Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPA2017-228 Comment 38c_05062019_SchmittFrom: Jerry Schmitt <JerrySchmitt@cox.net> Sent: Monday, May 06, 2019 1:01 PM To: Zdeba, Benjamin Cc: Zak, Peter; Weigand, Erik; Lowrey, Lee; Ellmore, Curtis; Kleiman, Lauren; Koetting, Peter; Kramer, Kory; Dixon, Diane; Avery, Brad; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Herdman, Jeff; O'Neill, William Subject: 4302 FordRd Project IS/MND issues and other concerns Attachments: FordRd MultiUnit IS MND and general concerns 2019-5-6.pdf See attached for my issues with the IS/MND conclusions on the 4302 Ford Rd Multi-Unit Proposed Project and other concerns. Jerry Schmitt Port Streets Neighborhood Watch Area Coordinator Port Streets Safety and Surveillance Committee IS/MND Issues and General Concerns of the Proposed 4302 Ford Rd Multi-Unit Residential Project Submitted May 6, 2019 Here are some observations and major concerns on the proposed 4302 Ford Road Multi-Unit proposed by Hines development next to the Port Streets and Bonita Canyon Sports Park with the tennis & pickleball courts as discussed at the April 18, 2019 Newport Beach Planning Commission meeting. Executive Summary: • This is a significant man-made risk and hazard to public safety that will most certainly result in injuries and possibly death. • The unnecessary liability to the city will be enormous as they will surely be sued for every injury and will be held liable for approving this hazardous design at the Park entrance. • The community’s enjoyment and use of the park will be greatly impeded. • The project fills no existing need for housing as there is a surplus of supply in the immediate area with more desirable environment that doesn’t subject residents to loud street noise, the pounding of tennis and picketballs and view of the utility building. Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration: I disagree with the following conclusions of the IS/MND that these do in fact exist: Hazard: This proposed project does indeed create substantial hazard and danger to community safety, and liability to the city especially due the design at the entrance to a busy park. Light Pollution: The project design will result in car headlights shining directly into the second story bedroom windows of people living at the end of Port Sheffield and Port Abbey. Car lights will also shine directly at the tenant’s windows as cars head towards the ocean on MacArthur Blvd and left onto Bonita Canyon Road. Lights from the Park lot and restrooms may pollute the tenants at night. Noise Pollution: 1. Tests need to be done to do a simulation analysis as the noise impact of the building location may deflect the picketball and other notices back on to park users increasing the noise level after the project is built. 2. There also may be an issue with picketball and other noises creating an echo and amplifying the noise impacting the tenants due to the V-shaped design. 3. Park users may also be subject to load music (some not appropriate for children) from the pool use by tenants and pool parties. A full EIR is required. The prior Phase 1 Environmental Assessment documents prepared in 2015 indicated that there are clear reasons to perform a full EIR. See below for more details on the above. Observations and Concerns: Safety Hazard. The project has several serious design safety flaws that endangers our kids and anyone trying to use the park or bike trail, putting the city at risk of liability, and will have a major impact on our ability to use and enjoy the Park. The project entrance flawed design is very dangerous to children, adults, bikers, and other vehicles (see photos below). To leave the project, cars will have to emerge underground with no visibility of potential kids in their path……they will have to over accelerate to get up the ramp on a curve….at the top of the ramp the cars will have a tendency to surge (slope goes from 14.5 percent to 2 percent) onto the sidewalk until the driver can adjust the speed which may be too late as kid or bike appears with limited visibility and not enough time to react. Delivery trucks also use this entrance/exit. Trucks Must Back Up to get out…while going uphill….on a 90 degree curved road with blind spots…looking out for cars going up or down the ramp…..over the side walk and main bike path (the students use this to go to and from CDM HS) …… looking out for oncoming traffic Ford Rd…while watching for outgoing traffic from the Park!!! The city would be reckless to expose the city to the liability of negligently approving a hazardous design at the Park entrance with a high probably of injury or death. This is very hard to do when the radius at the park entrance is greatly reduced when cars are parked on the street currently is daily and will be worst with the 25+ cars from the project due to the limited parking. Many trucks will go through the Park lot as that will be the easiest, but also a hazard to our children running to a birthday party or soccer game. Bicyclist are probably at higher risks considering the speeds of the bike and car speed making reaction time after the blind spots a split second to avoid a collision. All it takes is for the bike to quickly swerve causing them to lose balance, or catch a wheel, or apply too much pressure to the wrong brake and crash to the pavement. The bike trail passing the project entrance is a main thoroughfare through the area and is used by the kids who walk and bike to CDM HS. Bikers from outside the area passing through that may not know of the hidden death trap and may be at even higher risk. The project can only accommodate one small-medium delivery vehicle at a time. What will the other trucks do while waiting for the truck to get done and back out? It is 150 feet just to get to the elevators and garbage cans from the single truck parking area therefore no delivery or pick up will happen quickly. With 21 units, delivery vehicles such as Amazon, UPS, US Mail, FedEx, garbage, moving, Uber, Pick-Up- Stix, pet groomers, water, pizza, etc will be constant. What will happen when someone is moving in or out and the moving van is using the only parking spot blocking deliveries for 3-5 hours? The typical larger moving van will not fit anywhere on the project….do they unload at the closest street parking (if its open at the time) which is over 310 feet from the