HomeMy WebLinkAboutIS008_BANK OF NEWPORT IIIIIIIIIIUIIIII�VI�I�IIIIIIIIII� IIIIIIIINI
F,�yo•`Qo+, �
`\sa
NOTICE OF DETERMINATION
o e ° 11
co
March 31 , 1978
T ro f 0: ® Secretary for Resources FROM: Community Development Department
1416 Ninth Street, Room 1311 City of Newport Beach
Sacramento, California 95814 3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, Calif. 92663
® Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
County of Orange d
P. 0. Box 687
Santa Ana, California 92702
SUBJECT: Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 21108 or
21152 of the Public Resources Code
PROJECT TITLE: Bank of Newport: Office Building and Residential Development
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NUMBER (If submitted to' State Clearinghouse) :
CONTACT PERSON: R. V. Hogan TELEPHONE NUMBER: (714)640-2137
PROJECT LOCATION: Commercial : 2101 E. Coast Highway
Residential : 777 Avocado Street
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposed project includes the construction of a 45,000
square foot office building with 2-story parking structure, the demolition of an
existing motel complex, the renovation of an existing apartment complex and its
conversion to a condominium development.
This is to advise that the City of Newport Beach has made the following determinations
regarding the above described project:
1 . The project has been ® approved by the City of Newport Beach.
❑ disapproved
2. The project ❑ will have a significant effect on the environment.
® will not
3. ❑ An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant
to the provisions of CEQA.
C A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the
provisions of CEQA. A copy of the Negative Declaration is attached.
DATE RECEIVED FFILING:
ir
AF
JUNE Al!
of the do d 'J Beverly D l odd,
Envi ronli ntal Coordinator
NEGATIVE DECLARATION%
QJ •,
['o3k�GTU.If Secretary for Resources FROM: Community Development Dept.
X 1416 Ninth Street, Room 1311 City of Newport Beach
Sacramento, California 95814 3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, Calif. 92663
Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
XX P. 0. Box 687
Santa Ana, Californi:a 92702
NAME OF' PROJECT: Bank of Newport: Office Building and Residential
Development
PROJECT LOCATION: Commercial : 2101 E . Coast Highway
Residential : 777 Avocado Street
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The proposed project includes the construction of a 45 ,000 s . f. office
building with 2-story parking structure, the demolition of an existing
motel complex, the renovation of an existing apartment complex and its
conversion to a condominium development.
FINDING: Pursuant to the provisions of City Council Policy K-3 pertaining to
procedures and guidelines to implement the California Environmental
Quality Act, the Environmental Affairs Committee has evaluated the
proposed project and determined that the proposed project will not
have a significant effect on the environment.
MITIGATION MEASURES: See attached list
INITIAL STUDY PREPARED BY: Applicant, City of Newport Beach and
Haworth/Anderson/Lafer
INITIAL STUDY AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW AT: 3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, California 92663
DATE CEIDLOR fNG
APP ` „ 11179 everly Wood,
JUilc Environ ntal Coordinator
of I!, „ , Date: February 6 , 1978
�.1 Ot /
9 . The following measures have been incorporated into the site plan
to minimize potentially significant traffic impacts :
a . Access to the commercial property from Pacific Coast Highway
will be limited to right turn in/right turn out only .
b . Primary access from Avocado will be aligned at the first
median cut opposite Third Street to facilitate turning
movements . Secondary access to the VAM level of the parking
structure has been provided and will be limited to right turn
in only.
c� The intersection of Avocado and Pacific Coast Highway is
planned to be signalized when traffic increases .
d . A plan for signing, striping, and interior traffic control
devices will be submitted with the final project plans and
will be subject to the approval of the Community Development
Director and the City' s Traffic Engineer .
e . The final interior circulation and parking layout for both
the commercial use and the residential use will be subject .
to the approval of the City' s Traffic Engineer.
f. The proposed plan provides for adequate off-street parking .
g . Landscaping will be kept to a low height at intersections ,
access points , and curb cuts to provide maximum visibility
and minimize pedestrian/bicycle/vehicular conflicts .
h . The placement of controlled access gates for the residential
development will be subject to the review and approval of
the City ' s Traffic Engineer, Fire Department and Community
Development Department. The final location and style will
provide adequate emergency access , provision of stacking area
for cars and good visibility. for turning movements .
10 . Arrangements will be made for private - trash collection for both
the commercial and residential uses .
11 . Energy conservation measures will be incorporated into the final
plans for both the new commercial structure and the renovations
to the existing multi -family units as required by the building
codes and City requirements .
12 . Flow restricting devices will be used where possible to conserve
water. Drought resistant plants will be selected for landscaping
to reduce water demand for irrigation purposes .
13 . Applicant will pay park in-lieu fees for the new dwelling units
as required by City Policy . These fees will be used by the City
for the acquisition or development of the neighborhood park
facilities . The applicant has also' provided two (2) paddle
tennis courts within the residential development for the use of
the residents .
-2-
kTICE OF DETERMINATION
Date March 31 , 1978
TO: ® Secretary for Resources FROM: Community Development Department
1416 Ninth Street, Room 1311 City of Newport Beach
Sacramento, California 95814 3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, Calif. 92663
1@ Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
County of Orange
P. 0. Box 687
Santa Ana, California 92702
SUBJECT: Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 21108 or
21152 of the Public Resources Code
PROJECT TITLE: Bank of Newport: Office Building and Residential Development
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NUMBER (If submitted to' State Clearinghouse) :
CONTACT PERSON: R. V. Hogan TELEPHONE NUMBER: (714)640-2137
PROJECT LOCATION: Commercial : 2101 E. Coast Highway
Residential : 777 Avocado Street
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposed project includes the construction of a 45,000
square foot office building with 2-story parking structure, the demolition of an
existing motel complex, the renovation of an existing apartment complex and its
.conversion to a condominium development.
This is to advise that the City of Newport Beach has made the following determinations
regarding the above described project:
1 . The project has been ® approved by the City of Newport Beach.
❑ disapproved
2. The project ❑ will have a significant effect on the environment.
will not
3. ❑ An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant
to the provisions of CEQA.
CX1 A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the
provisions of CEQA. A copy of the Negative Declaration is attached.
DATE RECEIVED FOR FILING:
Beverly D Nood,
Environental Coordinator
• NEGATIVE DECLARATION l
TO: Secretary for Resources FROM: Community Development Dept.
nX 1416 Ninth Street, Room 1311 City of Newport Beach
Sacramento, California 95814 3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, Calif. 92663
XX Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
P. 0. Box 687
Santa Ana, California 92702
NAME OF PROJECT: Bank of Newport: Office Building and Residential
Development
PROJECT LOCATION: Commercial : 2101 E . Coast Highway
Residential : 777 Avocado Street
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The proposed project includes the construction of a 45 ,000 s . f. office
building with 2-story parking structure , the demolition of an existing
motel complex, the renovation of an existing apartment complex and its
conversion to a condominium development.
FINDING: Pursuant to the provisions of City Council Policy K-3 pertaining to
procedures and guidelines to implement the California Environmental
Quality Act, the Environmental Affairs Committee has evaluated the
proposed project and determined that the proposed project will not
have a significant effect on the environment.
MITIGATION MEASURES: See attached list
INITIAL STUDY PREPARED BY: Applicant, City of Newport Beach and
Haworth/Anderson/Lafer
INITIAL STUDY AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW AT: 3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, California 92663
DATE RECEIVED FOR FILING:
everly Wwood,
C- runngntal Coordinator
Date: February 6 , 1978
I
Based on the Initial Study, the following mitigation measures have
been incorporated into the project to reduce potentially significant
environmental impacts :
1 . Prior to the issuance of grading and building permits , a complete
geotechnical evaluation of the site will be prepared by a
qualified engineer which will take into account soils , geology
and seismic characteristics of t'he site . The report will contain
appropriate recommendations for the design and engineering of the
proposed project. Final project plans will be subject to the
City' s approval . Grading operations will be limited to day time
hours per City Code and will be conducted under the supervision
of a qualified soils engineer
2 . Sufficient exhaust/ventilation equipment will be installed in
the parking structure to satisfy existing building codes , taking
into account the additional' emissions generated at the drive-up
banking facility .
3 . Runoff from the completed project will be directed to existing
storm drains . Construction stages will be subject to erosion
control measures approved by th,e City' s grading engineer. A
parking lot cleaning and maintenance program will be established
for both the commercial use and the residential use, and be the
responsibility ,of the, property owners to maintain .
4. Introduced landscaping will be replaced on site , in particular
where landscaping serves as a screen between residential and
commercial areas . Street trees will be replaced as, required.
Final landscape plans are subject to the approval of the Director
of Community Development and the Director of Parks , Beaches and
Recreation.
5 . Residential areas to the west and south of the project area will
be protected acoustically and aesthetically by a combination of
landscape and decorative wall treatment. Particular attention
will be paid• to area west of the driveway along the western edge
of the property. The final design of the landscaped areas and
noise attenuation walls will be subject to the approval of the
Community Development Director.
6 . The office structure and the residential units will be remodeled to
meet noise insulation standards per building code and City
requirements .
7 . Lighting of the parking areas (including structures) and outside
lighting on the buildings will be subject to the review and
approval of the Community Development Department when final pro-
ject plans are submitted. Lighting. .will be directed away from
residential uses .
8. The commercial use and the residential use have been grade
separated and buffers installed (back to back parking structures
at the new property line) . Use conflicts have been minimized .
-1 -
' • I
9 . The following measures have been incorporated into the site plan
to minimize potentially significant traffic impacts :
a . Access to the commercial property from Pacific Coast Highway
will be limited to right turn in/right turn out only .
b . Primary access from Avocado will be aligned at the first
median cut opposite Third Street to facilitate turning
movements . Secondary access to the lM level of the parking
structure has been provided and will be limited to right turn
in only.
GThe intersection of Avocado and Pacific Coast Highway is
planned to be signalized when traffic increases .
d . A plan for signing, striping, and interior traffic control
devices will be submitted with the final project plans and
will be subject to the approval of the Community Development
Director and the City' s Traffic Engineer.
e . The final interior circulation and parking layout for both
the commercial use and the residential use will be subject
to the approval of the City' s Traffic Engineer.
f. The proposed plan provides for adequate off-street parking.
g . Landscaping will be kept to a low height at intersections ,
access points , and curb cuts to provide maximum visibility
and minimize pedestrian/bicycle/vehicular conflicts .
h . The placement of controlled access gates for the residential
development will be subject to the review and approval of
the City ' s Traffic Engineer, Fire Department and Community
Development Department. The final location and style will
provide adequate emergency access , provision of stacking area
for cars and good visi.bility. for turning movements .
10 . Arrangements will be made for private trash collection for both
the commercial and residential uses .
11 . Energy conservation measures will be incorporated into the final
plans for both the new commercial structure and the renovations
to the existing multi-family units as required by the building
codes and City requirements .
12. Flow restricting devices will be used where possible to conserve
water. Drought resistant plants will be selected for landscaping
to reduce water demand for irrigation purposes .
13 . Applicant will pay park in-lieu fees for the new dwelling units
as required by City Policy . These fees will be used by the City
for the acquisition or development of the neighborhood park
facilities . The applicant has also' provided two (2) paddle
tennis courts within the residential development for the use of
the residents .
-2-
, i
I
I _
-a�G4V; 2 P
W
urban (Manning. • design • housing • land -use'• environmental analysis
February,22', 1978
Ms. Beverly Wood ! ; o,
City of Newport Beach
330 Newport Bou l evard '
Beach-, CA 92663r
Newport .Bea - „`; .' ,• .,r i .p9.,? ,9,,a ;
. . ' ,. ?r, .r,.•.: �, . r it. ,.I
;S,T;A;T?E 'M`E•,N T
PROJECT: BANK OF.NEWPORT = INITIAL`STUDY
EFFORT COMPLETED:
AF
Acceptance.of, the''Initial Study, by City's Environmental
Coordinator and submittal of twenty-five. (25) cop,ies' : ;
for review by the 'Planning Commission and general, public ,
(submitted to City 'February 17,'1,978). "
PROGRESS PAYMENT:
Final amount due, per contract: ",$429.00* ,
Please make ,check payab'Ie
to Haworth/Anderson/Lafer
THANK YOU
*Refer to Invoice dated February ,10, 1978 . ,
for time and materials charges. '
• � r
31706 Pacific coast highway,•;sduth laguna,ca92677 •tel(7M)4 9-2206
, r
ho'Luorth anderson lafer
urban planning . design - housing . land use • environmental analysis
February 10, 1978
f'
Ms. Beverly Wood
City of Newport Beach
330 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, CA 92663
S T A T E MEN T
PROJECT: `BANK OF NEWPORT - INITIAL STUDY
EFFORT COMPLETED:
Submittal of Screen Check Initial Study including traffic
studies and attendance at Environmental Affairs Committee
meeting.
Principal 38.5 hrs @ $40/hr $1 ,540.00
Research Associate 1 .5 hrs @.$18/hr 27.00
Secretary 12.5 hrs @ $, 8/hr 100.00
$1,667.00
Expenses, travel , reproduction, etc. 42.00
$1 ,709.00
Traffic Studies 500.00
Time and Materials Total:' $2,209.00
PROGRESS PAYMENT: Per contractual agreement,, 80%:
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE: $1,716.00
Please make check payable
to Haworth/Anderson/Lafer
T H A N K Y 0 U
31706 pacific coast highway . south laguna.ca92677 •tall(714)499-2206
•
DRAFT
INITIAL STUDY
•
• PROPOSED COMMERCIAL OFFICE
AND RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUMS
BANK OF NEWPORT
•
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
•
•
•
• HAWORTH/ANDERSON/LAFER
FEBRUARY 1, 1978
•
•
February 2, 1978
Beverly;
Did not have time to finish the
sections on Bicycle and Pedestrian
Circulation nor Noise, but I will
review these verbally at the meeting
Friday.
