|
||||
|
|
||||
|
|
SANTA ANA HEIGHTS PROJECT ADVISORY COMMITTEE Minutes SANTA ANA HEIGHTS PROJECT AREA COMMITTEE Tuesday, December 5, 2006 - 6:30 p.m. Dec. 5th PAC Meeting / Crean Library 6:30 PM Guests: Rich Hoisington, Sr. Civil Engineer/ Edward Frondoso, Project Engineer, Councilman Ed Selich , Dave Kiff PAC Members in Attendance: Mary Slouka, Rick Dayton, Tim Stoaks, Greg Carroll, Gary Hall, Richard Moriarty, Jayne Jones Excused: Ted Nichols 1. Approval of minutes from October PAC Meeting Minutes: Rick would like to add to the minutes: “At the end of the trail report Rick asked Dave Kiff and Jayne if there was a schedule to repair the levees. To their knowledge the flood control dist. doesn’t have a schedule. If there was a failure in the levy, there is a built in clearance space to account for that. Richard motions to approve the minutes with the change. Mary 2nds. Motion passes. 2. Public Comments: (3 minutes or less) 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. May Ranck: There is graffiti on the back of the apartments on the West Side. Dave Kiff will call the graffiti hotline and have them take care of it. Mary Slouka asked if City of Newport is still taking care of code enforcement on the West Side. Dave reported that the contract with the County is up for renewal and should be before the city council soon. May also told us that the County has a new stricter dog barking code. ********************** Staff and Committee Reports 3.Chairman's Report - Annexation of West Side, PAC Member Update, Overview of Projects Today our new Supervisor John Moorlach was sworn in. Some of you may have met John a year ago at our Dec. PAC meeting in 2005. Since that time I have been in constant contact with John keeping him up to speed on RDA issues. The PAC looks forward to returning to a time when we had open communication with our County Supervisor and a strong advocate for us on the Board of Supervisors. We hope that Supervisor Moorlach will follow in the footsteps of Supervisor Tom Wilson, who sent a representative from his office to every PAC meeting and attended many PAC meetings personally NO New PAC Members Yet In our last newsletter PAC had high hopes that two new PAC members would have been appointed from the West Side of Santa Ana Hts. to serve on our committee by now. That has not happened, and not for lack of trying. Thank you to all the folks who submitted applications. We had a good number of them. More than any other time we have asked to fill positions. All applications were all sent to Mark Esslinger's office at the County and he in turn forwarded them to the 5th District. Don Hughes in Supervisor Silva's office was aware of the applications and PAC was informed that the Supervisor decided not to appoint anyone wishing to leave that up to our incoming Supervisor John Moorlach as one of his first official duties. We hope to have Supervisor Moorlach appoint our two newest members by our Feb. PAC meeting. Remember that you can always submit a PAC application to Mark Esslinger at the County of Orange at anytime during the year. Those applications are held on file until openings occur. At the LAFCO meeting in November, the LAFCO board voted to postpone the West Side Annexation for another 6 months. The Cities of Newport Beach and Costa Mesa sent letters to LAFCO asking for the postponement stating that they wanted to meet again to continue discussing the Banning Ranch issue and try to come to some sort of resolution. This postponement came as no surprise to PAC in light of recent developments and efforts by Supervisor Campbell, Norby and Corea all who would like to see the close of the Redevelopment Agency and no money spent on the projects at hand. With the RDA money gone, and no prospect for the city to take over the RDA as originally planned, why would they want to annex the West Side? Remember that it was Supervisor Silva who stated that he would not support the City of Newport Beach taking over the RDA without annexing the West Side. With no Redevelopment Agency there is little hope on the horizon for this annexation. That is why it is more important than ever that PAC and the City work with our incoming Supervisor to stop the County from dissolving this agency. I attended the LAFCO meeting with fellow PAC members Greg Carroll and Tim Stoaks. We all agreed that the postponement was unfair and unwarranted just based on the fact that it is STILL up to the owners of Banning Ranch which city they choose to be annexed to and which city they protest out of. Those folks need to make a decision so this process can move on, if in fact it is ever moving on. PAC has continued to protest strongly about the West Side Annexation being tied to the Banning Ranch issue. It was unfair then and it is still unfair now as the two areas have nothing to do with each other. Needless to say that our target date for annexation of July 2007 for the West Side Annexation to Newport Beach will not be met. PAC sees the City of Newport Beach as a strong ally on fighting the closure of the RDA based on the fact that the City has moved forward in good faith with all of our projects and are out of pocket dollars that they thought they would re coup from RDA funds, and rightfully so after all we do have 