1. DISPUTE RESOLUTION Bay City Partners & City Of Seal Beach 1

2. DISPUTE RESOLUTION Bay City Partners & City Of Seal Beach 2

3. Commission Direction Bay City Partners & City Of Seal Beach Commission Direction from the November 15, 2013 Public Hearing The item was continued because of uncertainty of the sufficiency of the economic data. Although other questions were raised during the discussion of the motion, it is clear that there was only one area where the applicant was asked for additional information; sufficiency of economic data. 3

4. Commissioner Comments Bay City Partners & City Of Seal Beach 4 Need a peer review of how the study was constructed and what it means. The Commission doesn’t have enough information to reach a conclusion.

5. Commissioner Comments Bay City Partners & City Of Seal Beach Statement that there is an interest to get something done. Was hopeful that the continuance will be short. 5

6. Commissioner Comments Bay City Partners & City Of Seal Beach Clarification (not approval or action on) of the Exchange Agreement with the State Lands Commission was asked for. Statement that it is appropriate to bring the application forward as expeditiously as possible. A desire was expressed to consider Bike Camping as a use. 6

7. Commissioner Comments Bay City Partners & City Of Seal Beach Recommendation was made to use Kosmont for the Peer Review Study. Hope to move application forward quickly. 7

8. INITIAL APPLICATION SUBMITTAL TIMELINE Bay City Partners & City Of Seal Beach 8

9. APPLICATION RE-SUBMITTAL TIMELINE Bay City Partners & City Of Seal Beach 9

10. Dispute Items Bay City Partners & City Of Seal Beach Dispute Issue No 1 - SLC Exchange Agreement 1.Applicant has reached agreement with the SLC Staff. 2.Application submitted in 2013 was accepted as complete. 3.Nothing has changed in the project since then. 4.No Commission direction to obtain exchange Agreement approval by SLC at the November 2013 Hearing. 5.SLC has stated it has no objections to Coastal Commission going first. 6.Does not make sense to go to SLC first. 10

11. Dispute Items Bay City Partners & City Of Seal Beach Dispute Issue No 2 - Peer review of Economic Data 1.Respected Commission’s desire for more detailed data. 2.Commissioners requested a “Peer Review” which has now been provided by Kosmont.. 4.. It is inappropriate to ask for specific project pro forma data from an applicant as it is beyond Commission’s purview 11

12. Dispute Items Bay City Partners & City Of Seal Beach Dispute Issue No 3 - Project Mitigation 1.This is to determine completeness of application, 2.If Coastal Commission believes mitigation is appropriate you can impose it as a condition of approval. 12

13. Conclusion Bay City Partners & City Of Seal Beach 1.During the November 2013 meeting, the sentiment expressed to us by the Commissioners is that you wanted this brought back relatively expeditiously. 2.The Commission raised the economic data sufficiency issue and we responded to it. It is time to accept the application and then staff can make its recommendation. 3.That’s all we ask - for that opportunity. 4.We Request acceptance of the application as complete and a hearing for October 2014. 13