Following that meeting, they will
be incorporated into the Final Draft
along with the exhibits.
Sincerely,
HAWORTH/ANDERSON/LAFER
Carl N uhausen
I
DRAFT
INITIAL STUDY
• PROPOSED COMMERCIAL OFFICE
AND RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUMS
BANK OF NEWPORT
•
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
•
•
• HAWORTH/ANDERSON/LAFER
FEBRUARY 1, 1978
•
CONTENTS
• Page
SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
• Title . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Sponsor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Lead Agency , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 1
Other Responsible Agencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Project Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
• Existing Land Use • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
General Plan and Zoning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Project Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Project Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
• LAND USE/DESIGN
Existing Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , 4
Environmental Impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Mitigation Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
• TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION
Existing Conditions ' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Environmental Impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Mitigation Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
•
PARKING
Existing Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Env i ronmenta I Impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
• Mitigation Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION
• NOISE
SUMMARY
The following section shall include a summary of significant adverse
• impacts and suggested mitigation measures upon review of the draft
initial study by the Environmental Affairs Committee.
•
•
-i- '
•
•
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
TITLE: Proposed Commercial. Office and Condominiums; Bank of
• Newport
SPONSOR. Bank of Newport
Dover Drive at 16th Street
Newport Beach, CA 92660
LEAD AGENCY: City of Newport Beach
3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, CA 92660
• OTHER California Coastal Commission
RESPONSIBLE South Coast Regional Commission
AGENCIES : 666 E. Ocean Boulevard
Long Beach, CA 90801
• California Department of Transportation
120 South Spring Street
Los Angeles, CA 90012
PROJECT The project site includes 5.5 net acres of land situated
• LOCATION: at the southwesterly corner of Pacific Coast Highway
and Avocado Avenue in Corona Del Mar. More specifically,
the project site is bounded by Pacific Coast Highway
to the north, Avocado Avenue to the east, Kewamee Drive
to the south, and Zahma Drive to the west (see Exhibits
1 and 2).
•
EXISTING The majority of the subject property, some 2.7 acres, .
LAND USE : is presently developed with a 74-unit motel (Sandpiper
Inn). Adjoining the motel to the east is an existing
restaurant (Kam's) located on 0.8 acres of the subject
• property at the intersection of Pacific Coast Highway
and Avocado Avenue. South and west of the motel is
an existing 42-unit apartment complex situated on
1.7 acres of the subject property at the intersection
of Avocado Avenue and Kewamee Drive. The most westerly
corner of the subject property, approximately 0.3 acres,
• contains two private tennis courts.
GENERAL PLAN The property is designated for a combination of retail
• AND- ZONING: and service commercial , and administrative, profes-
sional and financial uses by the General Plan. Such
designation permits the existing motel and restaurant
uses, and proposed commercial office use. In reviewing
the General Plan designation for the property, the
Planning Commission determined that such designation
• was not intended to eliminate the existing residential
uses and that allowing the continuation of such uses,
including the proposed multi-family condominiums,
would be consistent with the intent of the General Plan
for the property.
• The existing zoning for the property is Unclassified.
It is anticipated that the project sponsor will apply
to have the property rezoned to C-1 and R-3, consistent
with its proposed future use.
• PROJECT The proposed project is intended to remove the existing
OBJECTIVES : 74-unit motel and replace such use, in part, with a
45,000-square-foot commercial office structure to serve
as the corporate headquarters of the Bank of Newport.
Existing office and banking facilities of the Bank of
• Newport located on Pacific Coast 'Highway to the east
and also at the corner of Dover Drive and 16th Street
to the north, would be removed and their operations
rehoused in the proposed commercial office structure.
In addition, the proposed project would serve to convert
• a portion of the existing motel and the existing apart-
ments to a 45-unit condominium complex. This will include
the rehabilitation of existing structures so as to meet
local code requirements and to increase their market-
ability as condominium units. New garage structures
will also be added with the condominium units to satisfy
local code requirements. Further, the proposed -condo-
minium complex will be subdivided from the present
total property area to facilitate its sale to prospec-
tive future homeowners.
The existing restaurant is intended to remain and would
• not be altered as a part of the proposed project.
PROJECT The proposed commercial office structure would be
DESCRIPTION : situated adjacent to Pacific Coast Highway and contain
some 45,000 square feet of space devoted primarily to
• banking, administrative and corporate offices. The
proposed office structure would contain a total of
four stories, with the first or lowest story set below
the existing surface grade of the site. The total
• -2-
structure would extend some 47 feet in height, or a
• maximum of 37 feet above' the surrounding surface level
of the site. The average maximum height of the roof
structure would be 35 feet above grade.
A total of 210 parking spaces would be incorporated .with
the proposed commercial offices, including 98 spaces -
below grade and 112 spaces at surface level . Drive-thru
teller facilities as part of the banking operation will
also be incorporated with the subterranean parking
facilities.
The proposed condominiums will include a total of 45
• units, to be housed in the existing two- and three-story
apartment buildings and single-story motel unit near
the south and westerly portions of the property. The
existing swimming pool in this same area will be removed.
The two existing tennis courts will be reduced in size
to two paddle tennis courts and reserved for the future
• private use of the condominium residents.
A total of 92 parking spaces would be provided with the
condominium units, including 70 enclosed garage spaces
and 22 open parking spaces. Thirty-six of the enclosed
parking spaces will be housed in existing garage
• structures, with the balance of 34 spaces located
within the central and westerly portions of the property.
•
•
•
• -3-
LAND USE/DESIGN
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The majority of the subject property, some 2.7 acres, is presently
• developed with a 74-unit motel . Adjoining the motel to the east is an
existing restaurant located on 0.8 acres of the subject property at the
intersection of Pacific Coast Highway and Avocado Avenue. South and west
of the motel is an existing 42-unit apartment complex situated on 1.7
• acres of the subject •property at the intersection of Avocado Avenue and
Kewamee Drive. - The most westerly corner of the subject property,
approximately 0.3 acres, contains two private tennis courts.
• The motel is comprised of both one- and two-story structures, with the
majority being two stories in height. The nearest two-story units are
set back a distance of 57 feet from Pacific Coast Highway and some 27 feet
from Zahma Drive near the westerly boundary of the property. The 27-foot
• setback along Zahma Drive includes approximately 10 feet within the
public right-of-way.
Other single-story motel units on the southerly portion of the property
• are located within 16 feet of Zahma Drive. The 16-foot setback, again,
Includes approximately 10 feet within the public right-of-way. The
setback areas along Zahma Drive are fully landscaped, including those
areas designated within the public right-of-way.
•
The existing apartments are contained in two- and three-story structures
near the south and westerly boundary of "the property. The tallest
existing structures on the property are two three-story apartments
• situated some 93 feet west of Avocado Avenue and approximately 112 feet
north of Kewamee Drive. These particular structures are estimated to
reach an overall height of 32 feet above grade.
• Separating the three-story apartments from Avocado Avenue is a double
row of single-story garages reaching an estimated height of 10 feet. The
• -4-
• garages are set back a distance of 12 feet from Avocado Avenue. The
12-foot setback area is fully landscaped between the garages and Avocado
Avenue.
• Between the three-story apartments to the west exists a two-story apart-
ment structure running parallel with Kewamee Drive. This particular
structure is estimated to reach an overall height of 18 feet and is set
back approximately 30 feet from Kewamee Drive. Westerly of the apartment
structure is a 7-foot high concrete block wall situated some 15 to 20 feet
from Kewamee Drive. The above setback distances include approximately
10 feet within the public right-of-way. The setback area between the
concrete block wall and Kewamee Drive is fully landscaped, including that
portion designated within the public right-of-way.
Existing uses surrounding the subject property include one-story, single-
family residences to the south and west; one- and two-story single-family
• residences and duplexes to the east; and a variety of•commercial uses,
including a service station, liquor store, restaurants and other retail
commercial uses also to the east, adjacent to Pacific Coast Highway. The
immediate property to the north along Pacific Coast Highway is presently
• vacant, excepting for the existing Bank of Newport facility which would
be removed upon completion of the proposed commercial office structure.
The vacant property immediately north of the project is now under develop-
ment as part of the Corporate Plaza Planned Community. Such development
will ultimately include a series of one-, two- and three-story structures
containing various professional and administrative offices, related retail
and service commercial, and civic, cultural and financial uses. The
• Corporate Plaza Planned Community extends from Pacific Coast Highway to
Farallon Drive, and from Avocado Avenue to Newport Center Drive.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
•
The proposed project is intended to remove the existing 74-unit motel and
replace such use, in part, with a 45,000-square-foot commercial office
I •
-5-
• structure. The proposed commercial office structure would be situated
within 12 feet of Pacific Coast Highway and approximately 63 feet from
the westerly property line near Zahma Drive.
The proposed office structure would contain a total of four stories, with
the first story set below the existing surface level of the site. The
total structure would extend some 47 feet in height, or a maximum of ,
37 feet above the surrounding surface level of the site. The average
• maximum height of the roof structure would be 35 feet above grade.
Additionally, the proposed structure would extend 35 feet above the
centerline grade of Pacific Coast Highway.
• The proposed office structure would comply with the height limits set
forth by Coastal Commission guidelines; however, it would exceed the
height limits set forth by the City's local zoning ordinance. The Coastal
Commission guidelines restrict building structures in this area to a max!-
mum of 35 feet above the centerline grade of the adjoining frontage road.
Local code requirements limit building heights to a maximum of 32 feet or an
average maximum height of 32 feet where involving a sloping roof structure.
(The latter requirement applies. ) Where a sloping roof structure averages
• 32 feet in height,. the maximum height of the roof may extend up to 37 feet.
While the proposed office structure does not exceed the 37-foot height •
limit, it does exceed the 32-foot average height limit. The proposed
office structure would require the granting of a variance or use permit
by the City as now proposed.
Other existing structures in the immediate area vary among one, two and .
three stories in height. The tallest existing three-story structure, which
• is located on the subject property, is 32 feet in height. Those being
planned as part of the Corporate Plaza Planned Community will be limited to
a maximum height of 32 feet. The Coastal Commission guidelines might
• -6-
• further restrict the height limits in the Corporate Plaza Planned Community;
however, properties to the north of Pacific Coast Highway lie outside the
I
local coastal zone.
. The existing uses most likely to be affected by the scale of the proposed
office structure are those located to the west along Zahma Drive and to
the east along Avocado Avenue. Those along Zahma Drive face in a parallel
direction to the subject property and incorporate both fencing and land-
scaping along Zahma Drive which would serve to reduce direct views of the
subject property and the proposed commercial office structure. Addition-
ally, the existing landscaping along the easterly side of Zahma Drive
would help soften direct views of the proposed office structure. The
• nearest residence along Zahma Drive would be situated some 130 feet from
the proposed office structure.
The nearest existing residence along Avocado Avenue is some 300 feet from
the proposed office structure. Between the existing residences. and the
proposed office structure are various existing and proposed landscape
areas which would serve to soften direct views of the structure. In
consideration of the factors related to views both along Avocado and
• Zahma Drive, it is unlikely that the difference between the proposed
building height of 37 feet and a height limit of 32 feet would be
distinguishable to surrounding residents.
• The present arrangement and building scale of the existing apartments will
generally remain unchanged by the proposed project. The single-story
motel complex and 42-unit apartment structures would be converted to 45
condominium units. These would be housed in the same one-, two- and three-
story structures as now exist at the southerly half of the property.
Existing setbacks would be maintained, with the exception of the existing
apartments and one new six-car garage near Kewamee Drive. The existing
apartments will be extended to within 23 feet of Kewamee Drive and the new
• garage to within 14 feet of Kewamee Drive. Present setbacks in this area
• -7-
. - I
approximate 30 feet. Both the additions to the apartment and the new
• garage would, however, remain within the limits of the existing concrete
block wall .
Major new construction with the proposed condominium would involve the
addition of a 42-car garage near the central portion of the property.
The garage would extend to within 16 feet of Zahma Drive as does the
present motel structure. The garages would be situated in the same
• general location as the existing two-story motel units near the central
portion of the property.
MITIGATION MEASURES
• The following .measures are recommended to reduce. potential impacts related
to views to and within the proposed project.
1 . Provide sufficient landscaping along Zahma Drive, including an
• effective combination of trees, shrubbery and ground cover, to
soften views of the proposed commercial office "and condominium
structures.
2. Provide a minimum 6-foot high wall in, addition to the above
landscaping near the westerly boundary of the property from the
• proposed condominium garage structure to the southerly line of the
commercial office structure to screen direct views of the proposed
parking lot.
3. Preserve existing trees and other existing major vegetation, particu-
larly within the area of the existing apartments.
•
4. Provide additional space for landscaping at or between the proposed
upper level office parking area and proposed condominium garages
to help soften views of the rear elevation of the garages.
5. Restrict the type and arrangement of plant materials, signs, walls,
• etc., at major traffic intersections and pedestrian and bicycle
crossings to insure adequate sight distances.
