HomeMy WebLinkAboutIS022_BAYVIEW TERRACE Illlllh IIII III I�h MINI IIIII IIII� Iql �I IIII
Iga22
WOO-
NOT TO BE P!;!,• !..,,J. IN G:r;•,.,:v ri;_: t:3.
COURT OF APPLAL FOURTIT DISTRICT
1.�` COURT'OF APP51VOURTH DIS. .
SECOND DIVISION
' STATE•. OF CALIFOP141A MAY 9` 1972
IuHN R. Mu)b 'cLL, Cierk
{ _...................................•..
' Deputy Clerk• '
"
•• gw••• P . A. 1
, CASSEL, ) '
Plaintiff, Cross-Defendant and ) 4 Civil 11774
Appellant, )
(Sup.Ct.No.169G06)
CITY OF NEWPOTU BEACIV, a I4unicipal )
Corporation, et al. , ) - 0 P I N I 0 Pi
Defendants, ,Cross-Complainant§ )
'T : and Respondents . )
h:.
APPEAL from .a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange
County..: !Samuel Dreizen, .Judge.I Affirmed.
King Crosno for Plaintiff, Cross-nefendant and
'• .� Appelhant.
Dennis O'Neill, - City Attorney of Newport Beach, by
Tully II: Seymour, Special Counsel, 'for Defendants, Cross-Complainants
. - and Respondents.
In the action below the trial court held that the
City of Newport Beach had acquired an easement by dedication
for a public walkway fourteen feet in width, extending generally
along •the northeasterly edge of plaintiff ' s property and forever
restrained plaintiff from claiming any interest in said easement
r i? g
adverse to defendants or interfering in any manner with the use
of the easement by the public. Plaintiff appeals- from the judg-
ment asserting the court erred in finding a dedication and in not
limiting the easement to twelve feet in height.
Plaintiff purchased the property upon which the ease-
me
nt lies in 1968 from Ii. Betz who had inherited it from her
father in 1962. H. Betz ' father owned the property from 1923
until his death in 1962. When the land was acquired in 19231 a
fourteen feet wide paved walkway existed upon the northeasterly
' i,portion of the property and so remained until 1968 . During this
;'entire .period large numbers of the general public freely used
+•t1 . .,`the fourteen feet walkway as a 'public walkway.
Y� S
• � � In 1968 , plaintiff removed a six feet strip of the •
.:!'walkway and in 1969 erected a fence and installed gates barring
public access across; that.portion of the walkway running along
..:; plaintiff 's property. on the same day the defendantsremoved the
•: - gates and plaintiff brought this action to enjoin defendantsfrom .
?,ur ''• interfering with plaintiff's blockade of the walkway. Defendants
prevailed on their answer and cross-complaint. '
g t,
In plaintiff 's argument he distinguishes between a
i
-six feet strip of the walkway and an eight feet strip. Such
distinction is not necessary to our disposition.
1/ The six feet 'portion was reserved to the original
grantor to he used as a 'public walkway. - This may have been
quitclaimed back to the owner in 1968 . ,
-2-
An implied dedication to the public use .is established
where the public has used the land for a period of more than
five years with .full knowledge of the owner, without asking or
receiving permission to do so and without objection being made
by anyone. (Lion v. Cit ' of Santa Cruz , 2 Cal. 3d 29 , 38-39 . )
Ilere, there was substantial evidence of heavy, - con-
tinuous and unrestricted general public use of the fourteen feet
walkway'.from 1923 to 1b63, a period well in excess of five years.
From 1923 to 1968 , the owners had full knowledge of the public ;
use and only one attempt was made during the entire forty-five
:years which could- be construed as an act by the owner incon-
sistent with dedication.
'In 1930, the owner embedded tLo brass plates in the
walkway. Each plate announced that arevocable license was 'being
given over private property. Hot tar was shortly. thereafter
placed over the plates by the owner to obliterate their message
as he had been advised by counsel that he had no ownership in- '
terest in the walkway. The' tar continued to secrete the plates
for at least .ten years. The plates were not physically removed-
because it would have involved breaking up the walkway cement
in which they were embedded./
The question of whether a revocable license was granted ,
to the public was a question of fact. (Ginn v. City of Santa Cruz,
2/ In 1963, a tenant of II. Metz placed a small picket
fence over a portion of the six feet strip, leaving eight feet .
for public passage. The fence was removed in 1968 . Once an
implied dedication is completed, subsequent acts of adverse
possession by the owner cannot wrest back the land. (Civ.Code,
6 1007; Noble v. Merchants I•Tat. Realty Corp. , 24II Cal.App'. 2d
40, 51. )
supra, 2 Cal. 3d 29 , 40-41. ) The evidence is clear that the owner
abandoned his efforts at establishing a permissive use of the
i
walkway: Even if the owner's activity had not been abandoned,
the evidence -discloses that dedication had already occurred by
1928, five years after he had acquired the property in 1923 .' c
A
His attempt to assert a revocable license for the first time in e.
I 1930 was at best a futile act.
Even if the owner had not abandoned his 1930 attempt
--and there had been no dedication by 1930 , the placing of two
brass plates in the sidewalk, without more, would have been
but a minimal and ineffectual effort to exclude the public.
:,. , Upon the running of the five year period, a dedication as a
j matter of law could have been properly found. (Dion v. City
of Santa Cruz , s`pra, at p. 41. )3/
Plaintiff also contends that there was uncontradicted
evidence that a vertical limitation of twelve feet on the ease-
ment was reasonable. The evidence referred to is plaintiff 's
,r
:.testimony that a portion of an apartment building at another '
location had been built overhanging the walkway; that he "guessed"
it left a twelve feet clearance; and that the overhang did' not
impede traffic. The plain tiff expressed a desire to build
' overhanging the easement.
The court did not err in its declination to impose a
3/ Plaintiff is in error in arguing that the intent
of the potential donor is the crucial issue. When dedication
by adverse public use for the prescriptive period is sought to
be proven, the inquiry is to the intent and activities of
the public rather than the owner. (Gion v. City of Santa Cruz,
supra, at p. 38 . )
PP,
vertical limitation on the easement as the issue was not raised ,
in the pleadings and was not disclosed until the closing moments
of the trial •testimony, the evidence itself was conspicuously
deficient; and a vertical limitation may have adversely affected
substantial rights of abutting property owners , not parties to -
the action', in easements for light, air and possibly view.
(Kitzman v. Newman; 230 Cal .App. 2d 715, 725.)
Judgment affirmed.
2!11(^. 2 P.J.
We concur: ,
,7 �,.•
- J.
April 12, 1971 '
— - • � i,��_; =% � — �� ',�'.Igewater Place
=sse- -rs •. Beach)
- -- - own— r -~ IZNi11g the bay near
�= - � G-'TG-_ �`��`W ter Place, legally
- - Y Z��"ide Tract, and
after he acquired
in attempting to
to construct a
=- -- - may/% ;public walkway
-P=ace researching the
,)ffice. advised the
--, z `t�,\')ng legal claim to
property.
'`ZNinion, and appealed
�-Vtued the decision of
----- -=- - _ = - mil` 'Ile morning Mr. Cassel
— _ J ,1 Edgewater Place,
t110 sidewalk. The
Department on the
illegal and constituted
Lawsuit seeking an
from interfering with
_•�s p,--- - � Z i�o sidewalk. The City
-- t1\0 complaint for an
- _ =ir_e = =��� =�tnt, iaeeking to quiet
L•he Cassel property
- _ = of =�
=e�olo the Honorable Samuel
i.ch time the City
od that the sidewalk
—ous _ � ��r a period of in
and =_�; _giunl• Owner of the property '
-- - some that permission to
I '
Re: Cassel vs. City -2- April 12, 1971
pass was revocable had subsequently changed his mind, covered
the plates with tar, and had permitted the public to use the
sidewalk without objection. The City was fortunate in being
able to locate long-time residents of the neighborhood who
testified that they had used the sidewalks without objection
from anyone over a period of many years.
I am pleased tb report that the judge ruled in favor .of the
. City and determined that the public had acquired an easement
by dedication for a public walkway 14 feet in width in front of
the three lots owned by Mr. Cassel. Over the years, encroachments
have been built into the sidewalk area in front of the properties
located between the Cassel property and Adams Street to the east.
These encroachments consist of fences, porches and steps. Although
this adjudication does not directly affect these properties, the
evidence produced in the Cassel case and the court' s judgment
indicate that these encroachments arqq located on public property.
The encroachments have the effect of (reducing the width of the
sidewalk from 14 feet to approximately 8 feet.
It is my suggestion that the difficult questions which must be
answered regarding public rights of travel, access to the bay and
use of beaches in the general area between Main Street and 7th
on the peninsula bayfront should be approached on the basis of a
comprehensive staff study rather than on a piecemeal basis. We
are presently in the process of defining the scope and requirements
of such a study, and as soon as we have completed this preliminary
work we will present our findings to ,the City Council and request
policy direction.
