HomeMy WebLinkAbout5.0_FONBAS Animal Shelter_Presentation_1_Staff_PA2020-349From:Merlaina O Conner
To:CDD
Cc:Planning Commissioners
Subject:Project PA2020-349 / Activity UP2020-193 Newport Beach Animal Shelter
Date:Wednesday, March 3, 2021 1:38:11 PM
Attachments:Project Number PA2020-349 concerns.pdf
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
I Robert O’Conner owner of 20292 Riverside Drive Newport Beach, Ca 92660. I am the next door
neighbor of the current proposed site for the Friends of Newport Beach Animal Shelter. I am
informing you that with the lack of notice and a loss in my family I am unable to attend the meeting
that is scheduled for March 4th, 2021 at 6:30pm.
I have sent my questions and concerns as requested to the Planning Commissions e-mail and expect
them to be reviewed and taken with the importance they should be. I will be living directly next to a
publicly accessible Animal shelter and feel my concerns are important and should be taken as such.
Sent from Mail for Windows 10
Planning Commission - March 4, 2021 Item No. 5b Additional Materials Received
Friends of the Newport Beach Animal Shelter (PA2020-349)
Concerns & Questions
Name: ………………………. Robert O’Conner
Date: …………………………. March 3rd, 2021
Address: ……………………. 20292 Riverside Drive Newport Beach, Ca 92660 (directly next to proposed site)
Regarding …………………. Friends of Newport Beach Animal Shelter project at 20282 Riverside Drive
Newport Beach, Ca 92660.
My name is Robert O’Conner I have lived on Riverside Drive for the past 14 years with my wife
and three kids and have watched this street slip into looking less and less like the neighborhood we
moved into. This neighborhood was designed for residents who have a passion for animals (Dogs &
Cats). For the first 7 years it was filled with owners that mostly lived in the residence and ran a business
in the back section of the property which was designed for the kennel part of the residential kennel
zoning. All business that was conducted was conducted in the back of each property to keep the
inconvenience away from the other homeowners. You could have walked down the street most of the
day and not known that the kennels existed. Now we have 100+ dogs of all sizes walked within our
neighborhood with all types of behavior issues by dog walkers (volunteers) that have little to no
knowledge or control of those behaviors. We are having fewer individual residents running small well-
run kennels to having large rescues, shelters and new businesses (kennel delivery service) that are too
large for a small neighborhood like ours. I believe a Newport Beach no kill animal shelter will just push
this neighborhood further over the edge to the determent of the few that are still raising kids on this
street and would like to see it improve not get worse and less safe. We know this to be true as we have
lived next to the current Newport Beach shelter and business is conducted out front of the property and
in some cases in front of our property. Adoption groups have decided this street (in front of the
residential properties) is a great place to conduct their adoptions. There are many difficulties of having
these types of businesses pop up and putting a shelter that is open to the public and has no residence
and is vacant at night is just going to bring more of the same in the future and the only people it hurts is
the residents raising their family and living in their home.
Please understand there has been little to no notice to provide information for this hearing. I don’t
believe there was an adequate amount of information given to the homeowners in the surrounding
areas.
The actual residents are the only ones that are affected by these changes and I do not mean employees
being paid to live on the property. We deserve that all the issues are looked at properly before moving
forward with completely changing the entire look and feel of our neighborhood.
I would also request that the leadership of the Newport Animal Control be reviewed on how they
interact with residents. Issues and complaints are ignored and pushed to the side. Animal control
oversees and issues us our licensing and has the power to suspend or cancel or limit those licenses and
them being a neighbor with that kind of power creates friction.
❖ Residential status and overall look of neighborhood.
• Large signs on properties and vehicles that are a nuisance to homeowners.
• Unsupervised properties at night
Planning Commission - March 4, 2021 Item No. 5b Additional Materials Received
Friends of the Newport Beach Animal Shelter (PA2020-349)
• Conducting business in the front of properties infringes on the rights of the
residents on the street.
❖ Parking
• Employee parking (bigger businesses mean more employees)
• Company owned vehicles parked on Riverside Drive and throughout
neighborhood.
