Dear Fellow HB Neighbors,

There is a lot going on in our town over the next few months. Since we are all so very busy, we thought we’d take some time to quickly summarize the important issues. By taking less than 5 minutes to read this, you will be in-the-know about the various City ballot measures as well as Huntington Beach Neighbors litigation against the City.

First, Huntington Beach neighbors continues to press ahead with our CEQA lawsuit against the City in relation to the Downtown Specific Plan Update. We are finalizing our opening brief and will make it public once it has been filled. Our trial date has moved to February 17^th, both sides agreed that there was more time needed to review the voluminous documents. Without giving away the details of our arguments, we continue to find supporting materials that the City did not properly analyze and disclose the negative impacts associated with a larger/more dense downtown. We continue to fund this costly litigation out of our own pockets and appreciate the financial support from the community, please keep it coming (see www.huntingtonbeachneighbors.com to make a contribution).

Next, there are several major local HB measures on the ballot. Perhaps you are wondering what they mean and who’s opinion to trust. We have thoroughly read each of the measures and would be happy to try and help or direct you to the right place in the event you have a question. Below is our analysis and opinion:

Measure N makes changes to the City’s charter that for the most part are benign and brings it up to date. While there are some items that could be construed as negative, for the most part it is a good update and good for residents and will allow the City to run more like a business. This is a YES vote, read more about it here N Huntington Beach Charter Amendment Measure

Measure O aims to close a loophole in a prior 2002 voter approved measure that has allowed the City to count debt service (interest) or other indirect costs toward the required minimum 15% allotment toward infrastructure improvements (streets, alleys, storm drains, sidewalks, etc). Supporters of Measure O report that since 2002, $55 million dollars that should have gone toward infrastructure has been used to pay interest or other indirect costs that should have come from the general fund. Opponents are using scare tactics stating that Police and Fire services “could” be reduced.

Here are our thoughts on why this is a YES vote.

• It was the original will of the voters to ensure that the City uses 15% of the general fund to improve infrastructure – not use the money to service debt.
• The residents deserve to see some of their tax dollars at work and put to improvements that we all see and experience everyday, not to debt.
• Every year the City wastes countless amounts of money on pet projects that do not help the tax paying residents (Beach Edinger Corridor, Downtown Specific Plan, etc. are some recent examples, not to mention massive amount on avoidable litigation). A YES vote will reduce the extra money the City appears to have in its possession to spend on these types of projects. Perhaps it will force the City Leaders to be more frugal. Let’s spend what we have. If we don’t have it, don’t spend it.
• We do not believe Police and Fire services will be impacted – we believe this is a scare tactic and there are other places that can and will be cut before these services.

Read for yourselves here: O Huntington Beach Charter Amendment Section 617 Measure

Measure P is really difficult to understand and we believe is presented in a manner to confuse voters. It is a 25 page resolution/ordinance/opinion that shows a slight tax percentage decrease (the incentive), however it appears that the tax has been expanded to other services which would likely lead to more taxes. It is understandable that the City needs taxes, and in theory we’re okay with some increase, however this measure is deceitful in its presentation and for that reason alone, it is a definite NO vote. Read for yourself here P Huntington Beach Utility User’s Tax Measure

Measure Q is asking for voter approval to place Cell Phone Towers in a few locations that are close to schools and parks. There’s no hidden agenda on this measure, it is pretty simple and something we should help out our neighbors on. We certainly wouldn’t want a cell tower in our nearby park or school so lets support our neighbors and vote NO. You can read more here Q Huntington Beach Wireless Communications Measure Q Huntington Beach Wireless Communications Measure

Lastly with the upcoming election, Hunting Beach Neighbors is a non-profit organization and we are not able to endorse candidates as a group. That said, the following statements are made on behalf of Richard Plummer, David Rice & Angela Rainsberger as individuals.

We as individuals endorse the following candidates because we believe they represent the general interests of making HB a place for “Local’s” again:

Joe Shaw
Blair Farley
Connie Boardman
Bill Rorick

The only council member who is up for re-election is Joe Carchio. It is our personal opinion that Mr Carchio is bad for HB. In our opinion, he does not support the will of the people. In addition, there are several allegations of misappropriate actions including using tax payer money to pay for medial insurance for his x-wife.

As always, we welcome and encourage your feedback at www.huntingtonbeachneighbors.com and Facebook.

