Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989 CENTRAL BALBOA SPECIFIC AREA PLAN*NEW FILE* 1989 CENTRAL BALBOA S.A.P 9 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH. PLANNING DEPARTMENT 22 August 1989 TO: Rich Edmonton, Traffic Engineer FROM: Bret B. Bernard, Associate Planner SUBJECT: Central Balboa S.P.A.-- Parking and Circulation Study This is simply a follow-up memorandum to that forwarded to you on 04 August 1989 (please see a copy attached for your reference) regarding the consultant Parking and Circulation Study for the Central Balboa Specific Plan Area. Our department has subsequently received several more "inquiries" about the progress of the Specific Area Plan for that area. So that we might be able to better inform the public, and its elected representatives, could you communicate to us the state of the "draft" scope of services which you were going to prepare. If I recall correctly, our department's responsible staff members were to review this draft prior to final input from a combined meeting of all of the Central Balboa groups. Only then were we going to distribute the scope to qualified consultants. Please advise us if this procedure is different that what you might remember. BRET B. BERNARD, Associate Planner Enclosure xc: James D. Hewicker, Planning Department Director Robert P. Lenard, Advance Planning Manager Don Webb, City Engineer F:\WP50\BRET\MAPERTAI.MEM Planning Commission Meeting August 10. 1989 Agenda Item No. 7 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH TO: Planning Commission FROM: Planning Department SUBJECT: Amendment No. 679 (Public Hearing) Request to consider an amendment to Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code so as to define and regulate "specialty food" uses in the City; and the acceptance of an environmental document. Background On May 4, 1979, the Planning Commission voted to initiate Amendment No. 679, so as to provide a new category of food service to be called "specialty food" use. On June 8, 1989, the Planning Commission voted to deny the amendment. However, on June 22, 1989, the Planning Commission expressed a desire to rehear the item. A copy of the previously prepared staff report and minutes of the June 22, 1989 meeting are attached. Sueeested Action If desired, adopt Resolution No. , recommending to the City Council the adoption of the Amendment No. 679, which defines and regulates "specialty food" uses. PLANNING DEPARTMENT JAMES D. HEWICKER, Director c By 4 SANDRA L. GEl IS Senior Planner C\PCSR\A679-SF.810 Attachments: 1. Planning Commission staff report dated June 8, 1989. 2. Excerpt of the Planning Commission minutes of June 8, 1989. 3. Letter from Balboa Peninsula Point Association. i 0 A'PPAtJww No. 1 Planning Commission Meeting June 8. 1989 Agenda Item No. 10 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH TO: Planning Commission FROM: Planning Department Request to consider an amendment to Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code so as to define and regulate "specialty food" uses in the City,- and the acceptance of an environmental document. This is a request to amend the Zoning Code to provide a new category of food service, to be called "specialty food" use. Under the attached draft restaurant ordinance amendment, no use permit would be required for specialty food establishments having a gross floor area of 1,200 square feet or less and counter space or seating for 12 or fewer patrons, provided certain standards were met. i 14 M."11 On May 4, 1989, the Planning Commission voted to initiate the proposed Amendment No. 679, In accordance with City Council Policy K.3 and State guidelines to implement the California Environmental Quality Act, an Initial Study has been prepared for this amendment. On the basis of the Initial Study, it has been determined that the amendment will not have any significant environmental impact. A Negative Declaration has been prepared and is attached for Commission review. A "take-out restaurant" is defined by Section 20.72.010 of the Municipal Code as: ...a place of business which sells food products or beverages and which: 1. Delivers such food products or beverages to customers outside of the building in which they are prepared by means of a service window, counter or similar method or device, or 2. Delivers such food products or beverages to customers within a building which is designated in such a manner that a majority of the customers will remove such food products or beverages from the building for consumption. .2- • 0 TO: Planning Commission - 2. Section 20.72.020 of the Municipal Code requires that a use permit be obtained for all take-out restaurants. By contrast, a retail food store or retail bakery is a permitted use in many commercial districts of the City. The Code also specifies certain standards which are to be met by restaurants and take-out restaurants unless waived by the Planning Commission. Recent Take-out Restaurant Approvals The attached' tables list twenty five take-out restaurants which were approved between February, 1986, and April, 1989. As can be seen on the tables, the approved take-out restaurants appear to be of two types. Some specialize in only a few items, such as baked goods or ice cream. These take-outs generally have only limited seating and devote only a small portion of the facility to public area. Many of these smaller take-out restaurants function more like retail uses in terms of parking demand and general intensity of use. In these cases, the restaurant development standards are frequently not applicable and are often waived by the Planning Commission, although a use permit is still required. . Other, larger facilities may offer the opportunity to have a full meal on the premises. These facilities generally have a larger public area and more seats. Large chain take- out restaurants such as Taco Bell and Carl's Jr. would fall into this group. e,, � •_, M In order to relieve the smaller facilities of the burden of obtaining use permits, it is suggested that the zoning code be amended to provide a new category of food service, to be called "specialty food" use. Under the attached draft restaurant ordinance amendment, no use permit would be required for specialty food establishments having a gross floor area of 1,200 square feet or Jess and counter space or seating for 12 or fewer patrons, provided certain standards were met. Among the criteria to be considered are hours of operation, service of alcoholic beverages, control of grease and odors, and adequate trash disposal. An example of how these criteria would become important is the case of Gelato Classico at 2756 East Coast Highway. Use Permit No. 3070, which permitted the establishment of this facility was originally approved on November 10, 1983, and amended on September 5, 1985. The Planning Commission considered revocation of this use permit in February, 1989. Although Gelato Classico would have been exempt from the requirement for a use permit based solely on the size of the facility and the lack of seating, the