elevator, or the logical place for them to park and unload is in the Park through the pool area which is half that distance to the elevator than the nearest street parking spot? The underground parking is grossly limited leaving the Park as the logical place for tenants and guests to park. There are 3 spaces for handicapped, 13 for guests/visitors /housekeepers/nannies /repair/service personal /rental or sales office workers/property maintenance, etc. That leaves 39 for the people living there…..not even 2 per unit!! Of the 39 spots, 26 are Tandem Stalls so they have to be used by the same unit, or used by 13 units……that leaves 8 units fighting over the last 13 spots. But it will be much worse……..The (21) 2-4 bedroom units have a total of 63 bedrooms. Assuming an average of 1-person per bedroom (probably more for apartments or rental condos) will be short 25 parking spots and the cars will likely flow onto Ford Rd, the Park, and the Port Streets…..and that is not considering events such as pool parties or other gatherings! Residents and guests will surely use the convenient Park parking lot causing Park users to park on the street putting more kids and adults safety in danger as car and trucks backing out of the project. Due to the popularity of the already established Park, the city should require the project accommodate a full size moving van. This will enable two smaller delivery trucks to be on the property at once which is needed as deliveries will be slow as its 150 feet just to get to the elevator. An on premise turnaround should be required due to the proximity to the park. Most of the south side of Ford Rd is marked “No Parking” therefore most cars will have to park on the north side and run past the project entrance to get to their soccer games and birthday parties. The tenants being there the night before will have already taken all the good parking spots. Most tenants and guests will feel entitled to park in Public Park Parking. Pool liability. Being the Park parking lot is the closest for tenants who don’t have reserved parking in the project, and most logical way for to guests to enter for pool parties, the gate will likely be propped open many times. If a kid wandered in and drowned, the city would be one of the parties sued and held liability. Invasion of Privacy: • All floors of the units will be able to look down into the bedrooms and living quarters of the residences at the end of Port Sheffield and Port Abbey. • Parents have also expressed concern the project may house predators looking down and watching their children at the park and the park parking lot. Predator Paradise • Parents have also expressed concern that the 3 stories looms over the park so the tenants can view their kids at practically inch of the park. And if the desire was there, see opportunities for abduction. • Another parent pointed out that many predators watch the kids’ patterns to and from school planning an abduction. This is the main side walk and bike path kids take to CDM. Once a pattern is established, they can wait on the street, or the park lot which is less than 20 feet from the sidewalk/bike path. Cell Tower. Moving the cell tower from the current location (mostly hidden in the AT&T parking lot) to the open space that everyone will see on the other side of the AT&T building is a prerequisite or should be running concurrent with this application. Light pollution. The local residents and the tenants will experience light pollution. • Cars leaving the project will shine their lights directly into the second story bedrooms of the homes on Port Sheffield and Port Abbey. • The two lanes of cars going towards the ocean on MacArthur and turning left onto Bonita Canyon Dr will shine their lights into the proposed building. • The below city park bathroom lights are less than 150 feet from the building and the street light may be as close as 25 feet. Additional City Complaints. Even if the tenants knew of the pickleball and tennis courts when they moved in, there is a high likelihood they will try to get the city to restrict the use and noise. They may also complain about the restroom and Park lights. And the rest of the city will complain that the tenants are taking spots reserved for the Park. Due to the position and shape of the project, there is a high likelihood the building will cause the noise from the pickleball courts to echo and amplify. Or the sound may bounce back at the people trying to enjoy the park. Traffic will increase at the main exit to the community which is already can be completely gridlocked at rush hour times. Here is an actual 59 second video of trunks having trouble using the Ford Rd Turnaround taken 5/4/2019: https://youtu.be/JJ3noCLLu3g Construction Plan looks near impossible without use of City Park property or shutting down part of the park. The city should require a detailed plan of how the 2+ year (?) construction process and impact would look like. This tiny 1.06 acre would probably require all equipment and trailers to be off the property to be able to work on it. Where would that area be located? The community should not be unduly burdened during and after construction just so the developer can make a buck on a project that fills no need. The best use for this 1.06 acre of land is to expand the current Park for additional soccer fields, pickleball courts, or other activities. I understand the city tried to buy it from AT&T several years ago, but AT&T wanted way over market value for it so the city passed at that time. AT&T must be more realistic now as when Hines development recently approached them as they were able to work out a deal contingent on the city letting them build apartments or condos. If this goes though, the city will never have the opportunity to add to this Park. I see no need fulfilled by this project. However, if the city for some reason feels this project is needed, have Hines build on the other side of the AT&T building away from the park on city land with the above safety design changes….the city does a land swap and gets to expand the park….AT&T gets their money without having to relocate the cell tower….a Win-Win-Win. And when the truck gets out of the project they are still facing the wrong way and need to turn around 180-degrees which is hard to do when cars are parked there! Using the city Park as a turning lane also endangers our kids and