|
||||
|
|
||||
|
|
Project Area Advisory Committee (PAC) MINUTES Draft Tuesday, Feb. 6th, 2006 - 6:30 – 8:30 PM. PAC Members in Attendance: Barbara Venezia ,Mary Slouka, Rick Dayton, Tim Stoaks, Greg Carroll, Gary Hall, Richard Moriarty, Jayne Jones Ted Nichols, Ted Bosley, Gary Golson Excused: Mary Slouka ************************************************** 1. Approval of minutes from Dec. PAC Meeting Richard makes a motion to approve. Gary Hall 2nds. Motion passes. 2. Welcome and introduction of Guests and New PAC members: PAC Members - Ted Bosley & Gary Golson. Guests: Mario Mainero Chief of Staff for Supervisor Moorlach, City Council Rep. Nancy Gardner, Tony Brine City of Newport Beach 3. 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. No comments **************************************** Staff and Committee Reports 4. Chairman’s Report - Annexation of West Side, Overview of the projects for 2007 BV & Mario Mainero (10 mins) Feb. 2007 is the birthday of our PAC website! In 2006 our site received 158,914 hits. Since 2001 the site has been a valuable tool for up to date information on projects and the Redevelopment Agency (RDA). Next LAFCO meeting 9AM, Wednesday, February 14th 2007, Bldg. 10, Planning Commission Hearing Room. Both cities will give their 3 month report. Their 6 month report is due in May. At the Feb. meeting, there will be no action taken by LAFCO. On Feb 2nd we had a meeting with Supervisor Moorlach and Mario Mainero and we discussed the annexation of the West Side. We reviewed history of the issue and our goals for the future. They also had separate meetings that day with representatives from the City of Newport Beach and the City of Costa Mesa. Normally I would give you an update of our projects here but I am turning this time over to Mario Mainero. On Jan 31st our Projects Update Sub committee was present at a meeting at the Supervisor’s office initiated by Mario. He had also called in all the relevant parties in the County and asked them to prepare this update in order to get an overview of the projects, their progress, and a time line to work with so that their office could start bringing these projects forward to the Board of Supervisors. Mario Mainero reports: PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS AND TIMELINES A. Projects through County RDMD Ignacio Ochoa Asst. Public Works Director/Chief Engineer (714) 834-4377 1. KLINE DRIVE Project: The project will construct a paved public roadway, from Orchard Drive to approximately 650 feet southerly, serving 14 properties. Access to the lots is currently provided by an unpaved dirt road within a 30 foot wide private easement. In 2002, the County’s Housing and Community Services Department retained a Consultant to develop several street “Concepts” for consideration by the affected property owners in order to obtain voluntary dedication of right-of-way to construct the public street. Property owner meetings were held and surveys conducted and the Concepts were refined by the end of 2005. The area is currently under review for annexation by the City of Newport Beach. In August of 2006, RDMD was directed by the CEO to take the lead on project delivery. On December 4, 2006, OCDA requested that the project be placed “on hold” pending discussions with the new 2nd District Supervisor. Those have occurred, so the project should no longer be on hold. Once RDMD receives direction from OCDA to proceed with the project, a project report will be prepared addressing engineering and environmental issues. After project report preparation, construction plans for the project will be completed. Construction Costs: The construction cost for the roadway improvement is $600,000; Undergrounding costs approximately $250,000 additional. Key Issues Obtaining all property owner approval for voluntary dedication of right-of-way. This is at or near completion. Clarifying the preferred street “Concept”. It appears that consensus has now been reached on the preferred concept (“Alternative ‘D’”). 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 to one side required due to substandard street width. Undergrounding of overhead utilities (SCE and Telephone). Projected Milestones Board approval to advertise the project by June 2008.* Complete construction by Fall 2008.* *These milestones exclude Undergrounding overhead utilities. Utility Undergrounding would require additional dedicated right-of-way (utility easements) and Agreements with the effected Utility Companies. Undergrounding would increase project costs, impact individual property owners during connection to the new system and delay project delivery. Should it be determined to proceed with Undergrounding, consideration should be given to phasing the project by doing Undergrounding after the street improvements. 