TULLY .SEYMC�y�
City Attorney .
THS:mh
Att.
cc: City Clerk
City Manager
Public Works Director
Community Development Director
t •
/4 WIDE PULL/C
• ' X11,
_
E� � T�d7 _� .. 7 s 9'
13 /2 // '/O 9 B
0 43 La A
• .. i�; '•cam .A 4 L
8a�eoA i
CITY Y OF NEWPORT lJt.:ACH DRAWN DATE 4-7- 7/
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT APPROVED � • Aa4il=_,
/41WI49E PUBI./G AWWA VM1 E/544,IENI A55rT PUDLIC YIORi<G DIRECTZ a
_a.F: 1
�0
.1—� i
�/3, BLOG/� 2 DRAWING NO,
BAt170A BASi�i�,_: T�i1cr f
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
CITY ATTO1?.NEY
DEPARTHENT r
April 24j 1969
I.onorable Mayor and
: „�ers• of the City Council
, :cy Atton-iey
s,a ff Report - P. A. Cassel Property, Lots 11, 12, 13,
3iock 2, •Balboa Bayside Tract - Denial of Building
2emit
Cassel as owner of the subject properties submitted
ive plans to the Planning Department for approval prior
flying for a building permit. Thereafter a series of staff
sings were held with Mr. Cassel, his architect' and his attorney
Eder to resolve a number of issues which arose because of
^z location of the proposed buildings.
has been determined that Mr. Cassel's proposed building will
,:omply with all provisions of the Zoning Code except in two
respects :
1. The easterly side yard setback was proposed at 4.0 feet.
Code required 6 ..9 feet. This deviation has already, been
approved at a public hearing before the Modifications
Committee 'on March 13, 1969 . ,
2 . The front yard setback is shown on the owner' s plans as
-0- in the opinion of staff. The Zoning Ordinance requires
7 .0 feet (see Districting i,ap No. 11, Exhibit "A") measured
from Edgewater Place right-of-way (not the property line) .
This is the sole remaining' point of contention between the
owner and the City, insofar as is of a building permit
' is concerned.
To : The Honorable Mayor and
Members of the City Council -2- April 24, 1969
As indicated in our letter to Mr. Malat (Exhibit "B") , attorney
for Mr. Cassel, no building permit will be issued until this
matter is .resolved to the satisfaction bf the City. This could
I be legally done by either (1)' moving the building 'back 7.0
feet from its presently proposed location; ' (2) obtaining a
variance from the Planning Commission to allow the building to
be constructed with a -0- setback; (3) exchanging the existing
southerly -.7.0 feet of public right-of-way for a 7.0 foot strip
of land northerly; ' (4) having the City Council determine that
the City does not desire to maintain its 14.0 foot right-of-way;
or (5) obtaining a judicial decree that would establish the
rights of' the owner and the public.
Your review of the letter from the City Attorneys office to
Mr. Malat,' dated April 9, 1969, in conjunction with..the sketch
which is enclosed herewith (Exhibit "G") , will reveal that the
basic issue` is whether or, not the public has a 14.0 foot
easement for public highway (walkway) purposes over a portion
of Mr. Cassel's property.
Our legal determination that the public has a 14.0 foot easement
is based upon the following data:
1. The public obtained the southwesterly 6 feet of the 14 -feet
by Grant Deed reservation in original deeds to Lots 11, 12
and 13 dated respectively 1911, 1908 and 1911 (attached
l .
hereto'as Exhibits "C", "D" and "E") .
• •
To ; The Honorable Mayor and
members of the City Council -3- April 24, 1969
2 . The public has obtained the northeasterly 8 feet of the
14 feet, by prescription. Record data (see Ordinance
No. 351, Exhibit "F") shows this has been used as a
walkway by the public for a minimum of 41 years .
Mr. Malat,, in 'our previous meetings, has expressed disagreement
with our legal decision by relying upon the following arguments :
(1) a brass plate is imbedded in the sidewalk which states that
permission"'to pass is revocable by the owner of private property
at any time; (2) that the public has not used a full 14 foot
walkway in many years in the area bayward of Lots 1-10 located
southeasterly of this property; (3) thalt. encroachments have
existed into the walkway in front of Lots 1-10; (4) that the
7 ft. se'tbacic should be measured from the front (northeast)
property line.
A physical examination of the brass plate tends to confirm the
statements of neighboring owners that the brass plate has been
-installed within the past 10 ,years. In. such event it would not
serve to diminish the rights of the public in any way.
As to Mr. Malat' s arguments (2) and (3) above, it is true that
encroachments do exist bayward of the structure on Lots 1-10.
These encroachments are fences and hedges which rest in the
public right-of-way. However, the public at any time can assert
-its right to the full 14 feet and order the encroaching obstructions
removed. The property owners never gain superior rights to 'the
To : The Honorable Mayor and '
Members of the City Council -4- April 24, 1969
public property. Finally in -reference to the measurement line
for the setback, it should be ported out that normally the
property line and right-of-way line are `synonomous . The
general purposes for setbacks necessitate that they be measured
from the edge of the right-of-way, therefore 'in this instance
the measuring point is located seven (7 .0) feet inside
Mr. Cassel' s property line.
' As a result of the disagreement, Yrr. Cassel has requested a
hearing by the City Council -in order to explain his position.
Staff agrees with his right to do so primarily because it is
necessary• for him to exhaust his administrative remedies before
he attempts to obtain legal relief t'nrough the courts. Based upon
the evidence in our possession, we do think it improbable that
a court would rule against the position of the City,
The City Council is urged to support the legal interpretation
rendered by staff and advise Mr. Cassel that compliance therewith
will be necessary in order to obtain building permits. In the
event the Council determines that a 14 ft. public walkway and
access to 'the public waters is not necessary, any portion to be
surrendered would have to_ be accomplished through abandonment
proceedings.
Tully H. Seymour
• CityVAttrney '.
Y --—f
;•IOOQIRlit�^
Assistant City Attorney
TLW:ajr
:�'he Butler � � The Butler Roach Group, inc.
+ 505 Lomas Santa Fe Drive
Roach Solana Beath, California 92075
Group 1714/4Bf-9704
December 22, 1982
Fred Talarico
Environmental Coordinator
City of Newport Beach
3300 Newport Boulevard
P.O. Box 1768
Newport Beach, CA 92663-3884
SUBJECT: TRANSMITTAL OF SCREEN CHECK INITIAL STUDY FOR THE
REVISED BAYVIEW CENTER DEVELOPMENT
Dear Fred:
Enclosed are seven (7) copies' of the revised Initial Study for the Bay-
view Center development. We have done the revised sections in a
slightly different type style than the original report so you may see
where the major revisions are. The entire report will be typed in
the same type style when it is revised per the Screen Check dom ments.
I have also enclosed seven xerox copies of the tabulation from the
first page of the full-size plans from the project architect. The only
unresolved item in the Initial Study is verification of the site area
calculations.
If you have any questions, I will be in my office the week between
Christmas and New Year's Eve.
Merry Christmas!
Yours truly,
11 y
THE BUTLER ROACH GROUP, INC.
Patricia A. Butler
PAB/aa
Enclosures
AWASILLNUMBER
PLEASE COMP ILL INFORMATION IN THE 5 BLOCKS OUTLINED IN ORANGE {
SEE BACK OF ET FOR COMPLETE PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS 'I II III�I II' II� IpI11�1�}q''E
o. YOJJR FEDERAL EXPRFS ACCOUNT NUMBER r DATE �I� II II III OLI IBI II,{}7µ
00071 til4!^p'�32 A tltr:!##2 ` 'nl {II�Ip' AWF'SIE11µ781U18IWf11HE
FROM(YOMNeme) TO(RWIpienYS Neme) If NNM For PkkUp Or Saturday%hA
Bacpm PIMA NurAM
Petrkis A. W bald Tad 1
COMPANY DEPARTMENTIFLOOR NO. COMPANY go OEPARTMENTIFLOOR NO.
t,UwtdlF RUAZ:N- A*SLICLATf'b city
STREET ADDRESS I STREET ADDRESS(P.O.BOX NUMBERS ARE NOT,DELIVERABLE) -
- 0y LO%Ab :»ANTA VP Ut, 100 N!w 1 and
CITY STATE CITY STATE
z'fl to SCACH r CA Samah- CA
Z'P'0 r�R[LtixW e" IN TENDERING NIS SHIPMENT,SHIPPER AGREES THAT IIP .01IEewaIl YIRI xm
1�E�+xe�j 74 F.E.C.SHALL NOT BE LIABLE FOR SPECIAL INCIOEN- iOR n°lxxmxr ceuvFRr
ABLL�. is.32 a •323� Z TAl OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES ARISING I
YOUR NOTE9REFEIENRE NUMBERS(FIRST 12 CHARACTERS WU ALSO APPEAR ON INV010E1 CARRIAGE HEREOF F.E.C. FEDERAL EXPRESS O'
CLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, WITH
- RESPECT TO THIS SHIPMENT.THIS IS A NON-NEGOTIABLE EAEMHTCHAR6S _..