40 million dollars in the fund. The County has led PAC and the City to believe that they would be reimbursed for these projects such as under grounding, the arena, etc. PAC continues to be optimistic that with new leadership on a County level and City level we will be able to solve these issues and move forward as has always been the plan and someday we will see the annexation and East and West Side all under one city jurisdiction. Kline Drive: According to Larry Stansifer at the County, they are working on a memorandum of understanding agreement with the Resources and Development Management Dept. (RDMD) for project management services. We have also identified an RDMD engineering consultant to draft the project report that will use "Concept D" as its basis. Orchard St. Park: As per Larry Stansifer “We had counsel draft the Right of Entry Agreement between the Agency (County) and the property owner and they do have those back at the County. They had signed an earlier version, but the document had to be revised. Counsel also drafted the Resolutions for the Agency and County to be approved when the item goes to the Board. I will be meeting with the consultant probably sometime next week to discuss next steps including project schedules. The equipment won't be ordered until the BOS approves the project. I am working with one of our consultants who will manage the installation/construction process. I also consulted with our purchasing manager regarding buying the equipment using the State of California negotiated contracts, which will result in a lower project cost. “ We had a diagram of the park equipment to show at the PAC meeting. *********************************** 4. Irvine Avenue Widening - Rich Hoisington, Sr. Civil Engineer/ Edward Frondoso, Project Engineer (10 mins) Edward: the project scope has not changed since 2004. The project will provide additional lanes on both sides of the street including bus outlet and bike lanes. At the intersection of Mesa and Irvine they are widening adjacent to the Back Bay Center south of Mesa. None of the residents are affected. In front of the Back Bay Center they will be adding a 2nd retaining wall and another retaining wall for the apartments. Dec. 2007 construction should begin and take about 15 months. This was on the Board of Supervisors Agenda today and did pass. Sources of funding are Measure M funds and on Nov. 28th City of Newport Beach agreed to fund 50% cost sharing for Mesa Dr. The City will reimburse the county for improvements made in Newport Beach. Landscaping between the stock pile and medians will be paid for by the City and those funds needs to be determined. Maybe RDA funds? Bristol sidewalk, there will be a 9 ft. side walk 60 foot retaining wall and will underground the three poles there as well. They are still working on Caltrans approval and begin construction in July 07. There is no intention of increasing speed limit on Irvine Ave. 5.Community Center - Barbara V. (2 mins) The Community Center Project was by far our most ambitious project since its inception in 2001, and our biggest disappointment this past year. Now it's time to lay it to rest....This Dec. the PAC will officially vote to remove this from our project list. A sad commentary since out of all the projects this one actually was approved by the Board of Supervisors and had an official approved budget of 11.5 million dollars. These were more than sufficient dollars to complete this project as outlined by PAC and the community. But after years of planning and negotiating this past October everything fell apart when Councilwoman Daigle insisted on trying to place a 50 meter pool in this project when the community, the YMCA, the City Staff all opposed the pool size. The opposition was mostly due to the amount of traffic, noise and negative impact it would have created for the surrounding community. The price tag was a whole other issue. Let's not forget the main reason we opposed this, it just didn't physically fit at the location. The space just wasn't there. As projected costs spun out of control with the City Sub Committee of Mayor Don Webb and council members Daigle and Ridgeway insisting on expanding the scope of the Community Center and losing sight of the original plan, it died. Neither the PAC nor the County could support the new price tag of an excess of 26 million dollars. It was a mess. But the good news is that the YMCA property once valued and proposed to be sold to the City of Newport Beach at 4 million dollars, is now valued at 8-10 million dollars and the YMCA board has decided not to close and sell the facility. They will stay right where they are. The YMCA intends to raise the money it will need to refurbish the facility and continue to serve our community. PAC is happy that the YMCA will remain a vital part of our community especially for our senior citizens and our young children and that it will not be sold to make way for low cost housing as was the original plan by the City of Newport Beach before PAC proposed the Community Center concept. The YMCA will continue to move forward with its plans to build a new facility in Santa Ana as well. Congrads go out to our good friend at the YMCA Jon Voget who the PAC has worked with diligently from the