extended operating hours and trash disposal problems at the facility would have rendered it subject to a use permit under the proposed ordinance. Required parking for specialty food uses would be the same as that required for retail uses, i.e., one space for each 250 square feet of gross floor area. 3 0 TO: Planning Commission - 3. In order to provide for specialty food uses as a permitted use, it is necessary to amend the following sections of the Zoning Code: Section District 20.30.035 B "H" Combining District 20.30.040 B "Z" Combining District 20.32.015 C-N 20.33.020 OR 20.34.015 C-O 20.35.015 C-1 20.36.020 C-2 20.41.025 M-1 20.51.025 P-C 20.61.060 A Specific Plan (Newport Shores) 20.62.040 A Specific Plan (Mariners' Mile, RMC) 20.62.050 A Specific Plan (MAriners' Mile RSC) 20.63.030 A Specific Plan (Cannery Village/McFadden Square, SR DIstrict) 20.63.035 B Specific Plan (Cannery Village/McFadden Square, RMC District) 20.63.040 A Specific Plan (Cannery Village/McFadden Square, RSC Suggested Action District) If desired, adopt Resolution No. , recommending to the City Council the adoption of the proposed Amendment No. 6795,Wch defuses and regulates "specialty food" uses. PLANNING DEPARTMENT JAMES D. HEWICKER, Director SANDRA L GENIS Senior Planner I C\PCSR\A679.6.8.SLG Attachments: 1. Summaries of recent approvals. 2. Resolution No. 3. Proposed revissons to�aecc on 20,72. 4. Proposed revisions to additional sections of Title 20, 5. Negative Declaration. H iUN TAKEOUT RESTAURANT APPROVALS, 2/6/86 THROUGH 4/14/89 UFO-' ADDRESS DESCRIPTION SEATS EMPLOYES GROSS NET PERCENT PARKING PARKING PARKING ALCOHOL SQ.FT. PUBLIC PUBLIC REQUIRED TO CODE WAIVED 3278 4101 Jamboree Taco Bell 110 12 2528 1059 41.89% 72 85 13 No 3280 3101 Newport Carl's Jr. 71 16 2548 1189 46.66% 34 67 33 No 3284 3423 Via Lido Rocko's Italian 62 7 1216 804 66.12% 4 25 21 Beer/Wine 3309 1301 Dove Snack Bar 51 4 1270 649 51.10% 5 30 25'Beer/Wine 3230 351 Hospital Cafeteria 40 3 972 571 58.74% 4 23 19 No 3223 3995 Birch Chinese 36 6 1377 595 43.21% 20 34 14 Beer/Wine 013287 205 Main Britta's 31 5 1200 315 26.25% 5 29 24 Beer/Wine 3266 251 Shipyard Sandwiches 28 2 942 540 57.32% 2 21 19 Beer/Wine 3263 506 31st Alta Coffee 21 3 1210 331 27.36% 6 28 22 No 3191 3601 E.-Coast-Hwy. Deli 20 4 1935 727 37.57i 8 43 35 Beer/Wine a3209 603 E. Balboa Mexican 17 2 562 223 39.68% 2 14 12 No 3187 1616 San Miguel Pizza 16 4 1275 277 21.73% 6 30 24 Beer/Wine 3295 2549 Eastbluff Yogurt/Pizza 12 9 1387 345 24.87% 7 37 30 No 3297 3441 Via Lido Ice Cream 12 4 1090 521 47.80% 5 21 16 No 3235 3025 E. Coast Hwy. Muffins/Yogurt 12 4 1064 494 46.43% 4 26 22 No 3219 2727 Newport Heidi's Yogurt 4 2 875 118 13.49% 6 20 14 No 3311 1701 Corinthian Chinese 3 4 834 197 23.62% 5 21 16 No 3268 553 Newport Center Sweet Life Bakery 0 7 1579 227 14.38% 7 39 32 No 3290 3431 Via Oporto Muffins 0 3 615 100 16.26% 3 16 13 No 3319 211 Marine Mucho Munchies 0 2 392 60 15.31% 0 10 10 No 3348 301 Marine Yogurt Shop 0 2 521 326 62.57% 0 13 13 No 3241 220 Marine Grujebrot Bakery 0 2 875 84 9.60% 0 20 20 No 3,217 220 1/2 Marine Cinnamon Rolls 0 2 434 35 8.06% 0 11 11 No 3190 1130 Irvine Heidi's Yogurt 0 3 930 242 26.02% 22 22 0 No 3334 3101 W. Coast Hwy. LeMay's Yogurt 0 3 528 124 23.48% 3 14 11 No SORTED BY NUMBER OF SEATS n T TAKEOUT RESTAURANT APPROVALS, 2/6/86 THROUGH 4/14/89 UP ADDRESS DESCRIPTION SEATS EMPLOYES GROSS NET PERCENT PARKING PARKING PARKING ALCOHOL SQ.FT. PUBLIC PUBLIC REQUIRED TO CODE WAIVED 3280 3278 3191 3268 3295 3223 3187 3309 3284 3263 • 3287 3297 3235 3230 3266 3190 3219 3241 3311 3290 ♦ 3209 3334 3348 3217 3319 3101 Newport 4101 Jamboree 3601 E. Coast Hwy. 553 Newport Center 2549 Eastbluff 3995 Bitch 1616 San Miguel 1301 Dove 3423 Via Lido 506 31st 205 Main 3441 Via Lido 3025 E. Coast Hwy. 351 Hospital 251 Shipyard 1130 Irvine 2727 Newport 220 Marine 1701 Corinthian 3431 Via Oporto 603 E. Balboa 3101 W. Coast Hwy. 301 Marine 220 1/2 Marine 211 Marine Carl's Jr. Taco Bell Deli Sweet Life Bakery Yogurt/Pizza Chinese Pizza Snack Bar Rocko's Italian Alta Coffee Britta's Ice Cream Muffins/Yogurt Cafeteria Sandwiches Heidi's Yogurt Heidi's Yogurt Grujebrot Bakery Chinese Muffins Mexican LeMay's Yogurt Yogurt Shop Cinnamon Rolls Mucho Munchies SORTED BY GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE 71 16 2548 1189 46.66% 34 67 33 No 110 12 2528 1059 41.89t 72 85 13 No 20 4 1935 727 37.57% 8 43 35 Beer/Wine 0 7 1579 227 14.38% 7 39' 32 No 12 9 1387 345 24.87% 7 37 30 No 36 6 1377 595 43.21t 20 34 14 Beer/Wine 16 4 1275 277 21.73% 6 30 24 Beer/Wine 51 4 1270 649 51.10% 5 30 25 Beer/Wine 62 7 1216 804 66.12% 4 25 21 Beer/Wine 21 3 1210 331 27.36% 6 28 22 He 31 5 1200 315 26.25% 5 29 24 Beer/Wine 12 4 1090. 521 47.80% 5 21 16 No 12 4 1064, 494 46.43% 4 26 22 No 40 3 972: 571 58.74% 4 23 19 No 28 2 942 540 57.32% 2 21 19 Beer/Wine 0 3 930- 242 26.0246 22 22 0 No 4 2 875, 118 13.49% 6 20 14 NO 0 2 875 : 84 9.60t 0 20 20 No 3 4 834. 197 23.62% 5 21 16 No 0 3 615- 100 16.26% 3 16 13 No 17 2 562- 223 39.68% 2 14 12 No 0 3 528- 124 23.48% 3 14 11 No 0 2 521- 326 62.57% 0 13 13 No 0 2 434 35 8.06% 0 11 11 No 0 2 392J 60 15.31% 0 10 10 No 9 i TAKEOUT RESTAURANT APPROVALS, 2/6/86 THROUGH 4/14/89 UP ADDRESS DESCRIPTION SEATS EMPLOYES GROSS NET PERCENT PARKING PARKING PARKING ALCOHOL SQ.FT. PUBLIC PUBLIC REQUIRED TO CODE WAIVED 3284 3348 3230 3266 3309 3297 3280 3235 3223 3278 • 3209 3191 3263 s3287 3190 3295 3311 3334 3187 3290 3319 3268 3219 3241 3217 3423 Via Lido 301 Marine 351 Hospital 251 Shipyard 1301 Dove 3441 Via Lido 3101 Newport 3025 E. Coast Hwy. 3995 Birch 4101 Jamboree 603 E. Balboa 3601 E. Coast Hwy. 506 31st 205 Main 1130 Irvine 2549 Eastbluff 1701 Corinthian 3101 W. Coast Hwy. 1616 San Miguel 3431 Via Oporto 211 Marine 553 Newport Center 2727 Newport 220 Marine 220 1/2 Marine SORTED BY PERCENT PUBLIC Rocko's Italian Yogurt Shop Cafeteria Sandwiches Snack Bar Ice Cream Carl's Jr. Muffins/Yogurt Chinese Taco Bell Mexican Deli Alta Coffee Britta's Heidi's Yogurt Yogurt/Pizza Chinese LeMay's Yogurt Pizza Muffins Mucho Munchies Sweet Life Bakery Heidi's Yogurt Grujebrot Bakery Cinnamon Rolls 62 7 1216 804 66.12% 4 25 21 Beer/Wine 0 2 521 326 62.57% 0 13 13 No 40 3 972 571 58.74% 4 23. 