a proposal is being aired that will spell the closing of 5 h Street. This is inappropriate and again points out the inconsistencies of the advice given the City. Again, on another note; we have worked in the past to bring together a cooperative effort of the property owners on both Blocks 104 and 105 along with the wishes of the City Planners and City Planning. Commission and City Council. Our efforts were dashed because despite our efforts, the property owners lost faith in dealing with the City. And now we must be subjected to witness a possible repeat of history. How do you reconcile commercial off of Main Street being successful when those who are in new buildings off of Main street are failing or vacant? A much broader stroke must be made in looking at the over all Downtown Development ranging from Beach to 90 Street This look must be made with careful consideration of the dynamics of people, people movement and economics. Emphasize the economics. Although it appears the braod-stroke planned approach has been taken, day to day practice dearly indicates it is being done piecemeal fashion. I must point out that we ran several scenarios and developed one in which the City gained the most in terms of property values and taxes back to the city, including Transient Occupancy Taxes. In contrast to this,we looked at 100%commercial development,and even with the sales tax increment, such a scenario fell significantly short of our proposal to develop a mixture of commercial and timeshare on Block 105 with further commercial development on Block 104 along with a three to four tier parking structure with commercial around its perimeter facing Walnut and 5'h Streets where there is now a single level of surface parking. We shared our findings with Staff. Given what we know to date, I suspect the advice given the City is not the best I strongly urge that you give complete consideration to the fact that the CIM proposal is at best no more that a sophisticated smoke screen to get a foot in the door to%wvork something out later': Even though this consideration is to enable the Redevelopment Agency to enter only into an ENA, it is enough to send the wrong message; the message,that you dont want to send to the community, that the Council has made a decision based on incomplete and/or erroneous information and is riding rough-shod over its own business citizenry and property owners. R Ga ci 9- ddy 6b61 Mike Roberts Managing Member V0,H0b38 N010H11NnH cc: City Clerk's Office Huntington Beach Resident j0 'kilo Attn: Connie Brockway A8310 Alin 03AI3038 , 04-06-93 03: 09PM F 0 1 4-26-1558 1 1 -26A1.1 FROM 714 8056321 �' 2 I I I I Til� sons Enterprises I I' April 6, 1998 I I I j Dear Honorable Council Members: I ' I I Understand that at tonight's City Council meeting you will be considering the closing of Fifth Street as part of the phase 11 Redevelopment Plan. The closing of Fifth Street would have, in my'opinion, a significant negative impact on Plaza Almeria and the I downtown. I When we first started with Plaza Almeria. xe mere going to build sixty-eight relatively small condominium flats. Auer discussion with the Council :Members and the I' Community we redesigned the project to be less dense, but with higher end townhomes. We used hoists to take pictures and then designed and positioned the units to take I advantage of the Fifth Street view corridor. I Additionally, Fifth Street is parallel to Main Street and gives that busy street some traffic relief if ever Main Street were to b"ome a Pedestrian Mal) we would lose another logical access to the dowiztown. When Pier Colony was built, First Street was abandoned and built upon. Supposedly, a view corridor was provided for. I think most of you would I agree that the First Street view corridor leaves much to be desired. I In summary, I am fully committed to the revitalization of our downtown, but I would like to be put on record as being opposed to the closing of Fifth Street. My sense is that the folks in Townsquare will likewise be opposed to this proposal. I Sincercl}•, J hn H. Tillotson, Jr. 6 I 15272 Bolls Chic&Rd.,Huntingtw Beach,CA 92649 (714)e95.9552 FAX(714)8%-6321 04-06-98 10:47AM FROM 111 TO CITY CLERK P02 04-06-1998 09:20AM FROM JACK'S SURFBOARGs Ii! yb.Sb3GJJ r.