start of this project. He has now been assigned to a new project and writes to us" I am very excited to get some very strong help as we move forward with the growth and development of the Central Orange Coast YMCA. Robert Coleman has officially started as the Executive Director at the Newport Beach/ Costa Mesa service area. He has tremendous experience in the YMCA Movement and will be a tremendous asset to our association. I am transitioning to the Santa Ana / Tustin Service Area. Robert will office at the Newport Facility in my old office space. Gloria Davidson will remain as his Administrative Assistant and the Campaign Manager for the Central Orange Coast YMCA, “Partner with Youth”. I have relocated to a work station at the Orange County Metro offices until we can get out first phase completed and a modular office built on our property in Santa Ana. Yolanda Origel will be assisting me with managing my calendar and with our Santa Ana Capital Campaign efforts. " Rick makes a motion: that Barbara convey to John Moorlach that PAC would be willing to support an amendment regarding the 11.5 million dollars allocated for the Community Center if it is used for specific previously approved A list projects. Gary 2nds the motion Motion passes. 6.Development Committee & Fire Station Report - Rick D. (10 mins) RE: Fire Station Site Meeting and Job Walk-through On 11/15/06, Greg Carroll and Rick Dayton, representing the PAC Fire Station Subcommittee, attended a walk-through of the new fire station project with Fire Chief Tim Riley, new Fire Chief Steve Lewis, the architect Rubio Medina, the superintendent for the general contractor, and the project manager for Fire Department. Construction progress is very good. They estimate that construction is ahead of schedule. The estimated completion date for the building is June, 2007. Completion date for the training tower should be somewhat later than that. Rubio Medina indicated that there have not been any significant change orders or cost increases during construction to this date. Greg and Rick reviewed the final colors and materials palette for the building. The colors and materials are the same as what was approved by PAC members last year. The training tower colors will be reviewed and approved by PAC at a later date. Steve Lewis and Rubio Media were told of PAC’s preference that the tower be an “earth tone” color, just dark enough to conceal jet fuel residue. In the presence of the new Fire Chief, Steve Lewis, Greg and Rick confirmed with Chief Riley that PAC will be able to hold meetings in the Training Room at the south end of the building. This room appears to be slightly smaller than the room currently being used for meetings at the library, but should be adequate for PAC meetings. The room will have a service counter with a sink at one end, and it will have AV capability. ****************************** RE: Summary for CNB UP2006-021 Dentist Office at 2372 S. Bristol Street, Unit 3 Concerning UP2006-021, on 11/02/06, the Planning Commission voted 7-0 to deny the Use Permit application for a Dentist Office at 2372 S. Bristol Street. The PC noted in their review that the wording for the PA Zone specifically states that uses not listed are prohibited, and that in the intent clause for the PA Zone it is stated that the PA Zone is for “moderate intensity uses”. This description does not occur in the intent clause for the BP Zone. The Use Permit application was called up to the City Council for review (appeal) by Leslie Daigle and Todd Ridgeway. The Council voted to allow the Use Permit, but restricted the practice to no more than one dentist and two dental hygienists at any one time. This condition would transfer to new ownership should the office condo space be sold. The applicant was also conditioned to increase the parking from 42 to 45 stalls through re-striping and to provide accessibility upgrades in the form of conforming handicapped parking stalls and path of travel to the office space. PAC’s Development Committee had recommended denial of the Use Permit to the Planning Director, and PAC voted unanimously to appeal the Planning Director’s decision to the Planning Commission, should the Planning Director approve the project. After approval by the Planning Director, Commissioner Barry Eaton called up the project for Planning Commission review. In its review of the project, the PAC Development Committee had the following concerns with this application: 1. If this use permit is approved, it will change the Specific Plan for the PA district to include medical uses. The Specific Plan, as written, and as adopted by the City, makes clear distinction between “professional and administrative office” use and “medical and dental office” use. These two types of uses are listed separately in the permitted uses for the Business Park district. “Medical and dental office” use is not listed as a permitted use for the PA district. According to the Planning Director, the CNB Planning Dept. typically does not distinguish between these two types of office uses. However, for projects in the SAH Specific Plan area this distinction is in the Specific Plan section of the Zoning Code and needs to be enforced. The difference in parking standards and traffic between these two types of uses also justifies the distinction between professional and medical offices. 