• Volunteer dog walkers parking cars for 1-2 hours at a time.
• People visiting or looking to adopt dogs.
• Dog owners coming to claim their pets.
• All the above makes regular drop offs and pickups even more difficult all current
businesses.
• Lack of parking leads to individuals illegally parking in residents’ driveways or
blocking residents’ driveways.
❖ Traffic
• Increased every year due to the type of businesses that are added to our street
with no real guidelines for managing added issues.
• Number of cars creates a safety hazard for all the other activities that are
conducted on Riverside Drive due to and increase in rescues and shelters.
• Speed control (drivers are unaware of the hazard of speeding and no deterrents
put in place).
❖ Safety
• Injuries have occurred to residents and visitors due to excessive dog walking by
unqualified individuals.
• Dog owners visiting Newport Beach Animal Control after hours in order to
retrieve their pets have been loud and frustrated/irate because they are unable
to do so. Since there is no personnel those individuals come to 20292 Riverside
as the direct neighbor and having our lights on have received at least 5 visits
from upset and frustrated dog owners.
• Newport Beach Animal Shelter has had to call the police on more the a few
occasions to either calm down or remove angry dog owners.
• Rescues & shelters bring many unknown individuals to our neighborhood which
decreases the safety of our children and residents.
❖ Noise level
• Barking late at night and early in the morning, no attempt to control noise level
especially at rescues or shelters due to large amounts of foot traffic in and out
of facilities.
• Rescues and or shelters are not kept as quiet as a privately owned kennel are.
• No kennel building is completely soundproof and there needs to be night
supervision.
• Noise level effects the direct neighbors of said rescues and shelters at a much
higher level and is not addressed.
Planning Commission - March 4, 2021 Item No. 5b Additional Materials Received
Friends of the Newport Beach Animal Shelter (PA2020-349)
❖ Property Values
• Property value will be affected being a direct neighbor to this out of place
commercial office building stuck into a residential neighborhood.
• This will open the door to other buildings/businesses just like it.
Who on the board wants to live next to an animal shelter? For the record it is not
what we moved into!
The above Items have not been addressed. Newport Beach planning commission
needs to address all issues and then review all possible changes with all effected parties
before moving forward on any projects like the current proposed Animal Shelter.
Thank you for your time and for listening to the actual individuals that will be affected by your
decisions.
Robert & Merlaina O’Conner
Planning Commission - March 4, 2021 Item No. 5b Additional Materials Received
Friends of the Newport Beach Animal Shelter (PA2020-349)
From:Margaret Maas
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:Project File No. PA2020-349, 3/4/21 public hearing
Date:Wednesday, March 3, 2021 4:09:31 PM
Attachments:M. Maas to Planning Commission re Project File No. PA2020-349.pdf
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Please see attached my letter and comments re the application for a conditional use permit re
20282 Riverside Dr., Newport Beach, Project File No. PA2020-349, to be considered at the public
hearing March 4, 2021, 6:30 p.m.
Thank You for your consideration
Margaret Maas
Owner, 20301 Riverside Dr.
Newport Beach, CA
949/374-1002
Planning Commission - March 4, 2021 Item No. 5b Additional Materials Received
Friends of the Newport Beach Animal Shelter (PA2020-349)
Planning Commission - March 4, 2021 Item No. 5b Additional Materials Received
Friends of the Newport Beach Animal Shelter (PA2020-349)
Planning Commission - March 4, 2021 Item No. 5b Additional Materials Received
Friends of the Newport Beach Animal Shelter (PA2020-349)
From:Charles Klobe
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:PC Meeting 3/4/21 Agenda Item 5
Date:Wednesday, March 3, 2021 4:10:21 PM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Good day Mr. Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission,
I support the Staff recommendation for the FONBAS project and hope that you approve this
pursuant to the Staff report.
Thank You For Your Service,
Charles Klobe
Planning Commission - March 4, 2021 Item No. 5b Additional Materials Received
Friends of the Newport Beach Animal Shelter (PA2020-349)
From:Jeff Schneidewind
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:Comments re: Proposed City Animal Shelter PA2020-349, Activity no. UP2020-193
Date:Wednesday, March 3, 2021 4:32:26 PM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Comments from Jeffrey Schneidewind and Julie Schneidewind, residents of property
bordering proposed FONBAS Animal Shelter (PA2020-349) regarding Conditional Use
Permit no. UP2020-193 request.
