Here is a cool site that one of our members forwarded to us. The site easily shows crime stats, simply enter your address and or zip code. You can see Downtown has been a hotbed of activity with many calls that included assaults with deadly weapons, thefts, breaking and entering, robbery, etc. http://www.crimereports.com
Several months ago Huntington Beach Neighbors and our attorneys got together with the City of HB for a court mandated settlement meeting. In that meeting we reiterated that litigation was a last resort and it was our goal that the City would compromise by rescinding some of the more aggressive and extreme changes that would be allowed for Downtown under the new plan. You can see our list of considerations here.
We were told that the information would be passed along to the HB City Council for their review. After a few months without a response, our attorney’s contacted the Assistant City Attorney who told us that the HB City Council rejected our considerations and would not provide any counter proposal. They basically gave us the finger. While we were disappointed, it came as no surprise considering the manner in which the voting majority of the City Council operated throughout the DTSP hearings.
For those of you that have made it to downtown this summer, you can probably sense things ratcheting up a few notches past safe and comfortable. Now imagine a much larger downtown with 4-story buildings that extend further into the neighborhood with more mayhem.
The trial date (hearing on the petition) is January 13, 2011 at 9am at Orange County Court, 751 W. Santa Ana Blvd, Santa Ana – House-Civil Complex Center — Department CX105. Mark your calendar as you are welcome and encouraged to attend.
We continue to fund this costly lawsuit with limited donations and resources. If you live, work or play in downtown, your contributions to help protect the area are much appreciated. Protecting downtown and our neighborhoods will not happen without active support from you.
By Britney Barnes, britney.barnes@latimes.com
The Huntington Beach Police Department is considering posting the names of drunk-driving offenders on its website as part of a stepped-up strategy to address DUIs downtown and citywide.
Police submitted a report this month to the City Council identifying drinking and driving as a “significant problem” in Surf City and detailed proposed strategies for preventing and reducing the crime.
Tactics already include notifying establishments where those arrested for DUI had their last drink, DUI checkpoints and participating in Every 15 Minutes programs in schools. And police are asking the city to fund a third motorcycle officer for its DUI enforcement team.
Posting offenders’ names online would take enforcement into the digital age. Department officials did not know how many other Orange County cities, if any, posted suspected offenders’ names online.
“DUIs are a public-safety issue,” said police Lt. Russell Reinhart. “Public awareness of the problem, and scope of the problem, is one way of addressing any public-safety concern.”
The Police Department considered publishing the names of those arrested for DUI after the Huntington Beach Independent stopped publishing a weekly DUI list in December, according to the city report. The Independent decided to ax the standing feature after a change in editorial policy.
The department is considering posting the names, which are public record, online, not to embarrass people, but to send a message that Huntington is enforcing DUIs, he said.
“It’s not a wall of shame we’re looking to put up,” Reinhart said.
For the last three years, on average, the department has made 1,700 DUI arrests a year.
Huntington’s DUI rate was the third-highest for cities with similar populations in 2008, according to the report.
“We have a murder once every couple of years in Huntington Beach, but we have a dozen or so people killed in alcohol-related crashes every year,” Reinhart said.
However, Huntington still has the fourth-highest number of alcohol-related traffic collisions for its population, which is estimated at more than 201,000, according to the report.
Reinhart said officers are trying to focus on being proactive instead of reactive when it comes to drinking and driving.
“We’re trying to actually stop the problem before it happens,” he said. “We see it as a problem, the council sees it as a problem, the residents see it as a problem. We’re doing what we can to stop the problem rather than just react to the problem.”
The Police Department in March began tracking where those arrested on suspicion of drunken driving had their last drink. Police compiled the data and then began notifying the managers of those businesses on a monthly basis to inform them that they may have been over-serving customers.
The hope, Reinhart said, is that the establishments take action by serving fewer drinks and directing intoxicated patrons to taxis.
“There’s an expectation that they don’t serve people to the point of intoxication,” he said.
In a period from March 1 to June 30, the highest number of DUI arrestees claimed to have had their last drink at two Main Street restaurants. Fourteen arrestees claimed to have their last drinks at Baja Sharkeez, while eight said they were at Hurricanes Bar & Grill.
Ron Newman, a partner in Sharkeez, said his restaurant doesn’t serve those who are obviously intoxicated, will pay cab fare for those who cannot drive and serves free soft drinks to designated drivers.
But at the end of the night, Sharkeez can’t control what people do when they leave, he added.
“We can only control what goes on in our store,” Newman said. “We don’t know what’s going on after.”
