Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJUNE 1974 GPA SESSION*NEW FILE* JUNE 1974 GPA SESSION 0 a COUNCILMEN o oLoo3 �� m ROLL CALL �N 0 in12�a�m CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Julv 22. 1974 MINUTES INDEX A report was presented from the Community Develop- ment Department. Letters from Ruth K. Johnson and McKee Thompson in favor of subject Variance were presented. Letters were received after the agenda was printed from Mr, and Mrs. John Drabeck, Charles W. and e DeeMasters, B. H. Renard, Wilhelmina E. n Os, Mr. and Mrs. Ted Russell and Gerald and N thleen Thompson approving Variance No. 1042, and tter from Harwood & Adkinson to the Community Deve pment Director enclosing a letter to them from RicharwiDodd requesting Council to allow the variance th the exception of permitting the violation of the height rdinance. Don Adkinson, at rneyfor Richard Dodd, addressed the Council. Gordon Glass, architect, resented a petition signed he re- by nineteen China Cove rest\Counci quested variance. Motion x Mr. Glass was granted two s for his Ayes x x x x x x x presentation. Milo V. Olson, attorney repd Mrs. Thomson, and John Gay addi in favor of the proposed variance. Motion x The hearing was closed. Ayes xxxxxxx Motion x The decision of the Planning Commission was upheld, Ayes x x x x x x x and Variance No. 1042 was granted. 3. Mayor McInnis opened the public hearing regarding Gen Plan proposed General Plan Amendment. No. 4, being an Amendmt amendment to the Circulation Element to change the No. 4 classification of Irvine Avenue between 16th Street and Cliff Drive from a primary road to a local street, and to delete the intersection at Irvine and Pacific Coast Highway. A report was presented from the Community Develop- ment Department in connection with proposed Amend- ment Nos. 4, 5, 6 and 8. Donna Gallant, President of the Cliff Haven Community Association, addressed the Council in support of the proposed amendment. ra Volume 28 - Page 180 COUNCILMEN a m 'A N� ROLL CALL PN T��ZNy2�AAm CITY OF NEWPORT BAH Jul 22 1974 MINUTES INDEX Motion x The hearing was closed. Ayes xxxxxxx Motion x Resolution No. 8314, adopting an amendment to the R-8314 Ayes x x x x x x Circulation Element of the Newport Beach General Noes x Plan (General Plan Amendment No. 4), was adopted. 4. Mayor McInnis opened the public hearing regarding Gen Plan proposed General Plan Amendment No. 5, being an Amendmt amendment to the Circulation Element to change the No. 5 classification of 15th Street between Superior Avenue and Balboa Boulevard from a primary road to a secondary road. A letter was received after the agenda was printed from Beeco, Ltd, opposing the Planning Commission recommendations. John Haskell, representing Beeco, Ltd., addressed the Council in opposition to the proposed amendment. Motion x The hearing was closed. Ayes xxxxxxx Resolution No. 8315, adopting an amendment to the R-8315 Circulation Element of the Newport Beach General Motion x Ayes xxxxxxx Plan (General Plan Amendment No. 5), waad-opted. 5. Mayor McInnis opened the public hearing regarding Gen PI proposed General Plan Amendment No. 6 being an Am mt amendment to the 'Residential Growth Element and 6 Land Use Element to change the designated use of the property commonly known as the "Fun Zone" at t intersection of Palm Street and Bay Avenue on e Balboa Peninsula from multi -family reside ial to retail and service commercial. Don Adkinson addressed the Cou in opposition to the proposed amendment. John Konwiser address the Council in support of the proposed amend - ent. Motion x The hearing s closed. Ayes xxxxxxx Rc� ution No. 8316, adopting an amendment to the R-8316 -'and Use and Residential Growth Elements of the Motion x Newport Beach General Plan (General Plan Amendment Ayes xxxxxxx No. 6), was adopted. Volume 28 - Page 181 Mot Aye Mot Aye Noe Mot Aye Mot Aye Mot Aye Mot Aye f1 COUNCILMEN CITY OF NEWPORT BEICH MINUTES J 1I \_Icivt0a PT�22m�� BALL N T 9f is k I, m Jul 22, 1974 INDEX ion x he hearing was closed. s xxxxxxx ion x Resolution No. 8314, adopting endment to the R-8314 s x x x x x x Circulation Element of the Newport Beac al s x Plan (General Plan Amendment No. 4), was adopted. 4.. Mayor McInnis opened the public hearing regarding Gen Plan proposed General Plan Amendment No. 5, being an Amendmt amendment to the Circulation Element to change the No. 5 classification of 15th Street between Superior Avenue and Balboa Boulevard from a primary road to a secondary road. A letter was received after the agenda was printed from Beeco, Ltd, opposing the Planning Commission recommendations. John Haskell, representing Beeco, Ltd., addressed the Council in opposition to the proposed amendment. ion x The hearing was closed. s xxxxxxx Resolution No. 8315, adopting an amendment to the R-8315 ion x Circulation Element of the Newport Beach Geiieral s xxxxxxx Plan (General Plan Amendment No. 5), was adopted. 5. Mayor McInnis opened the public hearing regarding Gen P n proposed General Plan Amendment No. 6 being an A dmt amendment, to the 'Residential Growth Element and LVo. 6 Land Use Element to change the designated use of the,- property commonly known as the "Fun Zone" at th intersection of Palm Street and Bay Avenue on e mily residen 'al to Balboa Peninsula fZen retail and service Don Adkinson addrunci n opposition to the proposed amen John Konwiser addouncil in support of the proposed amenion x The hearing was c s xxxxxxx Resolutiop'No. 8316, adopting an amendment to the R-8316 Land U4 and Residential Growth Elements of the ion x Newport Beach General Plan (General Plan Amendment s x x x x x x x o. 6), was adopted. Volume 28 - Page 181 I RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT OF THE NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN (GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 5) WHEREAS, the City Council adopted a Circulation Element of the General Plan on March 11, 1974; and WHEREAS, Section 65361 of the California Government Code limits the amendment of a General Plan to a maximum of three times in any calendar year; and WHEREAS, Council Policy Q1, adopted April 22, 1974, provides for three amendments to the General Plan per year; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on proposed General Plan Amendment No. 5 on June 20, 1974; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that such amendment is in the best interests of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Newport Beach that General Plan Amendment No. 5 be adopted, amending the Circulation Element as follows: 1. Change and Highways' designation of 15th Street between Placentia Avenue and the property line between the Bond Publishing Company site and the Banning Property (just west of Monrovia Avenue) from a "Primary Road" to a "Secondary Road". 2. Revise the second sentence of Item 10, Page 9 of the Circulation Element report to read: "It involves the widening of existing 15th Street to four lanes undivided to a point just westerly of Monrovia Avenue, and continuing on with new construction at four lanes divided, crossing and intersecting..." ADOPTED this day of ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor 1974. DRB/bc 7/16/74 D IL BEECO, LTD. 3990 WESTERLY PLACE (fly t NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92660 (714) 833-8701/�� July 19, 1974� y r•'n �ry�n v 'r�N»� A The City Council .f1�7—��[1'✓ 3300 Newport Boulevard '' �' 0 1" d Newport Beach, Ca. 92660 D1_ I Subject: Newport Beach General Plan Amendment NO-5 Proposed Amendment to the Circulation Element Changing the Classification of 15th Street between Superior Avenue and Balboa Boulevard (extended). Gentlemen: With respect to the proposed amendment, we have reviewed Planning Commission recommendations, the Orange County Road Department pre- cise alignment studies and Environmental Impact Report as well as the city's General Plan studies and the recommendation of Alan M. Voorhees & Associates of April 11, 1974. Prior to the Planning Commission hearing of June 20, 1974, we wrote advising that we did not object to the proposed change in classifi- cation from a primary to a secondary road. Noting that the staff supported this change and that no particular controversyWas involved, we did not appear at the Planning Commission hearing. do not concur with the Planning Commission recommendation now before you, we wish to offer our observations on the subject. The first guide in street classification should be the d, yourtraffic demand with respect to the road network. In this regard, y treet. The consultant projects 14,000 ADT ultimate demand for 15th S Orange County projectsdultimateent, in demand ofs8500tADTVe EnviroEithernlevellwouldcbe easily accommodated by studies, a secondary road and obviates the necessity of primary classification. The Planning Commission apparently made their compromise proposal (leaving 15th Street part primary and part secondary) largely on the basis that planning in West Newport is not completed and possible changes might affect the size requirements on 15th Street. We concur that eventually some changes will probably be made in the West Newport circulation plan, but such changes could affect the size of any of a number of streets --up or down.. Parts of one street (15th) should not be speculatively singled out at this time, especially when doing esent plan, namely, arterials, leaves a glaring inconsistency in the pr Superior and Balboa (extended) connected by an arterial of two different -a - sizes. Obviously, if this span of 15th later require upgrading to a primary, it entire length in a cooperative effort by Street for some reason should should be changed along its the affected agencies. We shall continue to work with you toward comprehensive traffic plans for this area but, in the meantime, must oppose the introduction of this sort of stop -gap inconsistency into the existing plan. Therefore, we reiterate that we support the Newport Beach and County staffs' recommendation that the entire 15th Street link between Superior Avenue and Balboa Boulevard (extended) be designated a second- ary arterial. very truly yours, BEECO, LTD. John Haskell JH:DD CONCILMEN � \�C, m��;Zka� CI Y OF 0 NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES OLLCALL p�T9� z a1Z�apm July 22, 1974 INDEX Motion x The hearing was closed. Ayes xxxxxxx Motion x Resolution No. 8314, adoptin an amendment to the R-8314 Ayes x x x x x x Circulation Element of the Newport Beach General Noes x Plan (General Plan Amendment No. 4), was adopted. 4. ayor McInnis opened the public hearing regarding Gen Plan pr osed General Plan Amendment No. 5, being an Amendmt amehzi ent to the Circulation Element to change the No. 5 classific on of 15th Street between Superior Avenue and Balboa ulevard from a primary road to a secondary road. A letter was received ter the agenda was printed from Beeco, Ltd. opposin the Planning Commission recommendations. John Haskell, representing Beeco, d. , addressed the Council in opposition to the propose di amendment. Motion x The hearing was closed. Ayes xxxxxxx Resolution No. 8315, adopting an amendment to the -8315 Motion x Circulation Element of the Newport Beach General Ayes xxxxxxx Plan (General Plan Amendment No. 5), was adopted. 5. Mayor McInnis opened the public hearing regarding Gen Plan proposed General Plan AmendmentAm2ndment No._,6 being an Amendmt amendment, to the 'Residential Growth Element and No. 6 Land Use Element to change the designated use of the property commonly known as the "Fun Zone" at the intersection of Palm Street and Bay Avenue on the Balboa Peninsula from multi -family residential to retail and service commercial. Don Adkinson addressed the Council in opposition to the proposed amendment. John Konwiser addressed the Council in support of the proposed amendment. Motion x The hearing was closed. Ayes xxxxxxx Resolution No. 8316, adopting an amendment to the R-8316 Land Use and Residential Growth Elements of the Motion x Newport Beach General Plan (General Plan Amendment Ayes xxxxxxx No. 6), was adopted. _— Volume 28 - Page 181 , RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE AND RESIDENTIAL GROWTH ELEMENTS OF THE NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN (GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 6) WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted a Land Use Element and a Residential Growth Element of the General Plan on May 29, 1974; and WHEREAS, Section 65361 of the California Government Code limits the amendment of a General Plan to a maximum of three times in any calendar year; and WHEREAS, Council Policy Q1, adopted April 22, 1974, provides for three amendments to the General Plan per year; and WHEREAS,,the City Council held a public hearing on proposed General Plan Amendment No. 6 on June 20, 1974;' and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that such amendment is in the best interests of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Newport Beach that General Plan Amendment No. 6 be adopted, amending the Land Use and Residential Growth Elements as follows: 1. Land Use Element - Amend the Land Use Plan (map) to change the designation of the "Fun Zone" site from "Multi -Family Residential" to "Retail and Service Commercial". (No change to the text of the Land Use Element is required.) 2. Residential Growth Element - Amend the Residential Growth Plan (map) to delete the residential designation of the "Fun Zone" site. (No change to the text of the Residential Growth Element is required.) ADOPTED this day of ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor 1974. I� 5 DRB/bc 7/16/74 K.7w —r CITY OF COUNCILMEN � m om`�,o o�� i�m9p�m �o Z r.AI_I. I T 7 N12 a�ca .Tnly 29._ 1 Q74 0 NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES INDEX 6. Mayor McInnis opened the public hearing regarding Gen Plan proposed General Plan Amendment No. 8, being an Amendmt amendment to the Land Use Element to change the No. 8 designated use of the property at the southeast corner of Jamboree Road and Santa Barbara Drive from recreational and environmental open space to either governmental and environmental open space or administrative, professional, and financial com- mercial. David Neish, Planning Adminstrator for The Irvine Company, addressed the Council in support of the proposed amendment. Michael Gehring, representing Newport Harbor Chamber of Commerce, indicated he was present to answer any questions Council might have. Motion x The hearing was closed. Ayes xxxxxxx Resolution No. 8317 adopting an amendment to the R-8317 Motion x Land Use Element of the Newport Beach General Plan Ayes x x x x x x x (General -Plan Amendment No. 8),-was adooted.�, ORDINANCES FOR SECOND READING AND ADOPTION: 1. Ordinance No. 1576, being, One-way Streets AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF NE ORT BEACH AMENDING SECTION 12. 52//.0"60 OF THE NEWPORT BEACH MUNICIPAL BODE TO CHANGE THE ONE-WAY DI CTION OF TRAVEL ON PORTIONS O 46TH AND 47TH STREETS, changing the northea� ound traffic on 46th Street between Seashore i0rive and Balboa Boulevard to southwest bou �affic only, and changing the south- west bound affic on 47th Street between Seashore Drive a d River Avenue to northeast bound traffic only, as presented for second reading. Aotion x Ordinance No. 1576 was adopted. Oyes xxxxxx Z. Ordinance No. 1577, being, Rhine Wharf / J AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH AMENDING SECTIONS 17. 20. 010 AND Park f Volume 28 - Page 182 a _ ♦ 0 • RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN (GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 8) WHEREAS, the City Council adopted a Land Use Element D G of the General Plan on May 29, 1974; and WHEREAS, Section 65361 of the California Government Code limits the amendment of a General Plan to a maximum of three times in any calendar year; and WHEREAS, Council Policy Q1, adopted April 22, 1974, provides for three amendments to the General Plan per year; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on proposed General Plan Amendment No. 8 on June 20, 1974; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that such amendment is in the best interests of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Newport Beach that General Plan Amendment No. 8 be adopted, amending the Land Use Element as follows: 1. Revise the Land Use Plan (map) to change the designation of the property at the southeast corner of Jamboree Road and Santa Barbara Drive from "Recreational and Environmental Open Space" to "Administrative, Professional, and Financial Commercial". (No change to the text of the Land Use Element is required.) ADOPTED this day of 1974. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk DRB/bc 7/16/74 I ROLL CAL COUNCILMEN � m L pN T 7� N 12 a pin CITY OF NEWPORT .Tuly 22. 1974 BEACH MINUTES INDEX 6. Mayor McInnis opened the public hearing regarding Gen Plan proposed General Plan Amendment No. 8, being an Amendmt amendment to the Land Use Element to change the No. 8 designated use of the property at the southeast corner of Jamboree Road and Santa Barbara Drive from recreational and environmental open space to either governmental and environmental open space or ministrative, professional, and financial com- mer 'al. David Neis Planning Adminstrator for The Irvine Company, ad ssed the Council in support of the proposed amendm t. Michael Gehring, repres ting Newport Harbor Chamber of Commerce, in�l ated he was present to answer any questions Council m' ht have. Motion x The hearing was closed. Ayes xxxxxxx Resolution No. 8317, adopting an amendment to e R-8317 Motion x Land Use Element of the Newport Beach General Pla• Ayes x x x x x x x (General Plan Amendment No. 8), was adopted. ORDINANCES FOR SECOND READING AND ADOPTION: 1. Ordinance No. 1576, being, One-way di'reets AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH AMENDING SECTION 12. 52. 060 OF THE NEWPORT BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE TO CHANGE THE ONE-WAY DIRECTION OF TRAVEL ON PORTIONS OF 46TH AND 47TH STREETS, changing the northeast bound traffic on 46th Street between Seashore Drive and Balboa Boulevard to southwest bound traffic only, and changing the south- west bound traffic on 47th Street between Seashore Drive and River Avenue to northeast bound traffic only, was presented for second reading. Motion x Ordinance No. 1576 was adopted. Ayes xxxxxxx 2. Ordinance No. 1577, being, Rh' Wharf AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OFF 4V ORT Park BEACH AMENDING SECTI 7. Z0. 010 AND Volume 28 - Page 18Z C:J Y Pee J ORDINANCE NO. 1576 Opt. pment Q AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH t1 ✓U r AMENDING SECTION 12.52.060 OF THE NEWPORT NFW 20 BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE TO CHANGE THE ONE-WAY O� oRt DIRECTION OF TRAVEL ON PORTIONS OF 46TH ck/ BFACFI, AND 47TH STREETS 0 6 The City Council of the City of Newport Beach does ordain as follows: SECTION 1. Section 12.52.060 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is amended to read: "12.52.060 Newport Beach. The following streets and alleys shall be one-way streets and alleys in the direction indicated: South side of Balboa Boulevard between McFadden Place and Alvarado Street. East bound traffic only. North side of Balboa Boulevard between Alvarado Street and McFadden Place. West bound traffic only. The portion of McFadden Place westerly of the McFadden Parking Lot between Balboa Boulevard and Ocean Front. South bound traffic only. Ocean Front between McFadden Place and 24th Street. West bound traffic only. Twenty-first Place between McFadden Place and Ocean Front. Southwest bound traffic only. Twenty-third Street between Ocean Front and Balboa Boulevard. Northeast bound traffic only. Thirty-second Street between Balboa Boulevard and Marcus Avenue. Northeast bound traffic only. Thirty-third Street between Marcus Avenue and Balboa Boulevard. Southeast bound traffic only. Thirty-third Street between Seashore Drive and Balboa Boulevard. Northeast bound traffic only. Thirty-fourth Street between Marcus Avenue and Seashore Drive. Southwest bound traffic only. Thirty-fifth Street between Marcus Avenue and Seashore Drive. Northeast bound traffic only. -1- Thirty-sixth Street between Marcus Avenue and Seashore Drive. Southwest bound traffic only. Thirty-seventh Street between Park Lane and Lake Avenue. Northeast bound traffic only. Thirty-seventh Street between Seashore Drive and Balboa Boulevard. Northeast bound traffic only. Thirty-eighth Street between Seashore Drive and Balboa Boulevard. Northeast bound traffic only. Thirty-ninth Street between Seashore Drive and River Avenue. Southwest bound traffic only. Fortieth Street between Seashore Drive and River Avenue. Northeast bound traffic only. Forty-first Street between Seashore Drive and River Avenue. Southwest bound traffic only. Forty-second Street between Seashore Drive and River Avenue. Northeast bound traffic only. Forty-third Street between Seashore Drive and River Avenue. Southwest bound traffic only. Forty-fourth Street between Seashore Drive and River Avenue. Northeast bound traffic only. Forty-fifth Street between Seashore Drive and Balboa Boulevard. Southwest bound traffic only. Forty-sixth Street between Seashore Drive and Balboa Boulevard. Southwest bound traffic only. Forty-seventh Street between Seashore Drive and River Avenue. Northeast bound traffic only. Via Oporto between Via Lido and 32nd Street. South bound traffic only. Marcus Avenue between 32nd Street and 36th Street. Northwest bound traffic only. Lake Avenue between 32nd Street and 36th Street. South- east bound traffic only." -2- IN SECTION 2. This ordinance shall be published once in the official newspaper of the City, and the same shall be effective 30 days after the date of its adoption. This ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach held on the day of JUL 8 1974, and was adopted on the day of .IUL 2 2 1974, by the following vote, to wit: ATTEST: City Clerk AYES, COUNCILMEN: NOES, COUNCILMEN: ABSENT COUNCILMEN• Mayor -3- COUNCILMEN P m 2 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES ROLL CALL �pN T 9f Z 'u+=s m �pF Julv 8 1974 INDEX CONSENT CALENDAR: Motion x The following items were approved by one motion affirming Ayes x x x x x x x the actions on the Consent Calendar: 1. The following ordinances were introduced and passed to second reading on July 22, 1974: Proposed Ordinance No. 1576, being, AN ORDINANCE One-way OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH AMENDING Streetts SECTION 12, 52.060 OF THE NEWPORT BEACH 0-1576 MUNICIPAL CODE TO CHANGE THE ONE-WAY DIRECTION OF TRAVEL ON PORTIONS OF 46TH AND 47TH STREETS, changing the northeast bound traffic on 46th Street between Seashore Drive and Balboa Boulevard to southwest bound traffic only, and changing the southwest bound traffic on 47th Street between Seashore Drive and River Avenue to northeast bound traffic only. (A report from the Public Works Department was presented. ) Proposed Ordinance No. 1577, being, AN ORDINANCE Rhin OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH AMENDING W rf SECTIONS 17.20.010 AND 17.28.010 OF THE NEW- ark PORT BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE TO ALLOW FOR 0-1577 INCREASED MOORING TIME LIMITS AND RAFT G AT RHINE WHARF PARK, allowing a four-ho mooring time limit and allowing rafting at Rhine Wharf Park only with the Harbor Master' authori- zation under certain conditions. (A r ort from the Marine Department was presented. 