•
• -8-
•
TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION
EXISTING CONDITIONS
• The proposed project is located at the southwest corner of Pacific
Coast Highway and Avocado Avenue. Pacific Coast Highway is a major
highway with a current traffic volume of 34,000 vehicles per day.
East and west of Avocado, Pacific Coast Highway has two lanes of
traffic with painted center median. A left-turn lane exists on
Pacific Coast Highway at Avocado. Limited parking is allowed on the
south side of Pacific Coast Highway.
Avocado is a collector street and carries approximately 3,500 vehicles
per day. Avocado has two lanes of traffic in each direction with
a landscaped center median. An opening exists in this median at the
existing driveway to the motel and apartments. Parking is allowed
• on both sides of Avocado. Access to the existing motel is via two
driveways on Pacific Coast Highway and one driveway on Avocado. Access
to the apartments is available by driving through the motel complex
from Pacific Coast Highway and by a separate driveway on Avocado.
• There is no access from the existing development to any other City streets.
Table 1 shows the estimated traffic generated from the existing motel
and apartments as compared to the proposed office building and condo-
miniums.
Pacific Coast Highway is operating within its current capacity at
Level of Service "C" which is in the zone of stable flow but speeds
• are more closely controlled. The City and CALTRANS intend to improve
Pacific Coast Highway in the near future to increase capacity by
providing two additional travel lanes and a raised median.
•
• -9-
• Avocado Avenue is operating well within its capacity at the present
time. State warrants are currently met for traffic signals at
the intersection of Pacific Coast Highway and Avocado. However, a
problem does not exist at the intersection which would justify
• installing traffic signals at this time.
ENU RONMENTAL IMPACTS ' •
Traffic estimated to be generated by existing and proposed land uses
• are shown in Table 1 .*
Table 1
ESTIMATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES
• Generation Land Use Average Daily A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour
Rate Density Traffic (ADT) In Out In I Out
Existing 7 T.E./Unit 42 Units 294 8 13 13 8
Apartments
• Existing 8 T.E./Unit 74 Units 592 16 24 . 24 16
Motel i Total : 886 24 27 27 24
Proposed 13 T.E./1,000 S.F. 28,500 S.F. 370 40 9 18 48
Offices
• Proposed 36 T.E./1 ,000 S.F. 15,000 S.F. 540 21 5 9 26
Bank
Proposed 8 T.E./Unit 45 Units 360 11 15 15 11
Condos Total : 1,270 72 29 42 85
NET CHANGE: + 384 +48 - 8 + 5 1 +61
•
*Excluding existing restaurant use, to remain.
The traffic generation and peak hour rates used in this study for the
offices and apartments are consistent with those used in the Newport
Center Traffic Study, Phase Ii , prepared by Crommelin-Pringle & Associates
in 1976. The generation rates for the bank, condominiums and motel were
obtained from data published b the Orange Count Road Department in
• P Y 9 Y P
September, 1974.
-10-
• The number of employees in the office building are expected to range
from 75 to 100. During the A.M. peak hours of 8:00 to 9:00 A.M., it
Is estimated that only 20 percent of the employees.will be driving
Into the complex on their way to work. This would account for about
• 15 trips in the morning peak hour. In the P.M. peak hour of 5:00 to
6:00 P.M., it is expected that 60 percent of the employees will leave
the complex. This would account for approximately 40 trips in the
afternoon peak hour.
.Tablet indicates that approximately 380 addition6I• daily1veh•icl9 -1
trips will be generated by the proposed office building and condominiums
than is currently generated by the existing motel and apartments. These
• additional vehicle trips will add the following volumes to existing
streets:
Table 2
• TRIPS ADDED TO SURROUNDING STREETS
ADT A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour
Pacific Coast Highway 211 21 36
east of Avocado
Pacific Coast Highway 150 15 28
west of Avocado
Avocado north of drive- 268 27 45
way to complex
Avocado south of drive- 23 2 3
way to complex
• This directional distribution of vehicle trips was based on data in
the Newport Beach Traffic Study, Phase 11 .
The increase in traffic to be generated by the changes in land use will
• be insignificant on Pacific Coast Highway, representing about one-half
• -11-
of one percent of existing average daily traffic. Traffic volumes on
• 'Avocado will increase about 8 percent which also will have no signifi-
cant effect on this street which has the capacity to carry 15,000
vehicles per day.
• More importantly, the intersection of Pacific Coast Highway and
Avocado will carry only 250 additional vehicles per day. The additional
peak hour traffic at this intersection will not, by itself, signifi-
cantly increase the need for traffic signals at this intersection.
The revised circulation system within the development is not signifi-
cantly different than the existing pattern. There are, however, some
• changes that have been made.
Access to the condominiums will be via two driveways on Avocado Avenue.
Although this condominium complex is planned to have the major entrance
with a guard house at the south driveway, it appears that the north
driveway, which is being planned with an electric gate will be, by far,
the most heavily used access point. This is because the majority of
parking for the units is on the north side of the complex and because
• 95 percent of the trips generated by the condominiums will be coming
from or going to Pacific Coast Highway. Additional thought should
be given to moving the guard house to the north driveway. if the guard
house is an important feature of the development.
Access to the restaurant will remain as it now exists except that there
will be no internal circulation between the restaurant and the office
complex. Since there will be no left turns a.liowed on either Pacific
• Coast Highway or Avocado to or from the restaurant, patrons who will
be leaving the restaurant and wish to travel westerly on Pacific Coast
Highway will have to travel southerly on Avocado and make a U-turn at
the opening in the Avocado .median. Although this may be an awkward
• movement to some motorists, it should create no problem on Avocado
which will carry relatively light traffic volumes in relation to its
capacity. At the present time, it appears that the Newport Beach
• -12-
i Police Department allows parking adjacent to the center median on
Avocado. At some point, this practice should be stopped, at least
from Pacific Coast Highway to the first median opening since there
will be increased traffic activity on this portion of the street.
Access to the office complex is via a driveway on Pacific Coast High-
way and a driveway on Avocado. Both of these driveways allow internal
circulation by ramps to the upper and lower levels of parking being
• proposed. Driveways are wide and internal circulation is open so
that• no problems should result. Stop signs should be installed for
vehicles coming up the ramps to exit the parking lot because there
will be vehicles turning in front of both exit ramps to use the upper
• level of parking. Also, a double yellow centerline should be painted
on each ramp to separate opposing directions of traffic who will
not be able to see each other as they come around the turn in the
ramps. The bank drive-up teller lanes on the lower level should
• create no problems as long as proper signs and markings are installed
to direct customers who will be coming from the Avocado driveway and
must travel through the lower level parking lot to reach the teller
lanes. Unless proper signs and markings are installed including a
• double yellow centerline,-a possible conflict could result. . I_I Ir
The office complex will share use of the driveway on Avocado with the
condominium residents. This driveway has been designated to line up
'• with the median opening on Avocado which is an improvement over the
existing situation. Joint use of this driveway should create no
problems because of the low volumes generated by the condominiums and
the relatively low volumes on Avocado in relation to its capacity.
• Since there are three choices of turning movements that a motorist will
have when entering the driveway on Avocado, a good signing program at
that entrance is essential .
Although the developers of the office complex may feel there would be
a business advantage to allowing left-turns in and out of the driveway
• -13-
• on Pacific Coast Highway, it is doubtful that the City of Newport
Beach or CALTRANS would allow these movements for the following
reasons:
• Left-turns onto Pacific Coast Highway from this driveway would
• be unsafe at times and would reduce the capacity of Pacific
Coast Highway at this location.
• A raised median will be constructed on Pacific Coast Highway In
the future which should be opened only at intervals of 600 feet
or more.
•
• There is adequate circulation being planned in the office parking
areas to allow easy access to Avocado where left-turns onto Pacific
Coast Highway. can be made.
• Traffic studies which have been completed for the City indicate that
future traffic volumes on Pacific Coast Highway will be so great as to
require the highest standards of access control . Until the raised
median on Pacific Coast Highway is constructed, a NO LEFT TURN sign
• should be installed at the office driveway exit to Pacific Coast
Highway.
• MITIGATION MEASURES
There are several alternatives to the circulation system for this
project. There are none, however, which would be a significant improve-
ment over the proposed layout.
The following' is a summary of:suggested measures which should serve
to improve traffic efficiency and safety.
• 1 . This development does not significantly increase the need for
traffic signals at the intersection of Pacific Coast Highway
and Avocado. However, since warrants are now met for signals and
it is the intention to extend Avocado north of Pacific Coast
Highway in the future, provisions for signals should be made by
the City when planning access control on Pacific Coast Highway.
• -14-
• '2. For reasons of safety and efficiency on Pacific Coast Highway,
left-turns should not be allowed at the office complex driveway
to Pacific Coast Highway. A NO LEFT TURN sign should be installed
at the driveway exit to Pacific Coast Highway.
• 3. Parking should be prohibited along the center median on Avocado
between Pacific Coast Highway and the first median opening.
4. Stop signs should be installed on the exit ramps at the lower
parking level to avoid conflict with motorists using the upper
level of parking.
5. A double yellow centerline should be painted along the ramps
and main driveway entrances to separate opposing directions of
traffic.
6. A complete signing and marking program should be provided to
• direct traffic entering the Avocado driveway and also for those
customers using the drive-up teller lanes in the lower parking
level .
7. Additional thought should be given to moving the guard house for
the condominiums from the south driveway to the north driveway
• in order to serve the vast majority of residents.
8. If the electric gate is to remain at the northerly entrance,
increased space should be provided for automobile storage. Access
to the trash storage area may also be possible by such means
without requiring trash vehicles to circulate through the interior
• of the project.
9. Additionally, consideration should be given to restricting the
northerly driveway to existing traffic only to reduce conflict
with traffic utilizing the commercial office complex.
•
•
• -15-
PARKING
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The existing motel nearest Pacific Coast Highway includes approximately
75 off-street parking spaces for use by patrons and guests. Access to
• the above parking facilities is provided by two driveway entrances along
Pacific Coast Highway and one additional driveway entrance along
Avocado Avenue. A second adjoining driveway along Avocado Avenue provides
additional access to other notel units located near the intersection of
• Kewamee and Zahma Drive. Thirty additional open parking spaces in this
area are shared with the existing apartment units. An existing interior
driveway serves to link the above parking spaces with those situated
further north near Pacific Coast Highway. Included with the existing
• apartment units are 40 additional covered parking spaces and 20 open
parking spaces near Avocado Avenue and Kewamee Drive. In total , the
present motel and apartment uses provide 165 off-street parking spaces.
None of the above spaces are accessible from Kewamee or Zahma Drive.
The existing restaurant provides an additional 44 off-street parking
spaces upon the subject property. These are generally restricted to use
by restaurant patrons and primarily accessible from a single driveway
entrance located along Pacific Coast Highway. Two additional driveways
located along Avocado Avenue may also serve as access to the restaurant
but are restricted from use by the location of off-street parking stalls
along the southeasterly portion of the property. Existing off-street
• parking at the restaurant is not intended to serve the proposed commercial
office or condominiums.
In addition, approximately 11 on-street parking spaces exist along Pacific
• Coast Highway adjacent to the property. Twenty-four additional on-street
parking spaces exist adjacent to the property along Avocado Avenue.
On-street parking is also permitted to either side of the raised median
island along Avocado Avenue. This includes 20 on-street spaces between
3rd Avenue and Pacific Coast Highway and an additional 18 spaces between
3rd Avenue and Kewamee Drive.
• -16- 1_
. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
A total of 210 off-street parking spaces are proposed to be provided with
the commercial office use, including 98 spaces at the first-story level
(below surface grade) and 112 spaces at surface grade. Access to both
• levels of parking will be from a single driveway entrance along Pacific
Coast Highway and one additional entrance along Avocado Avenue. This
will serve to eliminate one of the three driveway entrances now existing
along Pacific Coast Highway and also combine, into a single driveway, the
• two adjoining driveways along Avocado Avenue serving the existing motel
and apartments.
To comply with existing parking standards of the South Coast Regional
• Coastal Commission, the proposed commercial office use would require the
following number of off-street parking spaces:
Required Parking Per Coastal
Commission Guidelines (1/12/78)
Proposed Commercial Office
Direct Banking 15,000 sq.ft. @ 1/175 sq.ft. = 86 spaces
• Administrative 15,000 sq.ft. @ 1/250 sq.ft.• = 60 spaces
Affiliated Offices 6,500 sq.ft. @ 1/250 sq.ft. = 26 spaces
Corporate Offices 7,000 sq.ft. @ 1/250 sq.ft. = 28 spaces
Mech. & Misc. 1 ,500 sq.ft. @ i/250 sq.ft. = 6 spaces
• Total : 206 spaces
The total number of spaces as proposed by the commercial office use would
generally comply with Coastal Commission standards; however, certain proposed
• spaces are substandard in terms of size. The Commission guidelines require
all non-residential parking spaces to be a minimum of 9 feet in width and
18 feet in length. No provision is made for compact parking spaces as
indicated by the proposed parking plan, even though such spaces may be
• permitted by local ordinance. The proposed parking plan for the commercial
office use includes 11 spaces designated as 8 feet x 18 feet and 19 spaces
'• -17-
• designated as 8 feet x 16 feet. Additionally, Commission guidelines
require that various parking stalls be increased by one (1 ) foot in width
where near an obstruction (i .e., a building wall , fence, etc.) . Two
parking spaces proposed by the project do not comply with this require-
ment. In all , 70 comply with the Commission guidelines in terms of the
stall sizes required would reduce the nubmer of parking spaces proposed
for the commercial office use by five, or to an overall total of 205
spaces. This would be but one less than total number required by Commis-
sion guidelines.