2. IRVINE AVE WIDENING (Mesa Dr. to Bristol St.) Project: This project will widen and realign Irvine Avenue through Santa Ana Heights and the city of Newport Beach, and will upgrade the roadway from a Primary (four lane divided highway) to a Modified Major Arterial Highway (six lane highway). Planned annexations for portions of the roadway (either to Newport Beach or Costa Mesa) may impact the ultimate local jurisdiction and proposed improvements. Cities and County staff are working closely to finalize the roadway improvements. Construction Costs: The construction cost is estimated at $5,925,000 with OCTA funding consisting of $1,205,139 (MPAH), $1,104,905 (GMA) and $3,618,000 county Road. Key Issues The City of Newport Beach (CNB) has agreed to fund 50% of the right-of-way and construction cost for the Mesa Drive improvements. The City approved Amendment No.1 to Agreement D98-096 for the aforementioned funding on November 28, 2006. The Board approved this Agreement on January 23, 2007. Agreement D98-096 also stipulates that CNB will prepare Plans, Specifications and Estimate (PS&E) for the parkway landscaping and median landscaping and that CNB will pay the cost for design and construction for the landscaping. CNB will also own and maintain the landscaping post-construction. Right of way offers were made to nine property owners. Staff is moving forward with five successfully negotiated contracts. The Board approved a Resolution of Necessity to condemn and acquire easements for four parcels on December 5, 2006. A settlement was reached with one of these four, The Back Bay Center, on January 9, 2007. Projected Milestones 100% PS&E by February 2007 Obtain Regulatory Permits by February 2007 Obtain Right-of-Possession by April 2007 Board approval to advertise June 2007 3. BRISTOL STREET SIDEWALK: Project: The proposed project is located on the southerly side of SE Bristol Street and westerly of Irvine Avenue in the unincorporated area of Santa Ana Heights. The project will construct approximately 1200’ of sidewalk along SE Bristol Street, between Santa Ana Avenue and Irvine Avenue, including retaining walls, curb & gutter, drainage improvements, removal and replacement of chain link fence. This project also includes the Undergrounding of existing utilities (SCE, MPower and AT&T). Construction Costs: The project is estimated to cost $490,000 (exclusive of Undergrounding) and has acquired funding of $360,000 from the Federal Hazard Elimination Safety Funds and $150,000 Orange County Development Agency (OCDA) Funds. Key Issues RDMD staff has been in discussion with John Wayne Airport (JWA) concerning the internal transfer of right-of-way. JWA is evaluating the fencing type to be utilized at the back of walk. JWA has received a preliminary approval from Housing & Community Services Dept. (HCS) for OCDA funds, in the amount of approximately $133,000, to fund the iron-wrought fence type along the back of walk along Bristol Street and Irvine Avenue. Caltrans approved the Preliminary Environmental Studies (PES) on January 30, 2007. Staff is coordinating with Caltrans on the E76 approval to advertise the project. We anticipate this approval by May 2007. Currently evaluating Undergrounding costs and funding sources. Projected Milestones Board Approval to advertise June 2007 B. Project through Housing and Community Services Larry Stansifer OCDA Administration 480-2727 Orchard Drive Park Project: The project consists of replacing older park equipment with new park recreational equipment, including a playground surface that meets current safety standards. The park is located at the south-east end of Orchard Drive. The SAH PAC and neighborhood park committee have approved the preliminary design. Construction Costs: The estimated construction cost for the park improvement should be under $185,000. RDMD is currently refining this estimate. Key issues: The park, while public, is owned by the adjacent business park. A Right of Entry Agreement will be necessary for construction. The business park owner has provided an initial concurrence. The owner will also be responsible for on-going maintenance of the new equipment. Projected Milestones: Board approval date to award contract late July 2007. (Board approval of the plans, Right of Entry Agreement, Resolutions and advertising the project will be earlier.) C. Projects through City of Newport Beach Dave Kiff Asst. City Manager 949-644-3002 Mesa-Birch Park Pursuant to a letter to Supervisor Silva (July 14, 2004), we were (and remain) willing to maintain this park once it is built. We (City) don’t have to own it—ownership was not our first choice. We believe that funding for the park’s design and construction should come from RDA dollars, but that maintenance (and indemnification) would be on the City’s General Fund. With Supervisor Silva’s blessing, we embarked upon planning the park, including several meetings with PAC members. In mid-2006, after design approval by the City Council, we put it out to bid. In August 2006, low bid was $378K. We didn’t award the bid when the County backed off on the verbal deal. We have incurred about $30,214 in design costs for this Project. Mr. Kiff would expect that this park could be built in 4-5 months if given the go-ahead today. The residents wanted this parcel to have new monument signage and grass because, currently, it is a dump site for trash and weeds and is an entrance to the community. Santa Ana-Delhi Channel Equestrian Arenas This three-arena system is planned for the SA/Delhi Channel right-of-way. We have met with OCFCD to discuss permitting (two or three times) -- they have been amenable to the Project provided that they can pull out the poles if they need to maintain the channel. As such, the design accommodates that. The project now is before the Coastal Commission—the County brought it forward to the Coastal Commission and Coastal approved it once (2001), but that approval expired when the County never did anything to build the arenas. The new updated project is about the same as the one previously approved, but it envisions