|
||||
|
|
||||
|
|
SANTA ANA HEIGHTS PROJECT AREA COMMITTEE MINUTES FOR MEETING April 3 2007 PAC meeting (subject to change) In attendance : Barbara Venezia ,Mary Slouka, Rick Dayton, Tim Stoaks, Gary Hall, Richard Moriarty, Jayne Jones Ted Nichols, Ted Bosley, Gary Golson Excused: Greg Carroll 1. Approval of minutes from Feb. 2007 PAC Meeting Ted Bosley makes a motion to approve minutes and Richard 2nds it. Motion passes and minutes are approved. 2. Welcome and introduction of Guests: Mario Mainero, Chief Steve Lewis, Tony Brine, 3. Public Comments Public comments can only address PAC related issues or proposed projects. We ask that you do not comment on issues PAC has no jurisdiction over. We suggest you prepare your comments in advance and in writing to keep you focused and within the allotted time. If you have a comment on anything on the agenda, please wait until that agenda item is being discussed. No public comments 4. Mario Mainero Reports on Projects and Board of Supervisors meeting. (10 mins) SANTA ANA HEIGHTS PROJECTS STATUS/SCHEDULE April 3, 2007 ORCHARD DRIVE PARK: D. N. Marshall, Project Manager, (714) 454-4459 Project: to replace older park equipment with new park recreational equipment, including a playground surface that meets current RDMD/HBP safety standards and improvements necessary to meet Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. Park is located at the southeast end of Orchard Drive. Ongoing activities: • HCS/OCDA has obtained approval from SAH PAC and neighborhood park committee on preliminary design. The park, while public, is owned by adjacent business park. • A Right of Entry Agreement will be necessary for construction; this has been drafted by OCDA’s outside counsel. Business park owner has provided HCS/OCDA with an initial concurrence for right of entry agreement. • Owner will be responsible for on-going maintenance of new equipment once Project complete. Project cost: • Rough HCS/OCDA estimate indicates project cost should be under $185,000. RDMD will refine estimate as planning commences. Projected Milestones and status: • Topographic surveys completed 3/28/07 • HCS/OCDA to secure executed Right of Entry by 4/30/07. • Plans and Specifications to be completed by 5/8/07 • Plans and Specifications to be approved by the Board by 6/5/07 • Bid opening to be scheduled for 6/27/07 • Award of construction contract by the Board to be scheduled for 7/31/07 KLINE DRIVE: D. N. Marshall, Project Manager, (714) 454-4459 Project: to construct an all-weather public roadway, from Orchard Drive to approximately 650 feet southerly, to serve 14 properties. Access to lots currently provided by an unpaved dirt road within a 30 foot wide private easement. Ongoing activities: • Project funded through Orange County Development Agency (OCDA). • In 2002, County’s Housing and Community Services Department retained a Consultant to develop several street “Concepts” for approval by affected property owners, to obtain voluntary dedication of right-of- way to construct public street improvements. • Property owner meetings held, surveys conducted and Concepts refined by end of 2005. Area currently under review for annexation by Newport Beach or Costa Mesa. • August of 2006, RDMD directed by CEO to take lead on delivery of project. • Consultant retained to provide project management. December 2006, OCDA requested project be placed “on hold” pending discussions with 2nd District. On April 2, 2007, RDMD receives direction from OCDA to remove “on hold” status effective March 27, 2007 (date of Board approval of Redevelopment Agency work plan) and proceed with project. • RDMD to retain an A/E to prepare a project report to address engineering and environmental issues. After completion of report, A/E will complete construction plans for project. Project cost: Cost estimate for Project (exclusive of undergrounding utilities) about $600,000. Key Issues: • Obtaining all property owner approval for voluntary dedication of right-of-way. • Identifying the preferred street “Concept”. • Obtaining approvals of OCFA, City of Newport Beach, and/or City of Costa Mesa. • Resolving engineering issues related to drainage, street geometry, and utility relocations. • Parking restrictions required due to substandard street width. • Undergrounding of overhead utilities (SCE and Telephone) Projected Milestones: • Conceptual approval by all affected property owners by May, 2007 • Decision on undergrounding of utilities by May, 2007. • Completion of Project Report by November, 2007. • Complete design and R/W acquisition by April, 2008. • Approval to advertise the project by June, 2008.* • Complete construction by October, 2008.