Further, the parking plan for the commercial office use indicates seven
parking spaces to be provided in tandem. Such parking arrangement is not
• permitted by Commission guidelines unless valet service is provided.
The arrangement of other parking spaces by the plan pose potential conflicts
in terms of traffic circulation. These include the 12 parking spaces
• backing onto the driveway ramp and drive-thru teller lanes from the south,
the eight parking spaces backing onto the driveway aisle and drive-thru
teller lanes from the east, and nine parking spaces backing onto the drive-
way aisle leading from Avocado Avenue to the upper parking level .
The proposed condominiums would be required to provide 97 parking spaces in
compliance with Coastal Commission guidelines as follows:
• Required Parking Per Coastal
Commission Guidelines (1/23/78)
Proposed Residential Condominiums
Total 45 units @ 2 spaces/unit = 90 spaces
plus, 1 space/unit guest parking = 7 spaces
Total : 97 spaces
• In addition, the City's local ordinance would require that a minimum
of 41 spaces be contained in a garage or carport.
• -18-
The proposed parking plan for the condominiums indicates that a total
• of 116 parking spaces would be provided, including 90 garage spaces and
26 open spaces. The total number and type of spaces (being open and
enclosed) would generally comply with Coastal Commission guidelines
• and local zoning requirements. The size and arrangement.of certain
parking spaces, however, would not.
The three open parking spaces nearest the southerly entrance to the
• condominiums are substandard in terms of stall length (measuring 16 feet
in length) and backup space (measuring 23 feet) . Five additional spaces
near the westerly end of this driveway have but 21 to 23 feet of backup
space. Such space is required to be a minimum of 25 feet x 4 inches by
Is Coastal Commission guidelines and no less than 24 feet by local zoning
requirements.
Along the most westerly portion of driveway heading in a northerly
• direction, the proposed plan indicates four open parking spaces in tandem
with four covered parking spaces. Tandem parking in connection with
residential uses is not permitted by Coastal Commission guidelines, unless
no other alternative exists. Being that the proposed plan includes more
• than the required number of parking spaces, it is doubtful whether such
parking arrangement would be permitted.
The garage structure immediately east of the above spaces poses potential
• traffic circulation conflicts in that the two most northerly parking stalls
have very limited sight distance of traffic heading south from the driveway
at the northerly entrance to the project. Traffic making a left-hand turn
movement at this location would also have limited view of cars backing
• from these two enclosed spaces.
Finally, the proposed entrance to the garage structure at the end of the
northerly driveway to the project is substandard in terms of both Coastal
• Commission guidelines and local zoning requirements. Such entrance is
indicated at a width of 16 feet and would generally be required to be
20 feet in width to meet both Coastal Commission guidelines and local zoning
requirements.
• -19-
MITIGATION MEASURES
The following measures are recommended to reduce potential impacts and
to comply with Coastal Commission guidelines and local zoning requirements.
• Commercial 1 . Increase 8-foot wide stalls at upper parking level
Offices to 9 feet to comply with Coastal Commission guide-
lines and local City requirements. (This would
result in the loss of one parking space. )
2. Widen end stalls at lower parking level to 10 feet
• near obstructions to comply with Coastal Commission
guidelines. (This would result in the loss of one
parking space, )
3. Increase width and length of 8 feet x 16 feet
compact spaces to 9 feet x 18 feet to comply with
• Coastal Commission guidelines. (This would result
in the loss of three parking stalls and a reduction
in the width of the adjacent aisle space from 30
to 27 feet. )
4. Provide valet service in conjunction with the
• proposed tandem parking spaces to comply with
Coastal Commission guidelines; consider possible
elimination of proposed tandem spaces (resulting
in the loss of seven parking spaces), and/or
consider the possible joint use of parking
facilities at the existing restaurant.
•
5. Restrict tandem parking spaces and other parking
spaces backing onto driveway entrances and drive-
thru teller lanes to employee parking only.
6. Include other designated employee parking at the
• lower level , away from the main building.
Condominiums 7. increase parking stall length of three spaces nearest
southerly entrance to 18-foot minimum to comply
with Coastal Commission guidelines. (This would
• result in a 3-foot reduction of the proposed land-
scaping and walkway area in this location. )
8. Redesign other 90-degree parking along this same
driveway to 30-degree angular parking in compliance
• with Coastal Commission guidelines. (This would
result in the loss of one parking space. )
• -20-
9. Eliminate the four proposed oepn tandem parking
• spaces to comply with Coastal Commission guidelines;
relocate the four enclosed parking spaces adjacent
to the above spaces so they are flush with the other
enclosed spaces in this area to discourage possible
tandem parking.
• 10. Modify the proposed garage structure immediately
west of the three-story condominium units to
provide two open parking spaces (instead of the two
enclosed spaces) near the most northerly driveway
to increase sight distances in this location, or
eliminate the two enclosed end stalls completely.
•
11 . Widen the entrance to the garage structure at the
most westerly end of the property to 20 feet
minimum to comply with Coastal Commission guidelines
and local zoning requirements.
•
•
•
•
•
•
I• -21-
AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into on this I6th day of
January, 1978, by and between the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH , a municipal
corporation, hereinafter referred to as " CITY , " and HAWOR'TH , ANDERSON ,
LAFER, hereinafter referred to as "CONSULTANT. "
W I T N E S S E T H
WHEREAS, the CITY has determined that an Initial Study is
necessary in conjunction with an application of the Bank of Newport
for a Zone Change , Site Plan Review , Use Permit, and Tentative Map
on a site on East Coast .Highway , in the City of Newport Beach ,
County of Orange, State of California ; and
WHEREAS, CONSULTANT has submitted to CITY a proposal to
prepare said Initial Study; and
WHEREAS , CITY desires to accept said proposal .
NOW, THEREFORE , in consideration of the foregoing , the
parties hereto agree as follows :
1 . GENERAL
CONSULTANT agrees to prepare the subject Initial Study
in accordance with the requirements set forth in Paragraph 2 of
this Agreement. CITY agrees to remit to CONSULTANT the amounts
set forth in paragraph 3 o.f this Agreement in accordance with the
terms and conditions set forth in this document .
2 .. SCOPE OF WORK
The subject Initial Study will be prepared in accordance
with the CONSULTANT ' S proposal dated January 3, 1978, which is
attached to this Agreement marked as Exhibit "A" and by reference
incorporated herein at this point as if fully set forth . Included
with the proposal is attendance at the meeting of the Environmental
Affairs Committee ( resulting' in an additional fee of $$ce .
- 1 -
3 . BILLING AND PAYMENT
CONSULTANT shall be paid under this Agreement on a time
and material basis and i-n no event shall the maximum amount of this
Agreement exceed Two Thousand One Hundred and .Forty-Five Dollars
($2 ,145 .00) . Partial payments shall be made by CITY to CONSULTANT
upon CONSULTANT' S presentation of statements verifying the time and
material costs incurred by it in connection with this Agreement .
4 . FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE
CONSULTANT shall use diligent efforts to complete this
contract within twenty-one (21 ) days after execution of this Agree"
ment. The subject Initial Study must meet the approval of the
Environmental Affairs Committee of the City . In the event additional
work is required due to input during the public hearings , said
additional work shall be subject, to a separate contract.
5 . TERMINATION
This Agreement is subject to termination by the CITY at
any time upon serving written notice to CONSULTANT. The CITY shall
be thereafter liable to consultant only for .fees a-nd costs incurred
as of the date CONSULTANT receives such notice of terminati-on
IN WITNESS WHEREOF , the parties hereto have entered into this
Agreement as of the date and year first above written .
APPROVE AS TO FORM CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
By
s ' sta Ci ttorney Tirecto
Co ity De lopme'nt Department
CITY
HAWORTH-ANDERSON-LAFER
Bya
CONSULTANT
2 -
t
and '18.1rSon
urban planning design - housing • land use onyironmental ,analysis
January 3, 1978,
Ms. Beverly Wood
Environmental Coordinator
City,of Newport-Beach
3300 Newport Boulevard `
Newport Beach,. CA 92660
Dear Beverly;
We appreciate the opportunity to submit the following proposal to prepare
an environmental initial .study of the proposed Bank of Newport project for
the City of. 'Newport Beach. , :The initial study will . consider both the
proposed commercial and residential portions of the project as designated
by the project sponsor..
We have estimated that the initial study would be completed within three :
(3) weeks time following execution of an agreement between the City of
Newport Beach and Haworth/Anderson/Lafer. This time period would encompass
all necessary work efforts to complete the screen check initial study,
exclusive of .the time period for review by the Environmental Affairs
Committee and/or Planning Commission.
7.
Included with the proposal is a listing of the estimated costs to comp IcO
the initial study. _ These costs include all anticipated` expenses by our
firm ( i .e. , for salaries, overhead, report reproduction, supplies, etc. )
as well as various expenses to be incurred by other specialized consultants
whom we would employ during the course of the study. In particular, we
would engage the services of a traffic engineer, Mr. Paul Cook, to assist:
in preparing the portions of the study pertaining to vehicular access and
circulation. A copy of Mr. Cook's personal resumes is attached for your
review.
We are further proposing that the study be conducted on a time and materials .
basis, riot to exceed the total cost figure indicated in the proposal .
Billings for work accomplished in completing the initial study will be in
accordance with the attached fee schedule. The total cost figure includes
all expenses as listed above, as well as various expenses required to
produce six (6) copies of the screen check initial study for review by
the Environmental Affairs Cormittee and twenty-five (25) copies of the
initial study (as may be required) for review by the Planning Commission.
;;7Cfi pacific tOQ3' higniuc{j - south laguna.ca92677 • ,ei!7l-1)499-22C6
Ns_ Beverly Wood January 3, ,1978
City of Newport Beach : Page Z
h t S •E
1 h
Fr i
t
Add itionaltexpenses related to "the consultants attendance at 'pub 11c
meetings (subsequent'to the submittal_of the screen check initial study)`
are not included as part. of the 'tota1. cost ,figure Alisted in the proposal. `
The consultant(s), however, may be requested .to attend :such meetings for•
which expenses would ,be charged_ on a time and materials basis • in accor-
chedule.
i �h the. attach , ,
dance w ed... fee s
Again, thank you for the opportunity of
submitting the following proposal'
.Please contact me if youhave-any questions .or need` additional information
regarding our proposal . - '
Sincerely, 4
f.
HAWORTH/ANDERSON/LAFER ,
A Corporation
Carl Neuhausen, Principal
CN:bw
Enclosure
e -
K "
Z
f
S
F
5
f
EXH"IBIT A
PROPOSAL TO PREPARE
ENVIRONMENTAL INITIAL STUDY
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
Haworth/Anderson/Lafer, Inc. (Consultant) will prepare an Environmental
Initial Study of the proposed commercial-residential project'by the' Bank
of Newport to be located at 2101 E. Pacific Coast Highway and 777 Avocado
Avenue in the City of Newport Beach. The Environmental Initial Study
will comply with all applicable guidelines of the California Environmental
Quality Act (C.E.Q.A. ) as amended, and other applicable guidelines of
the City of Newport Beach. in particular, the Environmental Initial Study
will include the following:
I, CONTENTS OF INITIAL STUDY
A. SUMMARY .
A summary of major potential adverse impacts and mitigation
measures identified in the Initial Study.
B. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
1 . The name or title of the proposed project and project sponsor. "
2.' The name of the lead agency and other responsible agencies
involved with the proposed project.
3. A written and graphic description of the location and
boundaries of the proposed project.
4. A brief description of immediate past development and uses
of the subject property.
5. A statement of the purpose and objectives of the proposed
project.
6. A general description of the projectts technical and environ-
mental characteristics, considering the principal engineering
proposals.
Y
C. ' ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
1 . A description of the environment in the vicinity of the project
site as it exists before commencement of the project, both
from a local and regional perspective. The specific environ-
mental features •to be addressed in the Initial Study will include:
a. Land Use - a description of existing uses in the vicinity
of the project site, including a description of existing
'- zoning and general plan designations as to potential
development. .
b. Traffic and Circulation - a description of existing and
master planned facilities, including vehicular traffic
volumes, distribution, street capacities and access at
and near the project site.
c. Noise - a description of existing noise levels at and
near the project site, based on existing traffic volumes
and building configurations.
D. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
1 . A detailed discussion of the probable impact of all• temporary
and permanent activities associated with the project in relation
to each of the environmental factors listed above, including:
a. Land Use - a detailed discussion of the compatibility
of the adjoining proposed uses (commercial offices,
restaurant and condominiums) with each other and with
Immediate surrounding uses; considering such features as
traffic, noise, views, building scale, building setbacks;._
architectural treatments, and landscaping.
b. Traffic and Circulation - 'a detailed discussion of potential
traffic impacts by •the proposed project, considering added
traffic volumes, circulation patterns (both internal and -
external of the project), access to and from surrounding .
streets (considering restricted turn movements along Coast
Highway and Avocado), emergency access and parking require-
ments, etc.
c. Noise - a discussion of potential impacts from noise sources
related -to project -traffic (i .e., internal circulation and
parking facilities), project construction activities, and
potential changes in existing"noise levels from structural
changes and •traffic along Pacific Coast Highway.
E.", M I T I GAT I ON MEASURES
The identification and discussion of various mitigation measures
which would serve to reduce significant, adverse environmental
impacts of those listed above. This discussion will include an
Identification of the acceptable levels -to which such impacts would
be reduced, and the basis upon which such levels were identified.