more water quality protection. This is why the design costs (incurred by the City) are about $45,000 at this point. The project itself is about $175,000 (estimated). If Coastal approves this Project, it could be built in 3-4 months. Utility Undergrounding (Mesa-Cypress) We have incurred about $108,000 in costs (design costs charged by SCE) for this project, which would underground high-voltage lines along Cypress and Mesa in East SAH. SCE has recently presented to us their preliminary cost estimate for SCE’s portion of the Project---that’s $3,643,930, and it includes about $655,000 allocated towards the conversion of private hookups to the underground network. This was a bone of contention for many when initially discussed by Supervisor Silva and by the City—usually, private property owners pay the price of their conversions. But PAC and others argued that the Undergrounding effort would not be successful if residents had to pay this $5K to $15K cost. With SCE done, the designs go next to AT&T. We have not yet paid AT&T, and AT&T will not start until AT&T gets a check (estimated to be $90K). AT&T will come up with a cost—likely to be smaller than SCE’s—to align the AT&T lines with the trenches and conduit laid by SCE. Originally, we estimated that this Project would be about $7.5 million total, including a Multi-Use Trail that could be constructed on existing Trail right-of-way along Mesa. The Trail’s holdup now is that SCE’s poles are in the way. The City will likely not move further forward on this Project (going to AT&T,) until we get some word from the Board that this is still something they want to do. If we get that agreement, AT&T will take about 4-5 months to do their design. Then it may have to go to Time Warner and finally then it could go out to bid. UU Projects typically require us to put the money in the SCE-AT&T-TWC tills “up front,” then they do the work and draw down the funds, returning what’s left (if anything). I. PROCESS FOR MOVING FORWARD In order to move everything forward as soon as possible, perhaps each of you could comment on the feasibility of the following, to the extent it applies to your group: 1. Kline Drive. OCDA to forthwith direct RDMD to proceed with the project, so that a project report will then be prepared addressing engineering and environmental issues. After project report preparation, construction plans for the project will be completed. Unless there is significant objection, in order to move the project along in one phase, the project report should address undergrounding the utilities before paving. This will keep the project moving to an anticipated completion date of fall 2008. 2. Irvine Ave. Widening. Eminent domain in progress (per County Counsel). RDMD to bring ASR to advertise for RFP to construct improvements by July 2007. 3. Bristol St. Sidewalk. Come to final agreement with JWA on the iron fence shortly. RDMD to bring ASR to advertise for RFP to construct improvements by June 2007. 4. Orchard Drive Park. HCS/OCDA to obtain concurrence and Right of Entry from owner of business park, and then to bring ASR to advertise for RFP to construct improvements by April 2007, and award of contract by late July 2007. 5. Santa Ana-Delhi Channel Equestrian Arenas. City of Newport Beach to obtain Coastal Commission approval in late spring, 2007, and completion of the project within 3-4 months thereafter, or by fall 2007. 6. Utility Undergrounding (Mesa-Cypress). The City of Newport Beach is to work with Supervisor Moorlach’s staff to prepare an ASR for the Board to consider approving the project in concept with an estimated price not to exceed $7.5 million. If approval is secured, the City would pay AT & T with the receipt of $90,000 in RDA Funds to design their segment of the Undergrounding, and then do the same with Time Warner. When the designs have been completed, City of Newport Beach to work with Supervisor Moorlach’s staff to prepare an ASR for the Board to consider approving the project in final form if necessary. 7. Mesa-Birch Park. City of Newport Beach to work with Supervisor Moorlach’s staff to prepare an ASR for the Board to consider approving the project based on a lease to the City and RDA funds to design and construct the park, with the City paying for the maintenance of the park as its lease payment to the County. This would be predicated on the provision in the lease that after the County constructs the project, all indemnification and maintenance will be borne solely by the City of Newport Beach, at no future cost to the County. If approval is secured, the project would be completed 4-5 months thereafter. As is clear, each of these projects will require Board approval to proceed and be paid from RDA funds, and such approval is not guaranteed. However, this timeline at least sets out when and how each project will be moved forward to the point of Board decision. Supervisor Moorlach’s staff to meet within two weeks with CEO’s office to present this plan for consideration and advice on how best to move forward. *************************************************** 5. Traffic Report for Spruce St. – Tony Brine City of Newport Beach (10 min) Cut through traffic coming off of Bristol down Spruce is the main problem that he was aware of. They have sent out a traffic count company and they have started placing traffic counting hardware on streets. They have started with some initial counts on Zenith, Orchid and Orchard. They do not have the completed reports. In addition, on Orchard and Orchid they are doing counts on speeds as well as traffic. The studies will look at traffic in both directions. The car rental places are a point of contention as well as the fast food traffic during lunch hours. He also talked about the “Road Calming” measure that was passed by the City Council last year. These use tools to slow traffic down such as speed bumps, cull de sac, narrowing streets, (choker) to name a few. The other issue to look at is emergency access. You can find this Road Calming policy on the City’s web site. Tony was here tonight to hear what concerns the neighbors have. Speed control on Mesa Dr. is also a concern. 