19 No 28 2 942 540 57.32% 2 21 19 Beer/Wine 51 4 1270 649 51.10% 5 30 25 Beer/Wine 12 4 1090 521 47.80% 5 21 16 No 71 16 2548 1189 46.66% 34 67 33 No 12 4 1064 494 46.43% 4 26 22 No 36 6 1377 595 43.21% 20 34 14 Beer/Wine 110 12 2528 1059 41.89% 72 85 13 No 17 2 562 223 39.68% 2 14 12 No 20 4 1935 727 37.57% 8 43 35 Beer/Wine 21 3 1210 331 27.36% 6 28 22 No 31 5 1200 315 26.25% 5 29 24 Beer/Wine 0 3 930 242 26.02% 22 22 0 No 12 9 1387 345 24.87% 7 37 30 No 3 4 834 197 23.62% 5 21 16 No 0 3 528 124 23.48% 3 14 it No 16 4 1275 277 21.73% 6 30 24 Beer/Wine 0 3 615 100 16.26% 3 16 13 No 0 2 392 60 15.31% 0 10 10 No 0 7 1579 227 14.38% 7 39 32 No 4 2 875 118 13.49% 6 20 14 No 0 2 875 84 9.60% 0 20 20 No 0 2 434 35 8.06% 0 11 11 No • • 0 0 AtOwent no. 2 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF IME CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL THE APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT NO. 679 OF TITLE 20 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE SO AS TO DEFINE AND REGULATE "SPECIALTY FOOD" USES IN THE CITY WHEREAS, the Newport Beach Municipal Code currently requires that a restaurant use permit for a be obtained in order to establish any food service uses which provide seating or dispense beverages for Immediate consumption; and WHEREAS, many of the smaller facilities function basically like retail uses in terms of parking demand and general intensity of use; and WHEREAS, restaurant development standards are frequently not applicable to the smaller facilities and such standards are often waived by the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, the time and expense required to obtain a use permit for smaller facilities meeting certain criteria places an undue and unnecessary burden on such smaller facilities; and WHEREAS, at its meeting of May 4, 1989, the Planning Commission scheduled Zoning Amendment No. 679 for public hearing at the Planning Commission meeting of June 8, 1989; and WHEREAS, the public was duty noticed of the public hearing; and WHEREAS, on June 8, 1989, the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach held a public hearing regarding Amendment No. 679; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach does hereby recommend that the City Council of the City of Newport Beach approve Amendment No. 679 to the Zoning Code so as to define and regulate "specialty food" uses in the City of Newport Beach, as set forth in the attached Exhibit "A". ADOPTED this — day of . 1989, by the following vote, to wit; BY Gary W. Pomeroy Chairman BY Gary J. DI Suno Secretary C\RESOL\A679•PC.SLG NOES ABSENT t 7 NLL4WL"C11L avt/. .. RESTAURANT,a Chapter 20.72 RESTAURANTS Sections: Page 190 RESTAURANTS Chapter 20.72 20.72.010 Definitions. 20,72,015 Uses Permitted. 20.72020 Use Permit Required. 20.72.030 Application Contents. 20.72.040 Site. 20.72.050 Setbacks. 20.72.060 Parking and Traffic Control. 20.72.070 Walls. 20.72.080 Landscaping. 20.72.090 Lighting. 20.72.100 Signing. 20.72.110 Utilities. 20.72.120 Storage. 20.72.130 Modification or Waiver of Requirements. 20.72.140 Additional Requirements. 20.72.150 Nonconforming Structures and Uses. 20.72.010 DEFINITIONS. As used in this chapter the following terms shall have the meanings indicated: OA. RESTAURANT. The term "restaurant" shall mean a place of business which sells or serves food products or beverages for consumption on the premises within a building consisting of a permanent structure that is fully enclosed with a roof and walls, and where incidental dining to the extent of not more than twenty-five percent (25%) of the net public area may be permitted out-of-doors on a patio, deck or terrace that is integrated into the building design. For purposes of Section 20.720.020 through term "restaurant" shall include "drive-in," "take-out" and "outdoor" restaurants. B. OUTDOOR RESTAURANT. The term "outdoor restaurant" shall mean a place of business which sells or serves food products or beverages for consumption on the premises where such place of business is located, and which provides for, or permits 0 11 consumption of, such food products or beverages out-of-doors other than on an incidental basis. A.C. DRIVE-IN AND TAKE-OUT RESTAURANT. The terms "drive-in," and "take-out" restaurants shall mean a place of business which sells food products or beverages and which: 1. Delivers such food products or beverages to customers outside of the building in which they are prepared by means of a service window, counter or similar method or device, or 2. Delivers such food products or beverages to customers within a building which is designated in such a manner that a majority of the customers will remove such food products or beverages from the building for consumption. DU. CHANGE IN OPERATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS. The term "change in operational characteristics" shall include any of the following: 1. Any substantial increase in the hours a restaurant, outdoor restaurant, or drive- in and takeout restaurant is open for business (hours of operation) or an extension of the hours of operation past 12:30 am. if the restaurant is within 200 feet of a residential zone. An increase in hours of operation is deemed substantial if, given the proximity of the restaurant pUtdoor restaurant. drive- in or takeout restaurant, or related parking facilities to a residential zone, the increase has the potential to cause, or make worse, noise or traffic congestion in the neighborhood; 2. The introduction of live entertainment or dancing, or a significant change in the character of the live entertainment; 3. The introduction of the sale of alcoholic beverages; 4. Any significant increase in the size of the area principally devoted to the sale of alcoholic beverages; 5. A loss of on -site or off -site parking spaces for a period of ninety (90) days or more, which would reduce available parking below the number then required by the provisions of this title or the Use Permit applicable to the restaurant; 6. The introduction of valet, tandem, or compact parking spaces; and 0 7. Any increase in the net public area of a restaurant or any increase in the gross floor area of a drive-in, take-out or outdoor restaurant. (Ord. 1505 § 10, 1973; Ord. 1266 § 2, 1968; prior Ord. 1202 § 3 (part), 1967; Ord. 85-17, October 23, 1985). 20 72 015 USES PERMITTED 1 2 Trash receptacles for patrons are provided within the facility, 2 All trash is stored on site in a screened area until readfor pickuo 4 A trash compactor is provided. I roll N��Icofiolic beverages are served. ertainm nt or dancing is permitted, 20.72.020 USE PERMIT REQUIRED. A. D&e in andout de r-estaufafAs, -Restaurants may be permitted in all zoning districts designated for such uses, and in any Planned Community Districts or Specific Plan Areas designated for said uses, subject to the securing of a use permit in each case. l� -tell" B. A use permit, or an amendment to a use permit, shall be required prior to any change in operational characteristics of a restaurant. (Ord. 1505 § 11, 1973; Ord. 1202 3 (part), 1967,•- Ord. 85-17, October 23, 1985). A use 12ermit shall be required for gny�spccially food use which does not meet 20.72.030 APPLICATION CONTENTS. An application for a use permit or an amendment to a use permit, required by this chapter, shall be on a form supplied by the Planning Department, and where appropriate, shall be accompanied by the following information, maps, and plans: (a) A statement specifying the nature of the restaurant, the proposed hours of operation, whether the applicant intends to provide live entertainment and/or dancing, and other pertinent information regarding the operational characteristics of the proposed restaurant or spccialty food use. (b) A plot plan of the property drawn to scale showing the location of all buildings, storage facilities, planting areas, signs, outside eating areas, walls, parking areas, and curb cuts. (c) A floor plan of any building delineating all interior floor space and indicating its proposed use. (d) A parking layout and traffic plan showing all parking spaces, aisles, access points and directional signs and markings. (e) A grading plan indicating how the property is to be graded and drained. (f) Elevations including all building and sign faces and materials. (g) Such other plans, drawings and information as the Planning Director may reasonably require. (Ord. 1202 § 3 (part), 1967; Ord. 85.17, October 23, 1985). 