Where alternative measures are available to mitigate an impact, each
will be discussed and the basis for selecting one alternative will
be identified.
F. REFERENCES
. Following each individual section of the report, or included within
a separate section, all pertinent material , studies or persons • -
consulted in the preparation of the report will be listed or
included for reference. The identity of all federal, state or local
agencies, or other organizations and 'private individuals consulted
In- preparing the Initial Study, and the identity of the persons,
firm or agency preparing the Initial Study by contract or other
authorization, will also be Iistted.' Reference,to these sources "
within the text of the appropriate sections will be made by means
of footnotes.
II. PERFORMANCE
The consultant agrees to commence work on the Environmental initial Study
within three (3) days following execution of an agreement between the
City of Newport Beach and the consultant and to diligently continue the
same to completion. Six (6) copies of a Screen Check Initial Study will
be submitted by the consultant to -the City within three (3) weeks follow-
ing execution of such an agreement. The Environmental Affairs Committee
may require additional information 'and/or modifications to -the Screen •
Check Initial Study prior to accepting the document as an Initial Study.
Upon such acceptance, the consultant will provide twenty-five •(25) copies .
cf the Initial Study (as may be required) for review by the Planning
Commission and general public. Production costs for these reports,
based on the consultant's standard format, are included as part of the
total compensation to be paid to the consultant.
III, COMPENSATION
A. For preparing the Environmental Initial Study, Haworth/Anderson/
Lafer will require, on a time-and-materials basi , a total fee
RVO 10 Mou61�. C>�tE PIAL.A 7 �c2rX—M V.F. COL L/X20,
not to exceed T rn •runnennn nnin :A49P!TV cn i n �xo oc nn�
( %2 145°,00)
The estimated distribution of costs for preparing the Environmental
Initial Study are set forth in Exhi'bit B.
B. All costs will be charged on. a time-and-materials basis in accor-
dance with the attached fee schedule, Exhibit C. Services to be
provided by various subconsultants shall be charged at direct cost
to Haworth/Anderson/Lafer.
C. Accumulated costs up to eighty percent (80%) of the total amount
listed in Exhibit B will be due and payable upon the submittal of
the Screen Check Initial Study by Haworth/Anderson/Lafer. Additional '
costs charged against the remaining balance of monies will be due
and payable upon acceptance of the Initial Study by the Ctty's'
Environmental Coordinator.
D. The total amount listed in Exhibit B does, + i de public meetings
by the consultant subsequent to the submittal of the Screen Check
Initial Study. Required attendance at public meetings will be
charged on a time-and-materials basis in accordance with -the attached
fee schedule, Exhibit C.
IV, CONSULTANT REPRESENTATIVE
Carl Neuhausen will serve as project director and principal liaison on p
behalf of Flaworth/Anderson/Lafer, Inc.
EXHIBIT B
ESTIMATED DISTRIBUTION OF COSTS
I . * H/A/L Staff
Principal 10 hrs @ $10/hr $ 400.00
Associate 20 hrs @ $30/hr '600.00
Research Associate 10 hrs @ $18/hr . 180.00 F
Draftsman 5 hrs @ $10/hr 50.00
Secretary 15 hrs @ $ 8/hr 120.00
Subtotal : $1,350.00
H . Other Consultants
Traffic Engineer $ 500.00
Subtotal : $1,850.00
III . Report Reproduction
6 copies screen check initial study $ 25.00
25 copies initial study(1 ) 150.00
Subtotal : $2,025.00
- M1
IV. Public Meetings
4Qefare Environmental Affairs Committee IZS.bU
a Waea i ng-CorTm' +�J (Not Included)
!
TOTAL NOT TO EXCEED: 42,=-.-04
(1 ) As required for Planning Commission review.
(2) To be provided on a time-and-materials basis
in accordance with fee schedule, Exhibit C.
L_ '
EXHIBIT C.
HAWORTH/ANDERSON/LAFER
FEE SCHEDULE
Principal $40.00/hr
Associate $30.00/hr
Research Associate $18.00/hr
Draftsman $10.00/hr
Secretary • $ 8.00/hr
Additional expenses such as for travel , meals and
supplies are charged on a direct cost basis.
1'1t01:I-SS10\AL RESUME
Paul E. Cook - Consulting Traffic Engineer for R.G.B. Engineering, Inc_
Aclldcrlic•.1.,1cr.'•rolnd:
llrliversity or 1.1:1111e, B.S.C-E.
thliversity of Southern Cnlirornia, M.P.A.
1?r+:istration: - •
Registered Civil Engineer, State of California_
1'roressional Organizations:
'rational Society of Professional Engineers
Amcricwl.' Society of Civil El
gincers
American Public Works Association
American Society for Public Administration
Institute of 'Traffic lingincers
0r•ang.o County 'Traffic I:nt;ineers Colmcil, Past Chairman
I'r_n(:essiunal Experience: '
1973 - Present Directur of Public V,'orks/City Engineer, City of Cl:rremout .
P.esnonsible for all public works mid engineering; with
the' city.
1970 - IJ73 City 'Traffic Engineer, City of Inglewood. Respontible
for all traffic• engineering; and transportation pluming;
in the city including; rlaintonance of traffic facilities.
I'lanned E constructed such innovative Projects as the
$500,000 Prairie Avenue reversible lane system T, the
$1 .5 million city wide computerized traffic control
systerl. Collpleted $3 million city wide 11•terial street -'
ligliting? system F, a downtown pitrking structure. Created
unique methods of handlil:p• heavy traffic generated by
two sport complexes, the I'Orurn f, Ilollywood Park Racetrack. •
196S -1970 City 'Traffic Ens?incer, City of Iluntinrton ltcach.
Responsible for all traffic engineering F transportation
planning for the city. Installed traffic siglnals -it aixty
intersections throughout the city. Plallned annual
highway ir::provmaents. 1'lcrked closely t,'ith dovelopers as
the city grew from a population of 70,000 to 110,000 in
five years.
4
M.
1463 - 1965 Assistant County Traffic Engineer, Orange County Road
Departmont. Responsible for t.raiisportation planning
for the road department. Conducted major transportation
studies throughout the county. Supervises! Complex
traffic analysis on proposed developments such as the
Irvine Ranch, Moulton Ranch, Mission Iriejo,. $ Luguna
:Niguel . Analyzed and wrote comprohens.ive reports on
proposed `reewuys and interchanges throughout the county. .
1960 - 1963 Iri; hway liuginecr, California Division of highways, Los
Anooles. Rotated through five dopartmcnts learning all'
phases or liighwav enl;ineering.
----------- OITY OF NEW PORT BEACM--- RECEIPT
,n N E
1Tm� NEWPO RT BEACH,CALIFORNIA 92663 o. 76390
iron+a / /'V 197
Liv�
l .�.
� 'RECEIVED FROM ^ � �`^� M
FOR:
13 �/ D w- T f
ACCOUNT NO. MO T `r�
/ ^ r `
C j
DEPARTMENT
i
8Y AA i6a,111t
-- w
lo, ,'CPS ~
� s
haworth • anderson • laf er
urban plann►ng • des►gn • hous►ng • land use • env►ronmental analys►s
January 3, 1978
Ms. Beverly Wood
Environmental Coordinator
City of Newport Beach
3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Dear Beverly;
We appreciate the opportunity to submit the following proposal to prepare
an environmental initial study of the proposed Bank of Newport project for
the City of Newport Beach. The initial study will consider both the
proposed commercial and residential portions of the project as designated
by the project sponsor.
We have estimated that the initial study would be completed within three
(3) weeks time following execution of an agreement between the City of
Newport Beach and Haworth/Anderson/Lafer. This time period would encompass
all necessary work efforts to complete the screen check initial study,
exclusive of the time period for review by the Environmental Affairs
Committee and/or Planning Commission.
Included with the proposal is a listing of the estimated costs to complete
the initial study. These costs include all anticipated expenses by our
firm (i .e., for salaries, overhead, report reproduction, supplies, etc.)
as well as various expenses to be incurred by other specialized consultants
whom we would employ during the course of the study. In particular, we
would engage the services of a traffic engineer, Mr. Paul Cook, to assist
in preparing the portions of the study pertaining to vehicular access and
circulation. A copy of Mr. Cook's personal resume is attached for your
review.
We are further proposing that the study be conducted on a time and materials
basis, not to exceed the total cost figure indicated in the proposal .
Billings for work accomplished in completing the initial study will be in
accordance with the attached fee schedule. The total cost figure includes
all expenses as listed above, as well as various expenses required to
produce six (6) copies of the screen check initial study for review by
the Environmental Affairs Committee and twenty-five (25) copies of the
initial study (as may be required) for review by the Planning Commission.
31706 pac►f►c coast h►ghway • south Iaguna.ca92677 •tel(71A)A99-2206
Ms. Beverly Wood January 3, 1978
City of Newport Beach Page 2
Additional expenses related to the consultants' attendance at public
meetings (subsequent to the submittal of the screen check initial study)
are not included as part of the total cost figure listed in the proposal .
The consultant(s), however, may be requested to attend such meetings for
which expenses would be charged on a time and materials basis in accor-
dance with the attached fee schedule.
Again, thank you for the opportunity of submitting the following proposal .
Please contact me if you have any questions or need additional information
regarding our proposal .
Sincerely,
HAWORTH/ANDERSON/LAFER
A Corporation
Carl Neuhausen, Principal
CN:bw
Enclosure
•
EXHIBIT A
PROPOSAL TO PREPARE
ENVIRONMENTAL INITIAL STUDY
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
Haworth/Anderson/Lafer, Inc. (Consultant) will prepare an Environmental
Initial Study of the proposed commercial-residential project by the Bank
of Newport to be located at 2101 E. Pacific Coast Highway and 777 Avocado
Avenue in the City of Newport Beach. The Environmental Initial Study
will comply with all applicable guidelines of the California Environmental
Quality Act (C.E.Q.A. ) as amended; and other applicable guidelines of
the City of Newport Beach. In particular, the Environmental Initial Study
will include the following:
I, CONTENTS OF INITIAL STUDY
A. SUMMARY .
A summary of major potential adverse impacts and mitigation
measures identified in the Initial Study.
B. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
1 . The name or title of the proposed project and project sponsor.
2. The name of the lead agency and other responsible agencies
involved with the proposed project.
3. A written and graphic description of the location and
boundaries of the proposed project.
4. A brief description of immediate past development and uses
of the subject property.
5. A statement of the purpose and objectives of the proposed
project.
6. A general description of the project's technical and environ-
mental characteristics, considering the principal engineering
proposals.
C. 'ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
1 . A description of the environment in the vicinity of the project
site as it exists before commencement of the project, both
from a local and regional perspective. The specific environ-
mental features to be addressed in the Initial Study will include:
a. Land Use - a description of existing uses in the vicinity
of the project site, including a description of existing
zoning and general plan designations as to potential
development.
b. Traffic and Circulation - a description of existing and
master planned facilities, including vehicular traffic
volumes, distribution, street capacities and access at
and near the project site.
c. Noise - a description of existing noise levels at and
near the project site, based on existing traffic volumes
and building configurations.
D. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
1 . A detailed discussion of the probable impact of all temporary
and permanent activities associated with the project in relation
to each of the environmental factors listed above, including:
a. Land Use - a detailed discussion of the compatibility
of the adjoining proposed uses (commercial offices,
restaurant and condominiums) with each other and with
Immediate surrounding uses; considering such features as
traffic, noise, views, building scale, building setbacks,
architectural treatments, and landscaping.
b. Traffic and Circulation - a detailed discussion of potential
traffic impacts by the proposed project, considering added
traffic volumes, circulation patterns (both internal and
external of the project), access to and from surrounding
streets (considering restricted turn movements along Coast
Highway and Avocado), emergency access and parking require-
ments, etc.
c. Noise - a discussion of potential impacts from noise sources
related to project traffic (i .e., internal circulation and
parking facilities), project construction activities, and
potential changes in existing noise levels from structural
changes and traffic along Pacific Coast Highway.
1
E. MITIGATION MEASURES
The identification and discussion of various mitigation measures
which would serve to reduce significant, adverse environmental
impacts of those listed above. This discussion will include an
identification of the acceptable levels to which such impacts would
be reduced, and the basis upon which such levels were identified.
Where alternative measures are available to mitigate an impact, each
will be discussed and the basis for selecting one alternative will
be identified.
F. REFERENCES
Following each individual section of the report, or included within
a separate section, all pertinent material , studies or persons
consulted in the preparation of the report will be listed or
included for reference. The identity of all federal , state or local
agencies, or other organizations and private individuals consulted
in preparing the Initial Study, and the identity of the persons,
firm or agency preparing the Initial Study by contract or other
authorization, will also be listed. Reference.to these sources
within the text of the appropriate sections will be made by means
of footnotes.
II, PERFORMANCE
The consultant agrees to commence work on the Environmental Initial Study
within three (3) days following execution of an agreement between the
City of Newport Beach and the consultant and to diligently continue the
same to completion. Six (6) copies of a Screen Check Initial Study will
be submitted by the consultant to the City within three (3) weeks follow-
ing execution of such an agreement. The Environmental Affairs Committee
may require additional information and/or modifications to the Screen
Check Initial Study prior to accepting the document as an Initial Study.
Upon such acceptance, the consultant will provide twenty-five (25) copies
of the Initial Study (as may be required) for review by the Planning
Commission and general public. Production costs for these reports,
based on the consultant's standard format, are included as part of the
total compensation to be paid to the consultant.