* * These milestones are without consideration to undergrounding overhead utilities, which would require additional dedicated right-of-way, Agreements with Utility Companies, increase project costs, impact individual property owners during connection to underground system, and likely delay project delivery. Irvine Ave Widening Bristol St. sidewalk Cal trans as approved the environmental studies for Bristol St. sidewalk and should go to the BOS in May. Board approval by June 2007 for going out to bid. Mesa Birch Park The city is going to put this out to bid. They had done this once, but never awarded the bid. It should be 60-90 days before they award that bid and about 7 months before completion. Undergrounding Undergrounding should be completed in 2009. Southern Ca Edison said that it will cost 7.9 million and Mario feels he will be able to get more funds from the sound intinuation program should we need more funding. *********************** INFORMATION ON SOUND ATTENUATION IN SANTA ANA HEIGHTS FROM JOHN WAYNE AIRPORT 1. County submitted an application to the Division of Aeronautics, California DOT, for its sixth variance from certain provisions of the California Noise Standards with respect to the continued operation of JWA. 2. The County has been granted five previous variances from the Department for the continued operation of JWA based, in part, on the County's adoption and implementation of a variety of noise compatibility measures and noise and related capacity regulations, including an Acoustical Insulation Program ("AIP") and a Purchase Assurance Program. These measures have resulted in the sound attenuation and acquisition of navigation easements for residences in the Santa Ana Heights area. 3. Specifically, the required compliance with, and variances under, California Noise Standards, together with the Board of Supervisor’s mid-1980s adoption of the Santa Ana Heights Specific Plan and environmental mitigation measures, resulted in implementation of the residential purchase assurance program and the residential acoustical insulation program. 4. Over the years these programs have successfully accomplished land use and noise exposure compatibility for 509 homes in the Board-adopted eligibility areas. 5. Further, in the Santa Ana Heights area rezoned as Business Park, hundreds of additional residential uses have been converted to compatible uses. 6. In the summer of 2006, as the final residential acoustical insulation construction improvement one-year warrantees were ending, JWA staff determined that their program records showed eight properties in the eligibility area which had never received written notice of their opportunity to voluntarily participate in the acoustical insulation program. Despite JWA’s intention to bring the acoustical insulation program to closure, JWA Director Alan Murphy determined that the best course of action was to formally contact in writing those eight property owners and provide them the option to participate in the acoustical insulation program. Our contact resulted in three property owners recently volunteering to participate in the program. 7. As JWA already did for the 413 homes that accepted participation in the acoustical insulation program, these three homes will receive a pre-construction acoustical audit that determines their indoor noise exposure and the amount of quieting (acoustical insulation) they will need in order to objectively meet the 45 dB CNEL exposure limit mandated by the State and the County. Those technical findings will support detailed architectural designs, construction schedules, contractor solicitations and hires, and construction improvements. With the improvements complete, JWA’s consultant will prepare the post-construction acoustical audit to document the objective improvements and compliance with the exposure criteria. JWA is now working to schedule the pre-construction acoustical audits with each homeowner. They expect to complete the construction improvement steps and the final audit reports this Summer or Fall. 8. Once these last eligible homes become compatible with the State and County noise exposure limits, JWA staff will be ready to work with the Caltrans Division of Aeronautics for their determination that JWA no longer requires a noise variance under the California Noise Standards. The Airport Director will report that milestone to the Board of Supervisors in a formal Agenda Staff Report for their consideration in a scheduled public meeting. 9. Once these steps, processes, and approvals are successfully complete, it will be timely for JWA to request that the Board accept return of the SAH Development Agency funds now held for use in the acoustical insulation program. SAH Development Agency funds totaling $2,604,598 are now held by John Wayne Airport for the remaining acoustical insulation program costs and any other costs associated with the overall California Noise Standards compliance. 