20.72.040 SITE. The site shall be of sufficient size and configuration to satisfy all requirements for off-street parking, setbacks, curb cuts, walls, landscaping and refuse storage as provided in this chapter. (Ord. 1202 § 3 (part), 1967). 20.72.050 SETBACKS. The Planning Commission may establish setbacks more restrictive than those required by the regulations for the zoning district in which the proposed use would be located if it determines they are necessary or desirable for the protection of the public health, safety and welfare or to insure compatibility with uses on contiguous properties. (Ord. 1202 $ 3 (part); February 14, 1967). 20.72,060 PARKING AND TRAFFIC CONTROL. A. OFF-STREET PARKING. Off-street parking for restaurants, outdoor restaurants. drive-in and take- 1-' out restaurants, and Epecially food uses shall be as specified in Chapter 20.30, General Controls -Commercial Districts. All parking areas shall meet the City of Newport Beach Off -Street Parking Standards. B. CURB CUTS. The size and location of curb cuts for driveways shall be determined by standards on file in the Department of Public Works. C. CIRCULATION. Parking areas and driveways shall be arranged so that a free flow of vehicular traffic and adequate site clearances are permitted at all times. If the Traffic Engineer determines that there is a need to accommodate vehicles waiting for service, a reservoir parking area for standing vehicles shall be provided in addition to the other required parking and driveway areas. (Ord. 1201 § 3 (part); 'February 14, 1967; Ord. 85-17, October 23, 1985). 20.72.070 WALLS. On property occupied by a restaurant aA solid masonry wall 6 feet in height shall be erected on all interior lot lines, said wall to be reduced to 3 feet in height within any required front yard setback area or within 15 feet of the comer of any intersecting street or alley right-of-way. Walls 3 feet in height shall be erected between on -site parking areas and public rights -of -way. (Ord. 1202 § 3 (part), February 14, 1967). 20.72.080 LANDSCAPING. On proper occupied by a restaurant.-Npot less than 10 percent of the total site area shall be devoted to landscaped planting areas, including: (a) A planting area with a width of 3 or more feet between street side property Hues and walls screening parking facilities. (b) A planting area with a width of 3 or more feet adjacent to interior property lines. All such planting areas shall be separated from vehicular or pedestrian paved areas by 6-inch-high concrete curbing. The bumper stops shall be -installed and located in such a manner as to preclude parked vehicles from overhanging such planting areas. All planting areas shall be provided with a permanent sprinkler irrigation system and hose bibs for supplemental watering. (Ord. 1202 § 3 (part), February 14, 1967). 20.72.090 LIGHTING. On propeLty occupied by a restaurant. Agll parking areas shall be illuminated by lighting with minimum intensity in any location of 2 foot-candles and an average intensity of 5 foot-candles. The lighting system shall be designed to minimize the reflection of light to streets and properties adjoining the restaurant site. No lighting standard shall exceed a height of 10 feet from the finished grade of the restaurant site. (Ord. 1202 § 3 (part), 1967). 20.72.100 SIGNING. All signs shall conform to the provisions of Chapter 20.06. (Ord. 1753 § 28, 1977; Ord. 1202 § 3 (part), 1967; Ord. 85-17, October 23, 1985). 13 t� • 20.72.110 UTILPIMffiS. All utility services on the restaurant site shall be installed underground. (Ord. 120Z § 3 (part), 1967). 20.72.120 STORAGE. A. SUPPLY STORAGE. All facilities for storage of supplies shall be located within a building. B. REFUSE STORAGE. Any refuse storage area located outside of a completely enclosed building shall be surrounded by a solid masonry wall 6 feet in height with self-locking gates. (Ord. 1202 13 (part), 1967). 20.72.130 MODIFICATION OR WAIVER OF REQUIREMENTS. The Planning Commission, or City Council on review or appeal, may modify or waive any of the development standards contained in this chapter if strict compliance with the standards is not necessary to achieve the purpose of intent of the standard. (Ord. 1202 13 (part), 1967; Ord. 85-17, October 23, 1985). 20.72.140 ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS. The Planning Commission shall have the right to add additional conditions of approval in order to insure compatibility of the development with the surrounding area and the goals and objectives of the General Plan of the City. (Ord. 1202 § 3 (part), 1967; Ord. 85.17, October 23, 1985). 20.72.150 NONCONFORMING STRUCTURES AND USES. (A) Except as provided in Section 20.72.020, the provisions of Chapter 20.83 shall be applicable to all types of restaurants and slleaia_1ty (food uses, In the event of any conflict between the provisions of this Chapter and the provisions of Chapter 20.83, the provisions of this Chapter shall control. (B) Maintenance, repairs, and structural alterations can be made to any building in use as any type of restaurant on the effective date of this Chapter without the requirement to obtain a use permit. (Ord. 1202 § 3 (part), 1967; Ord. 85.17, October 23, 1985). n�uur.auuca... .rv. : ADDITIONAL SECTIONS OF TITLE 20 TO BE AMENDED GENERAL CONTROLS - COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS "H" COMBINING DISTRICT. 20.30.035 B. Off -Street Parking Required - Schedule. Off-street parking on the building site, or with City Council approval upon recommendation of the Planning Commission, on a separate lot from the building site or sites, shall be required in all districts with which the "-H" District is combined, according to the following formula: (1) Retail Stores and specialty food uses: One parking space for each 250 square feet of gross floor area, and one loading space for each 10,000 square feet of gross floor area... "Z" COMBINING DISTRICT. 