Newman said he visited the Huntington Beach location after receiving notification from the Police Department to review guidelines with staff and make sure all rules were being followed.
Hurricanes General Manager Kerry Lovett said the restaurant also doesn’t serve those who are obviously intoxicated, offers designated drivers free sodas, directs patrons to taxis outside and puts all servers through an alcohol-training program.
Lovett said he posts the notifications for his staff to remind them that selling an extra $5 drink isn’t as important as making sure the customers are safe and that they come back; they won’t if they get a DUI after leaving.
“Whatever we can do to support the P.D. and stop this happening, we’re more than willing,” he said.
The department has seen a relationship between the increase of alcohol licenses and the increase in DUI arrests, Reinhart said.
The arrest tracking so far “supports our belief that there is a link between the two,” he said.
It’s the city that has a DUI problem, but the problem is concentrated downtown, Reinhart said.
The area, which is popular with tourists who crowd the street for events like this weekend’s U.S. Open of Surfing, as well as locals, has become a problem over the last decade for residents and police, due to the number of visitors flooding the city on weekends and during the summer to drink.
The 2.4-square-mile downtown makes up about 1.5% of the city, but has 11% of calls to police.
Officers in 2009 arrested 900 people — 600 of them for alcohol- and drug-related crimes — downtown, Police Chief Ken Small said at a meeting on the downtown parking problems in March.
About 19% of the city’s liquor licenses are issued to downtown businesses, according to the state Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) records.
The area has seen a “considerable increase” in alcohol licenses over the past decade, Reinhart said.
Downtown is known for its bar scene, but there is actually only one true bar, Perqs — which hasn’t given officials too much trouble, Reinhart said. The other 42 establishments with licenses are classified as restaurants because they serve food, he said.
Reinhart said many of the establishments are responsible and haven’t been a problem, but there has been a pattern of fights, disturbances and drunken driving from a few, he said.
Some residents fear the number of venues able to sell alcohol has grown to such an extent that police no longer have the resources or manpower to handle the situation, said David Rice, a downtown resident and president of Huntington Beach Neighbors, a grassroots organization dedicated to reducing density and limiting the expansion of bars.
“I’m not blaming the police,” he said. “I think they have too much to do. Too many bars, I think, is the issue.”
Rice said he isn’t calling for a decrease in alcohol establishments, just more responsible patrons, but some residents want the city to crack down on the number of liquor licenses.
Downtown resident Kirk Mason said there has been too much growth when it comes to liquor licenses. The father of two said he is worried about his children driving around the area. Mason said he warns his 17-year-old son to avoid driving in the downtown area after 10 p.m. and has him call before he drives home to estimate an arrival time.
“I’m in favor of stopping additional liquor licenses in the city,” he said of the about 220 licenses citywide, adding that the 43 downtown are “pretty crazy.”
Mayor Cathy Green said the City Council doesn’t really have a say over liquor licenses, because they are under the purview of the ABC.
“We can do certain things, but we really don’t oversee the ABC licenses,” she said.
By the numbers
•Huntington Beach has about 220 establishments with active liquor licenses.
• More than 200 of those licenses are for restaurants.
• 53 were approved before 2000.
• 26 are on Main Street.
• Only one establishment, the Huntington Beach Beer Co. at 201 Main St., is licensed as a general brew-pub.
• The Huntington Harbour Yacht Club and the Elks Lodge 1959 have club liquor licenses.
Source: All information from the state Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control records.
Kirk of 11th Street went on to say:
On Saturday my son was leaving to go to a friend’s house and noticed that his left rear taillight was cracked. Parking was crazy early in the morning. There was no available parking and the cars that were fortunate to have a space were jammed so close together they couldn’t safely get out of their spots. Unfortunately this is a common occurrence and people are forced to play bumper cars to get in and out of spaces. My son’s car was damaged as a result. We are not sure what type of vehicle was parked behind my sons Honda Element, but it was high enough to miss the bumper but hit the tail light. Of course after they damaged the car they did not leave a note.
We hung out in the front yard quite a bit Sunday and Monday and witnessed vehicles bump others a few times, cramming both small cars and large SUV’s into the unmarked spots.
Having marked parking spots like 5th & 6th St would prevent most of the damage issues. But we still don’t have enough parking to support all the visitors who want to get to the beach or visit downtown.
The Approved Downtown Plan Specific Plan (DTSP) allows for 45-foot buildings with high densities to be built adjacent to homes and share alleys with existing residences. Residents who live on 6th Street, 3rd street, 2nd street (and others) will have to contend with sharing alleys with active businesses that receive daily truck deliveries of food, kegs & other supplies.