8 Myths about Downtown HB

MYTH 1)

Adding extra density will create a renaissance of retail stores and neighborhood services in DTHB. HB City Staff argues that Downtown needs future 4 to 5 story buildings and very high residential density (50 DU/Acre) to create enough demand to stimulate new retail stores. The city’s EIR estimates 648 new Dwelling Units (DU) will be developed in the Downtown core area. If the current 3-story height limit were to remain, about 448 DU would be developed. So does City Staff believes 200 more DU will cause a renaissance? There are currently over 7000 people who live within a 10 minute walk of Downtown, plus the 516 DU to be built two blocks away at Pacific City. The city has already failed at capturing the very high disposable income ($96,219) of these 7000 adjoining residents. Adding 200 more DU, and ruining the “Village Concept” with big boxy buildings will not stimulated retail development.

MYTH 2)

The existing buildings are blighted and not viable. HB City Staff believes that Main Street (north of Orange) and 5th Street (north of Walnut) is blighted and we must have new big boxy buildings with minimal parking, to create a viable neighborhood. Every retail space along Main Street north of Orange is occupied with viable tenants. Most of these businesses are neighborhood serving and bring HB locals to Downtown during non-peak times, creating a balanced Downtown. The City’s own Specific Plan (page 8-2) refers to these properties as “viable” but high density development is the only way to stimulate new development. The fact is these areas are not blighted. Let future development happen naturally, within the current scale of Downtown.

MYTH 3)

New 4 and 5 story buildings will blend into the Downtown Neighborhood. The 1983 Downtown Specific Plan established the concept that the tallest buildings would be situated at Main Street and PCH, and building heights would be reduced on city blocks moving north. Currently, three buildings along PCH are 4 storys. All buildings north of Walnut are 3 storys or less. The remaining sites for future development are skinny lots with alleys behind them. New 4 and 5 story buildings developed on these lots will seem out of scale and they will dwarf over the adjoining one and two story houses. It is not possible to build a 5 story on a small lot and have it blend into a “Village Concept” neighborhood.

MYTH 4)

Tourist will patronize shops 4 and 5 blocks from the beach. The city’s original plan was to have a large tourist destination on Triangle Park luring tourist to shops along north Main Street. The City has wisely abandoned this plan, yet they still plan on replacing the viable businesses along north Main Street without an anchor to draw shoppers. No new large garages are planned in north Main Street. So what will draw tourist to an area so far from parking and the beach? Sounds like a recipe for a ghost town during non-peak periods and many vacant retail shops.

MYTH 5)

The Updated Specific Plan will solve the current parking problems. The HB City staff assures us that new high-density development will provide adequate parking and help solve the shortage of parking during peak periods. In reality, for the past 12 years the city allows up to 50% of the required parking for new development to be excused by the city through a in-lieu parking fee. The city collects a low fee from the developer to build the parking in a future city garage. The city currently has a requirement to build 263 in-lieu parking spaces. According to the DTSP the city is planning on relying on the in-lieu parking program to subsidize the development costs for the new high-density buildings. The DTSP is eliminating the 2000 Parking Master Plan and has no plan to build a new city parking garage. As new development occurs along north Main Street, the convenient surface parking lots will be eliminated and replaced with under-parked high-density development. Neighborhood services will be substantially reduced because locals will not want to patronize shops with inconvenient paid parking. The best example of this is the new CVS Drug Store in The Strand. The Updated DTSP should have a plan to build a new city garage and provide convenient free short-term parking for neighborhood services.

MYTH 6)

Adding new Downtown restaurants and bars will increase city income. Restaurants and bars generate substantial sales tax and the HB Downtown District (with 55 of these establishments) generates some of the highest taxes in HB. The Updated Specific Plan continues this plan with over a 50% increase in the number of new restaurant and bars. The problem with this plan is restaurant/bars require expensive city services such as police, fire/paramedics, cleaning and maintenance. The HB City staff is only looking at the revenue projections and not the added costs to the city. Downtown restaurant/bars are also closing because of over-saturation, and increase security issues are scarring away many HB residents. The city needs to develop a new Downtown business plan that creates a balance between residents and tourist, and promotes new office and retail uses that creates a balance during peak and non-peak periods. If the city allows bars to continue to increase without limitation this ghost town will eventually be filled with the only thing that can make money in an area so saturated by bars that the local population avoids it, more bars. The atmosphere of the bars will drive out other business and the local population and the associated crime will creep into the neighborhood. Police services are being cut back and the DTSP states that almost no new police resources will be needed.