2. The following resolutions we adopted: Resolution No. 8308 ap oving the application for 1974 Cliff Dr State Grant funds for e Cliff Drive Park Project. View Park (A report from th arks, Beaches and Recreation R-8308 Director was sented.) Reao1 do o. 8309 authorizing execution of an agree- Rhine ment b ween the City of Newport Beach and Raub, Wharf Bel , Frost & Associates for engineering services in Park c • nection with Rhine Wharf Park design and Lido R-8309 Park Drive improvements. (A report from the Public Works Director was presented.) Resolution No. 8310 prohibiting the parking of vehicles Parking on a portion of Ocean Boulevard, Corona del Mar, Prohibi- during summer months; on the northerly side of tions Ocean Boulevard between Jasminie and Larkspur R-8310 Avenues on Saturdays, Sundays and Holidays from June 15 to the Monday after Labor Day. (A report from the Public Works Department was presented. ) Volume 28 - Page 173 July 8, 1974 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO. H-1 (a) TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: Public Works Department SUBJECT: ONE-WAY STREETS IN WEST NEWPORT RECOMMENDATION: Introduce an ordinance amending Section 12.52.060 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code to change the one-way direction of the following streets: 46th Street between Seashore Drive and Balboa Boulevard from northeast bound to southwest bound traffic only. 2. 47th Street between Seashore Drive and River Avenue from southwest bound to northeast bound traffic only. DISCUSSION: Changing the one-way direction of 46th and 47th Streets are needed to complement the widening of Balboa Boulevard. A traffic signal is being constructed at the realigned River Avenue intersection to provide safe access to and from the West Newport area. Reversing the direction of 47th Street will provide a direct connection to River Avenue allowing residents in the area to use the new traffic signal to gain access to Balboa Boulevard. The West Newport Beach Improvement Association has reviewed and approved the proposed changes. The property owners and year mound tennants living on 46th and 47th Streets were contacted and a majority of them favored the change. Also, the City Traffic Affairs Committee has reviewed the proposed changes and recommend the one-way direction of 46th and 47th Streets be changed. Bill E. Darnell Traffic Engineer BED:bcd COUNCILMEN 0� n� o oZ'fG9•pp �a o�m ROLL CALLinm=Zma CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Julv 22. 1974 MINUTES INDEX A report was presented from the Community Develop- I ment Department. Letters from Ruth K. Johnson and McKee Thompson in favor of subject Variance were presented. \ Letters were received after the agenda was printed \\ from Mr. and Mrs. John Drabeck, Charles W. and Dee Dee Masters, B. H. Renard, Wilhelmina E. yan Os, Mr. and Mrs. Ted Russell and Gerald and Kathleen Thompson approving Variance No. 1042, and a etter from Harwood & Adkinson to the Community De lopment Director enclosing a letter to them from Richa H. Dodd requesting Council to allow the variance\ithe exception of permitting the violation of the hedinance. Don Adkinson, a orney for Richard Dodd, addressed the Council. Gordon Glass, architec \\presented a petition signed by nineteen China Cove re *dents the re- quested variance. Motion x Mr. Glass was granted twoes for his Ayes xxxxxxx presentation. Milo V. Olson, attorney rend Mrs. Thomson, and John Gay ad ' in favor of the proposed variance. Motion x The hearing was closed. Ayes xxxxxxx Motion x The decision of the Planning Commission was upheld, Ayes x x x x x x x and Variance No. 1042 was granted. 3. Mayor McInnis opened the public hearing regarding Gen Plan proposed General Plan Amendment No. 4, being an Axnendmt amendment to the Circulation Element to change the No. 4 classification of Irvine Avenue between 16th Street �— and Cliff Drive from a primary road to a local street, and to delete the intersection at Irvine and Pacific Coast Highway. A report was presented from the Community Develop- ment Department in connection with proposed Amend- ment Nos. 4, 5, 6 and 8. Donna Gallant, President of the Cliff Haven Community Association, addressed the Council in support of the proposed amendment. Volume 28 - Page 180 COUNCILMEN 'A \VL\A onirAll�AP�m CI• OF NEWPORT BE• H .Tnly 2.7- 1974 MINUTES INDEX Motion x The hearing was closed. Ayes xxxxxxx Motion x Resolution No. 8314, adopting an amendment to the R-8314 Ayes x x x x x x Circulation Element of the Newport Beach General Noes x Plan (General Plan Amendment No. 4), was adopted. 4. Mayor McInnis opened the public hearing regarding Gen Plan proposed General Plan Amendment No. 5, being an A'men�C'mt amendment to the Circulation Element to change the No. 5 classification of 15th Street between Superior Avenue and Balboa Boulevard from a primary road to a secondary road. A letter was received after the agenda was printed from Beeco, Ltd. opposing the Planning Commission recommendations. John Haskell, representing Beeco, Ltd., addressed the Council in opposition to the proposed amendment. Motion x The hearing was closed. Ayes xxxxxxx Resolution No. 8315, adopting an amendment to the R-8315 Motion x Circulation Element of the Newport Beach General Ayes xxxxxxx Plan (General Plan Amendment No. 5), was adopted. 5. Mayor McInnis opened the public hearing regarding Gen Plan proposed General Plan Amendment No. 6 being an Amendmt amendment, to the Residential Growth Element and No. 6 Land Use Element to change the designated use of the property commonly known as the "Fun Zone" at the intersection of Palm Street and Bay Avenue on the Balboa Peninsula from multi -family residential to retail and service commercial. Don Adkinson addressed the Council in opposition to the proposed amendment. John Konwiser addressed the Council in support of the proposed amendment. Motion x The hearing was closed. Ayes xxxxxxx Resolution No. 8316, adopting an amendment to the R-8316 Land Use and Residential Growth Elements of the Motion x Newport Beach General Plan (General Plan Amendment Ayes xxxxxxx No. 6), was adopted. Volume 28 - Page 181 COUNCILMEN ROLL CALL s�7c mao CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Tiny 22. 1974 MINUTES INDEX 6. Mayor McInnis opened the public hearing regarding Gen Plan proposed General Plan Amendment No. 8, being an Amendmt amendment to the Land Use Element to change the No. designated use of the property at the southeast corner of Jamboree Road and Santa Barbara Drive from recreational and environmental open space to either governmental and environmental open space or administrative, professional, and financial com- mercial. David Neish, Planning Adminstrator for The Irvine Company, addressed the Council in support of the proposed amendment. Michael Gehring, representing Newport Harbor Chamber of Commerce, indicated he was present to answer any questions Council might have. Motion x The hearing was closed. Ayes xxxxxxx Resolution No. 8317, adopting an amendment to the R-8317 Motion x Land Use Element of the Newport Beach General Plan Ayes xxxxxxx (General Plan Amendment No. 8), was adopted. ORDINANCES FOR SECOND READING AND ADOPTION: 1. Ordinance No. 1576, ,being, / e-way Streets AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH AMENDING SECTION 12. 52. 060 O THE NEWPORT BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE O CHANGE THE ONE-WAY DIRECTI OF TRAVEL ON PORTIONS OF 46TJ AND 47TH STREETS, changing the northeast bou traffic on 46th Street between Seashore Drive nd Balboa Boulevard to southwest bound traffi only, and changing the south- west bound traffic 47th Street between Seashore Drive and Rive venue to northeast bound traffic only, was p sented for second reading. Motion x Ordin ce No. 1576 was adopted. Ayes xxxxxxx Ordinance No. 1577, being, Rhine r Wharf AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT Park BEAC1I AMENDING SECTIONS 17. 20. 010 AND Volume 28 - Page 182 1 *COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT R RESOLUTION NO. 83 14. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF T RUC �3iO4%f CITY FR 7ULATIONELEMENTOF BEACH ADOPTING AN AME TO THECTHE NEWPO �7�roRryo619e;9� BEACH GENERAL PLAN (GENERAL PLAN AMENDM cA4 cy� NO. 4) . .<%, WHEREAS, the City Council adopted a Circulation Element of the General Plan, on March 11, 1974; and WHEREAS, Section 65361 of the California Government Code limits the amendment of a General Plan to a maximum of three times in any calendar year; and WHEREAS, Council Policy Q1, adopted April 22, 1974, provides for three amendments to the General Plan per year, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on proposed General Plan Amendment No. 4 on June 20, 1974; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that such amendment is in the best interests of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Newport Beach that General Plan Amendment No. 4 be adopted, amending the Circulation Element as follows: 1. Change the Master Plan.of Streets and Highways designation of Irvine Avenue between 15th Street and 16th Street, from a primary road to a secondary road (4 lanes undivided, as currently exists) and, south of 15th Street, from a primary road to a "local street" (2 lanes, as currently exists). 2. Delete the proposed connection of Irvine Avenue to the Coast Highway from the Master Plan of Streets and Highways. 3. Delete specific proposal No. 12 on Page 10 from the Circulation Element Report. 4. Delete Irvine Avenue from the Priority "D" projects on Table 4 on Page 27 of the Circulation Element Report. ATTEST: ADOPTED this JUL day of Mayor 1974. City Clerk DRB/bc 7/15/74 • •COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT RESOLUTION NO. S3I- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT OF THE NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN (GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 5) WHEREAS, the City Council adopted a Circulation Element of the General Plan on March 11, 1974; and WHEREAS, Section 65361 of the California Government Code limits the amendment of a General Plan to a maximum of three times in any calendar year; and WHEREAS, Council Policy Q1, adopted April 22, 1974, provides for three amendments to the General Plan per year; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on proposed General Plan Amendment No. 5 on June 20, 1974; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that such amendment is in the best interests of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Newport Beach that General Plan Amendment No. 5 be adopted, amending the Circulation Element as follows: 1. Change the Master Flan of Streets and Highways' designation of 15th Street between Superior Avenue and the property line between the Bond Publishing Company site and the Banning Property (just west of Monrovia Avenue) from a "Primary Road" to a "Secondary Road". 2. Revise the second sentence of Item 10, Page 9'of the Circulation Element report to read: "It involves the widening of existing 15th Street to four lanes undivided to a point just westerly of Monrovia Avenue, and continuing on with new construction at four lanes divided, crossing and intersecting..." ADOPTED this day of `VL 2"1 1974. Mayor i'EST I erk RFC , Corn F/V �e2nie �O NBw OZ�o j9j9L�/ DRB/bc 7/16/74 • SPOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT RESOLUTION NO. 8316 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ADOPTING AN AMENDMEN TO THE LAND USE AND RESIDENTIAL GROWTH ELEMENTS OF THE NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN (GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 6) WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted a Land Use Element and a Residential Growth Element of the General Plan on May 29, 1974; and WHEREAS, Section 65361 of the California Government Code limits the amendment of a General Plan to a maximum of three times in any calendar year; and WHEREAS, Council Policy Q1, adopted April 22, 1974, provides for three amendments to the General Plan per year; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on proposed General Plan Amendment No. 6 on June 20, 1974; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that such amendment is in the best interests of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Newport Beach that General Plan Amendment No. 6 be adopted, amending the Land Use and Residential Growth Elements as follows: 1. Land Use Element - Amend the Land Use Plan (map) to change the designation of the "Fun Zone" site from "Multi -Family Residential" to "Retail and Service Commercial". (No change to the text of the Land Use Element is required.) 2. Residential Growth Element - Amend the Residential Growth Plan (map) to delete the residential designation of the "Fun Zone" site. (No change to the text of the Residential Growth Element is required.) ADOPTED this day of JUL 2 2 , 1974. Mayor N�� ATTEST: zC6Z4 . do (14 Or- Y Clerk JU vL i hoc City 6- NEW � 0F19TQ� rft— i Cg4F EACye 7/16/74 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT RESOLUTION NO. 83 17 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN (GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 8) WHEREAS, the City Council adopted a Land Use Element of the General Plan on May 29, 1974; and WHEREAS, Section 65361 of the California Government Code limits the amendment of a General Plan to a maximum of three times in any calendar year; and WHEREAS, Council Policy Q1, adopted April 22, 1974, provides for three amendments to the General Plan per year; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on proposed General Plan Amendment No. 8 on June 20, 1974; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that such amendment is in the best interests of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Newport Beach that General Plan Amendment No. 8 be adopted, amending the Land Use Element as follows: 1. Revise the Land Use Plan (map) to change the designation of the property at the southeast corner of Jamboree Road and Santa Barbara Drive from "Recreational and Environmental Open Space" to "Administrative, Professional, and Financial Commercial". (No change to the text of the Land Use Element is required.) ADOPTED this day of Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk JUL 22 , 1974. ' RECEI� dD � C, "ity Deg. �pment i Dept. JUL 2 619740o CITY OF NEWPORT BEACM,� CALIF. DRB/bc 7/16/74 City Council Meeting July 22, 1974 Agenda Items Nos. D-3 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH July 17, 1974 TO: City Council FROM: Department of Community Development SUBJ: General Plan Amendments A public hearing for consideration of General Plan Amendments Nos. 4, 5, 6, and 8 has been set for the July 22, 1974 City Council meeting. Staff suggests that the public hearing be conducted in a series of four hearing sessions, with a public hearing session being opened and closed for each individual amendment as it is considered. Attached are copies of the staff reports sent to the Planning Commission regarding General Plan Amendments Nos. 4, 5, 6, and 8. Also attached is a memo from the Public Works Department regarding General Plan Amendment No. 4 (Irvine Avenue). Environmental Significance All of these proposed General Plan Amendments were reviewed by the Environmental Affairs Committee on June 12, 1974. The Committee determined that there is no environmental significance (in terms of the California Environmental Quality Act). However, all future projects proposed within the context of these amendments, if adopted, will be subject to detailed environmental review. TO: City Council - 2 Planning Commission Recommendations At the June 20, 1974 public hearing, the Planning Commission adopted resolutions nos. 888, 889, 890, and 891 recommending City Council adoption of General Plan Amendments Nos. 4, 5, 6, and 8. Copies of the Planning Commission resolutions are attached. Recommended Action The public hearing session for each proposed General Plan Amend- ment should be opened, closed, and if desired, the City Council should adopt the General Plan Amendments as recommended by the Planning Commission. (If the City Council desires to change any of the amendments, the suggested change must be referred back to the Planning Commission for the Commission's review and comment, per Council Policy Q-1 and State Law.) Respectfully submitted, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT RVH:TC:jmb Att. Staff reports sent to Planning Commission. Memo from Public Works Department. Resolutions Nos. 888, 889, 890, and 891. 1• 16 To: Community Development Department Attention: Tim Cowell From: Public Works Department July 17, 1974 Re: Irvine Avenue, Possible Connection to Coast Highway Indicated below is a brief discussion of additional information requested on the possible connection of Irvine Avenue to Coast Highway. Traffic: Attached is a copy of a letter from Mr. Al Krier of Alan M. Voorhees & Associates regarding traffic aspects of the connection. Mr. Krier estimates that the average daily traffic (ADT) for the southerly end of Irvine Avenue should it be connected to Coast Highway is 12,000 to 15,000. This estimate compares with a present volume of roughly 4,000 ADT between Cliff Drive and 15th Street. A 4-lane street with left turn lanes and traffic signals at intersecting arterial streets would handle the project volume of traffic. With Irvine Avenue connected to Coast Highway, the estimated ADT for Dover Drive is 20,000 to 23,000; and for Riverside Avenue is 10,000 to 13,000. These figures compare with projected volumes without the connection of 32,000 ADT for Dover Drive and 18,000 for Riverside Avenue. The principle benefit of the Irvine Avenue connection to Coast Highway would be a reduction in traffic volumes on Dover Drive and on Riverside Avenue northerly of the highway, and thus a reduction in intersection volumes where those streets intersect the highway. This reduction in intersection volumes would in turn benefit traffic flow on Coast Highway. There would also be a modest benefit in traffic service for some residents of the Newport Heights area. Design and Grading Because of the grade differential of approximately 70 feet between Coast Highway and Cliff Drive, there will be considerable physical difficulty in connecting Irvine Avenue to the highway. Using a maximum grade of 6%, approximately 1200 feet of horizontal distance is needed to make up the grade differential. The distance from Coast Highway to Cliff Drive is only about 550 feet, thus the extension of Irvine Avenue would have to be skewed to make up the grade. Another possibility would be to start sloping Irvine Avenue down somewhat northerly of Cliff Drive, with Cliff Drive being carried on a crossing over the top of Irvine Avenue. A detailed study would be needed to determine the most desirable con- figuration. However, it can be seen from the above that making the connection would be a difficult and expensive undertaking. July 17, 1974 Re: Irvine Avenue, Possible Connection to Coast Highway Page 2 Right of Way Between Cliff Drive and 15th Street there are approximately 30 single- family residential parcels on the westerly side of Irvine Avenue. All except one of these parcels face'Irvine Avenue, with vehicular access being taken from an alley behind the properties. On the easterly side, the Horace Ensign Middle School occupies the block from Cliff Drive to Coral Place; and 6 parcels improved with apartments and with the Senior Citizens Recreation Center are located between Coral Place and 15th Street. These parcels face the cross streets, and have their sides adjacent to Irvine Avenue. As is the case with the Coast Highway connection, a detailed study would be needed to determine the most desirable configuration for the widening between Cliff Drive and 15th Street. A minimum project could provide for 4 lanes within the existing 60 foot right of way by relocating the curbs and prohibiting park- ing. An intermediate project could provide for retaining parking on one side by acquiring approximately 10 feet of additional right of way on the westerly side. (Most existing building setbacks are 20 feet on the westerly side and 8 feet on the easterly side, thus purchase of dwellings would not be necessary.) A maximum project could involve the purchase of the entire tier of properties on the westerly side of the street, with the surplus land to be resubdivided and sold for redevelopment. Between Cliff Drive and Coast Highway, from 3 to 5 residential parcels could be affected, depending on design. Most of the commercial property on the northerly side of the highway which could be affected is presently occu- pied by interim type uses. Conclusion In order to quantify the advantages and disadvantages of connecting Irvine Avenue to Coast Highway extensive engineering, environmental, traffic, and economic analysis would be needed. However the major issues are readily identifiable at this time and a decision can certainly be based on over-all policy considerations rather than on detailed studies. Benjamin B. Nolan City Engineer BBN:jd Att. Y W'd BOA PVI NI!I '.AN !III:;n CFI II ONNIA 92717 714/278-3363 9!4C�W/� ALAN M. VOORHEES & ASSOCIATES, INC. TRAlr.FvF?Tf, I P, AM P1 ANN'N', rluNSUL FANFS Mr. Ben Nolan City Engineer City of Newport Beach 3300 West Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92660 Dear Mr. Nolan: 15 July 1974 AMV REF: 465.049 On Wednesday, July 10, you inquired if we could, by using data developed in the Newport Beach Traffic Study, make an estimate of traffic that would use the southerly section of Irvine Avenue if it was connected to Coast Highway. Following my preliminary investigation, I informed you on July 12, that there was sufficient data to make a fairly good assessment of future traffic on this street segment. As a result of your authorization, I have prepared the following analysis. It has been quite some time now since we have discussed the details of the Newport Beach Traffic Study, particularly the Alternate Net- works. However, you may recall that the plans consisted of a base network, and four alternate networks which were later com- bined into three networks; A, B-C, and D. Of the three Alternate Networks, both A and D had the connection of Irvine Avenue to Coast Highway. Therefore, there is traffic