impedes our use of the park. Here is an actual 59 second video of trunks having trouble using the Ford Rd Turnaround taken 5/4/2019: https://youtu.be/JJ3noCLLu3g Why is the city considering a project that surely use the city park as a turning-a-round, moving van unloading, and tenant parking lot so the developer can make more money by not providing adequate car and truck parking, or a turn-a-round lane on project property! Amazon and other delivery trucks already have very restricted views already. Where will the mailman, UPS FedEx, Amazon, etc park on a typical weekend if a small moving truck is in the only delivery spot (typical larger moving vans will not fit), and the Park lot is full as will as the street????? Hines Proposal Intentionally and Fraudulently is Misleading the Public: I am new to this process and not trained to read schematics probably like most of the public. We rely 95% on the before and after photos and illustrations to try to understand the project. I was surprised there doesn’t seem to be any system in place to prevent the public being fraudulently mislead by the developer’s illustrations. Please contact me if I am missing something in the city’s process or if the developer will be fined, or prevented from presenting other proposals for a period of time in the future. As a typical Newport Beach resident I expect the actual plans and the illustrations to match. Before: How it looks today. After: How it will look when a tenant moves in on the opening day. The public deserves the truth. The more I study this project, every illustration contains public deceptions. For example: • In the photos with the application and distributed at the 4/18/2019 (see below), Hines doesn’t show the entrance, but trees growing out to driveway and delivery area to hide it. Even a commissioner asked “How to you get in? I think Hines knew the project entrance is a major safety risk and a non-starter with most people so they deceptively did not show it. See other two diagrams below. • Another example in the IS/MND Exhibits 9D (see below). All the trees to the right of the sidewalk are to be cut down. If a grove of trees it took 50 years to grow and it is replaced by a building a short hedge that is what we expect to be illustrated. It’s physically impossible for the trees to be located were they are depicted. See below two illustrations. The developer is also marketing this as saving the community from looking at the “unattractive” and “unsightly” AT&T building. However, you will see more of the AT&T building after they cut down all these trees marked in red. A cell tower that is currently hard to see will also be put out in the open on the other side of the AT&T building as well. This project does Not Fill Any Need in the area or for the city: • It does not appeal to seniors. Or as one senior said to the Hines rep after recent Hines community event and hearing their pitch, “Stop saying this is for seniors as we would never live her”. With only 3 total ADA parking spots for 63 bedrooms for tennants & visitors……. Cramped parking so you can’t open your car door the whole way making it a challenge to get into your car whether you are young or old. And if you are lucky to get 2 reserve parking spots to your unit, one car is trapped in the tandem parking. Seniors have also commented they don’t want to spend there retirment listening to pooundin picket balls, noicy streets or a view of a utility building. Hines stated at the 4/18/2019 study session that Port St seniors wanting to downside were a prime demographic. After asking 7-9 Port St seniors that question, the answer was always along the line of “Why would we do that? I love living in the Port Streets, my home is paid off, I don’t want the HUGE tax bill if sold, and I like a big home so my kids and grandkids feel comfortable and want to spend nights here.” • The other demographic Hines stated at the 4/18/2019 meeting was divorcees. Lawler stated, “Some of my friends are got a divorce and there was no where for them to go so they had to go outside the city”. Facts are there are 23 vacancies within a minute walk of the site and also within a minute the Big Canyon Villa condos offer a better living enviorment and for-sale options 30-50% less than proposed project. When I asked recent devorcees if they would have lived there, they say they prefer the more home like living available rather than the cold hotel like feel when you park in the basement and take elevator to a hallway. One interesting quote, “There is no way in h--- I would live there as I don’t want my x-wife’s friends going to the park and seeing me come or go with another women”. • At developer estimated condo prices around $2M, this does nothing for affordable housing. • With tenants subject to dawn-to-dust pounding of tennis/picketballs, next to one of the busiest and loudest intersections in Newport, butted up against a very unattractive utility building, owners and renters have at least 10+ condo/apartment complexes that are options with 5 minutes of the Port Streets, with better quality of life living conditions at same or better prices and there is a surplus of supply. The Port Street community is the closest and most impacted by this proposed project. This is a major assault on the Number One Value of the Port Streets which is to provide a safe environment for our kids! It was clear at the 4/18/2019 meeting that this is Ray Lawler’s pet project he has been working on for 4 years while and since he was a Commissioner. We ask the City Council and Planning Commissioners Please Do Not Push This Through to throw a bone to an x-Commissioner/friend, or because you believe that any new supply is good supply, or if this doesn’t get built there something else will someday. We ask the city to stop this project as the safety hazard, city liability, and other downsides far outweigh what little, if any community benefit. If the project does not meet that minimum criteria of public safety and our ability to enjoy the park, then stop wasting city time wait another 50 years or until some project does. Don’t let this project lead to the next tragic news story… https://ktla.com/2017/08/23/family-files-lawsuit-against-newport-beach-trash-hauler-driver-after-8-year-old-boy- fatally-hit-by-truck/ Jerry Schmitt Port Street Neighborhood Watch Area Coordinator Port Street Safety and Surveillance Committee