HB Neighbors

Downtown Huntington Beach is our City’s historic heart.  A few of the area’s many historic landmarks are the Pier (though reconstructed), Triangle Park, the Main Street Library, Dwyer Middle School, and the Post Office.  As such, the New Downtown Plan should provide added protections for this area’s historic landmarks.  Instead, the New Downtown Plan provides lesser protections for the area’s historic landmarks.

For example, within our entire City government, the Council-appointed, Historic Resources Board is the sole protector and advocate for the City’s historic landmarks.  Unbelievably, given these facts, the New Downtown Plan removes the Historic Resources Board’s authority over Downtown, the only part of our City where the Board’s authority is eliminated.

Does the New Downtown Plan provide enough protections for the many historic landmarks in our Downtown?  You be the Judge.

The Main Street Library is designated as a local landmark in the City’s General Plan Historic and Cultural Resources Element, as is the Dwyer Middle School.  Triangle Park is the second oldest park in the City, and may be its most historic park as well.

The New Downtown Plan’s large parking structure and performing arts venue at this site almost certainly would require a demolition of the Library and a substantial degradation of the Park.  As such, these negative impacts to our historic landmarks should have been analyzed by the City as a part of its review of the New Downtown Plan.  These negative impacts were not evaluated by the City.

Does the New Downtown Plan provide enough protections for the historic Triangle Park and Main Street Library?  You be the Judge.

In 2009, nearly 7,000 HB residents signed a petition to preserve the 100-year-old Triangle Park and the 60-year-old Main Street Library, as they are today.  All of these signatures were collected by neighborhood volunteers.   By comparison, in HB’s 2010 elections, it took something over 14,000 votes to win a seat on the City Council.

Despite this huge public outcry against a large development at the Park and Library, the New Downtown Plan permits an unlimited number of parking spaces to be built on the site, in aboveground and underground structures.  In addition, the Plan allows for a 25,000-square-foot performing arts center, or community theater.  At this size, such a facility could accommodate as many as 750 seats.

Does the New Downtown Plan provide enough protections for the historic Triangle Park and Main Street Library?  You be the Judge.

From at least the October 12, 2009 Planning Commission vote, the New Downtown Plan restricted four story buildings to larger lots, of at least 25,000 square feet.  Similarly, the City Council re-confirmed this provision in its approval of the New Downtown Plan on November 2, 2009.

Near the end of a later meeting on January 19, 2010, called solely to consider a decrease in the number of residential units per acre, Council Member Don Hansen moved to drastically reduce the minimum lot size to only 8,000 square feet for four story buildings.  His motion passed with only three votes, by Council Members Hansen, Keith Bohr, and Devin Dwyer.  Given the difficulty in assembling larger building lots, this change could triple the amount of space devoted to future four story buildings in our Downtown.

We call Council Member Hansen’s motion the 11th Hour Amendment for good reason.  This issue was NOT on the Council’s agenda for January 19, 2010.  This issue was NOT in the Staff Report from January 19, 2010 for the New Downtown Plan agenda item for the Council.  There was NO WAY that the public could have known that this issue was going to be discussed or voted on.  Council Member Hansen’s motion was made AFTER the close of public comments.  It was literally a last minute, late night, stealth change to the density and building heights of the New Downtown Plan.  These former, lesser limits already had been approved twice over the preceding three months.

Should Council Members Hansen, Bohr, and Dwyer have made this last minute, late night, substantial change in building density and heights for the New Downtown Plan, without any notice to the public or public comments?  You be the Judge.

According to the City’s Environmental Impact Report on the New Downtown Plan, “the existing parking demand greatly exceeds the parking capacity on summer holidays and special events . . . , with at-capacity conditions occurring during peak summer days, particularly on weekends. . . . The development thresholds identified in the existing Downtown Parking Master Plan have been met.”  And the City’s parking study, completed in 2007, preceded the occupancy of the Strand and other vacant Downtown commercial spaces.

Despite such undisputed facts, the New Downtown Plan eliminates the Downtown Parking Master Plan, allows for a net loss of 50 existing, on-street parking spaces along Main and 5th Streets, and reduces the ratio of required parking per square foot in new developments.  These less restrictive parking requirements will only worsen Downtown’s already strained summer parking conditions, in the face of the New Downtown Plan’s and Pacific City’s 2.3 million square feet of permitted new building.