20.30.040 B. Off -Street Parking Required - Schedule. Off-street parking, on the building site, or on a separate lot from the building site or sites with City Council approval on recommendation of the Planning Commission, shall be required in all districts with which the 'V District is combined, according to the following formula: (1) Retail and Wholesale Stores and specialty food uses: One parking space for each 350 square feet of gross floor area, and one loading space for each 10,000 square feet of gross floor area... C-N DISTRICT 20.32.015 Uses Permitted. The following uses shall be permitted in C-N Districts: (a) Professional offices, community centers, social halls, lodges and clubs. (b) Retail stores, 5pecially food uses in accordance with Section 20,72,015, and personal service establishments within a building, including appliance stores, bakeries (not wholesale), banks, barber shops, beauty parlors, book stores, department stores, drug stores, food shops, hardware stores, nurseries, offices, radio stores, antique shops, shoe shops, studios, tailor shops, and other uses which in the opinion of the Planning Commission are of a similar nature. (c) Accessory uses normally incidental to commercial developments, where such uses do not alter the character of the premises in respect to their use for purposes permitted in the district. Such accessory buildings shall be allowed only when constructed concurrent with or subsequent to the main building. i K Pq 0 (d) Temporary structures and uses, Regulations are as specified in Section 20.30.015 of General Controls - Commercial Districts, (e) Signs in accordance with Chapter 20.06. C-R DISTRICT 20.33.020 Permitted Uses. In the C-R District the following uses shall be permitted. (a) Commercial uses limited to retail, specially foods in accordance with Section 20.72,015, or personal service establishments, handicraft establishments, professional offices and other uses which, in the opinion of the Planning Commission, are of a similar nature. (b) Residential uses only in conjunction with permitted commercial uses. (e) Accessory uses normally incidental to commercial and residential developments, where such uses do not alter the character of the premises in respect to their use for purposes permitted in the district. (d) Temporary structures and uses. Regulations are as specified in Section 20.30.015 of General Controls - Commercial Districts. (e) Signs in accordance with Chapter 20.06. C-O DISTRICT 20.34.015 Uses Permitted. The following uses shall be permitted in C-O Districts; (a) Multiple dwellings or apartment houses, hotels, motels, professional offices, clubs. (b) Retail sales, specialty food uses in accordance with Section 20,72.015, and wholesale sales when combined with retail sales of a similar nature; storage therefore shall be within a building, except for boats. (c) Accessory uses normally incidental to uses permitted in the district. (d) Temporary structures and uses. Regulations are as specified in Section 20.30.015 of General Controls - Commercial Districts. (e) Signs in accordance with Chapter 20.06. 2 C-1 DISTRICT 20.35.015 Uses Permitted. The following uses shall be permitted in C-1 Districts: (a) Professional offices, community centers, social halls, lodges and clubs. (b) Retail stores, apecially food uses in accordance with Section 20 72 015 and personal service establishments within a building including appliance stores, bakeries (not wholesale), banks, barbershops, beauty parlors, bookstores, department stores, drugstores, food shops, hardware stores, nurseries, offices, radio stores, antiques shops, shoe shops, studios, tailor shops, fortune-telling businesses, and other uses which in the opinion of the Planning Commission are of similar nature. (c) Accessory uses normally incidental to commercial developments, where such uses do not alter the character of the premises in respect to their use for purposes permitted in the district. Such accessory buildings shall be allowed only when constructed concurrent with or subsequent to the main building. (d) Temporary structures and uses. Regulations are as specified in Section 20.30.015 of General Controls - Commercial Districts. (e) Signs in accordance with Chapter 20.06. C-2 DISTRICT 20.36.020 Uses Permitted. The following uses shall be permitted in the C-2 Districts: (a) Professional offices; community centers; social halls and clubs. (b) Retail stores; specialty food stores in accordance with Section I wholesale stores; wholesale bakeries; research laboratories and institutes; laundt storage within a building; fortune-telling businesses and other uses which, in the of the Planning Commission, are of a similar nature. (c) The following uses, when conducted within a building or enclosed by a solid board or masonry fence at least six feet in height in each case: Creameries; bottling works; building material yards; contractors yards; fuel yards; machine shops; storage of goods and materials; and other uses which in the opinion of the Planning Commission are of a similar nature. (d) Accessory uses normally incidental to commercial developments, where such uses do not alter the character of the premises in respect to their use for purposes permitted in the district. Such accessory buildings shall be allowed only when constructed concurrent with or subsequent to the main building. (e) Temporary structures and uses. Regulations are as specified in Section 20.30.015 of General Controls - Commercial Districts. (f) Signs in accordance with Chapter 20.06. 11 -W r i M-1 DISTRICT 20AL025 Uses Requiring Use Permit. The following uses shall be permitted subject to the securing of a use permit in each case: (a) Gasoline service stations; houseboat marinas; and fish smoking, curing or freezing. (b) Professional offices, restaurants, outdoor, drive-in and take-out restaurants. (c) Commercial uses including but not limited to retail and wholesale stores; specially food stores: cartography; bookbinding; printing; lithography; editorial and designing; laundries; dry cleaning plants; and any other uses which in the opinion of the Planning Commission are of a similar nature; provided, however, that the following exceptions shall apply to structures and uses which are in existence on the effective date of this section: 1. The lawful use of land or buildings in the M-1 District which do not meet the requirements of this subsection may be continued or changed to a use which would require the same or less on -site parking according to the standards established in Section 20.30.035 without compliance with the requirements of this subsection. 2 .Any existing structure may be repaired, altered or remodeled, without complying with the requirements of this subsection. 3. Any existing structure or use may be enlarged by not more than 109o' of its original gross area in any one year period without complying with the requirements of this subsection. (d) Recreational establishments, institutions, cemeteries, public buildings, parking of automobiles on roofs, removal of earthen materials, heliports and helistops, outdoor lighting may be permitted as specified more particularly in Section 20.40.020 of General Controls - Industrial Districts. P-C DISTRICT 2011.025 Uses Permitted. The following use of land shall be permitted in P-C Districts: (a) Those land uses permitted by the City's General Plan at or below a density or intensity prescribed by the General Plan. (b) Grading shall be permitted within a P-C District outside of a sector of immediate development subject to the securing of a grading permit. 