March 3, 2021
Dear Planning Commission members,
We own and reside at the fully-residential property at 20281 Kline Drive, immediately
behind the proposed shelter site. While we fully support the City’s efforts to establish its
own shelter, we feel this is not the proper location. Further, we wish to call attention to
inaccurate and misleading statements in the resolution and the staff report, and suggest the
process be postponed until these can be corrected, at least. However, we feel the City can
certainly find a better location to establish this service.
We own rescue pets and have followed generally the city’s efforts to open its shelter. We
adopted our dog from the Irvine shelter as a third-strike returnee, meaning he would have
been euthanized if we returned him or if he was not adopted. We have also adopted cats
from Irvine, whose shelter, incidentally, is properly located in an industrial area. We have
also had several rescue pets from Northern California, and twice, we have rescued cats
abandoned by Newport Beach neighbors who moved away, leaving the cats behind to
fend. Given that we’ve lived on this property since 1993, we’ve had to take deceased pets
to the county facility several times. Again, we understand the need.
While there were noise problems in the past from the kennels on Riverside Drive, most
current owners have done an exceptional job keeping the dogs quiet. However, the status
quo is greatly overstated in the resolution and in the staff report.
For example, the current, temporary site of the City shelter is, in fact, noisy compared to the
residential kennels. We haven’t complained because it’s currently far enough away from us
to avoid nuisance levels. But, when we do hear dogs barking, they are often the shelter
dogs. Will the new kennels, just 25 feet from our back wall, deaden noise sufficiently,
especially if the dogs begin howling after hours, when staff have left?
Planning Commission - March 4, 2021 Item No. 5b Additional Materials Received
Friends of the Newport Beach Animal Shelter (PA2020-349)
Further, the nature of Riverside Drive has changed in recent years, and this isn’t reflected
at all in the documents. Start-up day care and dog walking businesses have replaced what
used to be mostly dog breeders. For years after we moved in, there was only one regular
day-care kennel on Riverside. Breeders tend to have very few visitors, but the conversion
to boarding kennels has increased traffic in the neighborhood to the point where it can be
dangerous to walk or drive on Orchard Drive during “rush hours” as pets are dropped off
and picked up, and throughout the day as dog walkers cross and walk along the street
itself, sometimes seeming oblivious to approaching cars.
The resolution and report documents also contain several other incorrect and/or misleading
statements:
The documents repeatedly use “Commercial Nursery Overlay” to describe the
properties bordering the site to the Southeast. However, there are currently no
nurseries on our side of Kline Drive. There are, instead, six residences. While we
understand this is a zoning designation, there is currently only one nursery remaining
on the opposite side of the street, and we were told when we were annexed, by then
Asst. City Manager Dave Kiff, that these businesses would be grandfathered out as
they changed hands or closed. In other words, the neighborhood has, since
annexation, become more residential, but the documents create the impression there
are businesses everywhere.
In Section 3 of the proposal, there is at least one opinion listed repeatedly as a fact.
Under Finding A, Fact 1, “Although the Project would not provide a residential use, a
public animal shelter use would exist in harmony with neighborhood (sp).” This is
echoed in Finding C, Fact 7: “Given the nature and proximity of the nearby uses, the
Project would not introduce a negative effect to the area…” Again, it appears as Fact
1 under Finding E: “...the size and operation of the public animal shelter would
integrate well with other commercial kennels that are allowed to operate in the
neighborhood.” It’s misleading and seems underhanded to keep repeating this
opinion among the actual facts.
In several places, including Finding A, Fact 1, the document describes the residential
kennels in terms of normal businesses with employees and customer traffic. In fact,
the kennels impacting our home have been strictly family businesses and the former
owner of the proposed shelter site was a breeder who rarely saw customers. The
concept of animal breeders is completely omitted from the documentation.