Have you ever stood in the alley’s behind main Main Street businesses and smelled the stench coming from the restaurant dumpsters? If this was your alley would you open your windows? Read more…
HB NEIGHBORS FILED AN AMENDED CEQA SUIT
The HB Neighbors CEQA suit (petition) was amended to include new items documented when the downtown specific plan was re-opened. These new items support our allegations that the EIR is insufficient and should not be used to allow the creation of the new downtown specific plan. HB Neighbors is in favor of balanced well planned growth downtown that takes into account concerns of the residents, property & business owners.
HB Neighbors expects a court-ordered mandatory settlement meeting to be rescheduled in the next month. All indicators lead us to believe the city council will NOT be persuaded to settle. We will be taking this take this suit all the way!
VOLENTEERS NEEDED! to help transcribe the planning commission and city council hearings from tape. If you can help with this job please contact me.
See our NEW CEQA Petition page for the summary of the new items added.
In the recent city council meeting, which re-opened consideration of the DTSP, one of the seven council members was absent and another recused himself (we believe to avoid the conflict as he is up for re-election). The discussion seemed pretty staged as the City Staff took the opportunity for a 2nd bite at the apple, adding additional elements to the DTSP that were only favorable to developers.
While there were some great public comments against the DTSP, the council did not seem receptive. The one person who spoke in favor for the DTSP was the owner of twelve lots on 5th Street. He stated he could not do anything with the property and needed the increased density to make development work. He made no mention of how a 45-ft building (ten feet over the houses across the alley) and the new density would impact the residents. Nor did he mention that with any likely new development being composed of restaurants and bars, the kids who play in the alley would have to share it with employees taking smoke breaks! Residents on 6th will be subjected to daylight conditions at night (created by large numbers of high pressure sodium lights), glass clanking and breaking at 3 am as bars close up shop for the night by emptying their trashcans filled with bottles in the alley, worsened summer traffic that is already impossible and the new businesses’ employees competing for parking spots that don’t exist.
Council member Bohr, using hand gestures, thought that the height would work, taking into consideration the space of the alley between the house and potential 45 ft building. Definition of “work” is of course subjective.
Everyone, including the land owner on 5th, purchased their property with the current use and plan in place.
It doesn’t make sense to me that the reward for a few has such toxic implications for the mass.
The council member who re-opened the DTSP with the idea of lowering the density was surprised when another council member bypassed her motion with an alternate motion to approve the DTSP with the additional staff recommendations. His motion won 3 to 2 and that was that.
We have plenty of available space in the downtown area for more restaurants, retail, office, etc. Unfortunately we have a number of businesses that have gone under and more that won’t last another 12 months. It’s a sad state of affairs, but it’s a reality. Why do we need to create more space when we can’t support and make what we have work?
I attended the Charter Review Commission Meeting last night. I was there to propose a responsible growth measure that would put larger developments and land use changes before public vote. There were some supporters on the commission, but there were more folks opposed. The general argument is that we have a good system now that properly vets projects and land use changes. There were a couple of city folks there to help explain the system. There was additional concern that all projects would get stopped and could hurt the city’s income. Someone likened it to Prop 13.
The reality is that several other beach communities have added similar responsible growth elements their charters. There is a reason that they have been put in place.
In my opinion, this is the only way that we can take permanent control away from those abuse it. There is talk going on about making a petition drive to get this on a ballot. I would be curious from this in this group as to their opinion on this issue. Am I the only one who feels like things are out of control and the city is not listening to us? Do we need bigger downtown? Do we need a Beach Edinger Corridor? And more to come? If the city will not listen to us – what options do we have?
A message and quote from Dave Sullivan – two time city council member and two time mayor of Huntington Beach.
“I fully endorse HB Neighbors challenge to the city’s woefully inadequate Environmental Impact Report (E.I.R.). The report does not come close to properly analyzing the many adverse effects of the proposed massive density increases in our Downtown area.
I cannot believe that a majority of our Planning Commission and City Council have drunk the ‘New Urbanism’ Kool Aid.”
Dave Sullivan
City Council 1992-2000
Mayor 1996
City Council 2002-2006
Mayor 2006
Here’s an article by Britney Barnes from the LA Times / HB Independent announcing the suit late last week.
http://www.hbindependent.com/articles/2009/12/04/top_stories/hbi-lawsuit121009.txt
Recent Comments