32 miles per hour is the threshold speed that is the standard that they use in these studies. BV directed Rick Dayton and the Development Sub committee to meet with Tony and go over the scope of the study. Tony will be back with us at the next PAC meeting in April to report his findings. ************************************************** 6 Development Committee - Rick D. (10 mins) SANTA ANA HEIGHTS PROJECT ADVISORY COMMITTEE Date: 12/14/06 Javier Garcia / Ruby Garcia Senior Planner City of Newport Beach Planning Department P.O. Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA 92658-8915 (949) 644-3206 Fax: (949) 644-3229 RE: Modification for second building sign installed without modification permit or building permit 20072 Birch Street, Suite 230 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Modification Permit No. MD2006-116 Dear Mr. Garcia: Thank you for giving the PAC Development Subcommittee the opportunity to review and comment on the above-referenced application for modification permit. It is the opinion of the PAC Development Committee that the non-permitted signage facing Birch Street is not at all in keeping with the character and intent of the business park. The committee would not like to see this become a precedent. The committee feels that the attempt by either the tenant or building owner to install such blatantly large signage without a modification permit or building permit is particularly onerous. The Development Committee recommends denial of the modification permit. For PAC and for the community, the committee wishes to thank CNB staff for discovering this non-permitted signage and for requiring the applicant to file for a modification. Please send the committee a summary of this application process when it is completed. Sincerely, Rick Dayton PAC Development Subcommittee (949) 645-1717 fax: (949) 645-4243 1/17/07 footnote: The modification hearing for this application will be held in the Newport Beach Council Chambers on Monday, 1/22/07, at 3:00 PM. The sign in question faces Birch Street: “Newport Fertility Clinic” in black individual (non-illuminated) letters. The existing permitted sign faces Bristol Street. Other buildings in the Business Park have chosen to use the one allowed building sign to identify the building. However, in this case, the building owner has chosen to use the one allowed sign to identify a single tenant within the building. Other tenants in the building are now seeking to put signage on the building exterior, which has created a problem. If this is allowed to become a precedent, we could end up with a business park cluttered with individual tenant signage. This would not be in keeping with the Specific Plan guidelines. SANTA ANA HEIGHTS PROJECT ADVISORY COMMITTEE Date: 02/01/07 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 Medical Center Project at 20372 Birch Street Dear Rosalinh: The PAC Development Subcommittee has reviewed the submittal package proposing the construction of four (4) 2-story medical buildings over a parking garage level on a currently vacant lot. It is our understanding that the project meets all of the Business Park criteria in the Specific Plan, including the setback of 75 feet from the REQ properties and non-view glazing for elevations facing the REQ properties. It is also our understanding that this project meets the City parking standards for medical use. PAC recommends approval of this project. PAC requests that staff verify that this project does in fact comply with all applicable criteria in the Specific Plan. Since this project will have a significant amount of interface with the REQ District properties, PAC requests that staff enforce the property line wall and rear drainage guidelines outlined in the approved BP/REQ wall detail. Attached with this e-mail transmission please find a folder containing a .pdf file of the wall and rear drainage detail, a letter to Mr. Jay Garcia in 2005 concerning enforcement of this detail, and some photographs of recent projects built without compliance. Also please note in the photographs that the required screen landscaping in the rear landscape setback areas has also not been done in these two projects. PAC requests that this project conform to the landscaping guidelines for Business Park projects. Thank you for the opportunity to review this project. Sincerely, Richard A. Dayton PAC Development Committee Chairman (949) 645-1717 fax: (949) 645-4243 SANTA ANA HEIGHTS PROJECT ADVISORY COMMITTEE Date: 12/14/06 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 UP2006-028 Limousine Service at 20061 Birch Street Dear Rosalinh: The PAC Development Subcommittee has reviewed the second submittal package proposing a limousine rental service