10. The Airport Director believes that it is professionally responsible and compellingly necessary to not prematurely return any of the remaining potential acoustical insulation funds for their use on other SAH PAC community improvement projects until the final State variance waiver and Board acceptance action are completed. *********************** Santa Ana Heights California Noise Standards Compliance Summary of Units Completed Land Use Compatibility # Residences Residential Acoustical Insulation and 385 Avigation Easement Acquired Residential Purchase Assurance, 19 Acoustical Insulation, and Avigation Easement Acquired Residential Acoustical Insulation 9 Residential Avigation Easement Acquired 15 Residential Genuine Effort Acoustical 56 Insulation Offered and No Response Residential Genuine Effort Acoustical 25 Insulation Offered and Declined Total Units 509 Santa Ana Heights California Noise Standards Compliance Summary of Program Expenses and Revenues Status as of January 31, 2007 Deposit from OCDA (Fund 15A) 12-Aug-1993 $9,460,003 Total Interest earned $3,744,948 Total SAH Acoustical Expense ($3,098,883) Sub Total $10,106,068 Less: Fund returned to OCDA 27-Feb-2002 ($7,501,470) OCSA Balance Retained by JWA $2,604,598 Total SAH Acoustical Program $9,951,216 Less: FAA Grant Revenue ($6,852,333) Less: OCDA share ($3,098,883) $0 ******************************* Chief Steve Lewis reports on Fire Station Progress. (10 minutes) The Chief welcomed the opportunity to be invited to PAC and has been meeting some of the local residents who stop by the Fire Station project and he is open to answering any questions the may have. He feels it is important that stations are neighborhood friendly, and the Santa Ana Hts. station is no exception. He had served in Long Beach before coming to Newport. He feels it is important that the community at large is pleased with the development of the Santa Ana Hts. Fire Station. The project is moving along and there are continuing landscaping conversations as to how we can soften the wall around the station on Mesa Dr. as well as continuing the landscaping down the driving range side of the golf course along Mesa Drive. He is working with PAC on those issues. The station is slated to open in July and there will be a big opening party that all are invited to. The training tower is now going up. They are talking about a new rig at this station that is an urban search and rescue vehicle that would respond to any natural disaster. There are only 17 cities in Ca. that have these types of vehicles. We are getting one of these units which the state will buy for us. It can respond any where in our community even though it is a state asset. If it rolls out into the state for an emergency, the state will pay for any equipment and personnel that will go with the rig to the emergency. City has now approved money for a new fire truck so we will have 2 front lines and one back up. Tim asked about the high density residential at the airport proposed in the new general plan. How does that affect the Fire Dept.? The Chief stated that new construction will have sprinkler systems and that will help any disaster situation. The Chief has his office at City Hall ************************************* 6. Development Committee - Rick D. (10 mins) Rick Dayton reports Date: 02/13/07 Janet Brown Staff Planner, City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Blvd. P.O. Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA2-4048 (949) 644-3236 fax: (949) 644-3229 RE: CNB UP2007-003 Fire Station and FTC at 20401 Acacia Street Dear Janet: The PAC Development Subcommittee understands this to be a use permit application to the Planning Director to allow the development of the Santa Ana Heights Fire Station, classroom-style fire training room, and municipal Fire Training Center (“FTC”) located at the northwest corner of Mesa Drive and Acacia Street. The facility will provide for municipal fire protection and a municipal fire training center to serve the residents and businesses in and around Newport Beach and the surrounding communities. We understand the fire station is a single story building consisting of approximately 11,000 SF, including the classroom-type training room that can accommodate up to 70 persons. The FTC includes a freestanding 4-story training tower that is 43.5 feet high from the top of slab to the top of parapet. We understand that previous approval was given for the FTC to be as much as 45 feet high above adjacent natural grade, and that the proposed FTC is within the height limits granted by the previous approval. The PAC Development Subcommittee has had the opportunity to view the construction project first hand on 3 occasions in the recent past. The drawings for the fire station building included with this application appear to accurately reflect the construction that is progress, and appear to be consistent with the preliminary drawings that PAC has reviewed and approved in the past. PAC requests to be informed by staff if there are any significant deviations from what was previously approved. Concerning the FTC building, the ground footprint of the FTC appears to be somewhat larger than what PAC was shown earlier. However, the tower height was the main issue in previous PAC reviews, and that still falls within what was previously