III, COMPENSATION
A. For preparing the Environmental Initial Study, Haworth/Anderson/
Lafer will require, on a time-and-materials basis, a total fee
not to exceed TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY-FIVE DOLLARS ($2,025.00).
The estimated distribution of costs for preparing the Environmental
Initial Study are set forth in Exhibit B.
B. All costs will be charged on a time-and-materials basis in accor-
dance with the attached fee schedule, Exhibit C. Services to be
provided by various subconsultants shall be charged at direct cost
to Haworth/Anderson/Lafer.
C. Accumulated costs up to eighty percent (80%) of the total amount
listed in Exhibit B will be due and payable upon the submittal of
the Screen Check Initial Study by Haworth/Anderson/Lafer. Additional
costs charged against the remaining balance of monies will be due
and payable upon acceptance of the Initial Study by the City's•
Environmental Coordinator.
D. The total amount listed in Exhibit B does not include public meetings
by the consultant subsequent to the submittal of the Screen Check
Initial Study. Required attendance at public meetings will be
. charged on a time-and-materials basis in accordance with the attached
fee schedule, Exhibit C.
IV. CONSULTANT REPRESENTATIVE
Carl Neuhausen will serve as project director and principal liaison on
behalf of Haworth/Anderson/Later, Inc.
EXHIBIT B
ESTIMATED DISTRIBUTION OF COSTS
I . H%A/L Staff
Principal Oe hrs @ I0/hr $ 400.00
Associate 20 hrs @ $30/hr 600.00
Research Associate 10 hrs @ $18/hr 180.00
Draftsman 5 hrs @ $10/hr 50.00
Secretary 15 hrs @ $ 8/hr 120.00
Subtotal : $1 ,350.00
II . Other Consultants
Traffic Engineer $ 500.00
Subtotal : $1 ,850.00
III . Report Reproduction
6 copies screen check initial study $ 25.00
25 copies initial study(1 ) 150.00
Subtotal : $2,025.00
IV, Public Meetings
(Before Environmental Affairs Committee (Not Included)
and/or Planning Commission)
TOTAL NOT TO EXCEED: $2,025.00
a,/4,5:00
/25.0o
(1 ) As required for Planning Commission review.
(2) To be provided on a time-and-materials basis
in accordance with fee schedule, Exhibit C.
EXHIBIT C
I I
HAWORTH/ANDERSON/LAFER
FEE SCHEDULE
Principal $40.00/hr
Associate $30.00/hr
Research Associate $18.00/hr
Draftsman $10.00/hr
Secretary $ 8.00/hr
Additional expenses such as for travel , meals and
supplies are charged on a direct cost basis.
111toF iSS1oNAL RESUME
Paul H. Cook - Consulting Traffic Engineer for R.C.B. Engineering, Inc.
Acailcmic; Bacl_c!round:
ilniversity of !chine, B.S.C.E.
university of Southern California, M.P.A.
Rc!-.istrntion:
Registered Civil Engineer, State of California.
Professional Organizations:
National Society of Professional Engineers
American Society of Civil Eng,incers
American Public Works Association
American Society for Public Administration
institute of Traffic Engineers
or•anl;e County 'Traffic lin!;ineers Council, Past Chairman
Pr_oressional Experience:
1973 Present Director of Public 1Vorks/City Eng;incer, City of Claremont .
itesoonsible for all public works and engineering with
the city.
1970 - 1973 City 'Traffic Engineer, City of Inglewood. Responsible
for all traffic- engineering; and transportation planning
in the city including; maintenance of traffic facilities.
Planned & constructed such innovative projects as the
$500,000 Prairie Avenue reversible lane system Fi the
$1 .5 million city wide computerized traffic control
system. Completed $3 million city wide arterial street
ligliting; system F, a downtown narking structure. Created
unique methods of handlir;P heavy traffic generated by
two sport complexes, tyre 1'Orum Fr 1'lollywood Park Racetrack.
1965 -1970 City Traffic Engineer, City of Huntington Beach.
Responsible for all traffic engineering G transportation
planning for the city. Installed traffic signals at sixty
intersections throughout the city. Planned annual
highway ir!grrovements. Worked closely with developers as
the city grew from a population of 70,000 to 140,000 in
five years.
' 1963 - 1965 Assistant County Traffic Engineer, Orange County Road
Department. Responsible for transportation planning
for the road department. Conducted major transportation
studies throughout the county. Supervised conplex
traffic analysis on proposed developments such as the
Irvine Ranch, Moulton Ranch, Mission VLejo, F Laguna
Niguel . Analyzed and wrote comprehensive reports on
proposed freeways and interchanges throughout the county.
1960 - 1963 Uighway Engineer, California Division of highways, Los
Angeles. Rotated through five departments learning all
phases or highway engineering.
��'WPORr
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
C1FO DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
� i►t,�A
( 714) 640-2197
June 5, 1978
Mr. Stephen J . Smith , Vice President
Bank of Newport
Dove at Sixteenth Street
Newport Beach , California 92660
Re: Traffic Analysis : Office and Residential Project
Dear Mr. Smith :
Enclosed is a copy of the traffic analysis of the
office building and residential project required
under Council Policy S-1 and completed by Paul Cook .
Also included is a copy of the Report of Findings
and the receipt for the deposit of the consultant ' s
fees .
The Report of Findings and the traffic analysis
will be forwarded to the Council for the Study
Session on June 12th . If you have any questions ,
call me (640-2197) or Jim Hewicker (640-2266) .
Thank you for your cooperation .
Sincerely,
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
R. V . HOGAN, Director
BY
HLVEKLVWUUU
Envir mental Coordinator
BW/kk .
City Hall • 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California 92663
--~ CITY O F IV E W PO R T B .;.-.�..-,.�.-----~'���
! EACH RECEIPT !
NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92663
No. 82051
1 19 / 0
RECEIVED FROM 00 ' I
t FOR:
! fl! ACCOUNT NO. AMOUNT
O O DEPARTMENT !
! By
!
"'.Bank
®f N
...�.� Newport
a'! R co `ruo en 0
It oe Pg19,I
Py � s
May 23, 1978 •� M 4'p virc
Richard Hogan 0)
City of Newport Beach
Community Development Director
3300 Newport Beach Boulevard
Newport Beach, California 92660
Dear Mr. Hogan:
Bank of Newport would like to formally request an updating
of the traffic study originally done by Haworth/Anderson/
Lafer, dated February 17, 1978. We would also request
this study be accomplished in conformance with the proposed
City traffic ordinance designated as Council Policy S-1 .
Our new Headquarters will be replacing the current office that is
located at the corner of Pacific Coast Highway and Avocado,
and we feel the removal of the existing facility should be con-
sidered when determining traffic volume.
We would be pleased to supply your office with any information
that could assist you in this study.
4tep4he .
ting this matter would be greatly appreciated.
Smith
Vice President and
Assistant to the President
SJS/rwb
DOVER AT SIXTEENTH STREET*NEWPORT BEACH,CALIFORNIA 92660.645-5333
APPENDIX H
Date Filed
Environmental Information Form
(To be completed by applicant)
GENERAL ENFORMATION
I . Name and address of developer or project sponsor: yy�
N�WfanrzT - Damp zlx-ct�t-rl;
COAAAAW'Cl/* 1.. 21�I 1=. CppS 2 . Address o£ project: Sty ti - T 9WL1,
Assessor ' s Block and Lot Number L —
T� pc 3
3 . Name, address, and telephone number of person to be• contacted
concerning this project:
Lin. C`ct t •71 �r�cr 11
4. Indicate number of the permit application for the
which this form pertains : project to
5. L. st and describe any other related permits and other public
approvals required for this project, including those required by
y, regional, state and federal agencies : BITE 09� ( e TBN.
FWAL• PA2C5LAA4,1p ZONING EANn DrvrsiDN CC?'h.--5 - Qj/,A
AA
6. Existing zoning district: U1let t�� - P � �i<Ai ari
7. Proposed use of site (Project for which this. for'm is filed) :
N42rW • Cr?rr. �IQ3Z!2-� t� �� n
PROJJT DBSCRIPTTON
/ CP-H00 AlIN,NFU/vA —
8. Site size . boo XM 20� i
9. Square ' footage ,
10. :;.:.:•:ber of floors of construction. $SNIT. } �_ ( 2�
—
11 • :,' ant of off-street parkin " -,, 21
12 , Ltach plans .
CC�NST. ci(N ccwsr. crrt
- - 13 , Proposed scheduling .
111 . Associated projects .
35 , Anticipated incremental development ,
MA'y P DE — N004f , UPON &PPZQV,L4cs
afro/r�Q• �'r~n-(I��..
1
r�
16 . If residential, include the number ofrunits, schedule of
unit sizes, "range of sale prices or rents, and type of household
size expected.
17. If commercial, indicate the type, whether neighborhood, city
or regionally oriented, square footage of sales area, and loading
facilities .
18-. If industrial, indicate type, estimated employment per shift,
and loading facilities . N07 df L�GA -E
29. If institutional, indicate the major function, estimated
employment per "shift, estimated occupancy, loading facilities,
and community benefits to be derived from the project.
N07
- 20. If the project involves a variance, conditional use or rezonir
application, state this and indicate clearly why the application
is required.
Are the following items applicable to the project or its effects?
Discuss below all items checked yes (attach additional sheets as
necessary) ..
YES NO
X . 21. Change in existing features of any bays•, tidelands,
beaches, lakes or hills, or substantial alteration of
ground contours.
X 22. Change in scenic views or vistas from existing
residential, areas or public lands or roads . �
X 23 . Change in pattern, scale or character of general
area of project . ;
X 24 . Significant amounts of solid waste or litter.
_ . 25 . Change in dust, ash, smoke, fumes or odors in
vicinity.
x 26. Change in ocean, bay, lake, stream or ground Crater
quality or quantity, or alteration of existing drainage
patterns .
27. Substantial change in existing noise or vibration
levels in the vicinity.
28. Site on filled land or on slops of 10 percent or more.
X 29. Use of disposal of potentially hazardous materials,
such as toxic -substances, flammables or explosives .
a � f
H3
YES NO
30..• Substantial change in demand for municipal services
,(police, fire, water, sewage, etc. ) . ' LEe�3EN
X 31. Substantially increase fossil fuel consumption
(electricity, oil, natural gas, etc . ) .
.32 . Relationship to a larger project or series of
projects . C09_J:02,,*. �-
- • .
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
33. Describe the project site as it exists before the project,
including information on topography, soil stability, plants and
animals, and any cultural, 'historical or scenic aspects. Describe
any existing structures on the site, and the use of the structures.,
Attach photographs of the site . Snapshots or polaroid photos will
be accepted.
34. Describe the. surrounding properties, including information
on plants and animals and any cultural, historical or scenic
aspects. Indicate the type of land use .(rgsidential, commercial,
ets . ) , intensity of land use (one-family, apartment houses, shops,
department stores, etc . ) , and scale of development (height;
frontage, set-back, rear yard, etc . ) . Attach photographs of the
vicinity. Snapshots or polaroid photos will be accepted.
. CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished
...above and in the attached exhibits present the data and infor•--
mation required for this initial evaluation to the best of' my
. ability, and that the facts, statements, and information presented
are true- and correct to the best of -nowledge and belief.
lac. 8 16M7 .____ : h ,
Date '
X (Sitha ure
• •F2UL. ,. '�uFF�tJ G
Former s1c. op
APPENDIX H
Environmental Information Form
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
16. Residential will include:
Apartment Size
Building Total Sq.Ft. Type M (Interior)
I (1-story) 4,810 S.F. 1 bdrm. (1) 1,350 S.F.
1 bdrm. (1) 11260 S.F.
2 bdrms. (1) 1, 940 S.F.
II (2-story) 11, 270 S .F. 1 bdrm. (12) 660 S .F.
1 bdrm. ( 4) 850 S .F.
III (3-story) 24,750 S.F. 1 bdrm. ( 2) 660 S.F.
1 bdrm. ( 6) 890 S.F..
2 bdrms. (18) 1, 000 S.F.
Total Sq. Ft. of Buildings = 40, 830 S.F.
Total 1-Bedroom Units = 26
Total 2-Bedroom Units = 19
45 units
Total No. Garage Spaces - 90 spaces
Households are anticipated to be small family and adult.
Price range for purchase of condominium units probably will
be between $90, 000 . 00 and $150, 000 . 00.
17 . Commercial: Building to be the home office for Bank of
Newport. Anticipated square footage of 40,000 sq. ft.
Parking will be surface and subterranean.
Direct Banking - 15, 000 S.F.
Administrative - 10,000 S.F.
Affiliated Offices - 61500 S.F.
Corporate Office - 7 , 000 S.F.
Mechanical & Miscellaneous - 1,500 S.F.
t y • •
APPENDIX H
Environmental Information Form
ATTACHMENT NO. 2 (continued)
20. Project will require:
Site Plan Review - Specific' Plan Area
Zoning - Presently Unclassified Zone
Conditional Use Permit - Drive-Thru Banking Facility
variance - Possible Height Above 32 '-0"
to 40 '-0"
Division of Land - a. Divide Commercial and
Residentail Uses
b. Sub-Division of Residential
into Condominium Units
33 . Project Site is fully developed and improved with one-story,
two-story and three-story structures. The grading and
drainage is across paved surfaces to the street and public
collector systems. Plants and vegetation are imported
specimens used to screen and decorate the site. No rare or
unusual landscaping exists. The site and structure possess
no cultural or historical significance.