�� APD FLWI TI DEVELOPMENT COMPANY 101 MAIN OTREOT � �71a)636�587 HUNTI O N.S�ACH, CA. 92648 FAX (714)038`7881 i f. I i AAp 16, 199A. ' I 'Ma or hirle`�►DrtOo I Ci Q »unungtou Mach , 1240P ainl Street , Hu" n Beach,IC 92648 p 1 c��rn ! ' Develo meet Block 104 and 105 m ' p Cr -C _ ram', rT1M Ho or le!I�ayar 4nd Metilberg of the City Council: > i n 1 I o ? On Ap 14'�l met with Mr, David Biggs and some of the downtown property es�nd the o Pauly.selected by floe planning Stag regarding the development-of Blocks!104 end 145, 'ra w$s the r�i timo we were told the plans that the Stalfbad given the Company for be a pm' etties. " I I to ring t©y our attention that currently on tho old Theater lot there is a 65 car ! I par; lot; sed b�,*tenants, and far which I had paid $150,000, Wtt to the nvailable,par*ig, I feel that my tenants might reconsider the location bftheir offi�es'f you,allow the par*&lot to be taken over by another party and allow a build' I i to e built in!its plejc� I I WOUIC be against j h�•cottiplete closure of 5" street because with all the new bea4h devlelapmentland t6s r�ing number of people coming to Main Street, I imagine that sooner�r 4�oi IainlStreot would have to close to traffic and, without access front 5 h or I ' i 3cd �tre t ld Wect business for all the Downtown Morohants. I I am ndt opposed to $once development of Block 104 or 105, but against taking Av ay :5`h stro n and;the padding tot behind our Building. i Th ln*kou,f,r: allow"and to convey my views. Sin eroly, I i I , b e uti Diet►" pint Company . i i Page 2 - Council/Agency Agenda - 01/26/98 (2) 6:00 P.M. - Reconvene In Council Chamber Roll Call Julien, Harman, Green, Dettloff, Bauer, Sullivan, Garofalo [Present] Public Comments [None] 4-. Cession _ Dry nnnd [Removed From Agenda As On Agenda In Error] 2. (City Council/Redevelopment Agency) Study Session - Proposed Plans For Huntington Center Mall - Presentation [Representatives from Mace-Rich and F&A Architects, Glendale, made presentation using charts, artist renderings and aerial photograph] 3. (City Council/RedevelopmentAgency) Study Session - Blocks 104/105 Review Owe Participant Proposals - (MainStree 6th Stre t/5 Street/Walnut ut St ee Memorandum from the Economic Development Director and summary of the sev er Participant Proposals received for Blocks 104 and 105 submitted for luation by the City Coun [Slide Presentations made by representatives of all owner- participants] Council/Agency Adjournment [To Monday, February Z, 7998, at S:00 p.m.] CONNIE BROCKWAY, CITY CLERK City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street- Second Floor Huntington Beach, California 92648 Telephone: 714/536-5227 Internet: http:/hvww.ci.huntington_beach.ca.us (2) • i CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION Economic Development Department TO: Honorable Mayor and Council Members/Redevelopment Agency Members VIA: Ray Silver, Acting City Administrator/Executive Director BY: David C. Biggs, Director of Economic Development DATE: January 20, 1998 SUBJECT: Workshop Regarding Owner Participant Proposals-Blocks 104& 105 On December 12, 1997, the Council's Economic Development Committee reviewed the seven proposals received in response to the Redevelopment Agency's Request for Qualifications from owner-participants in Blocks 104 & 105. The Committee members did have questions for those owner-participants present at the meeting. However, given the importance of the matter, the Committee did not make a recommendation to the Council, but rather, determined the proposals should be reviewed by the Council as a whole. However, at the meeting, it was determined that the Economic Development Committee should conduct a site visit to the CEWFederal properties in Pasadena and Santa Monica. This site visit took place on December 30, 1998, as an Economic Development Committee meeting with Mayor Dettloff, Mayor Pro Tem Green, and Council Member Bauer ' attending. In addition, Community Development Director Melanie Fallon, Senior Planner Herb Fauland, and I participated in the site visit. Attached as Exhibit 1 is the memorandum dated December 11, 1997, to the Economic Development Committee which presents the alternatives for proceeding with Blocks 104 & 105. Staff will be prepared to summarize the alternatives and proposals for the Council at the workshop. The workshop will also include an opportunity for a representative of each owner-participant to make a short presentation on their proposal. It is anticipated that based upon City Council/Agency discussion, following the staff and owner-participant presentations, that general direction will have been provided by the City Council/Agency. This will allow for a formal action on one of the identified alternatives to be placed on a future City Council/Redevelopment Agency agenda for action. Attachments: (Listed on Next Page) memos/wrksh 126.doc List of Attachments ........ .. ........ ................. ............................__..._...... ..............._..........._ ................. .. ...._.............................................. ...........................................................__. .................................... 