4 1?' (c) The continuation of land uses, including agricultural, which existed in the district at the time of adoption of the Development Plan, except as otherwise provided herein. Existing land uses shall either be incorporated as part of the Development Plan or shall terminate in accordance with a specific abatement schedule submitted and approved as part of the Development Plan. Existing land uses which are prohibited by any provisions of Title 20 of this Code shall be terminated prior to final approval of the Development Plan. (d) Where existing land uses have been established by a Use Permit prior to the adoption of a P-C District and said uses are to be retained, the Use Permit as approved or subsequently amended shall constitute the required Development Plan W Specialty food uses in accordance with Section 20,72,015 shall be permitted in anv portion of a Planned Communitv District where retail uses area vermitted. NEWPORT SHORES SPECIFIC PLAN COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT 20.61.060 A. Uses Permitted. Retail stores, specially food uses in accordance with Section 20,72,015, and personal service establishments within a building, including appliance stores, bakeries (except wholesale), banks, barber shops, beauty parlors, book stores, drug stores, food shops, hardware stores, medical -dental offices, radio stores, antique shops, shoe shops, studios, tailor shops, and other uses which in the opinion of the Planning Commission are of a similar nature. RECREATION AND MARINE COMMERCIAL 20.62.040 A. Uses Permitted. (1) Marinas, yacht clubs, yacht brokers, social clubs, commercial recreation, boat sales, marine supply sales, boat repair and servicing, sports fishing establishments, hotels and motels, specia4 food uses in accordance with Section 20,72,015, business and professional offices where marine related services are offered to the general public, and other uses which, in the opinion of the Planning Commission, are of a similar nature. The Planning Commission's decision may be appealed to the City Council. (2) Signs in accordance with Chapter 20.06. RETAIL AND SERVICE COMMERCIAL. 20.62.050 A. Uses Permitted: pq tg • 0 (1) Retail sales, sy&cialty food uses in accordance with Section 20.72,015yacht brokers, boat sales, marine supply sales, boat repair and servicing, offices for personal and professional services which are offered to the general public, commercial recreation, hotels and motels, and other uses which, in the opinion of the Planning Commission, are of a similar nature. The decision of the Planning Commission may be appealed to the City Council. (2) Signs in accordance with Chapter 20.06. CANNERY VIIJ AGE/MC FADDEN SQUARE SPECIFIC PLAN SPECIALTY RETAI%,, SR DISTRICT 20.63.030 A. Permitted Uses. The following uses are permitted in the SR district: (1) Retail sales generally oriented to the casual pedestrian shopper such as antiques, art galleries, books, clothing, crafts, hobbies, jewelry, stationary, specialty food uses in accordance with Section 20,72.015and similar establishments. (2) Personal service establishments such as barber shops, beauty parlors, shoe repair, tailor shops, and similar establishments. (3) Professional and business offices providing direct services to the public, such as accountants, architects, attorneys, and realtors. (4) Professional and business offices not providing direct services to the public or not ancillary to an otherwise permitted use, such as corporate offices shall be permitted on the second floor only. (5) Residential uses on the second floor or above, where the ground floor is occupi d by a permitted use. AND MARINE COMMERCIAL, RMC DISTRICT 20.63.035 B. Permitted Uses. (1) Incentive Uses: Highest priority uses such as Marinas, yacht brokers, boat charters and rentals, marine construction, boat sales, boat repair and servicing, sports fishing establishments, dry -boat storage, boat launching, commercial fishing facilities, and retail marine sales, that when they occupy at least forty percent (409c) of a site, as defined herein, may be combined with uses under C.3. (2) Other Non -incentive Permitted Uses: Marine related offices where services are offered to the general public, such as marine surveyors and marine insurance brokers 20 C. Uses Which Require a Use Permit. (1) Incentive Uses: Highest priority uses such as marine related manufactur- ing, new boat construction, yacht clubs, marine service stations and gas docks, that when they occupy at least 40% of a site, as defined herein, may be combined with uses under C.3. (2) Other non -incentive uses such as social clubs, commercial recreation, hotels, motels, and 'bed and breakfasts', restaurants (outdoor, drive-in and take-out), and bakeries. (3) Uses which must be in conjunction with an Incentive Use occupying at least 40% of the site such as general retail and service commercial uses, professional and business offices, and light manufacturing (unless for marine products). RETAIL AND SERVICE COMMERCIAL - RSC DISTRICT. 20.63.040 A. Uses Permitted. (1) Retail sales, specially food personal service establishments within a I barber shops, bookstores, realtors, travel 20.63.030, Specialty Retail District and Commercial District. ;cordance with Section 20,72.015, and icluding accountants, architects, banks, and those uses permitted in Section 20.63.035, Recreational and Marine (2) Residential uses on the second floor or above, where the ground floor is occupied by a permitted use. (3) Professional and business offices not providing direct services to the public or not ancillary to an otherwise permitted use, such as corporate offices shall be permitted on the second floor only. (4) Marine industrial uses or light manufacturing of marine related products. C\PCSR\SP-FDS.ORD 7 Itttachment No. 5 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH P.O. BOX 1768, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658.8915 NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO: Office of Planning and Research 1400 Tenth Street, Room 121 Sacramento, CA 95814 County Clerk of the County '" ! of orange P.O. Box 838 Santa Ana, CA 92702 FROM: Planning Departmgnt City of Newport Beach P.O. Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA 92658-8915 NAME OF PROJECT: "Speciality Foods" Ordinances Amendment #679 I PROJECT LOCATION: City-wide; City of Newport Beach, California 92660 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Proposed revision of Title #20 of the Newport Beach Zoning Code, so as to define and regulate "speciality food" uses within the City. FINDING: Pursuant to the provisions of City Council Policy k-3 pertaining to procedpres and guidelines to implement the California Environmental Quality Act, t* Environmental Affairs Committee has evaluated the proposed project and determined that the proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment. MITIGATION MEASURES: None. INITIAL STUDY PREPARED BY: The City of Newport Beach. INITIAL STUDY AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW AT: 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, CA DATE RECEIVED FOR FILING: -Patricia L. empl ,incipal Planner Environmental Coordinator DATE: 02 May 1989 Nntunc�rl rj ,i • .,'V , Date Filed General Information 1. Name and address of deveL or project sponsor: 2. Address of project: — Assessor's Block and Lot Number: 3. Name, address, and telephone number of person to be contacted concern- ing this project: tdnaWaL 6, &tl5 Sri!fc Platoiei104N-3JJS 4. Indicate number of the Kermit application for the project to which this form pertains: //VV 5. List and describe any other related permits and other public'approvals required for this project, including those required by city, regional, state and federal agencies: 6. Existing zoning district: AJA 7. Proposed use of site (Project for which this'form is filed): dA Project Description 8. Site size. 9. Square footage. 