MOBILL SIIMECT TO CONDITIONS OF CONTRACT SET FORTH
ON REVERSE OF SHIPPER'S COPY UNLESS YOU DECLARE A
PAYMENT gBIB Shipper ❑BAN ReGplenYs FE.C.Acct. ❑NM 3N Poly F.E.C.ACM. ❑ Okl OWN DOW HIGHER VALUE,THE L ABIUTY OF FEDERAL.EXPRESS COB
-
PORATION IS LIMITED TO SIDOAO.FEDERAL EXPRESS DNS DECLARED VALUE CRA
❑Cash InASI Am,WnT NunOx/Dual COOK Number NOT CARRY CARGO LIABILITY INSURANCE.
SERVICES DELIVERY AND SPECIALHANDLING PACKAGES WEIGHT MECLARE
yD 05 EAY.ND. DATEALUE
1
CHECK ONLY ONE BOX (HECK SERVICES REGUIRFD
PRIORITY 1 OVERNIGHT LETTER HOLDI FOR PICK-UP AT FOLLO G CASH RECEIVED AGTRPO ADVANCE ORIGIN
10 IDAERNM LMEI(MrAI B0 SEA mzc¢1 M C .FEDERAL EXPRESS LOCATION SHOWN ❑mlax FlYNM31I
luo to roLepl IN SERVICE GUIDE RECIPIEENTS
COURIER PAN' 70 PHONE NUMBER IS REDUIflED.. p h ,*Kry AGTANIG. AGYAICE DESTINATION
B D.miwxnxr maupei BQ DnInA ❑ ."mmj5� . ❑ RE.mmmm, .
NPmsIMel 2
B,�yywmNlGm a� rupoxr slmiu rtouwm TO}µ TOTAL STREET ADDRESS OTHER
IA�IAms usl 8� 9 soeAw.Iwn awes moues awwerv.I
j x61mmD ARON[s SPNFE fP.I wO
❑IUpb61B31 - M BNYaur P<M mM.wn ewplNEMM
STANDARD AIR S[] %u lsmm�r s.e.q sum SMPPDTS OOgI CITY STATE DP TOTALCNIAICES
mrnroe.ww m+�w ps.I ❑REGULAR STOP
B❑w.e aum'wxa .xw g ❑ wn rcs tM. ❑ON-CALL STOP
ILe m>G LBM.I F.E. LOC.
I"IOV ERNIGRT'IS NEXT BUSI1NESS DAY 7 ❑ OTMPO srto I Mftx E FetleW EMM Corppgfgn RECEIVED BY:{3~1 -
FROMDPIASKAHAWAII RSATUPDAY D TWO ELIV. 8 ❑ X kA2Ud1730751..
EqY AVAILABLE IN CONTINENTAL U.S. pATHSIME ppA��FEIITTIMMMEEE RECEIVED F.E.C.EMPLOYEE NUSBEfl EEC-S-Q751 D!0/6
SEE"SPECIAL HANDLING." 9 C] REVISION DATE
1REV S
PRINTED U.S.A. 1
Patricia A. Butler
Environmental Planner
1223 Rutland Road, tiewport Beach, CA 92660 '714) 548-6062
505 Loma Santa Fe Drive,Solana Beach, CA92075 t714) 481-5501
October 8, 1981
Fred Talarico
Environmental Coordinator -
City of Newoort Beach
3300 W. Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, CA 92663
SUBJECT: Transmittal of Revised Screen Check Initial Study
for the proposed Bayview Terrace development
Dear Fred:
The following items are enclosed with this transmittal :
1 . Seven (7 ) copies of the revised Screen Check Initial Study;
2. One (1) copy of the full size set of plans from the
project architect; and,
3 . Your review copy of the original Screen Check Initial
Study, dated May 7, 1981.
I will call you on INTednesday, October 14 to check when you would like
to meet with the Environmental Affairs Committee to review the Screen
Check.
Yours truly,
to
co
01
Patricia A. Butler ` ,' 0 0 �
Environmental Planner L) . ;�.�
1tp ' 8
PAB/aay 9
Enclosures ��
'r RFc . 0
pi �i k
t� P'4«P,r� 9
Patricia A. Butler,
Environmental Planner
1223 Rutland Road, Newport Beach, CA 6` B'r�62
505 Loma Santa Fe Drive,Solana Beach, CA 92 14 -5501
December 18, 1981
Mr. Fred Talarico
Environmental Coordinator
City of Newport Beach
3300 Newport Blvd.
P.O. Box 1768
Newport Beach, CA 92663-3884
Subject: Transmittal of Initial Studies for
Bayview Terrace and Martha' s Vineyard.
Dear Fred:
Enclosed are the following:
1 . Twenty (20) copies of the final Initial Study for the
Bayview Terrace Development.
2 . Twenty (20) copies, of the final Initial Study for
Martha' s Vineyard Restaurant/Office Complex.
3 . Two (2) copies of the title page and new table of con-
tents for the Certified Final EIR for GPA 81-1 (H) .
If you have any questions , please call-me. =OCherfase, =Happy
Holidays !
Very truly yours ,
Patricia- A. Butler
Butler Environmental Planning
PAB/aa
Enclosures
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
Marine Department
T a +
October 27, 1981
TO: FRED TALA ICO, •PLANNING DEPARTMENT
FROM: Tony Me16m,,• Marine Department
SUBJECT: INITIAL STUDY - 'BAYVI'EW TERRACE
My only concern regarding this project is current parking
requirements on the site itself and the adjacent Fun Zone
Development Marina..
Currently bayward of the project there is a marina which
requires approximately 10.5 parking spaces. However, this
requirement has been waived as long as the marina is used as
a berthing place for boats for sale and rental boats. In
addition to this, the site must provide park-ing for 15 cars
for the adjacent Fun Zone Development Marina until spaces
are provided on that site .upom redevelopment.
Additionally, if the Bayvi.ew'Marina is ever converted to a
commercial area,. men's and women'+s restrooms .would be required.
/� G�/�
Ton Me um
Y
TM;db
rat 00
ly
vi
• I.LZS �at�7 1-IOUt�uC�
WtU� MVO (,or'f
WR41GHT ,0 t tMG. I /jery TOZEF f2woer
INFORMATION MEMO Od-__
o
9Uv4 �
PG Balboa Bayview Dev. Co. , Inc.
309 Palm
Balboa, Ca. , 92661
Attn: Jules Rickless, Pres.
A meeting was held August 21, 1981, at the City of Newport Beach,
to review parking, circulation and traffic.
PRESENT: City of Newport Beach,
Don Webb, Public Work's
Rich Edmonston, Traffic Engineering
William C. Clapet, Architect
William C. Clapet -1,5Gi 'qIO
1. 0 INFORMATION
1 .1 The city will not consider abandonment of the alley;
the following will be considered:
a. 10 ' setback: along the north side of the -entire alley
from Adams to Palm.
b. realignment of the alley so the parking structure will
not encroach into the alley.
The foregoing will provide for 20' wide circulation and
service access as well as allowing the alley to be
available to the city for maintenance of sewer and water
lines. The alley can be paved with a city approved de-
corative surface.
1. 2 The following concerns, for the parking structure,
should be evaluated and agreed on by the city and
developer:
a. the stall width, depth and aisle width relationships
for proper access
b. elevator size, requirements, etc. Provide technical
material as available from manufactuerer.
c. parking areas of 100 cars or more qualifies for
approximately 25% compact spaces with attendant
parking. This can allow for more flexibility and
1805 e. dyer road,*'te m, santa ana, California W5 714 . 540 . 1645
possibly more spaces.
d. a vehicular exit, near the elevator, onto Bay Ave.
would be required for effective circulation.
e. A minimum setback could be allowed for the parking
structure, as there will be no loading or unloading
on Bay Ave. because of the parking structure.
1. 3 The City Traffic Engineer will consider and evaluate the
circulation on Bay, Adams, Palm and the alley since the
project will be changing demands. The circulation is a
concern as it relates to Balboa Blvd. The evaluation will
also consider one-way and two-way circulation as well as
the potential of a signal at Palm and Balboa.
1.4 The Edgewater Place walkway property should be researched
by the title company - or by legal means to determine
whether 'it can be called open space or if it is a "Public'
Walk' with prescriptive rights.
WCC
CC: Master file
Owner
City of Newport Beach - Don Webb, Rich Edmonston
Bill Clapet
r
SEW PORT
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH_
M OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
C'9<lFO R��p (714) 640-2201
cl ti
June 25, 1982
RECEIVED 3
Planning
nenartment
Mr. Larry Bertino 0i `JUN251982D- 4
RUTAN & TUCKER CITY OF
611 Anton Bld. , 6 NEWPORT BEACH,
P.O. Box 1950
Costa Mesa, Ca. 92626 cb F
Re: Palm St. Hote1
Dear Mr. Bertino:
This is to confirm our telephone conversation of June 24, 1982,
wherein we discussed the demolition of what remains of the Palm
St. Hotel.