approved. The tower plan dimensions, 25’ x 22’, also appears to be approximately what was previously approved. The location of the FTC on the site appears to be the same as was previously approved. The Development Committee believes the final color selections for the FTC will be an important factor to help the burn tower aesthetics. Both Chief Steve Lewis and architect Rubio Medina have previously promised to PAC that PAC would be able to review the proposed color scheme for the FTC before it is finalized. PAC still feels it is important to do that. The PAC received confirmation from former Chief Tim Riley and new Chief Steve Lewis that PAC would be able to hold its regular bi-monthly meetings in the training room. If this community use needs to be acknowledged in the use permit, PAC requests that staff do so. I understand from our telephone conversation this morning that there will be a subsequent modification permit application to use drought-tolerant landscaping instead of the plant materials listed in the Specific Plan guidelines, and for approximately 100 LF portion of the screen block wall at Mesa Drive, which does not have the required 10 foot landscaped setback between the property line and the wall. PAC had been told previously by the design team of the intent to use drought-tolerant plant materials, and this was not an issue for PAC. PAC has a real concern, however, with the block wall and the lack of landscape setback on Mesa Drive. Chief Riley and the design team repeatedly assured PAC members and members of the community who were very concerned about the visual impact of the FTC tower from Mesa Drive that there would be trees as well as the block wall to help to screen the view of the tower from Mesa Drive. The preliminary drawings that PAC has on file appear to indicate the ability to landscape in front of the wall all the way to the west property line. Now, it is apparent from the working drawing Site Plan that no street trees or significant screen landscaping can be planted in front of the wall for approximately 100’ from the west property line. This is the area where screen landscaping is needed to partially conceal the FTC tower. In fact, approximately 20 LF of the wall nearest the west property line is constructed at the back of public sidewalk with no landscaping on the street side. There is no visual softening of the wall itself in this area. The frustration for the PAC committee at seeing this condition is exacerbated by the fact that the additional pad area gained by not following the landscape setback guidelines of the Specific Plan has not given any substantive benefit to the facility. The only improvement indicated in this area is a climbing wall. This improvement does not appear to be in any way site critical. It is apparent that it would have been possible to provide the street landscaping that was promised with no significant impact to fire station or FTC operations. Despite the fact that the wall has already been built in advance of approvals, PAC is very much opposed to the entitlement of this adverse and easily preventable condition. PAC requests that staff work toward a solution that provides the necessary (and promised) landscape screening of the FTC tower, and recommends removal and relocation of the 20 LF section of that has been built at the back of sidewalk with no possibility of street landscaping in front of it. This is an unfortunate and unnecessary condition at a key visual impact area: the entrance to the Business Park and the SAH residential community from the Irvine Avenue. For PAC, the Development Committee recommends approval of this use permit application. As stated above, PAC very much disapproves of the non-compliant wall and landscape setback condition on Mesa Drive and is very hopeful that staff will provide a more acceptable solution for the community before the modification permit process begins. PAC requests the opportunity to review the modification submittal materials during that process. Thank you for the opportunity to review this project and for continuing to include PAC and the community in this process. Sincerely, Richard A. Dayton ************************* Date: 03/30/07 RE: Landscape mitigation for block wall update CNB UP2007-003 Fire Station and FTC at 20401 Acacia Street The PAC Development Subcommittee met at the construction site with Fire Chief Steve Lewis on 03/05/07, to discuss the non-compliant block wall and landscaping on Mesa Drive. The subcommittee, PAC Chairman Barbara Venezia, and PAC member Tim Stoaks met again with City staff at the site on 03/07/07, to discuss possible landscaping mitigations to the non-compliant block wall. City staff offered to put screen trees inside the wall, as well as more screen trees on the bank outside the wall, to help screen the view of the FTC tower from Mesa Drive. They also offered to use a vine on the wall to help soften the view of the wall from Mesa Drive. Barbara Venezia suggested that the City also