2. Since the approval of this use permit would be a change in the permitted uses for the PA district, the committee believes that this application should be reviewed by the Planning Commission, not the Planning Director (per Section 20.44.055.B.2). Given the information provided in this report, should the Planning Director continue to process this application, PAC requests advice from the planning staff as to the appeal procedures that are available. 3.Attachment ‘A’ is a parking table the PAC committee has prepared to determine if the parking requirement is being met by this proposed project. (No parking summary was made available as part of the initial project summary provided to PAC.) From the table, the total required parking is 46 parking spaces. From the submitted site plan, it appears that the applicant is modifying a walk area adjacent to the first row of parking and re-striping several rows of existing parking to provide 45 parking spaces, including (1) van handicapped and (1) standard handicapped parking spaces. The proposed project appears to be short of compliance by (1) parking space. Due to the small scale of the submitted 8-1/2” X 11” site plan, it is not possible for the committee to determine if the parking stalls indicated comply with CNB parking stall criteria. The committee assumes that this is the case, as there is no indication in the submittal summary that the proposed parking stalls are non-compliant. Attachment ‘A’ : Parking table Use Area Parking ratio Req’d. Parking Parking to be provided Dentist Office 2707 SF* 5/1000*** 14** 13 General Office 7881 SF* 4/1000*** 32 32 Totals 10588 SF 46 45**** *This total is from the submittal summary. Since there is an existing medical use on the property that is not accounted for in the summary, this total is incorrect. **Required parking is based on this medical use only. It does not account for the existing non-compliant medical use. ***Based on gross building square footage for both medical and general business uses. ****Parking indicated on submitted Site Plan = 45 spaces. It does not appear to be possible to add additional parking to the site. 4.There is already an existing periodontist office at Suite 2372-A: John B. Crispens, DDS. Apparently this existing medical office use is operating without an approved use permit through the County. Since there already is a medical office use at this site, the maximum of 2,750 SF medical office use stated in the use permit application will be exceeded by the proposed project. Furthermore, the parking deficit will be more than one (1) parking space. It does not appear feasible to provide the required parking for two medical uses in the existing parking lot. 5.The additional traffic that medical uses create will be an additional traffic burden to the adjacent residential neighborhood. This property has a drive approach from Spruce Avenue. Because Bristol Street is one-way eastbound, patrons of businesses at this property tend to drive through the residential neighborhood to travel west, rather than driving east on Bristol, north on Jamboree, and west on Bristol north of the 73 freeway. Additional medical use at this property will exacerbate the non-local traffic problem through this residential neighborhood. This non-local traffic situation has been an on-going source of complaint at PAC meetings for many years. For the reasons listed above, the PAC Development Subcommittee recommended denial of this Use Permit application as submitted. PAC requested that the City Council uphold the decision of the Planning Commission and deny this Use Permit. PAC further requested that the City Council deliberate the current planning policy of considering professional and medical offices as equivalent uses when the traffic generation and parking demand for these two types of uses are so different. Conclusions: In this review process the Specific Plan has not been violated, as some have suggested. The second set of permitted uses for the PA District allows the Planning Commission (and by intent any higher body such as the City Council or Board of Supervisors) the latitude to approve any use it deems appropriate for this zone. Clearly, the Planning Director (or Zoning Administrator for County reviews) does not have this latitude. When the application was called up for Planning Commission review by Barry Eaton, the violation to the Specific Plan was removed. PAC can consider the Council decision as a win for the community, but the battle may not be over. The use conditions imposed should prevent the traffic and parking problems that the Development Committee feared IF the applicant, Dr. Wilhelm, abides by the conditions. It should be noted that neither the dentist nor his architect was in favor of the use restriction of 1 dentist and 2 hygienists working at any given time. The applicant had indicated to the Council that this was his intended use, and the Council held him to it. Nonetheless, the approved plan still indicates 7 dental stations. It seems quite likely that the dental operation will, in time; attempt to exceed the conditioned restriction. PAC and the neighborhood must continue to be vigilant and