The existing two- and three-story apartment buildings are to
remain and be refurbished.
The existing motel and coffee shop are to be demolished to
make way for the commercial building structure.
The existing restaurant, "KAM'S, " is not a part of this
project.
34. Surrounding Properties:
North - Corporate Plaza development under construction.
East - Existing neighborhood service station and retail.
Also R-1 and R-2 rental units.
South & West - Single family residential.
There are no cultural, historical or scenic aspects
apparent on any of the surrounding properties.
A PPENDIX I '
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
(To be completed by Lead Agency)
:x• 'BACKGROUND
l: . . Name of Proponent .�uK N
2. Address and Phone um ero �ro�
cKt i P-Uprl oponen
it-
3. '• Date of Checklist, Submitted I�
4. Agency Requiring Checklist -a 9777 �
Name of Proposal, if applica e mar1'!*
nA-L .
II.. ' ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
(Explanations all
on attached sheets. ) . -"yes" and "maybe" ansi-rers are required
•
YES hIAXF3E A'0
1•. .Earth. Will the proposal result in:
a. Unstable ear Eh condition
ehanges . in s or in
geologic substructures?
b. Disruptions, displacements, com-paction or over
covering o1' the soil? -
c. - Change• in topography or ground
"surface relief features?
d. The destruction, covering or
modification of any unique geologic,
Or. physical features?
e • Any increase in wind or dater y erosion of soils, either on or off
the site?
f. Changes in deposition or erosion
of beach sands, Or siltation.. depositionchanges
oreerosion !
which may modify the channel of
a river or stream or the bed of
the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake?
YES ry,yBE P10
g. Exposure of people "or property to
geologic hazards such as earthquakes,
landslides, mudslides, ground failure,
or similar hazards'? i V
2. Air. ' Will the proposal result in:
a. Substantial air emissions or
.deterioration of ambient air, quality? _—
b. The creation of objectionable ,
odors?
c. Alteration of air movement,
moisture or temperature, or any
change in climate, either locally
or regionally? ✓ ,
3 . Water. Glill the Proposal,, result in: - y
a . Changes in currents, or the course
or direction of water movements, in
either marine or fresh raters?
Changes in -absorption rates,
drainage pattersn, or the rate
and amount of surface water runoff? Y
C . Alterations to the course or , `
floW of flood watcrs? Y .
d. Change in the amount of surface
faat r :in any rater body?
e . Di.sc;harge into surface waters, - or•
:in any alteration Of surface water
iivality, including but not liriteu
to termperature, dissolved oxygen or
tuirLidity•? .
f'. A.lteratior: of th(C d.ir•(.ct:i.on or,
rate of flow of ground waters-?
L. *change in the• quantity of grourid
raters, either through direct additions
or withdrawals, or, through interception
of an aquifer by cuts or e-:cavations" _ v
13
XES MAYBE No
h. Substantial reduction in the. '
amount of water otherprise available
for public •riater supplies? , ✓
i. Exposure of people or property
to water related hazards such as !
flooding or tidal waves? !
4. Plant Life. Will the proposal result
i`_ I
a . Change in the diversity of species,
or number of any species of plants
(including trees, shrubs, grass,
crops, microflora and aquatic plants) ? -
�!
b. Reduction of the numbers o£ any �.
unique, rare or endangered species
of plants?
C . Introduction of new species of .
Plants into an area, or in a barrier
to the normal replenishment of
existinge
species? � ✓ S
d. Reduction in acreage of any
agricultural crop?
5• Animal Life. 1l)111 the proposal -✓
resume
e in the
species, or numbersdivergity of any S of
of animals (birds land n J sp..cies
including reptiles, haandals
shellfish, benthie or anisms,
insects or microfauna�?
b . Reduction of the numbers of any
unique, rare or endangered species
n
ql animals?
c . Introduction of' new species of
animals into an area, or result in
a barrier to the migration or
movement of animals?
d , Deterioration to existing fish
or wildlife habitat?
YES 14AYBE NO
6. Noise . Will the proposal result in:
a'. Increases in existing noise
levels? --
b. Exposure of people to severe
noise levels?
7. Light and Glare , Will the proposal .,
produce new light or glare? V/
8. Land Use. Will the proposal result in
a'-substantial alteration of the
present or planned land use of an
area?
9• "Natural Resources . Will the
proposal resu t in:
a . Increase in the rate of use of .
any natural resources?
b. Substantial depletion of any /
nonrenewable natural resource?,64ddT ✓
10. Risk of Upset . Does the proposal
involve a risk of an explosion or
the release of hazardous substances
(including, but not limited to, oil,
pesticides, chemicals or radiation) "
in the event of an accident or —•
upset conditions?
11 . Population, Will the proposal alter
the location, distribution, density,
or growth rate of the human_ popu-
lation of an area?
12 . Housing_ 4;ill the- proposal affect-
existing housing, or create a
deirand for additional housing?
13 . Trans portation/Circu lati_on. Will
the Proposal result _in:
a . Generation of. substantial addi-
tional vehicular movement? V
1 -
YES bir1V_13i NO
b. Effects .on existing parking
facilities, or demand for new
parking?
c . Substantial .impact upon existing
transportation systems? ✓
d. Alterations to present patterns
of circulation or movement of ✓� '`
people and/or goods? —
e.• Alterations to waterborne, rail .
or air traffic? ____ ✓
f. Increase in traffic hazards to
motor vehicles, bicyclists or - ✓
pedestrians? _
14. Public Services . 14111 the proposal
have an e3rfe�upon, or result in
a need for new or altered govern- '
mental services in any of the
x following areas:
y a. Fire protection? _
3 b. Police --protection?
_ o c. Schools?'
d. Parks or other recreational
facilities?
e . Nzintenance of public facili--
ties, 'including roads? ✓
f. Other governmental- services?
• 15 .. Energy. Will the proposal result in: j
a. Use of substantial amounts of i
fuel or energy? ✓
b. Substantial increase In demand .
upon existing sources' of energy, j
or require the development of new
sources of energy? szlev%sr'
16 "
YES " riAYBE r70
16. Utilities. Will the proposal result:
in a neea for new systems, or
substantial alterations to the
following utilities:
a . Power or natural gas?
b. " Communications systems?
c. Water? .
d . Sewer or septic tanks?
e . Storm water drainage?
f. Solid waste and disposal?
17. Human Health. Will the proposal -
resu t zn
a . Creation of any health hazard or
potential' health hazard (excluding .
mental health) .) v .
b. Exposure of people to putential ' .
health hazards?
1E3. Aesthetics . Will the proposal result
in the obstruction of any scenic '
vista orvies; open to the 2 public," or
will the proposal result in the
creation of an aesthetically _-
offensive site. open to -public view?
19. Recreation. Will' the proposal result
zn an impact upon the .quality or
quantity of existing recreational
opportunities?
20. Archeological/Historical . Will the
proposal resulti in an alteration
of a signi.ficaut archcoloical or
historical site, structure, object
or building?
17
YES nAYBE NO
21. Mandator • Findin s of Si nificance.
(a) Does the project have the potential
'to degrade the quality of the environment,
:. substantially ox reduce the habitat of a -fish
wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife ~ '
Population to drop below self sustaining
. .levels,. threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered
plant or animal or eliminate important
examples of the. major periods o£ California
history Or• prehistory?
b Does the protect have .the Poten-
tial to achieve short-tern, to
disadvantage of- long-term .
m , envi the the
mental goals? (A shon-
ort-term impact -
on the environment is one •which
occurs in a relatively brief,
definitive period of time while
long-term impacts will endure
well into the future, )
c.. Does the Project he
"'-- ✓r
Which are individuallyalimitedcts
but cumulatively considerable? _
separate pr ect
may impact on t more
one each reBour the
two or
resourceeis*relativelympact
small, but Vhere the effect of the
total of those impacts on the
e vironment is significant.• ' SEA M Ino;rAn0�J`i .
d. Does the --
mental effects
rwhich will cause . n�substantial adverse effects on
hunan beings, either directly
or indirectly? .
xII. DISCUSSIOPI OF E.NXROA T1T.gL E-VALUs1TIO11
! 18
IV. DETERMINATION
(To be completed by the Lead Agency) _
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find -the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant
effect on the environment, • and a NEGATIVE' DECL4P,ATION
L]
will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could -have a
significant effect on the environment, 'there not
the
be a significant effect in this case because the
mitigation measures described on an attached sheet
have been added to the project . A NEGATIVE DECL4ftATI0Pi
WILL BE PREPARED. =
7 I find- the proposed project MAY have a significant effec •
on the environment, and an ENVIRONKLE-NTAL IMPACT REPORT
is required.
Datef3ti'yA�?.�fig ature
• E„uai�rcw�i�r�'G '��iiu�IG t�i2 • .
For COu,�Guuir� ��riianas '�' cU�'
• ,Z?!/, ;Eke,-.a;i�o.� •• - .n . -
MEMORANDUM
TO: Carl Neuhausen January 23, 1978
Haworth/Anderson/Lafer
FROM: Paul E. Cook
Traffic Engineer
SUBJECT: Proposed Commercial Offices
and Condominiums, Bank of Newport
TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION ANALYSIS
1 . PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project consists of demolishing an existing 74-unit motel and
constructing in its place a four-story, 45,000-square foot office
building. The project also consists of converting an existing
42-unit apartment complex into a 45-unit condominium development.
An existing 7,600-square foot restaurant is to remain on the
northeasterly corner of the parcel .
II . EXISTING• CONDITIONS
This project is located at the southwest corner of Pacific Coast
Highway and Avocado Avenue in the City of Newport Beach. Pacific
Coast Highway is a major highway with a current traffic volume of
34,000 vehicles per day. East and west of Avocado, Pacific Coast
Highway has two lanes of traffic with a painted center median. A
left-turn lane exists on Pacific Coast Highway at Avocado. Limited
parking is allowed on the south side of Pacific Coast Highway.
Avocado is a collector street and carries approximately 3,500 vehicles
per day. Avocado has two lanes of traffic in each direction with
a landscaped center median. An opening exists in this median at the
existing driveway to the motel and apartments. Parking is allowed
on both sides of Avocado. Access to the existing motel is via two
driveways on Pacific Coast Highway and one driveway on Avocado. Access
to the apartments is available by driving through the motel complex
from Pacific Coast Highway and by a separate driveway on Avocado.
There A s no access from the existing development to any other City streets.
-1-
Table 1 shows the estimated traffic generated from the existing motel
-and apartments as compared to the proposed office building and condo-
miniums.
Pacific Coast Highway is operating within its current capacity at
Level of Service "C" which is in the zone of stable flow but speeds
are more closely controlled. The City and CALTRANS intend to improve
Pacific Coast Highway in the near future to increase capacity by
providing two additional travel lanes and a raised median.
Avocado Avenue is operating well within its capacity at the present
time. State warrants are currently met for traffic signals at
the intersection of Pacific Coast Highway and Avocado. However, a
problem does not exist at the intersection which would Justify
installing traffic signals at this time.
Ill . ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
Traffic estimated to be generated by existing and proposed land uses
are shown in Table 1 .*
Table i
ESTIMATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Generation Land Use Average Daily A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour
Rate Density Traffic (ADT) In Out In Out
Existing 7 T.E./Unit 42 Units 294 8 13 13 8
Apartments
Existing 8 T.E./Unit 74 Units 592 16 24 24 16
Motel 1 ii. Total : 886 24 27 37 24
Proposed 13 T.E./1 ,000 S.F. 28,500 S.F. 370 40 9 18 48•
Offices
Proposed 36 T.E./1 ,000 S.F. 15,000 S.F. 540 21 5 9 26
Bank
Proposed 8 T.E./Unit 45 Units 360 11 15 15 11
Condos Total : 1,270 72 29 42 85
NET CHANGE: + 384 +48 1 - 8 + 5 +61
i
*Excluding•existing restaurant use, to remain.
-2-
L
The traffic gendration and peak hour rates used in this study for the,
offices and apartments are consistent with those used in the Newport
Center Traffic Study, Phase 11, prepared by Crommelin-Pringle $ Associates
in 1976. The generation rates for the bank, condominiums and motel were
obtained from data published by the Orange County Road Department in
September, 1974.
Tabled indicates.that approximately MO additional •dailylvehicl9 1
trips will be generated by the proposed office building and condominiums
than is currently generated by the existing motel and apartments. These
additional vehicle trips will add the following volumes to existing
streets:
Table 2
TRIPS ADDED TO SURROUNDING STREETS
ADT A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour
Pacific Coast Highway 211 21 36
east of Avocado
Pacific Coast Highway 150 15 28
west of Avocado
Avocado north of drive- 268 27 45
way to complex
Avocado south of drive- 23 2 3
way to complex
This directional distribution of vehicle trips was based on data in
the Newport Beach Traffic Study, Phase 11 .
The. increase in traffic to be geenrated by the changes in land use will
be insignificant on Pacific Coast Highway, representing about one-half
of one percent of existing average daily traffic. Traffic volumes on
Avocado will increase about 8 percent which also will have no significant
effect on this street which has the capacity to carry 15,000 vehicles
per day.
-3-
More importantly, the intersection of Pacific Coast Highway and Avocado
will carry only 250 additional vehicles per day. The additional peak
hour traffic at this intersection will not, by itself, significantly
increase the need for traffic signals at this intersection.