During our conversation I advised you that Mr. Petrak, a
representative of the insurance company that carried fire
insurance for the structure, had no objection to demolition of
the building inasmuch as his investigation of the structure was
now complete.
You have advised me that you will promptly conclude your
investigation of the remains of the structure, that the
investigation will be completed during the week of June 28, 1982,
and that the building will be totally demolished on or before
July 2, 1982.
Per our conversation, I have also enclosed a copy of provisions
of Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code that establish
the requirements for rebuilding a non-conforming structure that
is severely damaged by fire.
Should you have any questions with respect to the procedures to
be followed, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned or
the Planning Department of the City of Newport Beach.
This office considers the remains of the Palm St. Hotel to
constitute a threat to the health and safety of persons who
happen to be in proximity to the site, as well as being an
eyesore. Your cooperation, and that of your client, in arranging
City Hall • 3300 6wport Boulevard, Newport Bea(b California 92663
for the prompt demolition of the remains of the burned building
will be greatly appreciated by this office, the Building and
Planning Departments, and the Planning Commission of the City of
Newport Beach.
Very truly yours,
Ro ERT ABURNIMM
Assistant City Attorney
I
RHB/pr
CC. Ray Schuller - Building Director
Jim Hewicker Planning Director
Ed Petrak - Tops Claims Service - L.A.
la —U. 4Ro18 I-Q'739
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
MEMORANDUM
February 18, 1983
To: Planning Commission
From: Robert H. Burnham - City Attorney
Re: Bayview Terrace Development/Use Permit No. 3018
The Planning Commission has requested this office to render an
opinion relative to the development rights, if any, accorded a
property owner by our Zoning Code in the case of a structure
which has been totally destroyed by fire.
Section 20.83.060 establishes the general rule in such a case and
that Section reads as follows:
"A nonconforming building damaged or destroyed by fire,
explosion, earthquake, or other act, to an extent of
more than ninety percent (90%) of its appraised value at
the time of the damage, as fixed by the General
Appraisal Company of Los Angeles, California, or other
equally responsible firm, or to an extent of one hundred
percent (100%) of the appraised value thereof according
to the assessment by the Assessor for the fiscal year
during which such destruction occurs, may be restored
only if a Use Permit is first obtained in each case" .
The Section quoted above would give a property owner greater
rights then allowed by the Zoning Code only in rare cases. For
example, if the building that was destroyed exceeded the floor
area permitted within the zone the Planning Commission could by,
use permit as opposed to variance, authorize the construction of
a new building that also exceeds floor area limitations. If the
property had been put to a use that was not permitted within the
zone in which the building was located the Planning Commission,
by use permit, would be empowered to permit the property owner to
continue the use after reconstruction. In both cases the Plan-
ning Commission would have to make findings that the proposed use
or structure would not adverse the impoact of the neighborhood,
findings which might be difficult to make especially where the
i
Planning Commission
February 18, 1983
Page 2
use was not which was not one which is permitted within the
district. Thus, the Zoning Code offers little comfort to a
property owner whose building has been destroyed by fire or other
calamity.
With regard to buildings located in commercial districts that are
nonconforming only because they do not comply with the parking
requirements different rules apply. In such a case the property
owner has an absolute right to restore the structure, without a
use permit and without providing parking provided that all of the
following conditions are met:
(A) The restoration work is commenced within 12 months
after the damage the damage or destruction occurs;
(B) The building after restoration does not exceed its
original gross floor area as it existed prior to
the damage or destruction;
(C) The use of the buiilding does not change to a use
which requires more parking than the original use
as it existed prior to the damage or destruction.
(20 .30 .030 NBMC) .
Given the size and nature of the development proposed by Bayview
Terrace Limited neither of the Sections referenced above apply
and the property owner has no special development or noncon-
forming right because of the unfortunate destruction of the
building. However, the property owner was, for purposes of
determining the applicability of the traffic phasing ordinance,
given credit for the structure that existed prior to the fire.
This resulted in the project being exempt from the application of
the traffic phasing ordinance and is consistent with the practice
of the City in giving credit for existing structures to
developers who propose to demolish structures during the course
of redevelopment.
4obrt H. Burnham
AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into on this 22nd day of
April , 1981 , by and between the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, a municipal
corporation , hereinafter referred to as "CITY" , and PATRICIA A.
BUTLER, 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 for development of
the Bayview Terrace Site , 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
here to 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
setforth in paragraph 3 of 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 April 17 , 1981 , which is
attached to this Agreement marked as Exhibit "A" and by reference
incorporated herein as this point as if fully set forth .
-1-
3 . BILLING AND PAYMENT
CONSULTANT shall be paid under this Agreement on a time
and material basis and in no event shall the maximum amount of
this Agreement exceed Two Thousand Seven, Hundred and Ninety-Five
Dollars ($2 ,795 .00) . Partial payments shall be made by the CITY
to CONSULTANT upon CONSULTANT' S presentation of statements verify-
ing 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
Agreement . 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 hear-
ings , 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 and costs incurred
as of the date CONSULTANT receives such notice of termination .
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have entered into this
Agreement as of the date and year first above written .
APPROVED AS TO FORM CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
Assistant City Attorney By Di a for Pl an ing Department
CITY
PATRICIA A. BUTLER
By
CONSULTANT
-2-
PATRICIA A. BUTLER
Environmental Planner
4262 Campus Drive 121 Broadway, Suite 611
Suite B-4 San Diego, CA 92101
Newport Beach, CA 92660 (714) 232-5980
Ms. Butler is an independent consultant providing expertise in
the development of viable community development plans and problem
solutions for areas subject to significant environmental con-
straints . Her clients include government and private business
organizations with projects ranging from urban redevelopment, air-
port noise/land use compatibility planning, and land use policy
analysis, to environmental and community impact assessments for
public and private development projects and land use plans. As an
environmental planner, Ms. Butler has over five years ' profession-
al experience in the areas of environmental and community impact
assessment and documentation; urban and regional planning problems
and solutions; and public presentation of data and findings for
complex and controversial projects. She has a thorough understand-
ing of the applicability and compliance requirements of environ-
mental and land use regulations for project planning, and has de-
veloped excellent working relationships with local, state and fed-
eral agencies in Los Angeles, Orange and San Diego Counties .
Prior to consulting independently, Ms. Butler served as a senior
project manager with the Environmental Sciences Division of VTN
Consolidated, Inc. in Irvine, California for four and one-half
years, from February, 1976 to July, 1980 . In addition to project
management and marketing, her responsibilities included:
° Land use planning and evaluation--Develop program
goals and objectives, evaluation criteria and im-
plementation plans; identify feasible land use plans
and alternatives; identify implementation strategies,
agency responsibilities and funding sources for var-
ious land use planning programs.
° Governmental regulatory processes--Identify local,
state and federal environmental regulatory require-
ments for projects and programs; develop compliance
programs, documentation and schedules; provide inter-
agency coordination.
° Preparation of environmental impact analyses--Conduct
and write social and human impact assessments , socio-
economic analyses and social psychological/community
impact assessments.
PATRICIA A. BUTLER
Environmental Planner
Page Two
Public participation programs and community surveys--
Formulation, administration and analysis of community
surveys and public participation programs.; presenta-
tions and defense at numerous public hearings and pro-
vision of expert witness testimony in litigation.
RELEVANT EXPERIENCE
A brief summary of Ms. Butler's current and recent project exper-
ience illustrates the variety of her involvement- in planning,
community development and impact assessment. These projects in-
clude Ms. Butler's participation as the sole or prime contractor
and as a subconsultant to others.
Urban Redevelopment
Assist the Planning and Development staff of the Centre City Devel-
opment Corporation in various planning and implementation activities
in the Corporation's capacity of facilitating downtown San Diego re-
development within the 335-acre project area. Prime contractor and
supervision of other consultants as necessary.
Airport Noise/Land Use Compatibility Planning, and Policy Analysis
and Recommendations
Project management and principal planner for the Airport Noise Con-
trol and Land Use Compatibility (ANCLUC) Plan for the John Wayne
Airport, Orange County Master Plan. Subconsultant to prime contrac-
tor - VTN Consolidated, Inc. ,
Preparation of a land use policy analysis and general land use policy
recommendations, and identification of noise/land use compatibility
problems and solutions for the Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport
Master Plan. Subconsultant to Bolt Beranek and Newman, Inc. ; prime
contractor - Ralph M. Parsons Company.
Land Use Policy Analysis and Environmental Assessment
Preparation of a programmatic Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for
the revision of the Housing Element of the Newport Beach General
Plan. Prime contractor for the EIR; subconsultant to Connerly and
Associates, prime contractor for overall preparation of the housing
element.
Associate project manager and principal investigator for preparation
of a joint EIR/Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for a proposed
second International Border Crossing in San Diego, California. Sub-
consultant to prime contractor - VTN Consolidated, Inc.