monitor any substantive changes to traffic through the neighborhood emanating from this site as a result of this new use. If more traffic is detected, PAC should deliberate the best method to monitor the traffic increase, substantiate violations of the use permit conditions, and request action by the City to stop the violation(s) or to terminate the use permit. Richard Moriarty makes a motion that the City does a traffic study of Zenith, Spruce St. & Orchid & Orchard. Mary 2nds the motion. Motion passes. Date: 12/04/06 RE: CNB UP2006-028 Limousine Service at 20061 Birch Street This is a follow-up to the Development Committee review on the use permit application by Let’s Roll Limousine Service, dated 11/16/06. The PAC Development Subcommittee has received on 12/04/06 a revised submittal package by the applicant from the case planner, Rosalinh Ung. The new plans have not been reviewed yet by the Development Committee. Due date for response by PAC is 12/13/06. The revised plans indicate parking for the limousines to the rear of the building and (2) parking stalls, including a handicapped parking stall, at the front of the building. The plans also appear to indicate more landscaping at the front of the property. The project is scheduled for Planning Commission hearing on 01/04/07. The Development Committee will review these revised plans and send a report to the case planner on or before 12/13/06. This review will be included with reports for the 02/07 PAC meeting. 7.Enforcement Report to SAH PAC : Shannon Swaford I’m sorry that I am unable to attend this evening. I am rounding out a semester and am in class tonight making a presentation for my Masters project. I continue to drive the SAH area a couple of times a week and I applaud you for how nice the neighborhood looks. I have received a nominal amount of complaints and lately my work has focused on such projects as illegal dwelling units and mandatory water quality construction inspections. Inspections on illegal units include two in the last two weeks. Construction inspections are occurring throughout the neighborhood including the new SAH fire station. Recently a code amendment was adopted by the city council. The code aims to limit the number of individual dwelling units in a residential area by requiring a minimal number of leases which must be furnished to inspectors upon request. . Please feel free to contact me during the work week either by email or phone—both are available on the PAC website. You may make complaints to me in writing and can check on any active permits or Code Enforcement cases on the City of Newport Beach Building Department Online Services site. 8.Under Grounding/ Mesa Birch Park - Dave K. (5 mins) Undergrounding UUD19 Phase V (Cypress St. from Orchard to northern street end) of the plans was field walked on 11/28/06 w/ SCE, CNB, IRWD, & CMSD for review of joint trench alignment, clearances to sewer, water lines, and storm drains. There were some notes and corrections noted and SCe will incorporate into their design. Phase IV plans were submitted to CNB for review 11/30/06 and will be routed to all parties for review. Field job walk will be scheduled in mid-December. Mesa Birch Park is still in limbo until ownership of land can be determined. 9.Trails/ Arena Subcommittee - Jayne J., Mary S., and Dave K. (10 mins) Jayne Jones attended a meeting at the city a few weeks ago and was given a copy of the preliminary arena design, topography and grading plan to share with the BBE Board and the PAC arena sub-committee. The engineers on the project would like to get their feedback at this time, and are completing preliminary water quality management plans--and preparing environmental documentation in advance of City, County, and Coastal Commission submittal--at this time. This is a first draft and not ready to be presented at the PAC meeting as of yet. George Berger with the City of Newport Beach anticipates the map will be ready to present to PAC at the Feb 2007 meeting and it should be present formally to the Coastal Commission after that. 10. New Business … an agenda item for PAC members & the public to put new projects and issues out there and add them to the next agenda Answers from Past PAC meetings: Regarding Mesa and Birch. The consensus is that the simplest thing is to change that stretch of Mesa -- between Acacia and Irvine -- to Birch. it means that no one would have to change stationery or title or anything like that. It would mean that, if you're coming from the West side, you drive down Mesa, cross Irvine and it becomes Birch, then turn right onto Mesa again. Dave will ask Planning Director if this plan can work. Richard asked-What about golf balls across trail access off Mesa Dr. Easements: The question was raised about old easements to the back bay through the estates on Mesa Dr. Jayne would like this answered as well. Dave Kiff will look into what this would entail. Spruce Street Traffic: Ed Selich brought this issue up at the last City Council meeting when the issue of the dentist office was being appealed. BV has let Dave Kiff know that the community wants a traffic study to see if Spruce can be made a cul de sac now that the Fire Station is being moved to Birch St. Pac meeting adjourned 8:00 PM |
|
||