landscape the bank in front of the golf course driving range as a way to compensate for the non-compliant wall. This bank currently has nothing on it but weeds and is an eyesore from Mesa Drive. Dave Kiff agreed to look into the possibility of the City extending the fire station landscaping to include this bank. The land belongs to the Irvine Company. The golf course is the lessee. It was agreed at the meeting that the Mexican sycamore trees shown on the RRM (the project architect) landscape plan would be changed to Brisbane box trees. The Brisbane box has been used by many of the commercial projects in the Business Park. It is one of the approved trees in the Specific Plan landscape guidelines. It is a fairly fast growing, broad leaf evergreen tree that makes a good screen tree. On 3/28, Dave Kiff sent a revised RRM landscape plan to Barbara Venezia, Tim Stoaks, and Rick Dayton for PAC to review. The plan now indicates (9) 36” box Brisbane box trees on Mesa Drive: (5) inside the wall, (4) outside the wall. It also indicates (16) 1 gallon creeping fig vines planted against the street side of the wall. Dave indicated in his e-mail that he is working with the Irvine Company to allow the City to put landscaping on the bank in front of the driving range screen. He said the City will prepare a landscape plan for this area. It won’t be part of RRM’s scope of work. PAC asked for a few additional shrubs in addition to the creeping fig at the area where the wall is close to the sidewalk. This will help to soften the wall until the creeping fig grows onto the wall. The revised landscape plans will help to screen the FTC tower, conceal the block wall, and put some nice landscaping on what has been a weedy eyesore area at the golf course. The PAC members that have been working with the City on these landscape measures are in agreement that this is a good mitigation for the community for the block wall that was built too close to the sidewalk. Sincerely, Richard A. Dayton PAC Development Committee Chairman *************************************************** Date: 03/12/07 Rosalinh Ung Staff Planner, City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Blvd. P.O. Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA2-4048 (949) 644-3206 fax: (949) 644-3229 RE: CNB UP2006-039 Newport Executive Court at 20372 Birch Street Second review Dear Rosalinh: The PAC Development Subcommittee has reviewed the second submittal package proposing the construction of four (4) 2-story medical buildings over a parking garage level on a currently vacant lot. The committee was pleased to see that the non-conformities with the Specific Plan regulations have been addressed. The Development Subcommittee would like the proposed project to address the following: 1. There are several very mature (>50 years old) trees on the property of 2141 Mesa Drive near the location of the proposed property line masonry wall. PAC requests assurance from the applicant that these trees, as well as any other existing mature trees on REQ lots adjacent to this project, are protected in place when the new property line wall is built. 2. Facing Birch Street, the street elevation is almost completely glass. This does not fit the Architectural Guidelines for Business Park Uses, Sections 20.44.020 B.2 and B.3. Section B.3 states, “The use of glass shall be subdued and in harmony with the building and the natural surroundings… Glazing shall not be used as a major architectural element, but may be used as an accent feature to add variety to building facades.” The street elevation would be more in keeping with the Specific Plan Guidelines and with the buildings that have already been built in the Business Park if the “glass box” look was articulated more with what appears to be a stone material shown between the two buildings. PAC requests that the Planning Commission review the proposed street elevation with respect to the Specific Plan Design Guidelines for use of glass. 3. The color of the plaster that is the predominant building material facing the REQ District is specified as Frazee CW004W “Delicate Blue”. This color is a white base with a hint of blue. Technically, this color is within the Guidelines range for plaster color. Section 20.44.020 B.2.c states, “Stucco, …in natural gray or colors ranging from whites to earth tones”. However, the committee feels that so much of this white color with light blue tint will seem stark and out of character. A light earth tone color, with some gray in it, would complement the gray glazing bands, and would be a much more in harmony with the natural surroundings and with the immediate equestrian neighborhood. PAC requests that the Project Architect and the Planning Commission re-evaluate this color choice. PAC recommends approval of this project. Thank you for the opportunity to review the second submittal of this project. Sincerely, Richard A. Dayton PAC Development Committee Chairman ********************* continued on next page |
|
||