With Downtown’s already strained summer parking conditions, does it make sense to allow a massive amount of new development while reducing parking requirements at the same time?  You be the Judge.

Compounding the understated traffic counts from our last discussion point, the City’s traffic study also failed to include nine (9) major planned projects in the vicinity of Downtown, most importantly the Beach/Edinger Corridor Study and the Poseidon Seawater Desalination Facility.  For one example among these nine (9) projects, the Beach/Edinger Corridor Study approved plans for new developments totaling 6,400 residential units, 875,000 square feet of retail, 350 hotel rooms, and 110,000 square feet of offices. 

As all of us locals know, Beach is the major route from Interstate 405 to our Downtown beaches.  And PCH is the major North-South route along the Coast serving this Beach/Edinger Corridor. 

Without question, the traffic in our City will be compounded from new developments approved for Downtown and along the Beach/Edinger Corridor.  Flying in the face of this common sense, the City did not consider the increased traffic from Beach/Edinger, among nine (9) total missing projects, in analyzing the negative environmental impacts of the New Downtown Plan’s 1.3+ million square feet of new developments.

In studying the negative environmental impacts of the New Downtown Plan, should the City have analyzed the compounded traffic from other major, nearby projects, like Beach/Edinger and Poseidon?  You be the Judge.

The City’s Environmental Impact Report (EIR) admits that the New Downtown Plan will cause four types of air pollution to exceed California or Federal standards.  For each of these types of air pollution, the EIR further acknowledges that their impacts were unavoidable and not subject to adequate mitigation.  And finally, the EIR accepts that the vast majority of these types of air pollution are generated by car, truck, and bus traffic.

In the face of these admissions, the EIR’s traffic study did not include the busiest days of the year, summer weekends.  The City recognizes that these days are the Downtown’s peak times for traffic congestion.  For example, they included a summer weekend day in their parking study.  The traffic study, however, by excluding these peak times, assuredly understated traffic counts.  And it consequently understated the New Downtown Plan’s negative impacts on air pollution, including the four types discussed above.

Should understated traffic counts provide the basis for analyzing the New Downtown Plan’s negative impacts on air pollution from vehicles?  You be the Judge.

The quote above comes from the City’s opposition brief, page 28.  Their claim is completely incredible.  The City Environmental Impact Report’s Noise Assessment was conducted  midday and midweek, in December, quite possibly at the quietest time of the entire year in Downtown.  Moreover, not a single noise monitor was located on the first three blocks of Main Street, nearest to the beach, which is the busiest and noisiest part of Downtown.

Can a midday noise study in midweek December, and excluding the first three blocks of Main, provide a representative sample for Downtown’s noise levels throughout the week and throughout the year?  Is this study at all credible?  You be the Judge.

The Existing Downtown Plan allowed for new construction totaling 715,000 square feet, not counting the Shorebreak Hotel at the Strand.  These developments have been completely built out since the Existing Plan’s adoption in 1995.  The fully permitted Pacific City will add close to another one million square feet of new building.  And the New Downtown Plan allows for an additional 1.3+ million square feet.  When Pacific City and the New Downtown Plan are combined, the total equals almost 2.3 million square feet of new development.  This sum will increase the permitted building in our Downtown by nearly 3.75 times, or 375%.  We believe that this massive expansion will overwhelm Downtown’s surrounding established residential neighborhoods.

Will 2.3 million square feet in new development, a 375% increase, improve our residential quality of life for our Downtown neighborhoods?  You be the Judge.

The City asserts (page 32 of its opposition brief) that all additional Police personnel, needed to support development permitted by the New Downtown Plan, “‘can be absorbed within existing staffing levels.’”

Downtown’s current number of alcohol-serving establishments is approaching forty, an over-saturation of bars.  The Existing Downtown Plan allowed for these 140,000 square feet of restaurants and bars.  When combined with Pacific City, the New Downtown Plan will permit an additional 140,000+ square feet of new restaurants and bars, an absolute doubling of space for these potentially problematic uses.  Thus, we could see two times as many bars as we have today, a future number in the range of eighty total.

Will Police staffing remain adequate in our Downtown, with the plans for doubling the number of bars?  You be the Judge.