assigned to that street segment for those two alternates. However, those networks also had the following road segm9nts which would affect traffic on Dover Drive and Irvine Avenue where they connect to Coast Highway. Alternate Network A Bay crossing making a direct connection between Coast Highway and Dover Drive. Bay crossing making a connection between San Joaquin Hills Road and Westcliff Drive Alternate Network D Bay crossing making a direct connection between Coast Highway and Dover Drive Bay crossing making a connection between San Joaquin Hills Road and 22nd Street. I. , . i .. n • U1i 1lrol • m; •VAtt • 12USTM n n . . u • I D . • nv . I HI: Aro a 91A . All F!m!K .:0 . NRVOURK 0 Mr. Ben Nolan 15 July 1974 Page 2 / 465.049 The following is a summary,of the north -south traffic volumes from taking a cordon north of Coast Highway between Riverside Avenue and Dover Drive. Street Alternate A Alternate D Riverside Avenue 14,400 15,400 Irvine Avenue 9,300 14,000 Dover Drive 23,000 16,000 Total 46,700 45,400 One purpose of this cordon check is to show that the volumes for the two alternates are about the same. A second and perhaps more important purpose is to ensure that traffic is neither created nor lost when a reassignment or estimate is made of the traffic that might use the Irvine Avenue connection. The next step in this analysis was to check the "base" analysis to determine the amount of traffic across this same cordon. Fortun- ately, as a result of the information prepared for the Newport Beach Alternate Land Use Study, the traffic assignment representing the "base"(present adopted road network) was available. The traffic volumes on Riverside Avenue and Dover Drive for that assign- ment are 19, 000 and 32, 000 respectively, for a total of 51, 000. This volume is approximately 5, 000 greater than Alternates A and D described above; therefore, this 5, 000 must be considered in the total volume in making an estimate of the traffic that could be ex- pected to use Irvine Avenue if connected to Coast Highway. Based on the above information, it is estimated that a daily traffic volume of 12, 000 to 15, 000 could be expected on the south end of Irvine Avenue if it was connected to Coast Highway. The volumes of traffic remaing on Dover Drive and Riverside Avenue with Irvine Avenue connected to Coast Highway would be directly related to the volume of traffic that was diverted to Irvine Avenue. These estimated volume ranges are 20, 000 to 23, 000 for Dover Drive, and 10, 000 to 13, 000 for Riverside Avenue. The maximum estimated volume of 15, 000 could be accommodated on Irvine Avenue if it was constructed as a secondary roadway (four lanes with no median). It would be necessary to provide traffic signal control and separate left turn lanes on Irvine Avenue at the arterial intersecting streets. In Phase III Newport Beach Traffic FIX l- ON Mr. Ben Nolan 15July 1974 Page 3 / 465.049 Study, the cost of right-of-way and construction on Irvi ne Avenue from 15th Street to Cliff Drive was estimated at $680, 000. The cost of right-of-way and construction for the segment from Cliff Drive to Coast Highway would also have to be included (no estimate available). I hope that the City will find this information helpful in investigating the major road system in this area. If I can provide any additional information for Irvine Avenue or related matters, please call me. Very truly yours, Gam/ 1114 A. H. Krier Regional Manager AHK:js Planning Commission Meeting June 20, 1974 Agenda Item No. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH June 13, 1974 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Department of Comipunity Devdlopment SUBJ: Proposed amendments to the General Plan (Public Hearing). At the meeting of May 16, 1974, the Planning Commission set a public hearing for June 20, 1974 to consider six proposed amendments to the General Plan. Attached are individuallstaff memos on each proposed amendment. Staff would suggest that the public hearing be conducted in a series of six hearing sessions, with a public hearing session being opened and closed for each individual amendment as it is considered. The proposed amendments have been assigned "General Plan Amendment Numbers" 3 through 8; two amendments have already been adopted (on December 17, 1973). COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT R. V. HOGAN, DIREC R By I 7.4f Cowell Advance Planning Administrator TC:jmb Att. Staff Memos 0 1b, Planning Commission Meeting June 20, 1974 Agenda Item No. 10-A CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH June 13, 1974 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Department of Community Development SUBJ: General Plan Amendment No. 3 -- Proposed amendment to the Circulation Element to change the,classification of Bison Avenue between Jamboree and MacArthur Boulevard from a primary road to a secondary road and/or a relocation of the intersection of Bison Avenue and Jamboree Road, and/or other realignment of the street system in this area. This proposed amendment was initiated at the direction of the City Council (per Council action at their meeting of March 11, 1974). The intent of the proposed amendment is to resolve the potential problem of a large volume of traffic crossing Jamboree Road from Bison Avenue to the east and continuing on Bison Avenue through the Eastbluff residential neighborhood (where Bison Avenue is a "local street"). Bison Avenue is described in the Circulation Element text on Page 12 as follows: "This is a short section of Bison Avenue being developed as a primary road connector between two major roads, Jamboree and MacArthur. This route will provide an important circulation element in'the system when the Corona del Mar Freeway is constructed." Attached is a memo from the City Engineer, which illustrates the traffic considerations involved and the problems attendant with a decision to undertake a major redesign of the circulation system in this area. Based on this memo, it appears that the most practical solution to the potential problem of a traffic impact on the Eastbluff neighborhood is to construct the intersection of Jamboree Road and Bison Avenue in such a manner TO: Planning Commission - 2 as to discourage, or, if need be, prohibit cross traffic from Bison Avenue on the east side to Bison Avenue on the west side of Jamboree Road. Environmental Significance This proposed amendment was reviewed by the Environmental Affairs Committee on June 12, 1974 and it was determined that there is no environmental significance (in terms of the California Environmental Quality Act), unless the alternative of a major realignment of Bison Avenue is decided upon. In this case, the Committee indicated that the environmental significance should be considered, based on detailed alignment studies. Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that an amendment be made to Page 12, Item 17, of the Circualtion Element, adding the following wording: "The City recognizes that there is a potential problem of the traffic impact on the Eastbluff neighborhood caused by vehicles crossing Jamboree Road from Bison Avenue to the east and continuing westerly. The City will construct the intersection of Jamboree Road and Bison Avenue in such a manner as to discourage a heavy volume of through traffic. Traffic volumes on Bison Avenue west of Jamboree Road will be closely monitored; if a problem develops, the configuration of the intersection will be revised to prohibit cross traffic on Bison Avenue." COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT R. V. HOGAN, DIRECTO By T owell Advance Planning Administrator TC:jmb Att. Memo from City Engineer 0 Planning Commission Meeting June 20, 1974 Agenda Item No. 10-B CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH June 14, 1974 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Department of Community Development SUBJ: General Plan Amendment No. 4 -- Proposed amendment to the Circulation Element to change the classification of Irvine Avenue between 16th Street and Cliff Drive from a primary road to a local street, and to delete the intersection at Irvine and Pacific Coast Highway. This proposed amendment was initiated at the direction of the City Council (per Council action at the meeting of March 11, 1974). The concern is with the potential adverse impact of increased traffic on the residences adjacent to Irvine Avenue. This project is described within the Circulation Element text on Page 10 as follows: "This section of Irvine Avenue is to be widened to four lanes from 15th Street ' to Cliff Drive. It is the only section of Irvine Avenue left in the City which is not four lanes. Because of its location and relatively low existing and projected traffic volumes, it is a low -priority project. No traffic deficiency is projected." (The connection to Coast Highway is shown as a "Route that Requires Further Coordination" on the Master Plan of Streets and Highways.) Attached is 'a memo from the City Engineer which indicates that the major effect of the widening of Irvine Avenue and the connection to Coast Highway would be to take some of the traffic load off of Dover Drive and, of course, increase traffic volumes on Irvine Avenue. The City Engineer's memo recommends that the Irvine Avenue portion of the Circulation Element not be amended at this time, except for the section between 15th and 16th Street, for which a reclassification from primary to secondary is recommended. TO: Planning Commission - 2 Environmental Significance This proposed amendment was reviewed by the Environmental Affairs Committee on June 12, 1974 and it was determined that there is no environmental significance (in terms of the California Environmental Quality Act). Recommendation No specific Community Development Department recommendation is made on the basic question of the classification of Irvine Avenue south of 15th Street, although the Community Development Department concurs with the City Engineer's recommendation on that section of Irvine Avenue between 15th and 16th Street. Staff would suggest that the following advantages and disadvantages of the proposed amendment be among those considered: Advantages of the proposed amendment: 1. It would preclude the potential adverse impact on the residences and schools adjacent to Irvine Avenue of the increased traffic which would result from the widening and connection of Irvine Avenue to Coast Highway. 2. It would preclude the proposed Coast Highway connection which will be difficult to accomplish, both physically and economically. Also, the grading operations and intersection configuration required may be aesthetically undesirable. Disadvantages of the proposed amendment: 1. This amendment would eliminate (unless a future amendment is made) the possibility of an additional north -south corridor connecting to Coast Highway and preclude the traffic circulation benefits which such a corridor would offer, namely a more efficient street system and a reduction of traffic volumes on Dover Drive and its intersection with Coast Highway. I'' '' . • • TO: Planning Commission - 3 If the Planning Commission determines that the potential adverse impact of increased traffic on Irvine Avenue outweighs the traffic circulation benefits, the following changes to the Circulation Element should be recommended to the City Council in order to effect the proposed amendment: 1. Change the Master Plan of Streets and Highways designation of Irvine Avenue between 15th Street and 16th Street, from a primary road to a secondary road (4 lanes undivided, as currently exists) and, south of 15th Street, from a primary road to a "local street" (2 lanes, as currently exists). 2. Delete the proposed connection of Irvine Avenue to the Coast Highway from the Master Plan of Streets and Highways. 3. Delete specific proposal number 12 on Page 10 from the Circulation Element Report. 4. Delete Irvine Avenue from the Priority "D" projects on Table 4 on Page 27 of the Circulation Element Report. In any event, staff does recommend that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that the Master Plan of Streets and Highways be amended to change the classification of the section of Irvine Avenue between 15th and 16th Street from a primary road to a secondary road. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT R. V. HOGAN, DIRECTR By T Cowell Advance Planning Administrator TC:jmb Att: Memo from the City Engineer Planning Commission Meeting June 20, 1974 Agenda Item No. 10-C CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH June 14, 1974 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Department of Community Development SUBJ: General Plan Amendment No. 5 -- Proposed amendment to the Circulation Element to change the classification of 15th Street between Superior Avenue and Balboa Boulevard (extended) from a primary road to a secondary road. This proposed amendment was initiated by the Planning Commission at the suggestion of staff. The intent is to bring the City's designation of this street into conformity with the County designation, since the County has already initiated precise alignment studies and E.I.R.'s on the street as a secondary road. Attached is a memo from the City Engineer which recommends this amendment. Environmental Significance This proposed amendment was reviewed by the Environmental Affairs Committee on June 12, 1974 and it was determined that there is no environmental significance (in terms of the California Environmental Quality Act). However, all future projects proposed within the context of this amendment, if adopted, will i be subject to detailed environmental review. Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that the Circulation Element be amended to change the "Master Plan of Streets and Highways" classification of 15th Street between Superior Avenue and Balboa Boulevard TO: Planning Commission - 2 (extended) from a primary road to a secondary road. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT R. V. HOGAN, DIRXCTORel v Ti m%- owe I I Advance Planning Administrator ATT: Memo from City Engineer Letter from A. H. Krier of Alan M. Voorhees & Associates, Inc. dated April 11, 1974. Planning Commission Meeting June 20, 1974 Agenda Item No. 10-D CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH June 14, 1974 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Department of Community Development SUBJ: General Plan Amendment No. 6 -- Proposed Amendment to the Residential Growth Element and Land Use Element to change designation of the "Fun Zone" site from "Multi -Family Residential" to "Retail and Service Commercial". This proposed amendment was initiated at the request of the property owner. This site was designated for "Multi -Family Residential" use as a result of the owner's proposal to develop a condominium project. On May 7, 1973, on appeal from the Planning Commission's denial, the City Council approved a Use Permit for condominium development in the Central Balboa commercial district (Cl). Subsequently, the condominium project was denied by the Coastal Commission. (Subject property remains zoned for commercial use.) In response to the Use Permit application for condominium development, the Advance Planning Division prepared a memo, dated June 12, 1972 (sent to the Planning Commission on June 15, 1974 as an attachment to the ,staff memo on the Use Permit application), which discussed the basic land use question. A copy of this memo is attached. Staff suggests that the concerns raised in this memo regarding residential use, and the arguments supporting commercial use, are still valid. ironmental Siqnificance This proposed amendment was reviewed by the Environmental Affairs Committee on June 12, 1974 and it was determined that there is no environmental significance (in terms of the California Environmental Quality Act). However, all future projects proposed within the context of this amendment, if adopted, will TO: Planning Commission - 2 be subject to detailed environmental review. Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that amendments to the Land Use Element and the Residential Growth Element be made as follows: 1. Land Use Element - Amend the Land Use Plan (map) to change the designation of the "Fun Zone" site from "Multi -Family Residential" to "Retail and Service Commercial". (No change to the text of the Land Use Element is required; see Page 15 for the discussion of the Central Balboa area.) 2. Residential Growth Element - Amend the Residential Growth Plan (map) to delete the residential designation of the "Fun Zone" site. (No change to the text of the Residential Growth Element is required; see Page 14 for the dis- cussion of the Balboa Peninsula.) COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT R. V. HOGAN, t.. D By n. Cowell Advance Planning Administrator TC: jmb Att: Advance Planning Division memo dated June 12, 1972. June 14, 1974 TO FROM: SUBJ: Planning Commission Meeting June 20, 1974 Agenda Item No. 10-E CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Planning Commission Department of Community Development General Plan Amendment No. 7 -- Proposed Amendment to the Residential Growth Element and Land Use Element to change designation of property adjacent to Irvine Avenue between 15th Street and Laurel Place from "Low Density Residential" to "Two -Family Residential". This proposed amendment was initiated at the request of the owner of the property located at 647 Irvine Avenue; the amendment request was made subsequent to the zone change request (from R1 to R2) which was denied by the Planning Commission on March 7, 1974. Since it would be inappropriate to redesignate a single resi- dential lot in an area zoned RI to "Two -Family Residential", staff suggests that the Planning Commission consider a larger area for possible redesignation. This logically could include all lots which are across from Newport Harbor High School and which front on Irvine Avenue. The attached map indicates those lots where the front of the house is oriented to Irvine Avenue and the size and use of each parcel. Environmental Significance This proposed amendment was reviewed by the Environmental Affairs Committee on June 12, 1974 and it was determined that there is no environmental significance (in terms of the California Environmental Quality Act). However, all future projects proposed within the context of this amendment, if adopted, will be subject to detailed environmental review. The major argument which has been raised in favor of this proposed amendment is that, if the property were rezoned to TO: Planning Commission - 2 R2, redevelopment would be encouraged The owners of the property at 647 Irvine Avenue, in a letter to the Planning Commission, have stated that "the west side of Irvine Avenue, between 15th and 16th Streets has long been an eyesore to the surrounding well -kept neighborhoods of Newport Beach" (A copy of this letter is attached.) The houses in this area are generally older and the overall apparent level of property maintenance is somewhat lower than the surrounding neighborhoods. While the City should certainly encourage a high level of property maintenance, staff is of the opinion that simply re- zoning each area, where the maintenance level starts to slip, to a higher density is not a desirable method of providing incentive to this end. In addition, the concept of rezoning property to higher densities in order to encourage redevelopment is in conflict with the controlled growth policy upon which the entire General Plan is based. Staff is of the opinion that it is not necessary to rezone property for higher density or higher intensity development in order to ensure redevelopment, particularly in an area with the high land values of Newport Beach. While the current proposal would only add about ten dwelling units to the total residential growth level, staff is of the opinion that the proposed amendment is unwarranted. No amendment should be made to the General Plan unless there is a clear benefit to the City as a whole. Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that this proposed amendment NOT be adopted. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT R. V. HOGAN, DIRECTOR Byr,� 4� Cowell Advance Planning Administrator TC:jmb Att: Map Letter by Mr. and Mrs. Robert McGiffin Planning Commission Meeting June 20, 1974 Agenda Item No. 10-F CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH June 14, 1974 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Department of Community Development SUBJ: General Plan Amendment No. 8 -- Proposed amendment to the Land Use Element to change designation of the property at the southeast corner of Jamboree Road and Santa Barbara Drive from "Recreational and Environmental Open Space" to either "Governmental, Educationa.l, and Institutional" or "Administrative, Professional, and Financial Commercial". - This proposed amendment was initiated at the request of the property owner (letter attached). The letter suggests that it was the intent of the Land Use Element that this area be designated for office commercial use. This was not the case; the designation of this site as open space was an oversight, but no other land use designation had been proposed for this site at the time the Land Use Plan was drafted. Subject property is a roughly triangular parcel of approximately 1.15 acres, north of the Irvine Coast Country Club. (See attached map.) It is apparent that the open space designation of this site is inappropriate since the property is under private ownership and not slated for public purchase for park purposes and not currently used for private open space purposes. There are two alternative land use designations which may logically be considered for this site: 1. Governmental, Educational, and Institutional 2. Administrative, Professional, and Financial Commercial The first alternative would be logical in terms of the location, since this site is located across Santa Barbara Drive from the police and fire stations. Also, this designation would permit the intended primary use of the site as the Chamber of Commerce TO: Planning Commission - 2 office. However, this designation would not permit commercial office use, which has been proposed in conjunction with the Chamber office, and it is somewhat questionable to designate privately -owned property for Governmental, Educational, and Institutional uses unless such a use is already established (e.g., a church), or unless public purchase of the property is anticipated. The second alternative appears to be the most reasonable since the site is within Newport Center and since most of Newport Center is designated for Administrative, Professional, and Financial Commercial use. This designation will permit the intended use as a Chamber of Commerce office with some commercial office space, and will provide for alternative private uses in the future (if the Chamber office were to be relocated). The site is currently zoned "PC", which permits any use which is consistent with the General Plan, subject to approval of a development plan. Environmental Significance This proposed amendment, including both alternatives, was reviewed by the Environmental Affairs Committee on June 12, 1974 and it was determined that there is no environmental significance (in terms of the California Environmental Quality Act). However, all future projects proposed within the context of this amendment, if adopted, will be subject to detailed environmental review. Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that the Land Use Plan (map) be amended to change the designation of the property at the southeast corner of Jamboree Road and Santa Barbara Drive from "Recreational and Environmental Open Space" to "Administrative, Professional, and Financial Commercial". (No change to the text of the TO: Planning Commission - 3 Land Use Element is required; see Page 23 for the discussion of Newport Center.) COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT R. V. HOGAN, DIRECTOR By Tim owe Advance Planning Administrator TC:jmb Att: Letter by Lawrence B Map Moore dated April 15, 1974. RESOLUTION NO. 888 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL THE ADOPTION OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT OF THE NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN (GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 4) WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted a Circulation Element of the General Plan, on March 11, 1974; and WHEREAS, Section 65361 of the California Government Code limits the amendment of a General Plan to a maximum of three times in any calendar year; and WHEREAS, Council Policy Q1, adopted April 22, 1974, provides for three amendments to the General Plan per year; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on proposed General Plan Amendment No. 4 on June 20, 1974, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has determined that such amendment is in the best interests of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that General Plan Amendment No. 4 be adopted, amending the Circulation Element as .follows: 1. Change the Master Plan of Streets and Highways designation of Irvine Avenue between 15th Street and 16th Street, from a primary road to a secondary road (4 lanes undivided, as currently exists) and, south of 15th Street, from a primary road to a "local street" (2 lanes, as currently exists). 2. Delete the proposed connection of Irvine Avenue to the Coast Highway from the Master Plan of Streets and Highways. 3. Delete specific proposal No. 12 on Page 10 from the Circu- lation Element Report. 4. Delete Irvine Avenue from the Priority "D" projects on Table 4 on Page 27 of the Circulation Element Report. Regularly passed and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach on the 20th day of June , 1974. AYES: Beckley, Hazewinkel, Heather, Parker, Rosener, Seely NOES: None ABSENT: Agee airman Secretary RESOLUTION NO. 889 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL THE ADOPTION OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT OF THE NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN (GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 5) WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted a Circulation Element of the General Plan, on March 11, 1974; and WHEREAS, Section 65361 of the California Government Code limits the amendment of a General Plan to a maximum of three times in any calendar year; and WHEREAS, Council Policy Q1, adopted April 22, 1974, provides for three amendments to the General Plan per year; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on proposed General Plan Amendment No. 5 on June 20, 1974, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has determined that such amendment is in the best interests of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that General Plan Amendment No. 5 be adopted, amending the Circulation Element as follows: 1. Change the Master Plan of Streets and Highways' designation of 15th Street between Placentia Avenue and the property line between the Bond Publishing Company site and the Banning Property (just west of Monrovia Avenue) from a "Primary Road" to a "Secondary Road". 2. Revise the second sentence of Item 10, Page 9, of the Circu- lation Element report to read: "It involves the widening of existing 15th Street to four lanes undivided to a point just westerly of Monrovia Avenue, and continuing on with new construction at four lanes divided, crossing and intersecting..." Regularly passed and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach on the 20th day of June , 1974. AYES: Beckley, Hazewinkel, Heather, Parker, Rosener NOES: None ABSENT: Agee ABSTENTIONS: Seely ecretary RESOLUTION NO. 890 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL THE ADOPTION OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE AND RESIDENTIAL GROWTH ELEMENTS OF THE NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN (GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 6) WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted a Land Use Element and a Residential Growth Element of the General Plan, on May 29, 1974; and WHEREAS, Section 65361 of the California Government Code limits the amendment of a General Plan to a maximum of three times in any calendar year; and WHEREAS, Council Policy Q1, adopted April 22, 1974, provides for three amendments to the General Plan per year; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commisison held a public hearing on proposed General Plan Amendment No. 6 on June 20, 1974, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has determined that such amendment is in the best interests of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that General Plan Amendment No. 6 be adopted, amending the Land Use and Residential Growth Elements as follows: 1. Land Use Element - Amend the Land Use Plan (map) to change the designation of the "Fun Zone" site from "Multi -Family Residential" to "Retail and Service Commercial". (No change to the text of the Land Use Element is required; see Page 15 for the discussion of the Central Balboa area.) 2. Residential Growth Element - Amend the Residential Growth Plan (map) to delete the residential designation of the "Fun Zone" site. (No change to the text of the Residential Growth Element is required; see Page 14 for the discussion of the Balboa Peninsula.) Regularly passed and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach on the 20th day of June 1974. AYES: Beckley, Hazewinkel, Heather, 'Parker, Rosener, Seely NOES:. None ABSENT: Agee Chairman Secretary RESOLUTION NO. 891 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL THE ADOPTION OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN (GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 8) WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted a Land Use Element of the General Plan, on May 29, 1974; and WHEREAS, Section 65361 of the California Government Code limits the amendment of a General Plan to a maximum of three times in any calendar year; and WHEREAS, Council Policy Q1, adopted April 22, 1974, provides for three amendments to the General Plan per year; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on proposed General Plan Amendment No. 8 on June 20, 1974, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has determined that such amendment is in the best interests of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that General Plan Amendment No. 8 be adopted, amending the Land Use Element as follows: 1. Revise the Land Use Plan (map) to change the designation of the property at the southeast corner of Jamboree Road and Santa Barbara Drive from "Recreational and Environmental Open Space" to "Administrative, Professional, and Financial Commercial". (No change to the text of the Land Use Element is required.) Regularly passed and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach on the 20th day of June , 1974. AYES: Beckley, Hazewinkel, Heather, Rosener, Seely NOES: None ABSENT: Agee ABSTENTIONS: Parker Chairman ecretary • -7� COUNCILMEN \.\POOP\4s�\\�G9\ 4a CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES ma O ➢ z. ROLL CALL N T f mz N 2 a F July 8, 1974 INDEX Motion x 4. Councilman Store's appointment of an alternate to Bicycle Ayes x x x Gerard Van Hoven on the Bicycle Trails Citizens Trails \ Advisory Committee was postponed to July 22. Cmte Councilman RyckoffIs appointment of Robert W.Adams Motion x as the alternate to Col. Herring Franklin on the Ayes x x x x x \ Bicycle Trails Citizens Advisory Committee was confirmed. 'Councilman Barrett's appointment of Ray Rosso as Motion x th\alternate to Betsy Carpenter on the Bicycle Trails Ayes x x x x x x x Citizens Advisory Committee was confirmed. CURRENT B INESS: 1. A letter from ttorney Donald E. Smallwood, Encroach representing B`o, Anderson, requesting permission ment/ to retain pots an\flowers encroaching on the beach at 103 Edge- 103 East EdgewateitAvenus, Balboa, was presented. water A report was presente\d\from the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Director to the City Manager. Donald Smallwood, attorney fo Bob Anderson, addressed the Council. Councilman Rogers left the Council tabl due to a personal conflict of interest. Councilman Dostal made a motion to gran subject request. Robert Physioc addressed the Council opposin the encroachment. Motion x Councilman Dostal amended his motion to allow the Ayes x x x x x x flower pots on the beach at 103 E. Edgewater Avenue, Absent x Balboa, subject to the conditions that there be no more than three pots and that the ice plant be kept trimmed to within three feet of the pots; and also subject to further review by the Council if these conditions are not met, which motion carried. 2. A report was presented from the Community Develop- General ment Department regarding proposed Amendments Plan Nos_ 3,_ 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 to the Newport Beach Amendmti General Plan. Larry Miller, representing the Newport Harbor Chamber of Commerce, addressed the Council in connection with General Plan Amendment No. 8. Volume 28 - Page 171 ROLL CALL Motion Ayes COUNCILMEN Aa m �A� 9Zm'sma�'A CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES aF Duly o, 171� Councilman Rogers resumed his seat at the Council table. x The following actions were taken as indicated: xxxxxxx General Plan Amendment No. 4, being an amendment to the Circulation Element to change the classification of Irvine Avenue between 16th Street and Cliff Drive from a primary road to a local street, and to delete the intersection at Irvine and Pacific Coast Highway, was set for public hearine on Julv 22 1974., General Plan Amendment N_o. 5, being an amendment to the Circulation Element to change the classification of 15th Street between Superior Avenue and Balboa Boulevard from a primary road to a secondary road, was set for public hearing on Jul_22,x 1974. General Plan Amendment No. 6, being an amendment to the Residential Growth Element and Land Use Element to change the designated use of the property commonly known as the "Fun Zone, " at the inter- section of Palm Street and Bay Avenue on the Balboa Peninsula, from multi -family residential to retail and service commercial, was set for public hearing on July 22, 1974. General Plan Amendment No 4 8, being an amendment to the Land Use Element to change the designated use of the property at the southeast corner of Jamboree Road and Santa Barbara Drive from recreational and environmental open space to either governmental and environmental open space or administrative, pro- fessional, and financial commercial, was set for public hearing on July 22, 1974. General Plan Amendment No. 3, being a proposed amendment to the Circulation Element to change the classification of 'Bison Avenue between Jamboree and MacArthur Boulevard from a primary road to a secondary road and/or a relocation of the intersection of Bison Avenue and Jamboree Road, and/or other realignment of the street system in this area, was referred to the Planning Commission with the direc- tion that it be reconsidered at the October General Plan Amendment Seasion. The Planning Commission decision to take no action on General Plan Amendment No. 7, being a proposed amendment to the Residential Growth and Land Use Elements to change the designated use of the property adjacent to Irvine Avenue between 15th Street and Laurel Place from low -density residential to two- family residential, was upheld. Volume 28 - Page 172 INDEX Amend- ment No. 4 Amend- ment No. 5 Amend - ment No. 6 Amend- ment No. 8 Amend- ment No. 3 Amend- ment No. 7 6c�.0 Z City Council Meeting July 8, 1974 Agenda Item No. G-2 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH June 28, 1974 TO: City Council FROM: Department of Community Development SUBJ: General Plan Amendments At their June 20, 1974 meeting, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on six proposed amendments to the General Plan, pursuant to Council Policy Q1 which provides for amendments three times a year (as limited by Section 65361 of th-e California Government Code). These proposed amendments have been assigned "General Plan Amendment Numbers" 3 through 8; two amendments were already adopted (on December 17, 1973). Of the six proposed amendments, the Planning Commission recommended four amendments for City Council adoption. (Resolutions 888, 889, 890, and 891 are attached.) Also attached, for the Council's information, are copies of the staff reports to the Planning Commission on each proposed amendment, and copies of all correspondence received on these proposed amendments. The Planning Commission recommended that General Plan Amendment No. 3, Bison Avenue reclassification, NOT be adopted at this time, but that meetings be held with the Traffic Engineer and the Eastbluff Homeowners Association to determine the most desirable solution to the potential traffic problem. The Planning Commission k }' r 6 0 TO: City Council - 2 indicated that the proposed reclassification of Bison Avenue from a primary road to a secondary road would not resolve the potential problem and that a special configuration of the Bison/Jamboree intersection should be decided upon only after discussion with the residents of Eastbluff. The Planning Commission recommended AGAINST adoption of Amendment No. 7 (single-family to two-family on the west side of Irvine Avenue), based on consideration of the single-family nature of the surrounding area and the determination that General Plan amendments which benefit single properties, and not the City as a whole, are not warranted. RECOMMENDATION Staff suggests that the City Council set a public hearing on proposed General Plan Amendments Nos. 4, 5, 6, and 8, as recommended by the Planning Commission, for the regularly -scheduled meeting of July 22, 1974; and that the Planning Commission be directed to include General Plan Amendment No. 3 (Bison Avenue) as one of the amendments to be considered during the October, 1974 amendment session. Respectfully submitted, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT oyxn, Ui,�Octor RVN: T"C: jmb Enc. Resolutions (4) Copies of the staff reports to the Planning Commission on each proposed amendment. Copies of all correspondence received on these proposed amendments. 0 RESOLUTION NO. 888 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL THE ADOPTION OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT OF THE NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN (GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 4) WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted a Circulation Element of the General Plan, on March 11, 1974; and WHEREAS, Section 65361 of the California Government Code limits the amendment of a General Plan to a maximum of three times in any calendar year; and WHEREAS, Council Policy Q1, adopted April 22, 1974, provides for three amendments to the General Plan per year; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on proposed General Plan Amendment No. 4 on June 20, 1974, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has determined that such amendment is in the best interests of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that General Plan Amendment No. 4 be adopted, amending the Circulation Element as follows: 1. Change the Master Plan of Streets and Highways designation of Irvine Avenue between 15th Street and 16th Street, from a primary road to a secondary road (4 lanes undivided, as currently exists) and, south of 15th Street, from a primary road to a "local street" (2 lanes, as currently exists). 2. Delete the proposed connection of Irvine Avenue to the Coast Highway from the Master Plan of Streets and Highways. 3. Delete specific proposal No. 12 on Page 10 from the Circu- lation Element Report. 4. Delete Irvine Avenue from the Priority "D" projects on Table 4 on Page 27 of the Circulation Element Report. Regularly passed and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach on the 20th day of June , 1974. AYES: Beckley, Hazewinkel, Heather, Parker, Rosener, Seely NOES: None ABSENT: Agee Chairman s v Secretary 0 • RESOLUTION NO. 889 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL THE ADOPTION OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT OF THE NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN (GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 5) WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted a Circulation Element of the General Plan, on March 11, 1974; and WHEREAS, Section 65361 of the California Government Code limits the amendment of a General Plan to a maximum of three t times in any calendar year; and WHEREAS, Council Policy Q1, adopted April 22, 1974, provides for three amendments to the General Plan per year; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a .public hearing on proposed General Plan Amendment No. 5 on June 20, 1974, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has determined that such amendment is in the best interests of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that General Plan Amendment No. 5 be adopted, amending the Circulation Element as follows: 1. Change the Master Plan of Streets and Highways' designation of 15th Street between Placentia Avenue and the property line between the Bond Publishing Company site and the Banning Property (just west of Monrovia Avenue) from a "Primary Road" to a "Secondary Road". 2. Revise the second sentence of Item 10, Page 9, of the Circu- lation Element report to read: "It involves the widening of existing 15th Street to four lanes undivided to a point just westerly of Monrovia Avenue, and continuing on with new k a construction at four lanes divided, crossing and intersecting..." Regularly passed and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach on the 20th day of June , 1974. AYES: Beckley, Hazewinkel, Heather, Parker, Rosener NOES: None ABSENT: Agee ABSTENTIONS: Seely Chairman Secretary It RESOLUTION NO. 890 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL THE ADOPTION OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE AND RESIDENTIAL GROWTH ELEMENTS OF THE NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN (GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 6) WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted a Land Use Element and a Residential Growth Element of the General Plan, on May 29, 1974; and WHEREAS, Section 65361 of the California Government Code limits the amendment of a General Plan to a maximum of three times in any calendar year; and WHEREAS, Council Policy Qli adapted April 22, 1974, provides for three amendments to the General Plan per year; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commisison held a public hearing on proposed General Plan Amendment No. 6 on June 20, 1974, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has determined that such amendment is in the best interests - of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that General Plan Amendment No. 6 be adopted, amending the Land Use and Residential Growth Elements as follows: 1. Land Use Element - Amend the Land Use Plan (map) to change the designation of the "Fun Zone" site from "Multi -Family Residential" to "Retail and Service Commercial". (No change to the text of the Land Use Element is required; see Page 15 for the discussion of the Central Balboa area.) 2. Residential Growth Element - Amend the Residential Growth Plan (map) to delete the residential designation of the "Fun Zone" site. (No change to the text of the Residential Growth Element is required; see Page 14 for the discussion of the Balboa Peninsula.) Regularly passed and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach on the 2Oth day of June , 1974. AYES: Beckley, Hazewinkel, Heather, Parker, Rosener, Seely NOES: None ABSENT: Agee Lnairman Secretary 4 � I RESOLUTION NO. 891 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL THE ADOPTION OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN (GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 8) WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted a Land Use Element of the General Plan, on May 29, 1974; and WHEREAS, Section 65361 of the California Government Code limits the amendment of a General Plan Ito a maximum of three times in any calendar year; and WHEREAS, Council Policy Ql, adopted April 22, 1974, provides for three amendments to the General Plan per year; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on proposed General Plan Amendment No. 8 on June 20, 1974, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has determined that such amendment is in the best interests of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that General Plan Amendment No. 8 be adopted, amending the Land Use Element as follows: 1. Revise the Land Use Plan (map) to change the designation of the property at the southeast corner of Jamboree Road and Santa Barbara Drive from "recreational and Environmental Open Space" to "Administrative, Professional, and Financial Commercial". (No change to the text of the Land Use Element is required.) Regularly passed and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach on the 20th day of June , 1974. AYES: Beckley, Hazewinkel, Heather, Rosener, Seely NOES: None ABSENT: Agee ABSTENTIONS: Parker airman ecretary V r Planning Commission Meeting June 20, 1974 Agenda Item No. 10 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH June 13, 1974 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Department of Community Development SUBJ: Proposed amendments to the General Plan (Public Hearing). At the meeting of May 16, 1974, the Planning Commission set a public hearing for June 20, 1974 to consider six proposed amendments to the General Plan. Attached are individual staff memos on each proposed amendment. Staff would suggest that the public hearing be conducted in a series of six hearing sessions, with a public hearing session being opened and closed for each individual amendment as it is considered. The proposed amendments have been assigned "General Plan Amendment Numbers" 3 through 8; two amendments have already been adopted (on December 17, 1973). COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT R. V. HOGAN, DIREC R r By_ Cowell Advance Planning Administrator TC:jmb Att. Staff Memos Planning Commission Meeting June 20, 1974 Agenda Item No. 10-A CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH June 13, 1974 TO: Planning Commission FROM SUBJ Department of Community Development General Plan Amendment No. 3 -- Proposed amendment to the Circulation Element to change the classification of Bison Avenue between Jamboree and MacArthur Boulevard from a primary road to a secondary road and/or a relocation of the intersection of Bison Avenue and Jamboree Road, and/or other realignment of the street system in this area. This proposed amendment was initiated at the direction of the City Council (per Council action at their meeting of March 11, 1974). The intent of the proposed amendment is to resolve the potential problem of a large volume of traffic crossing Jamboree Road from Bison Avenue to the east and continuing on Bison Avenue through the Eastbluff residential neighborhood (where Bison Avenue is a "local street"). Bison Avenue is described in the Circulation Element text on Page 12 as follows: "This is a short section of Bison Avenue being developed as a primary road connector between two major roads, Jamboree and MacArthur. This route will provide an important circulation element in the system when the Corona del Mar Freeway is constructed." Attached is a memo from the City Engineer, which illustrates the traffic considerations involved and the problems attendant with a decision to undertake a major redesign of the circulation system in this area. Based on this memo, it appears that the most practical solution to the potential problem of a traffic impact on the Eastbluff neighborhood is to construct the intersection of Jamboree Road and Bison Avenue in such a manner r + �• r TO: Planning Commission - 2 as to discourage, or, if need be, prohibit cross traffic from Bison Avenue on the east side to Bison Avenue on the west side of Jamboree Road. Environmental Significance This proposed amendment was reviewed by the Environmental Affairs Committee on June 12, 1974 and it was determined that there is no environmental significance (in terms of the California Environmental Quality Act), unless the alternative of a major realignment of Bison Avenue is decided upon. In this case, the Committee indicated that the environmental significance should be considered, based on detailed alignment studies. Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that an amendment be made to Page 12, Item 17, of the Circualtion Element, adding the following wording: "The City recognizes that there is a potential problem of the traffic impact on the Eastbluff neighborhood caused by vehicles crossing Jamboree Road from Bison Avenue to the east and continuing westerly. The City will construct the intersection of Jamboree Road and Bison Avenue in such'a manner as to discourage a heavy volume of through traffic. Traffic volumes on Bison Avenue west of Jamboree Road will be closely monitored; if a problem develops, the configuration of the intersection will be revised to prohibit cross traffic on Bison Avenue." COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT R. V. HOGAN, DIRECTO By _ 'f owe Advance Planning Administrator TC:jmb Att. Memo from City Engineer N 0 E TO: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FROM: Public Works Department June 13, 1974 SUBJECT: PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN, BISON AVENUE BETWEEN JAMBOREE ROAD AND MACARTHUR BOULEVARD INTRODUCTION: Bison Avenue between MacArthur Boulevard and Jamboree Road is presently classified as a primary street (4 lanes divided) on the circulation element. The street had previously been classified for many years as a major street (6 lanes divided); with the classification having been changed at the time the current circulation element was adopted. The change was based on information developed in the A. M. Voorhees traffic study. At present, the northerly half of Bison Avenue is improved from Jamboree Road easterly to Camelback Street with 2 travel lanes, curb on the northerly side, and curb on the southerly side. The latter curb would serve as the northerly median curb in the future if the street were to be widened to its full cross section. A hearing has been set to consider a further change in classifica- tion from a primary road to a secondary road, and/or a relocation of the inter- section of Bison Avenue and Jamboree Road, and/or other realignment of the street system in the area. DISCUSSION: The desire for a change in either the classification or the alignment of Bison Avenue is primarily based on the concern of residents in the Eastbluff area that a portion of the traffic on Bison easterly of Jamboree may either deliberately or inadvertently cross Jamboree and traverse the residential area. However, a review of land uses and street patterns in the area indicates that it is unlikely that a significant number of cars would enter Eastbluff from Bison easterly of Jamboree unless the drivers have a destination in Eastbluff. Changing the classification of Bison Avenue from primary to secondary (4 lanes not divided) would reduce the traffic handling capacity because the lesser width between exterior curbs (64 feet rather than 80 feet) eliminates the ability to provide left turn pockets at intersections together with shoulders available for right turns at the intersections. It should - be noted that the number of through lanes remains 4 under either classification, and there probably would not be any significant reduction in the number of vehicles crossing Jamboree Road into Eastbluff. The classification of Bison was based on traffic volumes projected from the land uses planned in the area. Reduction in classification below that required to serve projected traffic volumes could be expected•to result in the types of problems normally associated with traffic congestion. These in- clude delay to motorists, higher accident rate, increased hazards to bicyclists and pedestrians, greater smog generation, and a higher noise level. A realignment of Bison at this time would be a major undertaking. of the Propo ed mendment the on lem Subject: Bison sAvenue betweenoJamboree cRoad �andEMacA�ur Boulevardal Plan, Page 2. Several years of planning and considerable existing construction have been predicated on the present location of Bison. The interests and concerns of the County of Orange, the State, the City of Irvine, U.C.I., The Irvine Company, and Aeronutronics must be considered inasmuch as various realignment configura- tions could affect some or all of these parties. A realignment should not be seriously considered unless the feasibility is demonstrated by both an engineer- ing study and an environmental impact report. On a positive note however, westbound vehicles on Bison easterly of Jamboree could be prevented from entering Eastbluff by constructing an island in the northwest quadrant of the intersection as shown on the attached sketch. Such an island would also prevent left turns into Eastbluff for northbound Jamboree Road traffic, but all other turning movements at the intersection could be accommodated. This arrangement may not be satisfactory to the resi- dents of Eastbluff desiring to enter the tract at Bison Avenue from Jamboree Road northbound. RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. That neither the classification nor the alignment of Bison Avenue be changed, for the reasons as outlined above. 2. That operation of the Bison -Jamboree intersection be observed in an effort to identify and quantify the incidence of traffic entering the Eastbluff area which does not have a destination there. A further determina- tion can then be made as to the need for special channel- ization. Benjamin B. Nolan City Engineer BBN:hh Att. r rEASTS L UFF> I ANA RnRF-E Al (AERONUTROWC) a Ui 0 z D m Z "II I I 111 I 1 CITY OF NEWPORT BENCH PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT INTERSECTION CH41VNEL/2ATION ,SI5ON AVE. AT- U,0MBOREE ROAD I� EA ST S L Ui- ) RoA D �m ,0' I(IVORTH FORD A C. I DRAWN. DATE APPROVED PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR RE. NO. DRAWING NO. 7 n COHEN F6 KARGER MILTON M. CGHEN 505 30L- STREET•NEWPORT OEACH, CALIFORNIA 32660 PATTI KARGER TCLEPHONE(IIA) 695.IS30 June 13, 1974 Planriing Commission City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92660 Re: Bison Avenue Extension - Eastbluff Gentlemen: The undersigned is the owner of two properties in the section of Eastbluff Homes. The purpose of this communication is to adamantly object to the proposed Bison Avenue extension for the reason that the substantially increased 'traffic and noise will defeat the proper use of the home sites and the enjoyment thereof for the residents and children which was previously approved and zoned by your departmO for such residential purpose. The undersigned appreciates due consideration of the contents hereof. R.espp , ully submitted, .*1•-� ` n P '11 KAR CCTIIR PK/sg ,+ cc: Eastbluff ITomAreet rs Co unity Assn. Board of Dire Courtesy: , BePegg 2633 Bamboo Newport Beach, Calif. - Y'. x 19a�'� �1Laixutc»+�naze �olrrwnusw�. l'Wonci�ition Y 41 ace W. ATH AT• t w2a: rs, r.:.: General Plan Amendment re: Bison Ave. EAtensiOn e f ,he .00uri of w0ector6 nZ she Zastbluff Homeowners -Community _`sanclation has requenced that I wilte CO you to MCWS Our coil - corn re6ardin, the plannad sit -lane divided road b4t*.peen iiacArthur• it jamboree. Ve E' ' :1 that "via will have an ad su,e effect on o;ur residential co•r::.ls:nity. it will -enerate unwanted traffic feedin. uirecAy into our Aison Avenu,�. 'Extra tbrouab traffic, will Afeet everybody- in s '. 1;ifif and r :cially, Che chilurn who- ;talk, or, ride bites to h- :'. or to visit friends,, » Ih•s Maid of Directors feels that the ptesent., desu";rla txtrt° i9: un as viable. Yours very truly, Z. • Valeri4•",C.. �'o?lit•.>h . President, Aoard V Direntpts W c bIAL Jome'owners. Coltaucii•ty, ' ri 55'ci�i;2't1on. Owe awP .. •1 M % r ' Lf • Warr.. L. Bostic:, M.D. 2521 Buckeye Street Newport Beach, California 92060 June 11, 1974 Planning Commission City of Newport Beach City Council Chambers City Hall Newport Beach, California 92660 Dear Planning Commission: I respectfully request that you reconsider the General Plan concerning the width of Bison Avenue between Mac Arthur Blvd., and Jamboree Road. A six -lane divided road would create unwanted traffic and would have an adverse impact upon the residential quality of our community. Furthermore, increased traffic would pose a hazzard to the many young children in our area who walk or ride bikes to and from school. I would support an amendment that would substantially reduce the potential traffic impact and preserve the character of our residential community. Please consider my letter an expression of public test- imony in connection with the proposed General Plan Amendment concerning the Bison Avenue extension. Sincerely yours, Warren L. Bostick, M.D. \�>RECGIVGD b C cE V. itY Deve!op•nent Dept. 9 j%x4 , Oily Or `•1EV/Po'z BCACR- �'ti Planning Commission City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Blvd. June 13, 1)'/4 Newport Beach, Ca. 92660 Please consider this letter as an expression of public testimony in connection with the proposed General Plan Amendment concerning the Bison Avenue extension., We fe:l that the present designation is unacceptable. We support an amendment that would reduce the potential traffic impact and preserve the character of our residential community. sincerely, Lawrence F. Brixey VVT `Judith E. Bri-xey 2100 Aralia Newport Beach, Ca. 926b0 June 22, 1974 Planning Commission City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, Ca. 92660 Gentlemen, We wish to register our strong objection to the proposed six lane highway which would extend Bison Avenue to connect Jamboree Road with MacArthur Blvd. This highway, a concession to expediency, would release a flood of traffic into and through Eastbluff and inundate this fine residential area. This traffic would constitute a significant hazard to the many children who reside in Eastbluff and particularly on and in the vicinity of Bison and Bamboo Avenues. A much more satisfactory solution in our view would be to connect Jamboree and MacArthur further north so as to join Eastbluff Drive which is already a major artery. It should perhaps be remarked that as residents of Eastbluff vie take pride in our fine stable community and we take issue with business and traffic developments which degrade our neighborhood. We respectfully request that this letter be made part of the public testimony protesting the proposed Bison Avenue extension. Sincerely Sylvia and Frederick Reines 2655 Basswood St. Newport Beach, Ca., 9?660 v _ • of h P� Management � ;06 W. Fouq Stree Service Santa Ana, California 92701 Company (714) 541-5111 April 24, 1974 William Agee Chairman, Planning Commission City of Newport Beach Newport Beach, California 92660 Re: Circulation Element of the Newport Beach General Plan Project No. 26, Phase III Final Report Dear Mr. Agee: We understand that the City Council, at its March 11, 1974 public hearing, has referred to the Planning Commission for review of subject project with the possibility of change/amendment thereto. It is the firm belief of the Board of Directors of Eastbluff Home- owners Community Association that this project would route large, unnecessary traffic quantities through our residential community. We recommend alternative routing of Project No." 26 to join East - bluff Drive (either end) or Camelback Avenue. This proposal would eliminate the unwanted "T" intersection which appears to have no other example within the city, excepting private communities. Your early consideration shall be most welcome. Sincerely, G. M, Driscoll, Agent for EASTBLUFF HOMEOWNERS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION GMD/lmw cc: Steve Yekich, Pres. of the Assn 1� M s .1 t • � Crn'1ti � C7"LG'Y111�!. .Gui'Yti C�J�+r...i�it�/'�� lTL`C/tJ ✓ / /." /�/L!J" C�,Q.r-1 4 ..Z/��•c��[%��i'i1.•Z o'er r}��n�� i.///f-� �G L✓l,,G� c,� —•-ter' . , ✓�—' ��".�L ./'� t �G j'G.��L�-t' l..'•n.o< �.� L��G1-t�"� G'llir� ILI)I 2 • t r Planning Commission Meeting June,20„ 1974 Agenda Item No. 10-B CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH June 14, 1974 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Department of Community Development SUBJ: General Plan Amendment No. 4 -- Proposed amendment to the Circulation Element to change the classification of Irvine Avenue between 16th Street and Cliff Drive from a primary road to a local street, and to delete the intersection at Irvine and Pacific Coast Highway. This proposed amendment was initiated at the direction of the City Council (per Council action at the meeting of March 11, 1974). The concern is with the potential adverse impact of increased traffic on the residences adjacent to Irvine Avenue. This project is described within the Circulation Element text on Page 10 as follows: "This section of Irvine Avenue is'to be widened to four lanes from 15th Street to Cliff Drive. It is the only section of Irvine Avenue left in the City which is not four lanes. Because of its location and relatively low existing and projected traffic volumes, it is a low -priority project. No traffic deficiency is projected." (The connection to Coast Highway is shown as a "Route that Requires Further Coordination" on the Master Plan of Streets and Highways.) Attached is a memo from the City Engineer which indicates that the major effect of the widening of Irvine Avenue and the connection to Coast Highway would be to take some of the traffic load off of Dover Drive and, of course, increase traffic volumes on Irvine Avenue. The City Enginee.r's memo recommends that the Irvine Avenue portion of the Circulation Element not be amended at this time, except for the section between 15th and 16th Street, for which a reclassification from primary to secondary is recommended. C� TO: Planhing Commission - 2 Environmental Significance This proposed amendment was reviewed by the Environmental Affairs Committee on June 12, 1974 and it was determined that there s no environmental significance (in terms of the California Environmental Quality Act). Recommendation No specific Community Development Department recommendation is made on the basic question of the classification of Irvine Avenue south of 15th Street, although the Community Development Department concurs with the City Engineer's recommendation on that section of Irvine Avenue between 15th and 16th Street. Staff would suggest that the following advantages and disadvantages of the proposed amendment be among those considered: Advantages of the proposed amendment: I. It would preclude the potential adverse impact on the residences and schools adjacent to Irvine Avenue of the increased traffic which would result from the widening and connection of Irvine Avenue to Coast Highway. 2. It would preclude the proposed Coast Highway connection which will be difficult to accomplish, both physically and economically. Also, the grading operations and intersection configuration required may b'e aesthetically undesirable. Disadvantages of the proposed amendment: I. This amendment would eliminate (unless a future amendment is made) the possibility of an additional north -south corridor connecting to Coast Highway and preclude the traffic circulation benefits which such a corridor would offer, namely a more efficient street system and a reduction of traffic volumes on Dover Drive and its intersection with Coast Highway. 7 7 TO: Planning Commission - 3 If the Planning Commission determines that the potential adverse impact of increased traffic on Irvine Avenue outweighs the traffic circulation benefits, the following changes to the Circulation Element should be recommended to the City Council in order to effect the proposed amendments: 1. Change the Master Plan of Streets and Highways designation of Irvine Avenue between 15th Street and 16th Street, from a primary road to a secondary road (4 lanes undivided, as currently exists) and, south of 15th Street, from a primary road to a "local street" (2 lanes, as currently exists). 2. Delete the proposed connection of Irvine Avenue to the Coast Highway from the Master Plan of Streets and Highways. 3. Delete specific proposal number 12 on Page 10 from the Circulation Element Report. 4. Delete Irvine Avenue from the Priority "D" projects on Table 4 on Page 27 of the Circulation Element Report. In any event, staff does recommend that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that the Master Plan of Streets and Highways be amended to change the classification of the section of Irvine Avenue between 15th and 16th Street from a primary road to a secondary road. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT R. V. HOGAN, DINRECT R By --- Advance Planning Administrator TC:jmb Att: Memo from the Citv Enaineer June 13, 1974 TO: COMMUNITY DtVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FROM: Public Works Department SUBJECT: PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE GIRCULATION ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN, IRVINE AVENUE BETWEEN 16th STREET AND COAST HIGHWAY INTRODUCTION: Irvine Avenue between 16th Street and Cliff Drive is presently classified as a primary street (4 lanes divided) on the circulation element. Between 15th Street and Cliff Drive the street is improved as a local street; with 2 travel lanes, parking lanes, and curbs. Between 16th Street and 15th Street the street is improved with 4 travel lanes, parking lanes, and curbs. The circulation element also includes a possible connection to Coast Highway as a route requiring,further coordination. A hearing has been set to consider a change in classification of Irvine Avenue between 16th Street and Cliff Drive from a primary road to a local street, and to delete the intersection with Coast Highway. DISCUSSION: When the A. M. Voorhees traffic study was prepared the projected traffic volumes were based on a circulation system which did'not include the connection of Irvine Avenue with Coast Highway. The projected volumes thus remain valid if the proposed amendment deleting the intersection should be approved. The effect of the circulation element revisions being considered would be to maintain the status quo insofar as future north -south traffic -cir- culation connecting to Coast Highway in the area immediately westerly of the Upper Bay is concerned. Most of this traffic is carried on Dover Drive. Accord- ingly, if Irvine Avenue were connected to Coast Highway, the principal results would be an increase in traffic volumes on Irvine Avenue itself and a reduction in traffic volumes on Dover Drive and in the Dover Drive -Coast Highway intersection. It is apparent that there are and will continue to be traffic defic- iencies in the area being discussed. Changes in the circulation pattern which would relieve the deficiencies on Dover Drive would add traffic to Irvine Avenue, and would have an adverse effect on residents along Irvine Avenue. The evalua- tion to be made is to weigh the improvement in traffic service which would result from a connection of Irvine Avenue to Coast Highway against the adverse impact of increased traffic on Irvine Avenue. (It should be pointed out that the key element in the revisions being considered is whether or not Irvine Avenue con- nects to Coast Highway. If it does not connect there is no need for arterial status for Irvine Avenue between 15th Street and Cliff Drive, and the reclassifi- cation to local street status for that section should be approved.) Subject: Proposelomendment to the Circulation Elont of the General Plan, Irvine Avenue between 16th Street and Coast Highway Page 2 i Without detailed studies it is difficult to quantify the advantages and disadvantages of connecting Irvine Avenue to Coast Highway so as to enable a final evaluation at this time. However, it is germane to point out that the law would require preparation of an environmental impact report before it would be possible to implement the Coast Highway connection and/or the widening of the section of Irvine Avenue between 15th Street and Cliff Drive. The ability to evaluate and protect the interests§ of the neighborhood by mans of the environmental impact process should be considered together with the potential significant improvement in traffic service offered by widening Irvine Avenue southerly of 15th Street and connecting it to Coast Highway. It is felt that the interests of the City as a whole are best served by not elimin- ating the potential -Coast Highway connection from the circulation element at this time. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Irvine Avenue portion of the circulation element not be revised at'thi.s time except for the reach between 15th Street and 16th Street, which should be reclassified to secondary street. However if it is determined that a revision is to be approved, the following components are recommended: a. Delete the Coast Highway connection. b. Reclassify the portion from Cliff Drive to 15th Street to a local street. c. Reclassify the portion from 15th Street to 16th Street to a secondary street. ADDENDUM: The block of Irvine Avenue between 15th Street and 16th Street (the block adjacent to the High School) requires special discussion. This block was recently widened to 4 lanes by the City, with a total right of way width of 82 feet (corresponding to the normal right of way width for a secondary street of 80 feet to 84 feet). The Public Works Department considers that block to be at its ultimate width, and no further widening would be contemplated even though the primary street (100 foot right of way) classification presently exists for the block. In order to confirm the above intention,the reclassification to secondary street for the reach between 15th Street and 16th Street has been recommended regardless of the decision on the Coast Highway connection. A Benjamin B. Nolan City Engineer BBN:hh 7r- I Planning Commission Meeting June 20, 1974 Agenda Item Nb. l0-C CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH June 14, 1974 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Department of Community Development SUBJ; General Plan Amendment No. 5 -- Proposed amendment to the Circulation Element to change the classification of 15th Street between Superior Avenue and Balboa Boulevard (extended) from a primary road to a secondary road. This proposed amendment was initiated by the Planning Commission at the suggestion of staff. The intent is to bring the City's designation of this street into conformity with the County designation, since the County has already initiated precise alignment studies and E.I.R.'s on the street as a secondary road. Attached is a memo from the City Engineer which recommends this amendment. Environmental Significance This proposed amendment was reviewed by the Environmental Affairs Committee on June 12, 1974 and it was determined that there is no environmental significance (in terms of the California Environmental Quality Act). However, all future projects proposed within the context of this amendment, if adopted, will be subject to detailed environmental review. Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that the Circulation Element be amended to change the "Master Plan of Streets and Highways" classification of 15th Street between Superior Avenue and Balboa Boulevard • • 5 4 TO: Planning Commission - 2 (extended) from a primary road to a secondary road. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT R. V. HOGAN, D{IRRCCTO By im we I 1 Advance Planning Administrator ATT: Memo from City Engineer Letter from A. H. Krier of Alan M. Voorhees & Associates, Inc. dated April 11, 1974. June 13, 1974 TO: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FROM: Public Works Department SUBJECT: PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN, FIFTEENTH STREET BETWEEN SUPERIOR AVENUE AND BALBOA BOULEVARD EXTENSION INTRODUCTION: Fifteenth Street between Superior Avenue and the proposed extension of Balboa Boulevard is presently classified as a primary street (4 lanes divided) on the circulation element. The street had previously been classified as a secondary street (4 lanes not divided); with the classification having been changed at the time the current circulation element was adopted. Between Superior Avenue and the City limit line 200 feet westerly of Monrovia Avenue the street is located in an unincorporated County island. This portion is improved as a 2 lane local street from Superior to Monrovia, and is unimproved between Monrovia and the City limit line. The portion extending westerly into City area is completely unimproved, and no right of way has been dedicated as yet. A hearing has been set to consider a change in classification of Fifteenth Street between Superior Avenue and the extension of Balboa Boulevard from a primary road to a secondary road. DISCUSSION: The traffic volume of 14,000 ADT projected for Fifteenth Street can be satisfactorily accommodated on a secondary arterial highway. However there are some uncertainties regarding street planning in the area (particularly the continued connection of Superior Avenue to Coast Highway) which initially led the City's traffic consultant to recommend the upgrading from'a secondary classifica- tion to a primary classification. This matter has since been further reviewed by the consultant, with the qualified conclusion being reached that a secondary classification can be restored for Fifteenth Street. Please refer to the attached copy of a letter from Mr. A. H. Krier of Alan M. Voorhees Associates for a more detailed discussion. The Orange County Road Department has done a great deal of work by way of preparation for upgrading Fifteenth Street in the County island from a local street to a secondary street. The Road Department'has indicated that the further upgrading from secondary to primary classification results in increased problems with the existing developed properties adjacent to Fifteenth Street in •the County island. Because of -this factor and because of the lack of compelling traffic service needs, it is felt the reduction in classification is desirable. RECOMMENDATION: That Fifteenth Street between Superior Avenue and Balboa Boulevard extension be reduced in classification from primary road to secondary road. 'Benjamin B. Nolan 701 AVENUE, SAN DIEGO, CAUrORNIA 92117 . I 714/278 3363 ALAN M. VOORHEES & ASSOCIATES, INC. TRA,;S� 1RiATI01i AND r'L,UINING CONSU::TANTS 11 April 1974 Mr. Ben Nolen City Engineer City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92660 Dear Ben: On Wednesday April 10, we discussed by telephone the present and future status of 15th Street in the West Newport area. There appears to be a question whether this should be designated as a primary or secondary roadway. The recommended circulation element of the General Plan designates 15th Street as a primary roadway. To my recollection, this came about as a result of discussion with Bob Jaffe when alternatives in West Newport were being considered. Our most recent traffic pro- jections for the Newport Beach Network shows that 15th Street may have an ADT of approximately 14, 000. This would depend on the land use being developed as now planned, and the road system which develops with the land to connect with the General Plan streets. For instance, should Superior Avenue not connect to Coast Highway as has often been discussed, then 15th Street would carry this additional traffic, and likely require primary road status. An alternative to developing a primary roadway section is to develop 15th Street as a secondary roadway with close control of where drive- ways and street intersections are placed. This would create a minimum of side friction and permit traffic to flow smoothly. With adequate provision for off-street parking, on -street parking could be prohibited when the secondary roadway is constructed, which would permit a two-way left turn lane to be installed with left turn pockets at inter- sections. The roadway cross section and striping configuration would be like Campus Drive. The capacity of a roadway with that configura- tion is approximately 22, 000. In summary, I would say that 15th Street could be developed as a secondary roadway if Superior Avenue continues to intersect with Coast Highway. If superior Avenue is terminated before reaching Coast Highway, then 15th Street may be developed as a secondary roadway 5'!s•_`II'�J:/'•1 r•, • tu'u • Y'•., ._.. • U.^I'J'le n Vdl =`:0) • T:+9`II� • 4t. lt'b�+ a 9pN' a • nT:. a A:v•"1 • ..,�.. ., • hrl.°TpA JUaEra', 9 A711 rt/. • ..:, pRGO • ,.�, �i� • :bR�;11 • IF'U GtlC.:r, ...'• rIM1:. . •, , • n.rt:::',L•.In a ,J.•, • ., n 1'+'.:. .v •�• it Mr. Ben Nolen City of Newport Beach 11 April 1974 Page 2 with a two-way left turn lane, which would necessitate prohibition of parking. Before making this decision, the major and minor road system for this area should be reviewed to ensure that these roadways will provide adequate capacity. If you have any questions regarding this or other matters, please call me. Very truly yours, A. H.Krier Regional Manager AHK: j s BEECo, LTD. 3990 WESTERLY PLACE NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92660 (714) 833-8701 June 19, 1974 Public Works Department City of Newport Beach 3300 West Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, Calif. 92660 Re: Proposed Amendment to the Newport Beach General Plan - General Plan Amendment #5 Gentlemen: We understand the subject amendment would amend the circulation element of the Newport Beach General Plan to change the classification of 15th Street between Superior,Avenue and Balboa Boulevard from a primary road to a secondary road. This letter is to advise that we have reviewed the proposed amendment and do not object thereto. Sincerely, BEECO, LTD. ff ohn Haskell JH:DD op -. • Planning Commission Meeting June 20, 1974 Agenda Item No. 10-D CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH June 14, 1974 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Department of Community Development SUBJ: General Plan Amendment No. 6 -- Proposed Amendment to the Residential Growth Element and Land Use Element to change designation of the "Fun Zone" site from "Multi -Family Residential" to "Retail and Service Commercial". This proposed amendment was initiated at the request of the property owner. This site was designated for "Multi -Family Residential" use as a result of the owner's proposal to develop a condominium project. On May 7, 1973, on appeal from the Planning Commission's denial, the City Council approved a Use Permit for condominium development in the Central Balboa commercial district (Cl). Subsequently, the condominium project was denied by the Coastal Commission. (Subject property remains zoned for commercial use.) In response to the Use Permit application for condominium development, the,Adv.ance Planning Division prepared a memo, dated June 12, 1972 (sent to the Planning Commission on June 15, 1974 as an attachment to the staff memo on the Use Permit application), which discussed the basic land use question. A copy of this memo is attached. Staff suggests that the concerns raised in this memo regarding residential use, and the arguments supporting commercial use, are still valid. Environmental Significance This proposed amendment was reviewed by the Environmental Affairs Committee on June 12, 1974 and it was determined that there is no environmental significance (in terms of the California Environmental Quality Act). However, all future projects proposed within the context of this amendment, if adopted, will r w • 0 r r TO: Planning Commission - 2 be subject to detailed environmental review. Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that amendments to the Land Use Element and the Residential Growth Element be made as follows: 1. Land Use Element - Amend the Land Use Plan (map) to change the designation of the "Fun Zone" site from "Multi -Family Residential" to "Retail and Service Commercial". (No change to the text of the Land Use Element is required; see Page 15 for the discussion of the Central Balboa area.) 2. Residential Growth Element - Amend the Residential Growth Plan (map) to delete the residential designation of the "Fun Zone" site. (No change to the text of the Residential Growth Element is required; see Page 14 for the dis- cussion of the Balboa Peninsula.) COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT R. V. HOGAN, DIRECT By 1 I////� /m l v- lkW Cowel l Advance Planning Administrator TC:jmb Att: Advance Planning Division memo dated June 12, 1972. P w r e I CITY OF N EWPORT BEACH -- DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TO: James D. Hewicker, Assistant Director FROM: Carl M. Neuhausen, Advance Planning Administrator SUBJECT: Use Permit No. 1591 This memo is submitted in response to your request for review of the subject use permit application, The Advance Planning Division suggests that the first question which must b'e answered before considering the density, size and details of the proposed condo- minium project) is: "Is residential land use on the fun zone site desirable from a land use planning standpoint?" In answering this question the following considerations are most relevant : 1. The short-term effects of the proposed residential use on existing land uses in the immediate area. 2. The long-term effects of the proposed residential use on future development in the immediate area. 3. The effects of the existing and potential land uses in the immediate area on the proposed residential use (in terms of "liveability" of the residential units). The entire Central Balboa Area is designated as a "transitional area" to receive special in-depth study under the General Plan program. It is also likely that the Central Balboa Area will, along with other areas, be the subject of more specific planning, and community design efforts after the completion of the General Plan. Ideally, the question of land use on the fun zone site should be answered within the context of the General Plan and, possibly, the specific plans which may follow. However, we realize that the Commission must take some action on the subject proposal at this time (either a denial, an approval, or a continuance until comple- tion of the General .Plan), thus we are submitting the analysis contained herein. At this time, it is the Advance Planning Division's opinion that residential use of the fun zone site will have the following effects, related to the three factors listed above: 1. Effect on Existing Uses in immediate'Area Residential use of the fun zone site would be extremely dis- ruptive to the commercial, public and semi-public orientation of the area since it would break up the continuity of commercial uses, limit visual and physical access to th.e bay front (beyond the visual and physical access that probably would occur with non-residential uses), and eliminate commercial and rental boat Slips. N � 1 TO: James D. Hewicker, Assistant Director - 2. 2. Effect on Future Development Residential use of the fun zone site would seriously limit the extent of future commercial development since it would preclude the possibility oP continuous commercial use from the ferry crossing to*vlain Street. Although the proposed residential development may provide some additional market for local con- venience businesses, it would preclude the type and extent of commercial development necessary for and economically viable mixture of commercial uses. The development of a contiguous, pedestrian -oriented commercial area is possible, but not all of the commercial uses can be local convenience shopping. Any substantial commercial area in Central Balboa must depend on more than just the local market. Many of the existing businesses in Central Balboa are not local convenience businesses and are dependant on the "draw" that exists as a result of the other specialty shops, and restaurants, a� well as the ferry crossing, pier and beach. Of the approximately 5 acres of land devoted to existing commer- cial use in Central Balboa, only about 1 acre is used for local convenience businesses, while the other 4 acres are de•voted'to businesses which depend on the drawing power of the area for a substantial portion of their trade. In terms of numbers of establishments, out of a total of 67 businesses, 14 can be considered local convenience businesses. Development Research Associates, our economic consultants for the General Plan, indicate that, based on their studies of the exist- ing commercial uses, residential and commercial development trends and sales and performance figures, and in view of the existing public and private attractions in the area, the same land area now devoted to commercial use (approximately 5 acres including the fun zone site) can be supported in the future. The exact types of businesses and the configuration of the commercial area• will, and must, change to take advantage of the unique location and attractions. In order to support this extent of commercial development and to assure high-level sales performance in terms of sales volume per square foot of commercial space, they suggest a relatively contiguous, pedestrian -oriented commercial area, located between nodes of activity, and provided with adequate, conveniently located parking. 6RA indicates that the types of businesses which can he supported in this area depend highly on continuity, pedestrian access, impulse buying, and the draw created by complimentary, mutually-su;:portive commercial uses. DRA anticipates that, with this type of commercial development, the sales per square foot of commercial space will greatly increase, resulting in a more economically viable and efficient commercial area than that which now exists. As a result of this increased efficiency, the total retail and service commercial. floor space may decrease somewhat, while the floor space. devoted to other commercial uses (such as offices) may increase. r TO: James D. Hewicker, Assistant Director - 3. URA further states that, in their opinion, the fun zone site could feasibly be developed with economically viable commercial uses, provided that the development is, design -wise, properly related to the existing commercial uses, the ferry crossing, and harbor -front and walkway; provided that adequate and conveniently located pedestrian access and parking is made available; and pro- vided that the commercial development includes some uses which will provide a year-round draw. The possibility of•a mixture of some of the following uses could be considered: motel/hotel; restaurant/bar; and service, convenience, and specialty shops. DRA further indicates that while residential demand is high on the peninsula, any residential development within the Central Balboa area would have to insure clustering and continuity capabilities for existing and potential commercial uses. While the approximately 5 acres of 'commercial development which both the Advance Planning Division and DRA feel can continue to be supported in only about 50% of the total 10 acres of C-1 zoned land, approximately 1 acre is vacant, 1 acre is devoted to public facility and utility use, and approximately 3 acres are presently devoted to residential use. The existing residen- tial uses are mostly on the fringes of the commercial area and there is the possibility that more of the land on the fringes will be designated as residential on the General Plan, later rezoned to residential, and eventually developed or redeveloped• to residential use. Conceivably, the C-1 District could be reduced to a total area of about 6 acres by rezoning approximately 4 acres on the periphery to residential. Of this remaining 6 acres of C-1 zoning, 5 acres would be in commercial use•and 1 acre would remain in public facility and utility use. The question of exactly how much and which portions should be rezoned must await completion of the General Plan, but it is apparent at this time that the plan will not propose rezoning a large area in the middle of the C-1 District to residential. 3. Effect of Existing Uses on Residential Use of Fun Zone Site •' P .The effect of the existing land uses in the immediate area on the,residential use (and the residents) was discussed in the previous staff report, dated April 6, 1972, which pointed out the high volume of both pedestrian and vehicular traffic, the take-out restaurants and arcades, the restaurants and bars with live entertainment, and the general high activity level and noisiness of the immediate area both in the daytime and at night. In conclusion, the Advance Planning Division is -of the opinion that the answer to the first -questions-- "Is residentia'1 land use on the fun zone site desirable from a land use planning standpoint?" -- is no. n d y June 12, 1972 CARL M. NEUHAUS_N, dvance Planning Administrator D TE CMN/sm THE KONWISER CORPORATION • Builders and Developers 1-2, C(-(,i (r*("f� �* (, 4120 BIRCH STREET • SUITE 104 NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92660 714 . 833.2704 March 1, 1974 Mr. R. V. Hogan, Director, Community Development, Newport Beach City Hall 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, Calibrnia 92660 Dear Mr. Hogan: Would you kindly consider this letter our request to change the designated use of the property commonly known as the Fun Zone and as shown on the attached map from residential to commercial as indicated on the Land Use Element of the City of Newport Beach General Plan. I understand the City will consider changes to the Land Use Element during the month of April, and I would appreciate knowing of any further ac- tion required on my part other than this letter to ensure that my request will be considered by the City at the appropriate time. JK:mc Enclosure Very truly yours, T L}WISER�ORATION i ohn onwiser President o, RECEIVED Colrm e "11 DevaloP�t�ent Dept tWR 5 19740w CIV OF NEWP� LBGACHI Planning Commission Meeting June 20, 1974 Agenda Item No. 10-E CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH June 14, 1974 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Department of Community Development SUBJ: General Plan Amendment No. 7 -- Proposed Amendment to the Residential Growth Element and Land Use Element to change designation of property adjacent to Irvine Avenue between 15th Street and Laurel Place from "Low Density Residential" to "Two -Family Residential". This proposed amendment was initiated at the request of the owner of the property located at 647 Irvine Avenue; the amendment request was made subsequent to the zone change request (from R1 to R2) which was denied by the Planning Commission on March 7, 1974. Since it would be inappropriate to redesignate a single resi- dential lot in an area zoned R1 to "Two -Family Residential", staff suggests that the Planning Commission consider a larger area for possible redesignation. This logically could include all lots which are across from Newport,Harbor High School and which front on Irvine Avenue. The attached map indicates those lots where the front of the house is oriented to Irvine Avenue and the size and use of each parcel. Environmental Significance This proposed amendment was reviewed by the Environmental Affairs Committee on June 12, 1974 and it was determined that there is no environmental significance (in terms of the California Environmental Quality Act). However, all future projects proposed within the context of this amendment, if adopted, will be subject to detailed environmental review. The major argument which has been raised in favor of this proposed amendment is that, if the property were rezoned to TO: Planning Commission - 2 R2, redevelopment would be encouraged The owners of the property at 647 Irvine Avenue, in a letter to the Planning Commission, have stated that "the west side of Irvine Avenue, between 15th and 16th Streets has long been an eyesore to the surrounding well -kept neighborhoods of Newport Beach" (A copy of this letter is attached.) The houses in this area are generally older and the overall apparent level of property maintenance is somewhat lower than the surrounding neighborhoods. While the City should certainly encourage a high level of property maintenance, staff is of the opinion that simply re- zoning each area, where the maintenance level starts to slip, to a higher density is not a desirable method of providing incentive to this end. In addition, the concept of rezoning property to higher densities in order to encourage redevelopment is in conflict with the controlled growtfi policy upon which the entire General Plan is based. Staff is of the opinion that it is not necessary to rezone property for higher density or higher intensity development in order to ensure redevelopment, particularly in an area with the high land values of Newport Beach. While the current proposal would only add about ten dwelling units to the total,residential growth level, staff is of the opinion that the proposed amendment is unwarranted. No amendment should be made to the General Plan unless there is a clear benefit to the City as a whole. Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that this proposed amendment NOT be adopted. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT R. V. HOGAN, DIRECTOR By Cowell Advance Planning Administrator TC:jmb Att: Map Letter by Mr. and Mrs. Robert McGiffin 0 a m IRVINE AVENUE x D r r D Z m HARBOR HIGH SCHOOL. LOTS FRONTING ON IRVIRJE AVENUE r 33 c m m r 9 r D n m • • � itV4'' •r", r':�<}' ' ,t 1 y4tcal. "' ,r qi 'r•• r .• '. .,,r • � ¢ ',+ t ,yy..+••,frf , r, b'Co �dyti}. r.) sy��'$' 1'� . r ..r�,. � ,: ' � '+• •'� t,' ��.' t} � .. v�(�:t}t`',::}FV'r .tl wFt;. '�t' ,;r4`4 �`•r 1;�ny.�':ti. " � '� •,bv}.:'j � .' ''.�ft', •,.' �"I.� .+. tf + '•�' k•' 'Q-r ...�,• : ,•{, ,. �<<t��#: fir„y�.." ",{•;' tA�1 z�:.:;r . .:ie , t,.',• ;c N 2• ,. �a r '� }t¢.t '•%" "" #air +"1,�•'-6, n}'./ n•�` '"•.i ;1 "r :t' i'' .�,is°,'' x"i.^;!b•.'.� •.Iritrl, rQ ' ,"�_'~}n. �,y i }ts,.,,'�:b : ,[� , � � •j�'r; . 1.}3;} . 5!-.rr,.f.f �:';:•d 'I±JS:'�r �.: .,� ,,�r,�, ..:.' V �v _ 1r,k`C: v�,: .� r, 'v is��". skit• "'p,i yiz�j 6 'e t3,r) t- :r -5 S�rt:. :r. U V n`:'e Sy' ''u'�,'.aa P �+,•; "[ h•.t _ "=''fit. ':3,i `;'�+ 1!;,rr�r`Ty t 5 r•;..: .:34i:'j :.���?'• -,rl '' , . ii .,�tt3j,w }.,,,• vn; .''jx Y�Y,:'• Yai'' aF ."F#`it',�1. i f• �,', 4 r y,):}'t 5<!�4•�f' 4r� i }? a ' xr , T il?''H':' t , �• r•1�. .y3?•fi' ti �i.':5 } s,i;Y'p�r 's,:t •r•F�l�([�ryL , > a,. ,.•' 2� F': m '"M:::S .rlt<;• .S� _ :..`5,1rt '`:'fiPt;.rGS.;;T mrA^<}�>1 'i+>y.. • 'i.i:'' ':ce7J..p \.}lii: - e r'{ lC 'y _ �.;fr• t'�',7.,+i nrl;<:.•,'..,. .ogan•ai1'r3} YS+ 1ifi•:: `. r :5�• y ":. ' '..d;� iL.14 ' ai Min. •t�' ,�i' a' "f y r r f •` .. i' �1<.r�• • • g .i �5 - 'YYw v,;F. Y�:' • , •- , r` a .1•'M'� i;'.Cr',.:?'' f.•.. s� �t 'Ya.,r r•.m''}" `'kF4'v i>. p.,..- `.t ::h':� .-Vt as 1 t ;42 '�•:a,Y:'9.,1'`•'1- .?,, t .'r �+'c�t .,. • ;.',, r f��, Taxanin wCmmmisai'on� Z '. .; iFz • s' .!. ; .. 9;:.. .',y p:i{{ v`' ryr,: i, �:�'-•n;,�ic 1't3tt,,. r r . ' I�� • y..;.t t� , , t .nr �` JI i + rib.- wt�� i{r ! �`'r.. d •. I r',\v 5 �' .dF'i '; t 'q.0 `{' v` yt a t�i.�Fi/.,,, vY qNt T,'r:+w�.."n��{r< rl :_,•i{i •: ;� S%' .q i" �'ir u�.. 1, : it}! fit;. (r:. �:.. �f i 4 �', i : iY+".,'. ,LV^i'•'t <,: •1' - Sin � .. W '.h` {. 'YS. .p <.'�., �¢%° („'ry"C SCAT „s tµry, 5x.'.:5.'fl, "M f}r,;, '. •eJ•�,.F• ;ry .tVr�i,�y . OLL _ {'.:n,.''.Lr.'•{-'�3¢¢S�di'''r:>`... s,h�g<'n'>i,.a''l >ry ',ti %3y•� `y;t��;-t� !`'�,i}t:h,(tSY':S�TY,i�v�,t'�"(ilyn��tt'y.o}ei r� M"t5•"L;t!a..:...ai� f K ."� �,.'.re:•:.v.v 1 s y��:, 's.. '4r.�`kk".,s":r}t,t I�>Y�• '� 't•�`1yty'f+•,:5 eWJ'}v`✓'-,r..<inIi'rt•,.FYn.iv�,,. trj:`IY' �)1'•'RCyy� 1'`'`Yac4a: °v4'1;t:.�..k:.;...4sn�t�:w5.JI+rJ..•'i,iS' ; : yl<r'.�.�!��ii�+d`yy.¢'j^SM§{Yw`':L.4,{:S•o,'L}rT'.;. ;i�.{s.'•'.V'r'•'.•-, ,•y '.l i•Y1?':I4;+r�y,,9. �',i'r4;.i•,',•, •r..,..•; lL �,i'ra + 5 ' .r,; 1 �1•,kk2 r,ii S, {. .4'. -... C �}A. u:4 J aque� ,j+•`,rtr,'s:: �� .,,�`,-. . •;";.,r;.,��:. 1 ,. ..h'^,.. • ! -rs3: e+; e ';5' w 'for':, 'r'v .uY r•:i�I,SPi. , f•� :' ` li ,:�;3��y„„ yc.'b'I,S�'4 • ;r:: J`a�,Y I u ,•✓. :.a.. ��•y i •; ..•�, :+' ;;� y (iC} �,,4�`: ':7. •p>> `:;:5 �,; ,;i, n s,F�H�y,f�FN•?,,.�;. �•t`."� "lir�'ISn,ry.+y+h :i , General:.plan 'rsquest m ,k' r'�4; t'>, , j�A' •,,y{r,^ ij A,' C,,: r�1iC.") ,C lve �uqr. r.. y• n•`!+. F,' f 'v. i:i .�, ^ti "``• r If`.: 4.,n-, r 'e'N•;El"`h' Tay r o1{••^,'• i �,�- 'i,,.r:`iys/•' ;ts'6�... r.,• .{;'f`:•iTt r N%jrT• 1 r yF'{'. '•}y=-i5,3! i�{:a .. . . .": ,:+`.• ae,}.r:i,s.{ • ...,• �sy S. r,:4 �C 1. +�i .~ 5'... 'f,.r• '^S, $'r%•es3� ,6��.,a 38r;•..'. �.•. �,, fY?•in• .' 'frr .• rj4r��.1•�i ,1' t+' .,. V•''*�t'rf ., ,L`r, ., t.tt r .- :-• :', � ', � r'Ya•• 2: r t:' ,1 .` �1,., ',. Nit r.: a5:.< y'�', .. :'•, .: :����;.}�„�_.•;N_,I_ u 'i i, ,•. „,•-:.i jFi Y ; ��..y';a`:•Pr•`•h^! a' t:T -v :mivti..'<': :,y... nwti.vt:Vl3{�nkPlr.Y:lA1:;1�iw�Gliwr�`>�1i im'Jku)sl'}brt�ffaY}X�:bF%`�vit<w�.#.�,].c:+u�>iFa`��b:�r514vi4�o'r..9�x.8' G�Nrc� ncaaYwl9•� "` rk1+Ad1 .Lo"! Cli,2':Drina, Piewport Beach, Calif. April 1;, ty74 Pianning 4ommiss3.on: City of Newport Beach, Dear Members, May we respeetiully requaat gnat you ccnsiaer a revision to Wie General Ylan wnicri would per -air, aevelopmant of the lot located at 647 Irvine Ave, with a duplex. Very sincerely, ' N ril a 00�eoep'i'Cp,\p�1 AQ L obi 4. Mr. Hobert F. McGiffi,n Mrs. Jane E. PicGiffin Z:' Location: Porion of lot 28, Newport Heights, located at 647 Irvine Avenue, on the northwesterly side of Irvine Avenue between Margaret Drive and Holly Lane in Newport Heights. F� S t Planning Commission Meeting June 20, 1974 Agenda Item No. 10-F CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH June 14, 1974 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Department of Community Development SUBJ: General Plan Amendment No. 8 -- Proposed amendment to the Land Use Element to change designation of the property at the southeast corner of Jamboree Road and Santa Barbara Drive from "Recreational and Environmental Open Space" to either "Governmental, Educational, and Institutional" or "Administrative, Professional, and Financial Commercial". This proposed amendment was initiated 'at the request of the property owner (letter attached). The letter suggests that it was the intent of the Land Use Element that this area be designated for office commercial use. This was not the case; the designation of this site as open space was an oversight, but no other land use designation had been proposed for this site at the time the Land Use Plan was drafted. Subject property is a roughly triangular parcel of approximately 1.15 acres, north of the Irvine Coast Country Club. (See attached map.) It is apparent that the open space designation of this site is inappropriate since the property is under private ownership and not slated for public purchase for park purposes and not currently used for private open space purposes. There are two alternative land use designations which may logically be considered for this site: 1. Governmental, Educational, and Institutional 2. Administrative, Professional, and Financial Commercial The first alternative would be logical in terms of the location, since this site is located across Santa Barbara Drive from the police and fire stations. Also, this designation would permit the intended primary use of the site as the Chamber of Commerce u i r TO: Planning Commission - 2 office. However, this designation would not permit commercial office use, which has been proposed in conjunction with the Chamber office, and it is somewhat questionable to designate privately -owned property for Governmental, Educational, and Institutional uses unless such a use is already established (e.g., a church), or unless public purchase of the property is anticipated. The second alternative appears to be the most reasonable since the site is within Newport Center and since most of Newport Center is designated for Administrative, Professional, and Financial Commercial use. This designation will permit the intended use as a Chamber of Commerce office with some commercial office space, and w-ill provide for alternative private uses in the future (if the Chamber office were to be relocated). The site is currently zoned "PC", which permits any use which is consistent with the General Plan, subject to approval of a development plan. Environmental Significance This proposed amendment, including both alternatives, was reviewed by the Environmental Affairs Committee on June 12, 1974 and it was determined that there is no environmental significance (in terms of the California Environmental (duality Act). However, all future projects proposed within the context of this amendment, if adopted, will be subject to detailed environmental review. Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that the Land Use Plan (map) be amended to change the designation of the property at the southeast corner of Jamboree Road and Santa Barbara Drive from "Recreational and Environmental Open Space" to "Administrative, Professional, and Financial Commercial". (No change to the text of the it 4 t • • '9 e c TO: Planning Commission - 3 Land Use Element is required; see Page 23 for the discussion of Newport Center.) f COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT R. V. HOGAN, DIRECTOR By Tim owe Advance Planning Administrator TC:jmb Att: Letter by Lawrence B. Moore dated April 15, 1974. Map Y !' THE RVIINE MmRaNy, ----55A. Neeupox t.0 entecD ciu, Newport Beach, California 92663 (714) 644-3011 April 15, 1974 Planning Commission City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92660 Attention: R. Hogan, Director of Community Development Subject: OPEN SPACE ZONING DESIGNATION, S. E. CORNER SANTA BARBARA DRIVE AND JAMBOREE ROAD Gentlemen: At the time the General Plan, Land Use designations were being finalized and adopted by the City, it was The Irvine Company's understanding that the Open Space designation in the vicinity of subject property was to be limited to the golf course. It was also The Irvine Company's understanding that subject property, between the golf course and subject intersection was to be designated similar to the remainder of Newport Center in that area, Commercial -Office. We believe this was also the City's understanding. It appears a graphic error followed, as subject property is now shown with an Open Space designation. The Irvine Company, therefore, respectfully requests the General Plan designation and corresponding zoning be revised to properly reflect the understood intent. The Irvine Company, further, respectfully requests this matter be handled administratively as we are now negotiating with the Ldewport Beach Chamber of Commerce reference subject site and time is of importance. If it is your determination that the correction of this error cannot be accomplished administratively, please consider this letter as a request for an Amendment to the General Plan at the earliest possible hearing. Very tru�l�yyou�r/s?,� L urence B. Moore Assistant Director LB1,1: rkg cc: C. Buchanan L. Miller, Newport Beach Chamber of Commerce .nMBOREE ROAD Ci VA COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 1 m> O m m`m`x1j0tm,"� MINUTES ROLL CALL Motion Motion Ayes Absent rune cu, 19/4 INDEX favor of the change. In discussion the figures and percentages, Planning Commission determined that only 53% of the landowners on Newport Island were in vor of the change. There b ing no others desiring to appear fid be heard, th public hearing was closed. Following di cussion, motion was mad that the matter be tab d. X Following furthe discussion, tion was made that X X X X X the Planning Commi ion not aprove the matter in X concept for the foil wing�r 4asons: 1. That 53% of the pro csrty owners did not represent a suffic'en number of persons in favor of the cha e. 2. The magnitude of cost and 'nconvenience which would be re ired by all pr erty owners and residents y reason of address changes on station y, checks, legal docuihents, driver's licens s, Social Security, etc. 3. Th opposition of the Police and Fi `e Depart- nts as to increased difficulty in 11Qcating nd answering emergency calls. Planning Commission recessed at 8:50.P.M. and reconvened at 9:00 P.M. Item 10-A An amendment to the Circulation Element to change GENERAL the classification of Bison Avenue between JamboreePL N and MacArthur Boulevard from a primary road to a MENDMENT NO. 3 secondary road and/or a relocation of the inter- section of Bison Avenue and Jamboree Road, and/or other realignment of the street system in this NO ACTION area. Staff reviewed the request and recommendations with the Planning Commission and discussed alternative traffic and turning patterns at the intersection of Bison Avenue and Jamboree Road; whether or not present and future development would generate a Page 9. COMMISSIONERS • ,CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH DC � Y m A p m m Z P P A DMI rAll m June 20. 1974 MINUTES iunry sufficient amount of traffic to warrant Bison Avenu remaining a primary road; the feasibility of relo- cating an arterial highway; and alternative designs for construction of Bison Avenue. Public hearing was opened in connection with this matter. Valerie Murley, Chairman of the Citizens Environ- mental Quality Control Advisory Committee, appeared before the Planning Commission to comment on the intersection of Bison Avenue and Jamboree Road which is of concern to the Committee and concurred with the recommendation of the staff report. Chris Goelitz, 700 Bison Avenue, President of the Eastbluff Homeowners Association, appeared before the Planning Commission to comment on the hazardous conditions which exist at Bison Avenue and Bamboo Street and voiced concern over feeding more traffic into Eastbluff and the residential areas. She requested that traffic be prohibited from crossing Jamboree Road at Bison Avenue and entering the Eastbluff area. Ken Casserin, resident of Eastbluff, appeared befor the Commission and commented on the additional traffic which could be generated through the Bluffs into Eastbluff and out on Bison Avenue which would connect with the freeway. Dave Neish, Planning Administrator with The Irvine Company, appeared before the Planning Commission and concurred with the staff report and recommenda- tions of the Public Works Department. The Irvine Company is in favor of keeping Bison Avenue a primary road because part of the system does exist at the present time and because of the proposed developments which would require the primary desig- nation. As far as the intersection of Jamboree Road and Bison Avenue is concerned, The Irvine Company will cooperate with the City in every way they can to solve the problems which exist. He also advised that a study was being made by his company in -connection with the intersection and a copy of same would be forwarded to the Public Works Department. Valerie Murley again appeared before the Commission to state that the amendment proposed by staff would not preclude how the intersection of Bison and Jamboree would be built, it would only recog- nize that a problem exists. Page 10. my • COMMISSIONERS • CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH m m y— Z mrc MINUTES Z P ° ROLL CALL Motion Motion Ayes Noes Absent Motion Ayes Absent June 20, 1974 INDEX There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed. X Motion was made to amend the Circulation Element of the General Plan as recommended by the staff report. X An amendment to the motion was made to include X the change that Bison Avenue be changed from a X X X X X primary road to a secondary road. X X Following discussion, a substitute motion was made X X X X X X that no action be taken at this time in connection X with General Plan Amendment No. 3 and that the staff study the matter further and confer with the Eastbluff Homeowners Association in connection therewith. Item 10-B An amendment to the Circulation Element to change GENERAL the classification of Irvine Avenue between 16th PL�L N — Street and Cliff Drive from a primary road to a AMENDMENT NO. 4 local street, and to delete the intersection at Irvine and Pacific Coast Highway. APPROVED City Engineer Nolan reviewed this matter with the Commission including the recommendations as out- lined in the staff reports. Public hearing was opened in connection with this matter. Donna Gallant, 424 St. Andrews Road, President of the Cliffhaven Community Association, appeared before the Commission and advised of their support of the amendment to the Circulation Element. Rolland Landrigan, 535 E1 Modina, Newport Heights, appeared before the Planning Commission and commented on the staff report. Bob Hall, 506 Irvine Avenue, appeared before the Planning Commission in favor of the amendment. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed. Page 11. COMMISSIONERS • CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL Motion Ayes Absent Motion Ayes Abstain Absent n m x MINUTES uune 20, 1974 INDEX X Following discussion, motion was made to adopt X X X X X X Resolution No. 888 recommending to the City Council X that General Plan Amendment No. 4 be adopted, amending the Circulation Element as follows: 1. Change the Master Plan of Streets and Highways designation of Irvine Avenue between 15th Street and 16th Street, from a primary road to a seconda-ry road (4 lanes undivided, as currently exists) and, south of 15th Street, from a primary road to a "local street" (2 lanes, as currently exists). 2. Delete the proposed connection of Irvine Avenue to the Coast Highway from the Master Plan of Streets and Highways. 3. Delete specific proposal No. 12 on Page 10 from the Circulation Element Report. 4. Delete Irvine Avenue from the Priority "D" projects on Table 4 on Page 27 of the Circula- tion Element Report. Item 10-C An amendment to the Circulation Element to change GENERAL the Classification of 15th Street between Superior PL�— Avenue and Balboa Boulevard from a primary road to AMENDMENT a secon,dany road. NO. Public hearing was opened in connection with this APPROVED matter and there being no one desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed. Planning Commission discussed whether or not the amendment should be made at this time and to what extent in view of the undeveloped character of much of the area and in order to keep the City's options open. X Following discussion, motion was made to adopt X X X X X Resolution No. 889, recommending to the City Council X that General Plan Amendment No. 5 be adopted, X amending the Circulation Element as follows: 1. Change the Master Plan of Streets and Highways designation of 15th Street between Placentia Avenue and the property line between the Bond Publishing Company site and the Banning Pro- perty (just west of Monrovia Avenue) from a "Primary Road" to a "Secondary Road". Page 12. COMMISSIONERS • CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH R " m y- m Z { I ROLL CALL r Motion Ayes Absent MINUTES lima 9n_ 107a 2. Revise the second sentence of Item 10, Page 9, of the Circulation Element report to read: "It involves the widening of existing 15th Street to four lanes undivided to a point just westerly of Monrovia Avenue, and continuing on with new construction at four lanes divided, crossing and intersecting..." Commissioner Seely stated he occasionally represented Bond Publishing Company and abstained from voting. Item 10-D An amendment to the Residential Growth Element and GENERAL Land Use Element to change the designated use of PLAN the property commonly known as' the "fun zone", at AMENDMENT NO. 6 the intersection of Palm Street.and Bay Avenue on the Balboa Peninsula, from "multi -family residen- tial" to "retail and service lommercial". APPROVED Advance Planning Administrator Cowell appeared before the Planning Commission to review the reports and answer questions relative to the request. Public hearing was opened in connection with this matter. John Konwiser, 1907 Bayadere,�Corona del Mar, appeared before the Planning Commission to answer questions relative to the request. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed. X Following discussion, motion was made to adopt X X X X X X Resolution No. 890 recommending to the City Counci X that General Plan Amendment No. 6 be adopted, amending the Land Use and Residential Growth Elements as follows: 1. Land Use Element - Amend the Land Use Plan map to change the designation of the "Fun Zone" site from "Multi -Family Residential" to "Retail and Service Commercial". 2. Residential Growth Element - Amend the Residential Growth Plan map) to delete the residential designation of the "Fun Zone" site Page 13. ~, . 0• COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL Motion Ayes Absent M �• m Y� m i � m MINUTES Uune 20, 1g74 INDEX item 10-E An amendment to the Residential Growth and Land ENERAL Use Elements to change the designated use of the prope-ty adjacent to Irvine Avenue between 15th Street and Laurel Place from "low -density residen- LAN MENDMENT tial" to "two-family residential". OT Public hearing was opened in connection with this PPROVED matter. Roland Landrigan appeared before the Planning Commission and presented two letters in opposition to the amendment from the following: Alfred B. and Cynthia W. Wilson, 2301 Margaret Dr.; Sho Mukai, 635 Irvine Avenue. Mr. Landrigan also spoke in opposition to the amendment and agreed with the staff report and the recommendation for denial. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed. X Planning Commission determined there was no justi- X X X X X X X fication for the amendment, therefore motion was made that the amendment not be adopted. Commissioner Parker stepped down and abstained from deliberation on the following item because of its relationship to the Chamber of Commerce building proposed for the site in which he has been involved. Item 10-F An amendment to the Land Use Element to change the designated use of the property at the southeast corner of Jamboree Road and Santa Barbara Drive from "recreational and environmental open space" to either "governmental, educational,and institu- tional" or "administrative, professional, and financial commercial". GENERAL PLAN TRUENDMENT N0. 8 APPROVED Public hearing was opened in connection with this matter. Page 14. .. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH m m ? y MINUTES ROLL CALL Motion Ayes Abstain Absent Motion Ayes Absent Motion Ayes Absent Motion Ayes Absent rI vuuc cU, 1a,7 INDEX Dave Neish, Planning Administrator with The Irvine Company, appeared before the Planning Commission and advised they were in favor of amending the designation to administrative, professional, and financial commercial as recommended in the staff report. Larry Miller, Assistant Manager, Chamber of Commerce, appeared before the Commission to answer questions relative to the proposed development of the site. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed. X Motion was made to adopt Resolution No. 891, X X X X X recommending to the City Council that General Plan X Amendment No. 8 be adopted, amending the Land Use X Element as follows: 1. Revise the Land Use Plan (map) to change the designation of the property at the southeast corner of Jamboree Road and Santa Barbara Drive from "Recreational and Environmental Open Space" to "Administrative, Professional, and Financial Commercial". Item #11 PROPOSED NPr osed archaeological and paleontological po c� y POLICIES as p o osed by the Commission's Committee on Paleon ogy. CONT. TO X n continued this ma er to the Planning CXad JULY 1 X X X X X X meeting of, 1974. X ADDITIONALS: X Planning Cn ado Resolution No. 885, X X X X X X setting a ear' g for July 11, 1974, to X consider pncerning a design of the Upper Bay X Planning Cn adopted Resolutio o. 886, X X X X X X setting ahearing for July 18, 1 •74, to 2�0 X consider he proposed amendment to Title of the Newpor Beach Municipal Code as it pertains*'tro sig reguliatiions. Page 15. Y c Planning Commission Meeting June 20, 1974 Agenda Item No. 10 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH June 13, 1974 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Department of Community Development SUBJ: Proposed amendments to the General Plan (Public Hearing). At the meeting of May 16, 1974, the Planning Commission set a public hearing for June 20, 1974 to consider six proposed amendments to the General Plan. Attached are individual staff memos on each proposed amendment. Staff would suggest that the public hearing be conducted in a series of six hearing sessions, with a public hearing session being opened and closed for each individual amendment as it is considered. The proposed amendments have been assigned "General Plan Amendment Numbers" 3 through 8; two amendments have already been adopted (on December 17, 1973). COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT R. V. HOGAN, DIREC R s By — Cowell Advance Planning Administrator TC:jmb Att. Staff Memos • • t=�� �s.U2 NOTICE OF PUBLIC 'HEARING Notice is hereby given that the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach will hold a public hearing to consider the following proposed amendments to the Newport Beach General Plan: 1. An amendment to the Circulation Element to change the classi- fication of Bison Avenue between Jamboree and MacArthur Blvd. from a primary road to a secondary road and/or a relocation of the intersection of Bison Ave. and Jamboree Road, and/or other realignment of the street system in this area. 2. An amendment to the Circulation Element to change the classi- fication of Irvine Avenue between 16th Street and Cliff Drive from a primary road to a local street, and to delete the intersection at Irvine and Pacific Coast Highway. 3. An amendment to the Circulation Element to change the classi- fication of 15th Street between Superior Avenue and Balboa Blvd. from a primary road to a secondary road. 4. An amendment to the Residential Growth Element and Land Use Elements to change the designated use of the property commonly known as the "fun zone", at the intersection of Palm Street and Bay Avenue on the Balboa Peninsula, from "multi -family residential"•to "retail and service commercial". 5. An amendment to the Residential Growth and Land Use Elements to change the designated use of the property adjacent to Irvine Avenue between--15th Street and Laurel Place from "low -density residential" to "two-family residential" 6. An amendment to the Land Use Element to change the designated use of the property at the southeast corner of Jamboree Road r �, and Santa Barbara Drive from "recreational and env,ironmehtal open space" to either "governmental, educational, and institutional" or "administrative, professional, and financial commercial". Notice is hereby further,given that said public hearing will be held on the 20th day of June, 1974, at the hour of 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Newport Beach City Hall, at which time and place any and all persons interested may appear and be heard thereon. TC:jmb Joseph Rosener, Jr., Secretary Newport Beach City Planning Commission Publication Date June 6, 1974 Received for Publi _ By _ 4�A�� —2— e rM 19 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION NEWPORT HARBOR ENSIGN STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of Orange as. I, .._.... ...... RVO E. HWA ................ being first ................................... . dilly sworn, and on oath depose and say that I am the printer and publisher of the Newport Harbor Ensign, a weekly newspaper printed and published in the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange, State of California, and that the... NOTICE ON PUBLIC HEARING .... ........ ----...... . .. of which copy attached hereto is a true and complete copy, was printed and published in the regular issue(s) of said newspaper, and not in a supplement, ....1 .....---- consecu- tive times: to -wit the issue(s) of June b, 1974 ................ ..-----... _........ .. .............................. ........._..._..._...... ....... (Signed) �.�, �� L i —c� i, _. A_ Subscribed and sworn to before me this..t h..... day of ............................June........, :: ::__._.... Nota��- Public in and for th� C])oun y of Orange, State of California. Y �� q P1n2Y P F+IAPA t t,F IN �'. �`�� QRAN6E IOUMTY a+��TY:A!SST`pN EX RES LhC McE{�"_+f<<y • Gs&ra7 Plm 1, Au}mend culatfoq Elem to *,.Tgla�ificatian. B ?tet*een Jambplee, IArthur Blvd. fro tq.a,sec a relocatioq on of Bisap;Av Ro&d, ,and/or of eat of 4he street ar �. An ame eat to the C on Elet to c C* n Irvin IBBt� omi L�i eet kite ritna c streeapd• oa at Iralne° t Highway. dment. the »cement fo n cahMn of 1, S ertor d. flt r `O An deatials Land lies the sc a erl: eom ,�, t'. tion of, Avenw ong aU to' gxe8�- a1 to com a 5. An dentia 81em ig- ffited, be. and he hearde;predd: l sener,Jre COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT VIACW G1 n D n� Dp O T e.,12 e.l, m Mav 16. 1974 MINUTES uww Commissioner Parker stepped down from the dais and refrained from deliberation in connection with Item #12 inasmuch as he has been involved in Chamber of Commerce discussions pertaining to the property in question. erpretation of General Plan as related to Item #12 pro ed location of Chamber of Commerce office buildi at the corner of Jamboree Road and Santa Barbara ve. Community Deve pment Director Hogan reviewed this matter with the mission and advised of the need for an interpretati as outlined in the staff report. Planning Commission discuss the matter and determined that the open spac designation should be applied only to the country c b, therefore an amendment to the General Plan s uId be initiated in order to consider other designatio to the property north of the country club. Se ing of the public hearing in connection therewith as combined with Item #13. Commissioner Parker returned to the dais. Proposed Amendments to the General Plan. Item #13 Senior Planner Cowell distributed letters request- ing amendments to the General Plan and reviewed th various requests with the Planning Commission. Motion X following discussion, motion was made to adopt Ayes X X X X X X Resolution No. 884, setting a public hearing for Absent X June 20, 1974, to consider amendments to the Gener 1 Plan as follows: 1. An amendment to the Circulation Element to change the classification of Bison Avenue between Jamboree and MacArthur Blvd. from a primary road to a secondary road and/or a relocation of the intersection of Bison Ave. and Jamboree Road, and/or other realignment of the street system in this area. Page 13. 41 k 'COMMISSIONERS, • CITY OF NEWPORT RACH I onll rwl Mav 1A_ 1g74 MINUTES �� - �� •-✓ - • - INUCA 2. An amendment to the Circulation Element to change the classification of Irvine Avenue between 16th Street and Cliff Drive from a primary road to a local street, and to delete the intersection at Irvine and Pacific Coast Highway. 3. An amendment to the Circulation Element to change the classification of 15th Street be, tween Superior Avenue and Balboa Blvd. from a primary road to a secondary road. 4. An amendment to the Residential Growth Element and Land Use Elements to change the designated use of the property commonly known as the "Fun Zone", at the intersection of Palm Street and Bay Avenue on the Balboa Peninsula, from "multi- family residential" to "retail and service commercial". 5. An amendment to the Residential Growth and Land Use Elements to change the designated use of the property adjacent to Irvine Avenue between 15th Street and Laurel Place from "low -density residential" to "two-family residential". 6. An amendment to the Land Use Element to change the designated use of the property at the southeast corner of Jamboree Road and Santa Barbara Drive from "recreational and environ- mental open space" to either "governmental, educational, and institutional" or "administra tive, professional, and financial commercial". Proposed archaeological and paleontological policy Item #14 as proposed by the Commission's Committee on Paleontology. Comm ioner Heather requested that this matter be continue o the meeting of June 6, 1974, as problems ha risen from combining the subjects of archaeologica and paleontological policy together. She advi that the Committee had reviewed the paleontolo . al aspect but needed more time if the two subjec were to be combined. Motion X Planning Commission continued this ter to the Ayes X X X X X X meeting of June 6, 1974. Absent X Page 14. - � r RESOLUTION NO. 884 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO CONSIDER ADOPTION OF VARIOUS AMENDMENTS TO THE GENERAL PLAN WHEREAS, the General Plan of the City of Newport Beach sets forth objectives and supporting policies to be followed in the planning of the future development of said City; and WHEREAS, Section 707 of the City Charter of the City of Newport Beach requires the Planning Commission to hold a public hearing prior to the adoption of any amendment of the General Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission intends to consider adoption of the following various amendments: (1) An amendment to the Circulation Element to change the classification of Bison Avenue between Jamboree and MacArthur Boulevard from a primary road to a secondary road and/or a relocation of the intersection of Bison Avenue and Jamboree Road, and/or other realignment of the street system in this area; (2) An amendment to the Circulation Element to change the classification of Irvine Avenue between 16th Street and Cliff Drive from a primary road to a local street, and to delete the intersection at Irvine and Pacific Coast Highway; (3) An amendment to the Circulation Element to change the classification of 15th Street between Superior Avenue and Balboa Boulevard from a primary road to a secondary road; (4) An amendment to the Residential Growth Element and Land Use Elements to change the designated use of the property commonly known as the "fun zone", at the intersection of Palm Street and Bay Avenue on the Balboa Peninsula, from "multi- family residential" to "retail and service commercial". -1- (5) An amendment to the Residential Growth and Land Use Elements to change the designated use of the property adjacent to Irvine Avenue between 15th Street and Laurel Place from "'low -density residential" to "two-family residential"; (6) An amendment to the Land Use Element to change the designated use of the property at the southeast corner of Jamboree Road and Santa Barbara Drive from "recreational and environmental open space" to either "governmental, educational, and institutional" or "administrative, professional, and financial commercial"; at a public hearing to be held on the 20th day of June, 1974, at the hour of 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Newport Beach City Hall, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Secretary of the Newport Beach Planning Commission is hereby directed to publish notice of said hearing in accordance with the requirements of law. Regularly passed and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach, State of California, on the 16th day of May, 1974. AYES: Beckley, Hazewinkel, Heather, Parker, Rosener, Seely NOES: None ABSENT:— Agee I,J Q9 ,, C. Chairman William C. ewinkel -2- DRB/bc 5/21/74 rlGwr 1-5 May 16, 1974 Planning Commission Meeting Agenda Item No. 13 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH TO: Planning Commission FROM: Department of Community Development SUBJ: Proposed Amendments to the Newport Beach General Plan Recommendation The staff recommends to the Planning Commission that they set the following amendments to the Newport Beach General Plan for public hearing on June 6, 1974. 1. An amendment to the Circulation Element to change the classi- fication of Bison Avenue between Jamboree and MacArthur Blvd. from a primary road to a secondary road and/or a relocation of the intersection of Bison Ave. and Jamboree Road. 2. An amendment to the Circulation Element to change the classi- fication of Irvine Avenue between 16th Street and Cliff Drive from a primary road to a local street, and to delete the Intersection at Irvine and Pacific Coast Highway. 3. An amendment to the Circulation Element to change the classi- fication of 15th Street between Superior Avenue and Balboa Boule- vard from a primary road to a secondary road. 4. An amendment to the Residential Growth Element and Land Use Elements to change the designated use of the property commonly known as the "fun zone" from multi -family residential to retail and service commercial. 5. An amendment to the Residential Growth and Land Use Elements to change the designated use of the property adjacent to Irvine Avenue between 15th Street and Laurel Place from low -density residential to two-family residential. Background According to City Council Policy Q-1 the Planning Commission or the City Council may initiate amendments to the General Plan, with Planning Commission public hearings for consideration of such TO: Planning Commission - 2 amendments to be held in the months of February, June and October. A citizen and/or property owner may request the Planning Commission to consider an amendment to the General Plan by submitting in writing such a request to the Planning Commiss"ioii. The amendments proposed herein include all requests received from the public, those directed by the City Council, and those recommended by staff. The Commission should set but one public hearing at which each of the individual amendments will be consido-red. Discussion 1. An amendment to the Circulation Element to change the classi- fication of Bison Avenue between Jamboree and MacArthur Blvd. from a primary road to a secondary road and/or a relocation of the intersection of Bison Ave. and Jamboree Road. At their meeting on March 11, 1974 the City Council directed the Planning Commission to consider this amendment to the Circulation Element of the General P1-an.-, Bison Avenue is described in the Circulation Element text on page 12 as follows: "This is a short section of Bison Avenue being developed as a primary road connector between two major roads, Jamboree and MacArthur. This route will provide an important circulation element in the system when the Corona del Mar Freeway is constructed." 2. An amendment to the Circulation Element to change the classi- fication of Irvine Avenue between 16th Street and Cliff Drive from a primary road to a local street, and to delete the intersection at Irvine and Pacific Coast Highway. At their meeting on March 11, 1974 the City Council directed the Planning Commission to consider this amendment to the __- .Circulation Element T This project is described within the Circulation Element text on page 10 as follows: "This section of Irvine Avenue is to be widened to four lanes from 15th Street to Cliff Drive. It is the only section of Irvine Avenue left in the City which is not four lanes. Because I _ I L TO: Planning Commission - 3 of its location and relatively low existing and projected traffic %'rolumes, it is a low - priority project. No traffic deficiency is projected." 3. An amendment to the Circulation Element to change the classi- fication of 15th Street between Superior Avenue and Balboa Boulevard from a primary road to a secondary road. The County of Orange has already initiated precise alignment studies and Environmental Impact Reports on this segment of 15th Street as a secondary road. The City's Traffic Consultant has advised the staff in a letter dated April 11, 1974 (attached) that 15th Street could be developed as a secondary roadway if Superior Avenue continues to intersect with Coast Highway. Therefore, staff is recommending the Planning Commission consider this matter at the June 6, 1974 public hearing. 4. An amendment to the Residential Growth Element and Land Use Elements to change the designated use of the property commonly_ known as the "fun zone" from multi -family residential to retail and service commercial. At the present time, the property is zoned C-1, which is not in conformance with the existing land use designation in the General Plan. In a letter dated March 1, 1974 (attached), the property owner requested that the Planning Commission consider this amendment. In view of recent developments, the staff recommends that the designated use in 'the General Plan be re-evaluated. 5. An amendment to the Residential Growth and Land Use Elements to change the designated use of the property adjacent to Irvine Avenue between 15th Street and Holly Lane from low -density residential to two-family residential. In a letter dated April 15, 1974 the owner of the property located at 647 Irvine Avenue, requested that the Planning Commission consider amending the Residential Growth Element for their 0 • TO: Planning Commission - 4 particular property from low -density residential to two- family residential. The property owner stated that this particular area was deteriorating and that the reclassification to a higher density would act as a stimulus to rejuvenate the area. Staff believes that the reclassification of a single lot would not be proper and the subsequent rezoning, if this amendment was to be approved, would be spot zoning. Therefore, staff suggests that, if an amendment is desired, the Planning Commission consider a larger area which would include all lots fronting on Irvine Avenue between 15th Street and Holly Lane. Additional data on all of these proposed amendments will be submitted by staff for consideration during the public hearing on June,6, 1974. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT R. V. HO N, IR TOR O. 00 y: lm o Senior Planner RVH:TC:jmb 1117 714/273•'.353 w • /,: I Z t/: ALAN M. VOORHEES & ASSOCIATES, INC. t:C:'3ULTANTS Mr. Ben Nolen City Engineer City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92660 Dear Ben:" 11 April 1974 On Wednesday April 10, we discussed by telephone the present and future status of 15th Street in the West Newport area. There appears to be a question whether this should be designated as a primary or secondary roadway. The recommended circulation element of the General Plan designates 15th Street as a primary roadway. To my recollection, this came about as a result of discussion with Bob Jaffe when alternatives in 'West Newport were being considered. Our most recent traffic pro- jections for the Newport Beach Network shows that 15th Street may have --an ADT of approximately 14; 000: This would -depend- on the - land use being developed as now planned, and the road system which develops. with.-the-1"and•.to:connect.wiu`i.tire.General Plan -streets: --For.-._:.. .instance, should Superior Avenue not connect to Coast Highway as has - often been discussed, then 15th Street would carry this additional traffic, and likely require primary road status. An alternative to developing a primary roadway section is to develop 15th Street as a secondary roadway with close control of where drive- ways and street intersections are placed. This would create a minimum of side friction and permit traffic to flow smoothly. With adequate provision for off-street parking, on -street parking could be prohibited when the secondary roadway is constructed, which would permit a two-way left turn lane to be installed with left turn pockets at inter-' sections. The roadway cross section and striping configuration would be like Campus Drive. The capacity of a roadway with that configura- tion is approximately Z2, 000. In summary, I would say that 15th Street could be developed as a secondary roadway if Superior Avenue continues to intersect with Coast Highway. If superior Avenue is terminated before reaching Coast Highway, then 15th Street may be developed as a secondary roadway n a - > Y 75•u5s a •n.=:•^.) u C. v .' _ i n + .... _ u .... a : . ��7 Mr. Ben Nolen City of Newport Beach 11 April 1974 Page 2 with a two-way left turn lane, which would necessitate prohibition of h parking; - Before' making -this decision, the major and -minor'' xoa'd system for this area should be reviewed to ensure that these roadways will provide adequate capacity. If you have any questions regarding this or other matters, please call me. Very truly yours, A. H.Krier -- -- - Regional Manager THE KONW 5ER CORPORATION • Builders and Developers 4120 BIRCH STREET SUITE 104 NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92660 714 - 833-2704 March 1, 1974 Mr. R. V. Hogan, Director, Community Development Newport Beach City Hall 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, Calibrnia 92660 Dear Mr. Hogan: Would you kindly consider this letter our request to change the designated use of the property commonly known as the Fun Zone and as shown on the attached map from residential to commercial as indicated on the Land Use Element of the City of Newport Beach General Plan. I understand the City will consider changes to the Land Use Element during the month of April, and I would appreciate knowing of any further ac- tion required on my part other than this letter to ensure that my request will be considered by the City at the appropriate time. JK:mc Enclosure Very truly yours, Xohn/ N President r EC EtV EU R car' 'peril pev Deft 1g74P- CAT05 t1swPovil 3 j 13EACN�/� J