10. Number of floors of construction. 11. Amount of off -Street parking provided. 12. Attach plans. 13. Proposed scheduling. 14. Associated project. 15. Anticipated incremental development. 16. If residential, include the number of units, schedule of unit sizes, range of sale prices or rents, and type of household size expected. - 1 - 4 .. 17. I£ commercial, indicate the type, whether neighborhood, city or regionally oriented, square footage of sales area, and loading facili- ties. 18. If industrial, indicate type, estimated employment per shift, and loading facilities. 19. If institutional, indicate the major function, estimated employment per shift, estimated occupancy, loading facilities, and community benefits to be derived from the project. 20. If the project involves a variance, conditional use or rezoning application, state this and indicate clearly whey the application is required. Are the .following items applicable to the project or its effects? Discuss below all it*" checked yes (attach additional sheets as necessary). Yes No i 21. Change in existing features of any bays, tidelands, beaches,or hills, or substantial alteration of ground contours. 22. Change in scenic views or vistas from existing residential _ areas or public lands'or roads. 23. Change in pattern, scale or character of general area of project. 24. Signifttant amounts"of solid waste or litter. 25. change in dust, ash, smoke, fumes or odors -in vicinity. _ 26, Change in ocean, bay, lake, stream or ground water quality or i quantity, or alteration of existing drainage patterns. 27. Substantial change in existing noise or vibration levels in the vicinity. 28. Site on filled land or on slope of 10 percent or more. _ Z 29. Use of disposal of potentially hazardous materials, such as _ toxic substances, flammables or explosives. 30. Substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, _._- fire, water, sewage, etc.). 4� 31. Substantially increase fossil fuel consumption (electricity, _ _ oil, natural gas, etc.). 32. Relationship to a larger project or series of projects. -_ _. -2- r� E Environmental Setting 33. Describb the project site as it exists before the project, including information on topography, soil stability, plants and animals, and any cultural, historical or scenic aspects. Describe any existing struc- tures on the site, and the use of the structures. Attach photographs of the'site. Snapshots or polaroid photos will be accepted. W,4 34. Describe the surrounding properties, including information on plants and animals and any cultural historical or scenic aspects. Indicate the type of land use (residential, commercial, etc.), intensity of land use (one -family, apartment houses, shops, department stores, etc.), and scale of development (height, frontage, set -back, rear yard, etc.). Attach photographs of the vicinity. Snapshots or polaroid photos will be accepted. NA' Certification I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this initial'evalua- tion to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statemeits, and-informar tion presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge•and belief. Date IVSignature For The City of Newport Beach C\PLT\EIRFORM - 3 - I I. background 1. Name of Proponent The City of Newport Heach 2. Address and Phone Number of Proponent 3. Date Checklist submitted 02 May 1989 4. Agency Requiring Checklist The City of Newport Beach 5. Name of Proposal, if applicable "speciality Foods" ordinances Amendment #679 11. Environmental Impacts (Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required on attached sheets.) 1. Earth. Will the proposal result in: a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? --- 4. b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of the soil? C. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? ---- d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? ._-. e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of / soils, either on or off the site? _ x f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? — g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure, or similar hazards? _ - 1 - Yes Maybe No 2. Air. Will the proposal result in: a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration Z of ambient air quality? — b. The creation of objectionable odors? C. Alteration of air movement, moisture, or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? — 3. Water. Will the proposal result in: a.. Changes in currents, or the course of direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? — b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of / surface runoff? — �C C. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? — d. Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? — e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any ,.alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground water? — g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or with- drawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? h. Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? — i. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or tidal waves? — - 2 - Y-ea Kubik NQ 4. P106t Ufe. Will the proposal result in: A, Change in the diversity of species, or num- ber of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants)? .� b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? .-- c. Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? ---- / d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? x S. Animal Life. Bill the proposal result in: Of Spies, Or num- a bersgofiany species n the so£ animals (birds, 1 nd animals including reptiles, fish and shell- fish, benthic organisms or insects)? ^- b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? .— c. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migra- tion or movement of animals? — % d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? —•- 6. Noise. Will the proposal result in: A. Increases in existing noise levels? — -� b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? — — +� 7. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new light or glare? ---' S. Land Use. Will the proposal result in a•sub- stantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? -- -3- es Maybe No, 9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? 