PATRICIA A. BUTLER
Environmental Planner
Page Three
BACKGROUND
Education
1976-1977 University of California, Irvine
° Master 's Program in Social Ecology
° Advanced research design. Supervised
undergraduate research group in environ-
mental planning for one year.
1972-1976 University of California, Irvine
° B.A. in Social Ecology - June 1976
Dean 's List, graduated cum laude
Awards: Phi Beta Kappa
° Teaching assistant for courses in
Social Psychology, Environmental
Psychology, Environmental Planning
and Human Development
° Substitute lecturer in Environmental
Psychology
° Student intern at VTN Consolidated,
Inc. in the Environmental Sciences
Division from November, 1975 to June,.
1976
1974-1975 University of Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France
Education Abroad Program through the University
of California
° Conducted independent research in en-
vironmental psychology and environmental
planning; courses in architecture and
art history. All courses and coursework
conducted in French.
1971-1972 University of California, Los Angeles
° Attended university classes in accelerated
high school program.
Additional Information
Languages: Fluent in French; working knowledge of Spanish
Travel: Extensive travel in western and eastern Europe;
throughout tho United States; in Costa Rica,
Guatemala, Panama and Baja California
y
PATRICIA A. BUTLER
Environmental Planner
Page Four
Member: Association of Environmental Professionals
National Trust for Historic Preservation
Phi Beta Kappa
Publications: "Environmental Learning and Cognitive Mapping"
Authors: Gary W. Evans, David G. Marrero,
Patricia A. Butler; Environment and Behavior
Vol. 13, No. 1, January, 1981, Sage Publications,
Beverly Hills, CA.
PATRICIA A. BUTLER
Environmental Planner
CURRENT LIST OF CLIENTS
° Centre City Development Corporation, San Diego, California
(A non-profit corporation of the Redevelopment Agency of the
City of San Diego)
° Connerly and Associates, Sacramento, California
Housing Consultants
- Subconsultant for services for the Planning Department of
the City of Newport Beach, California
° Bolt Beranek and Newman, Inc. , Canoga Park, California
Acoustical Engineers , Noise Monitoring, Airport Planning
- Subconsultant for services for the Airport Authority of
the Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport; the Unified Port
District of the Port of San Diego
° VTN Consolidated, Inc. , Irvine, California
Engineers, Architects, Planners
- Subconsultant for services for the General Services Agency,
County of Orange, CA; the Engineering and Development Depart-
ment, City of San Diego.
° Eugene Roach Associates, Solana Beach, California
Architects, Planners
PATRICIA A. BUTLER
Environmental Planner
4262 Campus Drive 12121 Bay, Suite 611
Suite B-4 San Diego, CA 92101
Newport Beach, CA 92660 (714) 232-5980
Ms. Butler is an independent consultant providing expertise in
the development of viable community development plans and problem
solutions for areas subject to significant environmental con-
straints. Her clients include government and private business
organizations with projects ranging from urban redevelopment, air-
port noise/land use compatibility planning, and land use policy
analysis, to environmental and community impact assessments for
public and private development projects and land use plans. As an
environmental planner, Ms . Butler has over five years ' profession-
al experience in the areas of environmental and community impact
assessment and documentation; urban and regional planning problems
and solutions; and public presentation of data and findings for
complex and controversial projects. She has a thorough understand-
ing of the applicability and compliance requirements of environ-
mental and land use regulations for project planning, and has de-
veloped excellent working relationships with local, state and fed-
eral agencies in Los Angeles, Orange and San Diego Counties.
Prior to consulting independently, Ms. Butler served as a senior
project manager with the Environmental Sciences Division of VTN
Consolidated, Inc. in Irvine, California for four and one-half
years, from February, 1976 to July, 1988. In addition to project
management and marketing, her responsibilities included:
° Land use planning and evaluation--Develop program
goals and objectives, evaluation criteria and im-
plementation plans; 'identify feasible land use plans
and alternatives; identify implementation strategies ,
agency responsibilities and funding sources for var-
ious land use planning programs.
° Governmental regulatory processes--Identify local,
state and federal environmental regulatory require-
ments for projects and programs; develop compliance
programs, documentation and schedules; provide inter-
agency coordination.
° Preparation of environmental impact analyses--Conduct
and write social and human impact assessments , socio-
economic analyses and social psychological/community
impact assessments .
PATRICIA A. BUTLER
Environmental Planner
Page Two
Public participation programs and community surveys--
Formulation, administration and analysis of community
surveys and public participation programs; presenta-
tions 'and defense at numerous public hearings and pro-
vision of expert witness testimony in litigation.
RELEVANT EXPERIENCE
A brief summary of Ms. Butler's current and recent project exper-
ience illustrates the Variety of her involvement- in planning,
community development and impact assessment. These projects in-
clude Ms. Butler's participation as the sole or prime contractor
and as a subconsultant to others.
Urban Redevelopment
Assist the Planning and Development staff of the Centre City Devel-
opment Corporation in various planning and implementation activities
in the Corporation' s capacity of facilitating downtown San Diego re-
development within the 335-acre project area. Prime contractor and
supervision of other consultants as necessary.
Airport Noise/Land Use Compatibility Planning, and Policy Analysis
and Recommendations
Project management and principal planner for the Airport Noise Con-
trol and Land Use Compatibility (ANCLUC) Plan for the John Wayne
Airport, Orange County Master Plan. Subconsultant to prime contrac-
tor - VTN Consolidated, Inc.
Preparation of a land use policy analysis and general land use policy
recommendations, and identification of noise/land use compatibility
problems and solutions for the Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport
Master Plan. Subconsultant to Bolt Beranek and Newman, Inc. ; prime
contractor - Ralph M. Parsons Company.
Land Use Policy Analysis and Environmental Assessment
Preparation of a programmatic Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for
the revision of the Housing Element of the Newport Beach General
Plan. Prime contractor for the EIR; subconsultant to Connerly and
Associates, prime contractor for overall preparation of the housing
element.
Associate project manager and principal investigator for preparation
of a joint EIR/Environmental Impact statement (EIS) for a proposed
second International Border Crossing in San Diego, California. Sub-
consultant to prime contractor - VTN Consolidated, Inc.
PATRICIA A. BUTLER
Environmental Planner
Page Three
BACKGROUND
Education
1976-1977 University of California, Irvine
° Master' s Program in Social Ecology
• Advanced research design. Supervised
undergraduate research group in environ-
mental planning for one year.
1972-1976 University of California, Irvine
° B.A. in Social Ecology - June 1976
Dean 's List, graduated cum laude
Awards: Phi Beta Kappa
° Teaching assistant for courses in
Social Psychology, Environmental
Psychology, Environmental Planning
and Human Development
° Substitute lecturer in Environmental
Psychology
° Student intern at VTN Consolidated,
Inc . in the Environmental Sciences
Division from November, 1975 to June,
1976
1974-1975 University of Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France
Education Abroad Program through the University
of California
Conducted independent research in en-
vironmental psychology and environmental
planning; courses in architecture and
art history. All courses and coursework
conducted in French.
1971-1972 University of California, Los Angeles
° Attended university classes in accelerated
high school program.
Additional Information
Languages: Fluent in French; working knowledge of Spanish
Travel: Extensive travel in western and eastern Europe;
throughout the United States; in Costa Rica,
Guatemala, Panama and Baja California
PATRICIA A. BUTLER
Environmental Planner
Page Four
Member: Association of Environmental Professionals
National Trust for Historic Preservation
Phi Beta Kappa
Publications: "Environmental Learning and Cognitive Mapping"
Authors: Gary W. Evans, David G. Marrero,
Patricia A. Butler; Environment and Behavior
Vol. 13, No. 1, January, 1981, Sage Publications,
Beverly Hills, CA.
PATRICIA A. BUTLER
Environmental Planner
CURRENT LIST OF CLIENTS
° Centre City Development Corporation, San Diego, California
(A non-profit corporation of the Redevelopment Agency of the
City of San Diego)
° Connerly and Associates, Sacramento, California
Housing Consultants
- Subconsultant for services for the Planning Department of
the City of Newport Beach, California
° Bolt Beranek and Newman, Inc. , Canoga Park, California
Acoustical Engineers, Noise Monitoring, Airport Planning
- Subconsultant for services for the Airport Authority of
the Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport; the Unified Port
District of the Port of San Diego
° VTN Consolidated, Inc. , Irvine, California
Engineers, Architects, Planners
Subconsultant for services for the General Services Agency,
County of Orange, CA; the Engineering and Development Depart-
ment, City of San Diego.
° Eugene Roach Associates, Solana Beach, California
Architects, Planners
RECEIVEO
� Picnn,n� I
APR20
Patricia A. Butler
Environmental Planner
1223 Rutland Road, Newport Beach, CA 92660 C71 4�,6062
505 Loma Santa Fe Drive,Solana Beach, CA 92075((7(a3 481-5501
April 17, 1981
Mr. Fred Talarico
Environmental Coordinator
Planning Department
City of Newport Beach
3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, CA 92663
Subject: Proposal for preparation of an Initial Study for the
proposed Bayview Terrace development
Dear Mr. Talarico:
Thank you for this opportunity to present a proposal for prepara-
tion of an expanded Initial Study for the above referenced project.
