Huntington Beach Denies Lease for Pierside Project

After a long and emotional hearing Monday night, the City Council voted 4 to 3 to deny a lease of 3 1/2 beachfront acres for a controversial restaurant project called Pierside Village.

“I think this is the end of Pierside Village,” Mayor Peter M. Green said. “The council certainly cannot be forced to give a lease for this project.”

A tense audience immediately broke into applause and cheers after the vote.

Nonetheless, the issue will surface again on Wednesday when the state Coastal Commission, which has zoning authority over beach projects, considers the Pierside plans. A negative vote by the commission would kill any prospect for commercial restaurants at the site. An affirmative vote would leave the door open for some kind of commercial project.

Pierside Village, first proposed in 1986, has been the most controversial in the city’s recent history. It calls for two new restaurants on city-owned land adjoining the new pier at Pacific Coast Highway and Main Street, and relocating an existing restaurant to that site.

The decisive vote Monday night came from Councilman Jim Silva, who has previously supported the project. The three other negative votes came from Green and Councilwomen Linda Moulton-Patterson and Grace Winchell, all of whom had long opposed the project.

Silva’s vote surprised the audience, especially since he praised Pierside as he began to explain how he would vote. But after his brief speech, Silva said he wanted to reflect the wishes of the public in Huntington Beach and so would vote against it.

Pierside opponents told the City Council on Monday that the project would be a visual blight on the city’s famed oceanfront. Opponents also charged that the restaurant complex would hamper public access to the beach.

However, supporters said the project would be attractive and would actually give the public a better opportunity for a close view of the ocean. A public plaza planned with the restaurant complex would be open to everyone, the Pierside supporters said.

A key issue of the City Council debate Monday night was a new city charter amendment. Measure C, which won by a staggering 73% of the vote last fall, requires a citywide election whenever the city proposes to lease or sell park or beach land. City Atty. Gail C. Hutton has ruled that the Pierside project requires such a citywide vote.

City staff officials said that obviously there would be no vote now, since there is no lease to vote on.

Jonathan Chodos, spokesman for the proposed developer of Pierside, had no comment on the City Council’s rejection of the lease.

Earlier, Chodos had urged the City Council not to schedule a citywide vote until he had time to challenge Measure C in court. Chodos has repeatedly said he does not think the charter amendment applies to his project.

But City Administrator Michael T. Uberuaga recommended that the council not approve a restaurant lease unless Chodos’ corporation agreed in writing not to sue the city over Measure C. Uberuaga also recommended that Chodos’ firm, called Pierside Restaurant Development, pay half of the estimated $100,000 cost of a citywide vote on the project. Green said Chodos refused to agree to those terms.

The complicated Pierside issue boils down to two viewpoints. Opponents say the project means putting unneeded buildings on the beach. Supporters say the land is really not “beach” and that the restaurants would be good for business and downtown redevelopment.

The land proposed for the project, between Main and 1st streets, is not pristine beach. It is paved and currently used for parking.

Supporters of Pierside said it would beautify “an ugly area” near the pier. But opponents countered that there are cheaper and simpler ways to beautify the land, such as landscaping.