Circulation
The revised circulation system within the development is not; signJfit
L
cantly different than the existing pattern. There are, however, some
changes that have been made. '
Access to the condominiums will be via two driveways on Avocado Avenue.
Although this condominium complex is planned to have the major entrance
with a guard house at the south driveway, it appears that the north
driveway, which is being planned with an electric gate will be, by far,
the most heavily used access point. This is because the majority of
parking for the units is on the north side of the complex and because
95 percent of the trips generated by the condominiums will be coming
from or going to Pacific Coast Highway. Additional thought should
be given to moving the guard house to the north driveway if the guard
house is an important feature of the development.
Access to the restaurant will remain as it now exists except that there
will be no internal circulation between the restaurant and the office
complex. Since there will be no left turns allowed on either Pacific
Coast Highway or Avocado to or from the restaurant, patrons who will
be leaving the restaurant and wish to travel westerly on Pacific Coast
Highway will have to travel southerly on Avocado and make a U-turn at
the opening in the Avocado median. Although this may be an awkward
movement to some motorists, it should create no problem on Avocado
which will carry relatively light traffic volumes in relation to its
capacity. At the present time, it appears that the Newport Beach
Police Department allows parking adjacent to the center median on
Avocado. At some point, this practice should be stopped, at least
from Pacific Coast Highway to the first median opening since there will
be increased traffic activity on this portion of the street.
-4-
Access to the office complex is via a driveway on Pacific Coast High-
way and a driveway on Avocado. Both of these driveways allow internal
circulation by ramps to the upper and lower levels of parking being
proposed. Dirveways are wide and internal circulation is open so
that no problems should result. Stop signs should be installed for
vehicles coming up the ramps to exit the parking lot because there
will be vehicles turning in front of both exit ramps to use the upper
level of parking. Also, a double yellow centerline should be painted
on each ramp to separate opposing directions of traffic who will
not be able to see each other as they come around the turn in the
ramps. The bank drive-up teller lanes on the lower level should
create no problems as long as proper signs and markings are installed
to direct customers who will be coming from the Avocado driveway and
must travel through the lower level parking lot to reach the teller
lanes. Unless proper signs and markings are installed including a
double yellow centerline on the ramp, a possible conflict could result
since motorists, when leaving the teller lane, must immediately make
a sharp turn to use the exit ramp for access to Avocado.
The office complex will share use of the driveway on Avocado with the
condominium residents. This driveway has been designated to line up
with the median opening on Avocado which is an improvement over the
existing situation. Joint use of this driveway should create no
problems because of the low volumes generated by the condominiums and
the relatively low volumes on Avocado in relation to its capacity.
Since there are three choices of turning movements that a motorist will
have when entering the driveway on Avocado, a good signing program at
that entrance is essential .
Although the developers of the office complex may feel there would be
a business advantage to allowing left-turns in and out of the driveway
on Pacific Coast Highway, it is doubtful that the City of Newport Beach
or CALTRANS would allow these movements for the following reasons:
1 . The driveway is less than 400 feet from the Avocado intersection
which will be signalized in the future.
-5-
2. Left-turns onto Pacific Coast Highway from this driveway would
be unsafe at times and would reduce the capacity of Pacific
Coast Highway at this location.
3. A raised median will be constructed on Pacific Coast Highway in
the future which should be opened only at intervals of 600 feet
or more.
4. There is adequate circulation being planned in the office parking
areas to allow easy access to Avocado where left-turns onto Pacific
Coast Highway. can be made.
Traffic studies which have been completed for the City indicate that
future traffic volumes on Pacific Coast Highway will be so great as to
require the highest standards of access control . Until the raised
median on Pacific Coast Highway is constructed, a NO LEFT TURN sign
should be installed at the office driveway exit to Pacific Coast
Highway.
Transit Availability
The Orange County Transit District currently serves this area with
several bus lines providing connections to other communities in Orange
County.
IV. MITIGATION MEASURES
There are several alternatives to the circulation system for this
project. There are none, however, which would be a significant improve-
ment over the proposed layout.
The following is a summary of suggestions based on this project which
should improve traffic efficiency and safety. Some of these items
should be implemented only after consideration of factors such as
aesthetics and cost.
1 . This development does not significantly increase the need for
traffic signals at_ the intersection of Pacific Coast Highway
and Avocado. However, since warrants are now met for signals and
it is the intention to extend Avocado north of Pacific Coast
Highway in the future, provisions for signals should be mde by
the City when planning access control on Pacific Coast Highway. _
-6-
2. For reasons of safety and efficiency on Pacific Coast Highway,
left-turns should not be allowed at the office complex driveway
to Pacific Coast Highway. A NO LEFT TURN sign should be installed
at the driveway exit to Pacific Coast Highway.
3. Additional thought should be given to moving the guard house for .
the condominiums from the south driveway to the north driveway
in order to serve the vast majority of residents.
4. Parking should be prohibited along the center median on Avocado
between Pacific Coast Highway and the first median opening.
5. Stop signs should be installed on the exit ramps at the lower
parking level to avoid conflict with motorists using the upper
level of parking.
6. A double yellow centerline should be painted along the ramps to
separate opposing directions of traffic.
7. A complete signing and marking progarm will be necessary to
direct traffic entering the Avocado driveway and also for those
customers using the drive-up teller lanes in the lower parking
level .
-7-
°4 @m> CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
' FI *
February 7 , 1978
Carl Neuhausen
Haworth , Anderson , Lafer
31706 Pacific Coast Highway
South Laguna , Calif. 92677
Re : Bank of Newport Initial Study
Dear Carl ,
Enclosed is a copy of your draft of the subject Initial Study
with my comments noted . Most of my remarks resulted directly
from last Friday ' s meeting of the Environmental Affairs Commit-
tee , and I think we ' ve already discussed most of them.
In terms of graphics , I would like to see the following exhibits
included if possible :
1 . Vicinity/Locational Map
2 . Site Plan and Elevations ( reduced)
3 . Traffic/ Intersection Diagram (as discussed at meeting
on February 3 , 1978) showing existing volumes and
future volumes at Avocado/PCH intersection .
I have also included a copy of the Negative Declaration with a
list of mitigation measures attached . This will be printed as
part of our staff report on the project so there ' s no need to
include it as part of the Initial Study . I ' m sending it for
your reference , comments and suggestions .
If you have any questions , feel free to call . Thanks for your
cooperation.
Sincerely ,
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
R . V . HOGAN , DIRECTOR
By
ever] D . Wood,
Envir mental, Coordinator
BDW/sh
City ITall • 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California 92663
Encl .
��EWPpRT �
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
�41po �A
January 23, 1978
Carl Neuhausen
Haworth , Anderson , Lafer
31706 Pacific Coast Highway
South Laguna , Calif. 92677
Re : Contract: Bank of Newport Initial Study
Dear Mr . Neuhausen:
Enclosed is the contract for the preparation of the Initial
Study for the Bank of Newport project. I assume that the
report is well under way at this time since you were authorized
to proceed with the work a few weeks ago . I apologize for the
delay in getting the signed contract to you .
If the enclosed contract meets with your approval , please sign
the original and return it to me at your earliest convenience .
Thank you for your cooperation and patience.
Sincerely,
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT R. V . HOGAN , DIRECTOR
By
Beverl D . Wood,
Envir mental Coordinator
B DW/,s h
Encl . (2)
City Hall • 3300 Newport#Boulevard, Newport Beach, California 92663
i T
66,
------------------------ ---------- - ---
Q SEW PpRr
v 'z
Department of Community Development .
C•�Lf f'O PNP I
DATE: December 13, 1977
TO: Cal Stewart, Parks , Beaches & Recreation
Glen Weldon , Harbor Department
Irwin Miller, Public Works Department
Bill Darnell , Traffic Engineer
FROM: Beverly Wood, Environmental Coordinator
SUBJECT: Environmental Affairs Committee Agenda :
Harbor Hill Initial Study
Bank of Newport Project
There will be a meeting of the Environmental Affairs Committee on
Friday, December 16 , 1977 , at 10 : 30 A .M. to discuss the Harbor Hill
Initial Study and the proposed Bank of Newport building . The
Harbor Hill Initial Study , prepared by Larry Seeman , was distributed
last week . This project -includes 41 residential units and ± 9 .0 acres
of park on the MWD reservoir site at the corner of Spyglass Hill Road
and San Miguel Drive . The key issues here were identified as Land
Use (especially use of the park) , parking and circulation , grading
and drainage, views , and ,archaeological investigation .
The second project, the Bank of Newport building, is located at the
corner of East Coast Highway and Avocado Street in Corona del -Mar .
To date, all that has been completed for this project is an environ-
mental questionnaire which is attached for your review . Potentially,
the impacts to be discussed would be traffic , compatibility with
surrounding uses ,. protection of the residential uses adjacent to
commercial , impacts associated with demolition of existing buildings ,
views and aesthetics . Also to be clarified for his project is the
applicability of the Atherton Ordinance to the proposed residential
units for park in-lieu fees . The applicant has submitted preliminary
plans for the project for the purpose of making an environmental
determination and to get initial feedback on the project . Any and
all comments would be appreciated .
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
R. V . HOGAN , DIRECTOR
BY �—
Beverly/D. Wood ,
Environmental Coordinator
BDW/sh
of � port.T'
Tµt�z._-- -1.�1i._n�nP►.� �tss
a�_�-nact.ecrl,-1`•w _. .- , �vs ��,�sn�n�w� r�r��,n.«�.c��a.__���r '
�fN�»,/ I�ri.,� Swat-vw�s� �°�Y d cT.a.A�t�caa S.Lvc_�►—�_.�w .
lu t LraAro,Kie a tNscan�-trn Tn7 l+rJcW4Ww r
® Owwt:-v �u.1rn. .twin„►•, Ge►ot5 s•(-nc,,�iyTnwps
fj,w°`r�-'t��,,�,� ----- ----�`�>ts��.v�c_v�sr�•t<_� ,str t�xn�us»� •t�r►,sn!�
OKr wu euktrep, nor boLA-; Qt*44tw4 tar "4*01 "131•&
�.ci.l4M r_ . _ � _ I�auxc►�L ` _ _ �LtL�Tsc,trr�.x, • ro � ft�swt�r-rso
l k,ri�r..t4 1p.Icr ro Treats (P
wa*r is ►ltMTsut✓+f=
4.0
Aft
® �Knkstno ks+nerwr iP,lfi7oi,ruriM. L"*Sul•rl� • Lis�i„arc, ro .a /Tv'rre. o Kk
C/»u uu �bvcwriiut.�r ouNrr,er�u wr _r_+aw ► +bus±
Ole &r C�wt.wttriuuk �x/io C.esnnvnTav�=+- `ss
�}.�ow/ - -
/-- It�L_�'T � ana�+vn�rw+� � c:•rv�m;w•,�uw�-�is�--�,-t�c+t..
�N�MA{rIKA.IW/�/{f{"i••�fWitti/t��✓' '�^ a{,�,�.y�q--�(►yl. Ili° kY�'1 pi�MJ�Yih 1. l6tJk-L FK�wt CnSV. LA%*MTC' Y
' tv �'tvrr+u Tu�ovt /►tu�ss n.) WGt{.
�� 1�A{n-P1=� --- ram•'' -�i,�- or- •rruv�i�.,��--,�u-
-- - J�►rlMlitrJr ow �C �i+�C, ,h3o LOL fvA*ver- M
1-- /�+y.n.w>Fr. crys C;'D. Aw.:�+,.• A� t8•E'ivCnN�+'k12 .
`�tytlLa-- Ir tax u7' _L rLw__iJ1�aCefi.l.�i+wM34Mr�vCr Ar T�
I�V rturM a n.�n vy+ mt4viw.nn
AV t'CF4� h✓oturwo wNs*>`W POMWWDM�
op Grvc`72aucr� ,NGtrss G��
-- - Ttl IS1' /Mi'WLo2nrY! 7Y�1 TTrilrFyRc �•��iK:ls-�11�!�9
- klit--
�civTrr�e t»�+sµ eou.rrrrr+r�
va
iPWA**AAnM� TNt+�bh' iN flow rcrsnrsur,*- >tvius mow ui+rnr+a
-- ---tzlr-N-wlv7r7
-- —
e.�S%A-v s&rr,: ra �nr c eswrJ
MAvia Qrwo�•ro—
i iwv .c aw Lf/csr�✓�. Ta rFc A-07"Avu^� or t:13• k: 44,vv
— yJ--- --1i4a4�i�.�►Gti( - --
_ _—_ �'L n�sr�nne�eaD
J la+t'b w 7bswxic,s toms,
------------
ar
-----
-- - --- =-��� - �a - -
�u��
V [.,c�...G✓ .
-- ------ ��•G�^ f
---
-- - -- - - --- -------- ------ ---- - - -
• •
- - - �, _ .u.,.. . � , � --
-- --� -
_ _ —.—_—�. 2�_����'�.�t��x'L �blzf�[l:N_�' 'P��51'l��i"1�'J 5yVD1�L�>
- -_ ___-- 1 �—'k�'N�V2rm��19•N �YJ�i.fatrrL.
- - -- �. �r�v�___ off_/�r'rw,�.-ti i'rr�-rats �� ?J�u__ new
_ -- -- -- __ �I�`�» 'Fo-vz. � ��Zern�n 'n.vL•��c� t ram. t'zva.-yu-/
- --- a- -
�. 4,177
Of
25r g 9�X
T
_ sue, ?• �Q� ���.�.�
arbw 4vP& -sue ,Claims.
- -------- ----- - -