I would be pleased to assist the City of Newport Beach with pre-
paratioA of the environmental documentation required by the Califor-
nia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) , as identified in Section 15080
of the State EIR Guidelines and the City's respective procedures.
This letter outlines the anticipated scope of work, cost estimate
and schedule for preparing the Initial Study. According to this
proposal, I estimate that the Initial Study can be completed in
approximately three weeks for a total fee not to exceed Two Thousand
Seven Hundred Ninety-five Dollars ($2 ,795 . 00) .
Scope of Work
As we discussed, it appears that an expanded Initial Study which fo-
cuses on the areas of potentially significant environmental concern
would be most appropriate for the proposed project at this time.
According to the City's adopted procedures for implementation of
CEQA and the State EIR Guidelines., the required Initial Study will
include the following information:
1. Description of the proposed project, its location, and identi-
fication of the necessary permits for project implementation.
2 . A brief description of relevant existing conditions and identi-
fication of environmental impacts and mitigation measures, as
necessary, for the following areas of environmental concern:
- Land use, land use plans and zoning
- Circulation and parking
- Air quality
- Noise
• i
Mr. Fred Talarico
April 17, 1981
Page Two
Water quality
- Geology and soils
- Public services and Utilities
3 . Supporting appendices, as necessary, and references.
It is anticipated that land use issues and circulation and parking
are likely the most significant__issues to be addressed,.by=the Initial
Study for the proposed commercial/office development. In this con-
text, a preliminary identification of the contents of the land use
and zoning analysis includes examination of the consistency of the
project with the Newport Beach General Plan, the-.dxaffE`Lbcal-Coast
al Program and South Coast Regional Plan, and City zoning and sub-
division ordinances. The circulation and parking analysis will in-
clude examination of the project's conformance with the Traffic
Phasing Ordinance (TPO) , analysis of vehicular access and parking
impacts, and pedestrian and bicycle circulation on adjacent public
walkways. The Initial Study will include a description of project
vehicle trip generation, access, circulation and parking demand,
using trip generation and parking values established by the City
Traffic Engineer. The TPO analysis will consist of consultation
with the City Traffic Engineer and identification of potential com-
pliance requirements for the project in accordance with current city
policy S-1, Administrative Procedures for Implementing the Traffic
Phasing Ordinance. If further investigation or extensive facility
design mitigations are requested, it is understood that these would
become conditions of project approval to be undertaken by the devel-
oper, or are otherwise beyond the scope of the currently proposed
Initial Study.
The remaining areas of environmental concern will be examined in
sufficient detail to allow identification of potentially significant
impacts and corresponding, appropriate mitigation measures.
Cost Estimate and Schedule
Having reviewed the preliminary project information and environmen-
tal issues, I estimate that a Screen Check document can be submitted
within about two weeks (e.g. , 14 to 18 days) from receipt of an
authorization to proceed and provision of a definitive project des-
cription. An accurate description of existing uses on the site would
also be desirable at this time (i.e. , square footage of existing com-
mercial retail, number and type of hotel units, number of off-street
parking spaces) . Following review of the Screen Check document, the
final Initial Study can likely be completed and delivered within
another week.
Mr. Fred Talarico
April 17, 1981
Page Three
The estimated cost for completion of the scope of work for the
Initial Study within this time frame is Two Thousand Seven Hun-
dred and Ninety-five Dollars ($2,795.00) . This fee is proposed
on a time and materials basis, with the total estimated cost not
to exceed $2,795.00 . Attachment A shows the approximate distri-
bution of estimated labor and non-labor costs. The proposed fee
includes delivery of seven (7) copies of the Screen Check Initial
Study and thirty (30) copies of the final Initial Study to your
office. The camera-ready originals of the final Initial Study
could be given to the City or to the developer, if so desired.
The proposed fee also includes my attendance at one meeting of
the City Staff's Environmental Affairs Committee for the purpose
of reviewing the proposed project.
Personnel
I will personally supervise preparation of the Initial Study and
conduct portions of the technical analyses. I will be assisted
by Mr. Jim Lovins, a senior planner with whom I frequently asso-
ciate in conducting environmental and planning studies. I have
enclosed copies of both of our resumes for your additional infor-
mation.
Thank you for your consideration of this proposal. I look forward
to completing the required Initial Study in a timely and cost effec-
tive manner. If you have any questions, please call me at (714)
232-5980.
Yours truly,
T� 70 �
PATRICIA A. BUTLER
ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNER
u Attachments
R..
Mr. Fred Talarico
April 17, 1981
Attachment A
Cost Estimate
Direct Labor Amount
Senior Environmental Planner at $35. 00/hr. $ 1,260
estimated 36 hours
Senior Planner at $25.00/hour 1,200
- estimated 48 hours
TOTAL DIRECT LABOR $ 2 ,460
Reimbursables
Xerox/printing estimate
- 7 copies of Screen Check
-30 copies of Final $ 80
Typing/report production 180
Photographs, maps, miscellaneous 75
TOTAL REIMBURSABLES $ 335
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST S 2 ,,795
Patricia A. Butler
Environmental Planner
1223 Rutland Road, Newport Beach, CA 92660 (714) 548-6062
505 LomaSanta Fe Drive,Solana Beach, CA92075 (714) 481-5501
April 17, 1981
Mr. Fred Talarico
Environmental Coordinator
Planning Department
City of Newport Beach
3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, CA 92663
Subject: Proposal for preparation of an Initial Study for the
proposed Bayview Terrace development
Dear Mr. Talarico:
Thank you for this opportunity to present a proposal for prepara-
tion of an expanded Initial Study for the above referenced project.
I would be pleased to assist the City of Newport Beach with -pre-
paration of the environmental documentation required by the Califor-
nia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) , as identified in Section 15080
of the State EIR Guidelines and the City's respective procedures.
This letter outlines the anticipated scope of work, cost estimate
and schedule for preparing the Initial Study. According to this
proposal, I estimate that the Initial Study can be completed in
approximately three weeks for a total fee not to exceed Two Thousand
Seven Hundred Ninety-five Dollars ($2 ,795. 00) .
Scope of Work
As we discussed, it appears that an expanded Initial Study which fo-
cuses on the areas of potentially significant environmental concern
would be most appropriate for the proposed project at this time.
According to the City's adopted procedures for implementation of
CEQA and the State EIR Guidelines , the required Initial Study will
include the following information:
1. Description of the proposed project, its location, and identi-
fication of the necessary permits for project implementation.
2. A brief description of relevant existing conditions and identi-
fication of environmental impacts and mitigation measures, as
necessary, for the following areas of environmental concern:
- Land use, land use plans and zoning
- Circulation and parking
- Air quality
- Noise
i ,
Mr. Fred Talarico
April 17, 1981
Page Two
Water quality
- Geology and soils
- Public services and Utilities
3. Supporting appendices, as necessary, and references.
It is anticipated that land use issues and circulation and parking
are likely::the most signifibant_=issues 'to be addrbssed,.by=the Initial
Study for the proposed commercial/office development. In this con-
text, a preliminary identification of the contents of the land use
and zoning analysis includes examination of the consistency of the
project with the Newport Beach General Plan, thb-draf£'-Lbcal' Cdast
al Program and South Coast Regional Plan, and City zoning and sub-
division ordinances. The circulation and parking analysis will in-
clude examination of the project's conformance with the Traffic
Phasing Ordinance (TPO) , analysis of vehicular access and parking
impacts, and pedestrian and bicycle circulation on adjacent public
walkways. The Initial Study will include a description of project
vehicle trip generation, access, circulation and parking demand,
using trip generation and parking values established by the City
Traffic Engineer. The TPO analysis will consist of consultation
with the City Traffic Engineer and identification of potential com-
pliance requirements for the project in accordance with current city
policy S-1, Administrative Procedures for Implementing the Traffic
Phasing Ordinance. If further investigation or extensive facility
design mitigations are requested, it is understood that these would
become conditions of project approval to be undertaken by the devel-
oper, or are otherwise beyond the scope of the currently proposed
Initial Study.
The remaining areas of environmental concern will be examined in
sufficient detail to allow identification of potentially significant
impacts and corresponding, appropriate mitigation measures.
Cost Estimate and Schedule
Having reviewed the preliminary project information and environmen-
tal issues, I estimate that a Screen Check document can be submitted
within about two weeks (e.g. , 19 to 18 days) from receipt of an
authorization to proceed and provision of a definitive project des-
cription. An accurate description of existing uses on the site would
also be desirable at this time (i.e. , square footage of existing com-
mercial retail, number and type of hotel units, number of off-street
parking spaces) . Following review of the Screen Check document, the
final Initial Study can likely be completed and delivered within
another week.