in the existing 814 SF residential building on the subject property. PAC appreciates that the applicant is now proposing the limousine parking at the rear of the building. The site plan also now indicates 2 employee parking stalls, one of which is accessible. The accessible parking stall will need to be for a van, which means the loading aisle will need to be 8 feet wide instead of 5 feet. A note on the site plan still indicates that the existing building is unchanged. The floor plan that is included in this submittal appears to still lack accessibility upgrading. There doesn’t appear to be an upgrading of the existing landscaping at the street. As a permanent use, PAC still has the following concerns with this application: 1. There appears to have been no attempt to meet the Streetscape guidelines for the Business Park as set forth in Section 20.44.C.1. There is a 10 foot landscape setback requirement at Birch Street that is not being met. There is no indication of the required 3:1 berm slope or the designated street tree, Brisbane box. The site plan simply indicates a 28.3 foot long x 4 foot wide existing grass slope. This same section of the Specific Plan indicates the rest of the required landscape palette, and also indicates that “turf is discouraged”. As a permanent use, the application needs to meet the required landscape criteria. 2. As indicated in the previous review, it is the intent of the Specific Plan to encourage lot consolidation and larger commercial buildings in the Business Park. It appears at least a physical possibility to consolidate this parcel with 20071 for a larger commercial development. This would be PAC’s preference. The Development Committee does not object to the re-use of the existing residential structure, but feels there should be significant upgrading to the appearance and functionality of the existing building for a permanent use. It is also the opinion of the committee that the bright yellow color of the building is not appropriate for a “professional commercial appearance”. PAC recommends that if this project is to be approved as a permanent use it should be required to meet the landscape guidelines and to provide a significant upgrade to the existing building. Alternatively, it appears that this project could be reviewed by the Planning Director and approved for a renewable 5 year period as a Temporary Use under Section 20.44.050.C.2.a. The Development Subcommittee would support a Temporary Use Permit for this application if the Planning Director concludes that it is applicable for this use. This may make it easier for a lot consolidation in the future. Even as a temporary use the committee recommends that the exterior appearance of the building be upgraded with a more subtle paint color, and that conforming landscaping and street trees be required per Section 20.44.050.C.6.c in the existing 4 foot wide street planter area as well as the planter where an existing tree is indicated to remain. Thank you for the opportunity to give a second review of this project. Sincerely, Richard A. Dayton PAC Development Committee Chairman ******************************************************** 7 Code Enforcement – Shannon Swaford wrote report: (5 mins) Subject: Santa Ana Heights Code Enforcement Activity 12/2006-1/2007 1. The electrical box at the corner of Spruce and Bristol has finally been repaired. If you remember it was fastened to a wooden frame and taped off with caution tape. 2. There is an ongoing investigation regarding the conversion of use of properties on Orchid Street. I continue to work alongside the City Attorney’s Office to bring any violations into compliance. Currently, all construction has been permitted by the City of Newport Beach Building Department. 3. Please remember to park your vehicles either in a garage, driveway, or legally on the street. Parking vehicles on the curb and front yard will result in an Administrative Citation to the property owner. This rule is exempt on street sweeping days. 4. A contract with the County for WSAH code enforcement expired late in 2006. It is possible that in the future the County will contract with us again for Code Enforcement in WSAH. All code enforcement complaints should now be directed to the County. Call 866-552-8120 or 714-796-0233. All Code Enforcement complaints must be submitted in writing. Be sure to include your contact information. Shannon Swafford Water Quality Complaints Code & Water Quality Enforcement Officer 949-644-3213 City of Newport Beach or 3300 Newport Blvd 949-644-3215 Newport Beach, CA 92663 8 PAC Sub committees Re examined and Revised - BV (10 mins) ************************************************** 8/ Sub Committee update: ( BV 5 Mins) Let’s take a moment to go over each committee and see if the members would like to remain on the committee or switch and maybe suggest some other short term sub committees. Projects Update: This sub committee meets every other month with the City of Newport Beach and the County to follow up on projects and funding. It has been instrumental in giving us an overall view of the status of each project. Sub Committee Chair: BV Greg Carroll, Rick Dayton, Tim Stoaks Gary Golson Development Sub Committee: This committee reviews projects that are being built in the area. From office buildings to new structures they make sure they all comply with our Specific Plan. Sub Committee Chair Rick Dayton, Tim Stoaks. Gary Hall. |
|
||