Under Finding C, regarding design and use compatibility, most of the facts address
the front and sides of the property, and the only section describing the back, where
we are, contains errors. Under Fact 7, after another misleading description of
Planning Commission - March 4, 2021 Item No. 5b Additional Materials Received
Friends of the Newport Beach Animal Shelter (PA2020-349)
Commercial Nursery Overlay zoning, it says the properties on Kline Drive have
“...detached horticultural structures that serve as a buffer between residences and the
subject use.” This is a complete fabrication; there are currently no horticultural
structures on Kline Drive.
“Fact 7” says “The nearest habitable portion of the N (Commercial Nursery Overlay)
residences are around 65 to 85 feet away from the proposed dog kennels on-site.”
It’s true that our house, buffered only by the wall separating the properties, will be
about 65 feet away. But we also spend a great deal of time in our backyard, which
we’ve developed to include several covered seating areas, a small art studio, and a
vegetable garden. While we don’t sleep there, we certainly inhabit it during much of
the daytime. The “65 to 85 feet away” statement seems intentionally misleading given
these facts.
The documents frequently refer to “the block” or “the vicinity”. However, the report
uses these words to describe only the addresses on Riverside Drive, not those on
Orchard or Kline drives. Under Finding C, Fact 3 states, “Properties within the vicinity
of the project site are generally developed with single-story residential structures and
an intermixing of small-scale commercial buildings occupied primarily by other kennel
operations.” This makes it seem like commercial buildings are all over the
neighborhood, which is not true.
Getting picky, but even the directions used in the report can be misleading. Streets
and property lines are all on a 45° diagonal to cardinal compass points, but the
documents, for example, refer to our street only as “to the East,” even though
Orchard Drive is also to the East. Only cardinal compass points are used. In fact,
Kline is Southeast, and Orchard is Northeast.
In 1993, when we first moved to Kline Drive (from Del Mar Ave, just a few blocks away) as
renters, the unincorporated neighborhood was blighted and reeling from the 1980s airport
expansion lawsuits. Kline Drive was a non-maintained dirt road, half the houses were
vacant, and landscaping businesses dominated. Since then, the landscaping businesses
have mostly moved out, residents organized to deed the street to the County so it could be
improved and maintained, we further organized to advise in the annexation process, and
we have all since invested a great deal into renovating and updating our houses.
Given that the neighborhood has now become almost completely residential except for
Riverside Drive and the nursery on the northwest side, does the City really want to
introduce operations that could very well add pressure in the opposite direction? A public
shelter is a very different thing from a city yard, especially in terms of property values.
What happens in the future, when the shelter becomes full and more capacity is needed?
Planning Commission - March 4, 2021 Item No. 5b Additional Materials Received
Friends of the Newport Beach Animal Shelter (PA2020-349)
With all the high-density infill projects in the area, the number of pets needing shelter is
likely to increase, and the City is sure to try first to expand operations of their own shelter
rather than relocate.
Ultimately, the several misleading concepts and fabrications repeated throughout the
document lead us to conclude that this is already a done deal, and obviously, given that the
project proposal, review and approval, and the shelter operations and oversight will all be
handled by the City, it makes some sense that everyone seems to have rubber-stamped
the steps in the process necessary for this solution.
We just ask that everyone pause, step away from the warm glow of a problem seemingly
solved, and reconsider options. Look behind the curtain created by the vague language
and consider the residents like us who live in close proximity. Now that FONBAS has
raised the money, we ask that you please look at more appropriate locations for a public
shelter.
We wish someone had reached out to us much earlier than the legal limit of last Tuesday,
when we first heard of the proposal. Wouldn’t the project have been stronger with more
participation? At least the resolution and report might have been more accurate.
To the commission, we ask that you please deny this proposal in favor of a better site. The
City needs a quality facility with room to grow, but this site is not such a place. We have
lived here for years and invested a great deal in improving the neighborhood. Please don’t
drag it back down.
Thank you in advance for your careful consideration.
Sincerely,
Julie and Jeffrey Schneidewind
Planning Commission - March 4, 2021 Item No. 5b Additional Materials Received
Friends of the Newport Beach Animal Shelter (PA2020-349)