Mr. Fred Talarico
April 17, 1981
Page Three
The estimated cost for completion of the scope of work for the
Initial Study within this time frame is Two Thousand Seven Hun-
dred and Ninety-five Dollars ($2,795. 00) . This fee is proposed
on a time and materials basis, with the total estimated cost not
to exceed $2,795.00. Attachment A shows the approximate distri-
bution of estimated labor and non-labor costs. The proposed fee
includes delivery of seven (7) copies of the Screen Check Initial
Study and thirty (30) copies of the final Initial Study to your
office. The camera-ready originals of the final Initial Study
could be given to the City or to the developer, if so desired.
The proposed fee also includes my attendance at one meeting of
the City Staff 's Environmental Affairs Committee -for the purpose
of reviewing the proposed project.
Personnel
I will personally supervise preparation of the Initial Study and
conduct portions of the technical analyses. I will be assisted
by Mr. Jim Lovins, a senior planner with whom I frequently asso-
ciate in conducting environmental and planning studies. I have
enclosed copies of both of our resumes for your additional infor-
mation.
Thank you for your consideration of this proposal. I look forward
to completing the required initial Study in a timely and cost effec-
tive manner. If you have any questions, please call me at (714)
232-5980.
Yours Struly,
Z 1�
PATRICIA A. BUTLER
ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNER
Attachments
Mr. Fred Talarico
April 17, 1981
Attachment A
Cost Estimate
Direct Labor Amount
Senior Environmental Planner at $35 .00/hr. $ 1,260
- estimated 36 hours
Senior Planner at $25 . 00/hour 1,200
- estimated 48 hours
TOTAL DIRECT LABOR $ 2 ,460
Reimbursables
Xerox/printing estimate
- 7 copies of Screen Check
-30 copies of Final $ 80
Typing/report production 180
Photographs, maps , miscellaneous 75
TOTAL REIMBURSABLES $ 335
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST 8 2,795
)
Patricia A. Butler
Environmental Planner
1223 Rutland Road, Newport Beach, CA 92660 (714) 548-6062
505 Loma Santa Fe Drive,Solana Beach, CA 92075 (714) 481-5501
May 7 , 1981
Mr. Fred Talarico
Environmental Coordinator
Planning Dept. , City of Newport Beach
3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach , CA 92663
Subject: Transmittal of Screen Check Initial Study for the
proposed Bayview Terrace Development
Dear Fred :
Transmitted herewith are seven copies of the screen check Initial
Study for the Bayview Terrace development. Following your auth-
orization to proceed on April 22, 1981 , we prepared the enclosed
Initial Study according to the scope proposed in my letter to
you , dated April 17 , 1981 .
I would be pleased to review and discuss your comments on the
screen check at your earliest convenience . As indicated in my
letter proposal , we are also prepared to review the Initial Study,
with the city staff' s Environmental Affairs Committee . For your
scheduling purposes , please keep in mind that I will not be
available from May 15 through May 29 (vacation time) !
If you have any questions , please call me at (714) 232-5980.
Yours truly ,
Patricia A. Butler
Environmental Planner
Enclosures (7)
I
I ar
Patricia A. Butler
Environmental Planner
1223 Rutland Road, Newport Beach, CA 9266 - 8-6062
505 Loma Santa Fe Drive,Solana Beach, CA 92075 (714) 481-5501
July 27, 1981
Fred Talarico
Environmental Coordinator
City of Newport Beach
3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, CA 92663
Subject: Revised proposal for preparation of an Initial Study for
the revised plans for the Bayview Terrace project
Dear Fred:
Thank you for sending me the proposed revised plans and elevations
for the Bayview Terrace project. As you requested, I have reviewed
them in the context of my previous scope of services for an Initial
Study for the original project (April 17, 1981) , and in the context
of the screen check Initial Study I submitted for that project on
May 7, 1981. .
The environmental issues relative to the currently proposed project
are essentially the same as those identified in the original scope
of services. These include primary consideration of land use and
visual compatibility; circulation, access and parking; public ser-
vices and utilities; air quality and noise; and, water quality-re-
lated impacts. The screen check Initial Study submitted on May 7,
1981 would require some revision in most of these areas and the pro-
ject description in order to accomodate the revised project. Assum-
ing you would still require 7 copies of the screen check and 30
copies of the draft Initial Study, and my attendance at an Environ-
mental Affairs Committee meeting to review the study, I feel that
I can revise the Initial Study and meet those requirements with
minimal additional costs over the original contract amount.
I will provide a revised Initial Study and related products and ser-
vices itemized in my letter of April 17, 1981 for an additional
six hundred eighty dollars ($680 .00) over the original contract a-
mount of two thousand seven hundred ninety-five dollars ($2, 795.00) .
This would bring the total revised contract value to three thousand
four hundred seventy-five dollars ($3,475. 00) . I can supply the re-
vised screen check document within 10 to 14 days of your notice to
proceed.
i 1
Fred Talarico
July 27, 1981
page two
If you have any questions regarding the revised scope of services
for the Initial Study, please call me at (,714) 232-5980. 1 look
forward to hearing from you to revise and complete the initial
Study for the Bayview Terrace project.
Yours truly,
Patricia A. Butler
Environmental Planner
PAB/pr
Patricia A. Butler
Environmental Planner
1223 Rutland Road, Newport Beach, CA 92660 (714) 548-6062
505 Loma Santa Fe Drive,Solana Beach, CA 92075 (714) 481-5501
April 17, 1981
Mr. Fred Talarico
Environmental Coordinator
Planning Department
City of Newport Beach
3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, CA 92663
Subject: Proposal for preparation of an Initial Study for the
proposed Bayview Terrace development
Dear Mr. Talarico:
Thank you for this opportunity to present a proposal for prepara-
tion of an expanded Initial Study for the above referenced project.
I would be pleased to assist the City of Newport Beach with -pre-
paration of the environmental documentation required by the Califor-
nia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) , as identified in Section 15080
of the State EIR Guidelines and the City' s respective procedures.
This letter outlines the anticipated scope of work, cost estimate
and schedule for preparing the Initial Study. According to this
proposal , I estimate that the Initial Study can be completed in
approximately three weeks for a total fee not to exceed Two Thousand
Seven Hundred Ninety-five Dollars ($2 ,795 . 00) .
Scope of Work
As we discussed, it appears that an expanded Initial Study which fo-
cuses on the areas of potentially significant environmental concern
would be most appropriate for the proposed project at this time'.
According to the City 's adopted procedures for implementation of
CEQA and the State EIR Guidelines , the required Initial Study will
include the following information:
1 . Description of the proposed project, its location, -and identi-
fication of the-necessa-ry. -permits £or•.project -implementation. - -
2 . A brief- description of relevant existing conditions and identi-
fication of environmental impacts and mitigation measures , as
necessary, for the following areas of environmental concern:
- Land use, land use plans and zoning
- Circulation and parking
- Air quality
- Noise
Mr. Fred Talarico
April 17, 1981
Page Two
- Water quality
- Geology and soils
- Public services and Utilities
3 . Supporting appendices, as necessary, and references .
It is anticipated that land use issues and circulation and parking
are likely'-the most significant::issues "to be addressed,.by- tfie Initial
Study for the proposed commercial/office development. In this con-
text, a preliminary identification of the contents of the land use
and zoning analysis includes examination of the consistency of the
project with the Newport Beach General Plan, the-draft'-.Local- Coast
al Program and South Coast Regional Plan, -and City zoning and sub-
division ordinances . The circulation and parking analysis will in-
clude examination of the project's conformance with the Traffic
Phasing Ordinance (TPO) , analysis of vehicular access and parking
impacts, and pedestrian and bicycle circulation on adjacent public
walkways. The Initial Study will include a description of project
vehicle trip generation, access, circulation and parking demand,
using trip generation and parking values established by the City
Traffic Engineer. The TPO analysis will consist of consultation
with the City Traffic Engineer and identification of potential com-
pliance requirements for the project in accordance with current city
policy S-1, Administrative Procedures for Implementing the Traffic
Phasing Ordinance. If further investigation or extensive facility
design mitigations are requested, it is understood that these would
become conditions of project approval to be undertaken by the devel-
oper, or are otherwise beyond the scope of the currently proposed
Initial Study.
The remaining areas of environmental concern will be examined in
sufficient detail to allow identification of potentially significant
impacts and corresponding, appropriate mitigation measures.
Cost Estimate and Schedule
Having reviewed the preliminary project information and environmen-
tal issues , I estimate that a Screen Check document can be submitted
within about two weeks (e.g. , 14 to 18 days) from receipt of an
authorization to proceed and provision of a definitive 'project des-
cription. An accurate description of existing uses on the site would
also be desirable at this time (i.e. , square footage of existing com- -
mercial retail, number and type of hotel- units;_ number -of-off-streets-
parking spaces) . following review of. the Screen Check 'd'ocument,' the
final Initial Study can likely be completed and delivered within
another week.