MYTH 7)

The City knows and understands the impact Pacific City will have on the Downtown neighborhood. Pacific City was planned and entitled during 2002 to 2005. The developer started construction on this very large 31 acre, 1,000,000 square foot development with a major hotel, restaurants and 516 DU. In 2007, the financing fell apart. Similar large developments are now selling for less than 50%, and it does not appear Pacific City will be completed for at least five years. When it is completed, who knows how it will be developed. Traffic studies, security issues, demands for city services, estimated retail sales, and parking studies, are educated estimates by experts, but until a massive project like this is developed and seasoned, know one really knows the impact it will have on the Downtown neighborhood. HB Neighbors is in favor of the development of Pacific City, but the city should delay planning high-density development along north Main Street until the impacts of Pacific City are understood.

MYTH 8 )

Downtown HB needs to turn into a destination center that is pedestrian friendly. The Updated DTSP wants to turn Downtown into a walkable tourist destination center. Downtown is already a successful pedestrian friendly commercial center with large parking facilities. Our beaches and pier are major destinations for tourist, and the adjoining commercial area services these tourist during peak periods. During non-peak periods the commercial district is empty. The Downtown neighborhood is the densest neighborhood in HB with high household incomes. Over 22,000 residence live within one mile of Downtown and many of these neighbors already walk or bicycle to the main Street area. If the city would focus on higher quality shops, family oriented entertainment, and a variety of neighborhood services, the residents would shop more Downtown while leaving their cars at home.

Richard Plummer

Director of HB Neighbors

Blair Farley who is running for a seat on HB City Council recently posted a note on his Facebook page saying Triangle Park was close to becoming an “official” park.

Blair referenced that it was on the HB Community Services Commission agenda last week. Triangle Park and the downtown Library have been a hot topic as part of the DTSP (Downtown Specific Plan Update).

I called and spoke with David Dominguez who is the manager of HB Facilities, Development & Concessions to get the details. David explained that the Community Services Commission DID recommend that Triangle Park be added to the list of the city’s green space inventory and officially be made a park. He explained that this came up because the city was in the process of working on a major amendment to the general plan to account for, and adopt all the green space that will be produced by the Sunset Beach annexation (if the annexation happens). They decided to add Triangle Park to the list because of overwhelming community support and the fact that it would be easy to do as part of this general plan amendment.

The next step is for the planning commission to recommend the proposed changes to the general plan.

Then the general plan goes to the City Council for their approval/adoption.

They (the PC or City Council) can make changes to the plan which could exclude Triangle Park from the list (not sure why they would do that).

I specifically asked if Triangle Park would then be protected by Measure C and David Dominguez said once it is part of the parks inventory, it would indeed become covered by measure C.

It is worth noting that library construction on parkland does not require a citywide vote. Hence, even with Triangle Park as an official park, it is possible that the City could build a performing arts venue and an unknown number of supporting parking spaces. By calling the project a cultural center and library expansion, there can be an avoidance of a Measure C vote.

A city attorney last year pointed out that Measure C was in place when the Central Library was expanded as a Cultural Center with added parking at Central Park in 1994. No Measure C vote was taken.

However, all-in-all this sounds positive for all (residents and city folks) who have worked hard and persevered to preserve the park and library.

HB Neighbors take their fight to protect their neighborhood to the courts

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.

There are many City leaders who believe that a BIGGER downtown means BETTER and we should just accept it. We say NO and hope that you will continue to support our grassroots effort to help protect downtown and our neighborhoods. We are not trying to stop progress or development, we just want it be a reasonable balance.

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.

Just a reminder to you to continue re-visiting the candidate page.  New information will be added on an ongoing basis, but because it won’t be in the form of a new post, you won’t receive a heads up.  Besides information for those candidates for whom we have very little. we are interested in presenting information about former or current alliances that may predict how a candidate may vote under pressure.

HBN needs your help to decide on whom to support for the city council election in June.

Do you know who the candidates are for the upcoming council election? Do you know any of them personally? What can you tell us about them, their backgrounds, ethics, platforms? Tell us what you know (without slander or obscenity, please). We invite the candidates to write in, as well, to tell us about themselves. Spread the word.

HBN neither agrees nor disagrees with any post. Inappropriate posts will be removed.