Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout18 - Approve the Application for a Reconfigured Residential Dock at 939 Via Lido Soud - PowerPointJune 25, 2019 Item No. 18 Mark & Shana Conzelman Application to Reconstruct Dock 939 Via Lido Soud Newport Beach City Council June 25, 2019 Item 18 • New dock configuration meets Policy H-1 • No negative impact on navigation • No negative impact on existing harbor uses • No negative impact on adjacent property. Council Policy H-1 The Harbor Commission may permit a pier or float to extend beyond the pierhead line if the Harbor CoOmmission makes a determination that such extension will not negatively impact: (1) navigation; (2) adjacent property owners; and (3) existing harbor uses. Conzelman Dock Project I 8- 18" SQUARE PILES 1. 34'-9" T-0" 23'-0" T-0" 17'-7" PROJECT NE Plf RH�IS1JNE \ EXISTING DOCK 4.,0.. 1 a i \ NEW DOCK 1 1,201 S.F. __ 4 0 4 0 a N a 28.-0„ q EXISTING STAIRS 9 N a 4 0 NEV Is the existing pier permitted? • A pier permit was approved for Robert Warmington in 19811? 38 years ago. • The pier was constructed with a small deviation from the location but the float size was the same. • The existing float could accommodate a vessel that was 85 feet in length (63 feet + 22 feet overhang). • The pier has been inspected by the City. • The pier has been taxed by the City. • The Conzelmans bought the property with no knowledge that the pier was not exactly as approved. • Whether the existing pier is or is not entirely consistent with the 1981 drawing is not relevant to whether the proposed pier meets Policy H-1. Po#r CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH V S RO. BOX 1768, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658.8915 February 9, 1998 ., ,Mariners Escrow Corp P.O. Box 8808 Newport Beach, Ca. :92659 RE: Harbor Permik #v71-0939-1, for 939 Via Lido Soud, Newport Beach, Escrow p15746 -DM i ,Sirs: Regarding a pier.perm,t transfer for the above mentioned property,. the structure was inspected on February 9, at which time it was; determined that it conforms to City standards. Once we: -have the I Transfer Application card, with both the buyer and seller signatures.,, and the remaining $163 for the transfer fee; the permit.will be.transferred. !Sincerel - Wes 'Armand Harbor Inspector '. 3,300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach Bulkhead Station 172 N 13GS Disclaimer: N E W P O R T B E A C H © Every reasonable effort has been made to assure the accuracy of the data provided, however, The City of Newport Beach and its employees and agents �PEW�Rr 0 40 80 disc la any and all responsibility from or relating to �@ anim y results obtained in in its its use. J S �4voah�� Feet The claim that Policy H-1 never allowed piers to go beyond the Pierhead line east Of Bulkhead Station 172 is not supported by the Facts. Pier permit for 933 Via Lido Soud 10/24/2003 Coastal Commission Approved 5-03-480 1C ITY OF NEW, PORT SERCH CITT OF SO4POFT Kpa> VICINITY MRP � — 7L� mn —­— ,tea —.--------., - I , —47 -z--- --7 Z,e PROFILE V 4:' Dt7 J�, 111 1T SaMIWS RFE EXRES�!D IN FE -7 PiZ, ELZ%qTICNE DR3E9 Qi ILM LC,E; LDH EEL GRASS INSPECTION 1K NO EEL GRASS WITHIN 15' OF P ROJ M EEL GRASS IN THE PROJECT AREA SIGNATURE PERMIT DATE 6 COASTAL COMMISSION 0 EXHIBIT HARBOR RESOURCES PAGE. CITY OF NEWPORT BE L.-I.N V I Z A Pi'JJECT AUDRES,-: 9�3 //- L :gib �NJG 06NE:R NAME: The location of the existing dock provides no basis to deny the proposed dock • The Conzelmans did nothing to "violate" the pier permit. • The Conzelmans bought a home with an existing dock that the City had inspected and taxed. • It is unfair to deny the Conzelman application on the grounds that, in hindsight, the original property owner placed the dock float in a slightly different location than shown on a drawing 38 years ago. • For the proposed dock, navigation, neighbors and harbor uses would not be any different if the existing dock were as shown in the 1981 drawing. • The denial based on permit discrepancies which have existed for 38 years punishes the Conzelmans for events in which they had no part and no responsibility. No negative impact on navigation 200 feet is the maximum needed navigation channel w 200' width design is equal to 5 times the maximum beam of vessels passing the channel. If the City is going to make its determination on navigation on the maximum size vessel at 939 Via Lido Soud, it must also evaluate the existing maximum size vessels which might occupy the surrounding property. Bulkhead Station 172 N 13GS Disclaimer: N E W P O R T B E A C H © Every reasonable effort has been made to assure the accuracy of the data provided, however, The City of Newport Beach and its employees and agents �PEW�Rr 0 40 80 disc la any and all responsibility from or relating to �@ anim y results obtained in in its its use. J S �4voah�� Feet The claim that Policy H-1 never allowed piers to go beyond the Pierhead line east Of Bulkhead Station 172 is not supported by the Facts. n. NBG°S Disclaimer: N E W P O R T B E A C H Every reasonable effort has been made to assure the accuracy of the data provided, however, The City of OP Newport Beach and its employees and agents 0 40 80 disclaim any and all responsibility from or relating to any results obtainetl in its use. Feet 6/7Al2019 No negative impact on adjacent properties. Owners of all of the properties near 939 Via Lido Soud have approved the plan including: BillLyon - 929 Via Lido Soud — You have our support. Won't cause any negative impacts. Ira & Gayle Rosenstein - 933 Via Lido Soud -- We concur with your proposed dock reconfiguration Andrew Gabriel - 941 Via Lido Soud — Your dock configuration looks good to me. support your plan. Lucky Palmer - 944 Via Lido Soud — I am definitely in support. Good luck with this. No negative impact on existing harbor uses. • No negative impact on sailboat racing. "After reviewing the proposed configuration I believe it will have no impact on sailing and sailboat racing in the area of Newport Harbor East of Lido Isle:" Gary Thorne, Harbor 20 fleet captain, 2017-2018. • No negative impact on harbor dredging. The closest piling to the federal project line is set back by five feet. Conditional approval was appropriate • The original Council decision did not reverse the Harbor Commission. • The Harbor Commission denied a dock which it believed would allow a vessel to project 23 feet past the project line. • The Council approved a dock which would allow a vessel to project 6-7 feet past the project line.