1: i st 1 emoran um e :Dece:; er 1;1, 1991 _........................... .... ._.........::... .................... ..................._..............:.:..............._..... ........... . avi Biggs to ouna Economic eve opment omriuttee Members) 2. Attachment 1 Summary of RFQ's Received for Blocks 104 & 105 & ...................... ....................... Addendum. Site Plans: • Grand Pacific Resorts • Rutan& Tucker on Behalf Bagstad • No site plan submitted by Frank Alfonso • CIM Group w/Federal Realty • T.C. Management, Inc. • Abdelmuti • Jim& Victoria Lane 3 Attachment 2 Proposal Cnhque memos/wrksh126.doc • • EXHIBIT 1 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMMCATION Economic Development Department TO: Council Economic Development Committee VIA: Ray Silver, Acting City Administrator BY: David C. Biggs, Director of Economic Development DATE: December 11, 1997 SUBJECT: Alternatives for Proceeding With Blocks 104& 105 The Agency received seven responses to its Request for Qualifications from proposed- Owner-Participants. These responses are summarized in the attached matrix (Attachment 1). The options available to the City/Agency at this point in time generally follow the three alternative development strategies presented to the City Council/Agency Board at a workshop in June. The basic strategy involved separating the development of Block 104 and Block 105 with Block 105 being pre-entitled to the greatest extent possible prior to the solicitation• of developer proposals. Three alternative development strategy options under this basic strategy for Block 104 were: 1) Eventual rehabilitation by the current property owners on a market-driven basis with no Redevelopment Agency involvement. 2) Redevelopment Agency facilitated reconstruction with the current owners involving some level of financial assistance. 3) Redevelopment Agency acquisition of the Main Street properties and new construction with a new developer. At the conclusion of the workshop, staff was preparcd to recommend a development strategy to the Agency Board based on option 1 above. Subsequently, on September 2, 1997, the Agency Board authorized the issuance of a Request for Qualifications from proposed Owner-Participants in order have better information upon which to base its ultimate decision regarding the development strategy options. With the additional information obtained through the RFQ process and given the specific proposals received, there remain three options available to the Agency: g:dcb:projects:104105:edcalts.doc • • A. Do nothing based on the proposals submitted, and adopt the development strategy identified in June as the preferred strategy which has four elements: 1) Development of the two blocks should be de-linked and processed separately. 2) Block 105 should be"pre-entitled"for range of uses, including timeshare and this amendment to Subarea 3 of the Downtown Specific Plan should proceed concurrently with a similar application for the Morgan Stanley/ Shea 31-acre site. 3) Any solicitation of developer proposals for Block 105 should be deferred until 1998 when Pier Plaza is nearing completion and other site issues such as parking are resolved. 4) The Block 104 property owners should be encouraged to proceed with the rehabilitation of their buildings on a market-driven basis with no Redevelopment Agency involvement. B. Pursue a mix of the proposals submitted which is based upon de-linking the two blocks. 1) For Block 104, do nothing or pick all or some of the proposals submitted (Bagstad;Mulligan, Draper, Mase; Lane). 2) For Block 105, do nothing or grant as Exclusive Right to Negotiate to the Cracchiolo team. C. Pursue a more traditional redevelopment approach and grant an Exclusive Right to Negotiate to C]M/Federal Realty for Blocks 104 and 105. In order to assist the Economic Development Committee in evaluating proposals, staff has prepared a matrix (Attachment 2) which lists the pros and cons of each proposal. The Economic Development Committee has a number of ways it could proceed today: 1) Review the proposals based on the written information submitted and make a recommendation to the City Council/Agency Board based thereon; 2) After reviewing the proposals based on the information today, invite all or a selected number of respondents to participate in a future interview process, and then make a recommendation to the City Council/Agency Board; 3) Forward the proposals on the City Council/Agency Board for review and evaluation with no recommendation from the EDC. xc: Melanie Fallon, Community Development Director Les Jones, Public Works Director Ron Hagan, Community Services Director g:dcb:proj ects:104105:edcalts.doc n 1V`o : :::::::. ....:::.::.: .. :..: t aG..:m . t.... .. . .............. ..... ....::. .... .:: ......:: .:'::: . ...:.:;.... R 'Q'sece�ved, ar3hck` 4 SOS