Mr. Fred Talarico
April 17, 1981
Page Three
The estimated cost for completion of the scope of work for the
Initial Study within this time frame is Two Thousand Seven Hun-
dred and Ninety-five Dollars ($2, 795. 00) . This fee is proposed
on a time and materials basis, with the total estimated cost not
to exceed $2., 795. 00. Attachment A shows the approximate distri-
bution of estimated labor and non-labor costs. The proposed fee
includes delivery of seven (7) copies of the Screen Check Initial "
Study and thirty (30) copies of the final Initial Study to your
office. The camera-ready originals of the final Initial Study
could be given to the City or to- the developer, if so desired.
The proposed fee also includes my attendance at one meeting of
the City Staff' s Environmental Affairs Committee -for the purpose
of reviewing the proposed project.
Personnel
I will personally supervise preparation of the Initial Study and
conduct portions of the technical analyses. I will be assisted
by Mr. Jim Lovins, a senior planner with whom I frequently asso-
ciate in conducting .environmental and planning studies . I have
enclosed copies of both of our resumes for your additional infor-
mation.
Thank you for your consideration of this proposal. I look forward
to completing the required Initial Study in a timely and cost effec-
tive manner. If you have any questions, please call me at (714)
232-5980 .
Yours truly,
12 -
PATRICIA A. BUTLER
ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNER
Attachments
C.
Mr. Fred Talarico
April 17 , 1981
Attachment A
Cost Estimate
Direct Labor Amount
Senior Environmental Planner at $35 .00/hr. $ 1,260
- estimated 36 hours
Senior Planner at $25 . 00/hour 1 ,200
- estimated 48 hours
TOTAL DIRECT LABOR $ 2 ,460
Reimbursables
Xerox/printing estimate
- 7 copies of Screen Check
-30 copies of Final $ 80
Typing/report production . 180
Photographs , maps , miscellaneous 75
TOTAL REIMBURSABLES $ 335 _
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST S 2 ,795
JAMES LOVINS ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNER
Pierce Community College, Los Angeles: A.A. , Architecture, 1969
California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo: B.A. , English, 1972
Western State University College of Law, Fullerton, 1973-1974
California State Polytechnic University, Pomona: Master of Urban Planning, 1976
Member: American Planning Association
National Trust for Historic Preservation
Institute for Urban Design
As an urban planner, Mr. Lovins is concerned with urban and regional planning,
including preparation of land use studies, corridor selection studies and the
evaluation of aesthetic and scenic impacts for site specific studies. In
addition, his background includes the preparation of environmental impact
reports; feasibility studies and environmental assessments; socioeconomic
impact evaluations; planning and environmental procedures process studies;
analysis of governmental regulatory and permit processes; and multi-media
presentations.
Recent projects include acting as the associate project manager for an
environmental assessment that was being prepared for Public Service Company of
New Mexico. The project involved the preparation of an Applicant's Environ-
mental Analysis for a 176-mile, 500-kV transmission line located in north-
western New Mexico. His primary duties included project management and task
assignments, analysis of existing land use and land •use impacts, and the
analysis of the socioeconomic impacts of the transmission line.
Other recent project involvements include analysis of existing and proposed land
use and the impacts on cultural and historic sites of the proposed multi-purpose
redevelopment of 250+ acres in downtown San Diego, California. In addition,
he designed and participated in three forums for the general public to assess
social and economic concerns of citizens and property owners within the redevelop-
ment project boundaries.
He 1,as also been involved in the preparation of state and local permits needed
for construction of a 55-mW geothermal power plant in southwestern Utah. The
permits and an overview of the permit process were included in a Geothermal Loan
Guarantee Application to the Federal Energy Research and Development Administration.
His work experience also includes the Plains Electric Corridor Evaluation Study and
Draft EIR, during which he participated in the selection of corridor alternatives
for a 345-kV transmission line in north central New Mexico; and the evaluation of
the California Department of Fish and Game Environmental Analysis Process.
Additional experience includes acting as the project manager and overall project
coordinator for the design, preparation of plans and specifications for public
improvements to establish a semi-mall in downtown Huntington Beach. His primary
duties include project management and task assignments, analysis of hard-scape
elements and coordination with landscape architects and traffic engineers.
Site planning experience includes the preparation of various site plan alterna-
tives for a 70-acre_Eite in Hermosillo, Mexico. In addition to site specific
project work, he was involved with the preparation of a specific plan for the
northwest section of the City of Hermosillo, Mexico.
JAMES LOVINS ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNER
Pierce Community College, Los Angeles: A.A. , Architecture, 1969
California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo: B.A. , English, 1972
Western State University College of Law, Fullerton, 1973-1974
California State Polytechnic University, Pomona: Master of Urban Planning, 1976
Member: American Planning Association
National Trust for Historic Preservation
Institute for Urban Design
As an urban planner, Mr. Lovins is concerned with urban and regional planning,
including preparation of land use studies, corridor selection studies and the
evaluation of aesthetic and scenic impacts for site specific studies. In
addition, his background includes the preparation of environmental impact
reports; feasibility studies and environmental assessments; socioeconomic
impact evaluations; planning and environmental procedures process studies;
analysis of governmental regulatory and permit processes; and multi-media
presentations.
Recent projects include acting as the associate project manager for an
environmental assessment that was being prepared for Public Service Company of
New Mexico. The project involved the preparation of an'Applicant's Environ-
mental Analysis for a 176-mile, 500-kV transmission line located in north-
western New Mexico. His primary duties included project management and task
assignments, analysis of existing land use and land use impacts, and the
analysis of the socioeconomic impacts of the transmission line.
Other recent project involvements include analysis of existing and proposed land
use and the impacts on cultural and historic sites of the proposed multi-purpose
redevelopment of 250+ acres in downtown San Diego, California. In addition,
he designed and participated in three forums for the general public to assess
social and economic concerns of citizens and property owners within the redevelop-
ment project boundaries.
He bas also been involved in the preparation of state and local permits needed
for construction of a 55-mW geothermal power plant in southwestern Utah. The
permits and an overview of the permit process were included in a Geothermal Loan
Guarantee Application to the Federal Energy Research and Development Administration.
His work experience also includes the Plains Electric Corridor Evaluation Study and
Draft EIR, during which he participated in the selection of corridor alternatives
for a 345-kV transmission line in north central New Mexico; and the evaluation of
the California Department of Fish and Game Environmental Analysis Process.
Additional experience includes acting as the project manager and overall project
coordinator for the design, preparation of plans and specifications for public
improvements to establish a semi-mall in downtown Huntington Beach. His primary
duties include project management and task assignments, analysis of hard-scape
elements and coordination with landscape architects and traffic engineers.
Site planning experience includes the preparation, of various site plan alterna-
tives for a 70-acre site in Hermosillo, Mexico. In addition to site specific
project work, he was involved with the preparation of a specific plan for the
northwest section of the City of Hermosillo, Mexico.
JAMES H. LAVINS
8632 HATTERAS DRIVE • HUNTINGTON BEACH , CALIFORNIA 92646
(714)960.1096
21 A Pizi 's 1
EA2 E
&'ZLOSED ARE Two e-� P►e5 o F- MY
K. SLLH6 F :)K- '�OUZ FILES. SHOULD '1/0LI
RE4ule APDrnc)N4L I ov, L-4ovE Ds-rAi►-eD
INFpRMAT16I4 6-0K-Me-T j RASO 1�• arL t f �s�LF
S I I�GGJ2,EL'l�
'v v' �--�L�"(�1•rL
�tiewPoRT
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
u r
C111FORN�P (Planning Department)
April 9 , 1981
Trish Butler
275 Stratford Court
Corona del Mar, CA 92014
SUBJECT : "INITIAL STUDY PROPOSAL - BAYVIEW TERRACE"
Dear Ms . Butler:
Pursuant to our phone conversation of Thursday , April 9, 1981 ,
enclosed please find a copy of the proposed project site plan .
Those areas listed below are ones I believe should be reviewed
in the "Focused"/"Expanded" Initial Study :
A. Land Use/Planning
1 . General Plan Conforming (all elements )
2 . Zoning
3 . Local Coastal Plan
4. Subdivision
B . Circulation
1 . Ingress/Egress
2 . Parking (compacts , marina , elevator)
3 . Pedestrian/Bicycle
C. Water Quality
1 . "General Discussion"
D. Air Quality
1 . General impacts of roads on this use .
E . Noise
1 . Impact road adjacent on this use .
City Hall • 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California 92663
Trish Butler
April 9, 1981
Page Two
F. Public Services & Utilities - very limited
G. Geology/Soils - very limited .
Please provide two copies of a proposed scope of services .
There would be attendance at the City Staff ' s Environmental
Affairs Committee, no public hearings . We will need 7
copies of a screencheck and 30 copies of a draft.
It looks like an interesting project.
Very truly yours ,
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
JAMES D . HEWICKER , DIRECTOR
d4Zac;��
By
re al mr 1co
Environmental Coordinator
Enclosure
FT/pw