10. Risk of Upset. Will the proposal involve: a. A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? b.' Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan? 11. Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? — 12. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing or create a demand for additional housing? — 13. Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: , a. * Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? — b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? — C. Substantial impact Upon existing trans- portation systems? — d. Alterations to present patterns of circula- tion or movement of people and/or goods? e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic?_ .f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists, or pedestrians? — 14. Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered gov- ernmental services in any of the following areas: - 4 - a ,1 Fm 16. 17. a. Fire protection? --- b. Police protection? --- '` c. Schools? d. Parks or other recreational facilities? a. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? _ f. other governmental services? -- Energy. Will the proposal result in: a, Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources or energy, or require the development of new sources of anorgy? — Utilites. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a. Power or natural gas? b. U?Communications systems? -- c. Water? —'— d. Sewer or septic tanks? -- e. Storm water drainage? -- -� f. Solid waste and disposal? Human Htealth. Will the proposal result in? A. Creation of any health4bazard or potential health heazard (excluding mental health)? _ b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? -- M -5- Yes Maybe No 18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to'public view? 19. Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? — 20. Cultural Resources. a. Will the proposal result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or • historic archaeological site? b. Will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure, or object? c. Does the proposal have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? d. Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses with the potential impact area? 21. Har#atory Findings of Significance. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self'sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? — 31 40' nA,s .i" Mavbe ` b. - Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long -terse, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a rela- tively brief, definitive period of time while long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) --- c. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively con- siderable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where « the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.) -- -� d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?,_-- .� III. Discussion of Eonironmeatal Evaluation (Narrative description of environmental impacts.) IV. Determinption 1V on the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECIARATION WILL BE PREPARED. I find that although the proposed project could have a signif icsut effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. Q A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. I find the proposed project NAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ERVIRONMF.NTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. Q 02 May 1989 Date C\PLT\EIRLIST.FRM Signa re Br B. Bernard, Associate Planner For The City Of Newport Beach . 7 - COMMISSIONERS ymG�c^�yN01y9 ?y�'o� y f�yonyo • June 8, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES ROLL CALL INDEX Amendment No 679 (Public Hearing) Item No.10 Request to consider an amendment to Title 20 of the Newport A679 Beach Municipal Code so as to define and regulate — "specialty food" uses in the City; and the acceptance of Denied an environmental document. INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach William Laycock, Current Planning Manager, explained that the standards proposed for the "specialty food" use are comparable to the standards adopted for typical small take- out restaurants that have been approved on Marine Avenue on Balboa Island and on the Balboa Peninsula. He stated that if an applicant met the requirements of the proposed Ordinance, the Ordinance would alleviate the need for a use permit and the applicant would automatically receive an approval for a "specialty food" use. However, an applicant would be required to apply for a use permit if all of the standards are not met. Commissioner Pers6n stated that the proposed Ordinance was requested inasmuch as the original Take -Out Restaurant Ordinance was written for the typical take-out restaurant similar to McDonald's Restaurant. The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Dick Nichols, 519 Iris Avenue, appeared before the Planning Commission to state his objections with respect to the proposed Ordinance. He indicated that inasmuch as the Restaurant Ordinance permitted a restaurant in any commercial district, restaurants are now in retail stores where they are an inappropriate use of property; that any establishment that sells food should be required to apply for a use permit inasmuch as it would put some restrictions on a food establishment; small restaurant owners typically violate the law the most inasmuch as they often do not provide trash compactors, and the lack of seating initiates loitering; more traffic is generated than the required one parking space for each 250 square feet if a "special food" use is successful, and there are typically several employees on the premises. Mr. Nichols further stated that a 10:00 p.m. closing time is appropriate; however, he said that after 11:00 p.m. becomes a problem inasmuch as it takes an additional one- -32- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES June 8, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX half hour to completely close the facility. He suggested that the Restaurant Ordinance should be amended to state that if a restaurant Ia operating hour changes to 11:00 p.m. or later within 200 feet of a residential area, that the use permit shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission. Mr. Laycock explained that the subject Ordinance is for "specialty food" establishments only. He commented that the public notice did not advertise consideration to amend the Restaurant Ordinance. Chairman Pomeroy explained that the "Specialty Food" Ordinance proposes to simplify the approval process for a small businessman. Commissioner Pers6n referred to Section 20.72.015 "Uses Permitted" of the proposed Amendment, and he explained that if the establishment provided the nine standards listed that a use permit would not be required; however, if the facility did not meet the standards and did not provide parking, a use permit would be required. Commissioner Edwards referred to Section 20.72.015, and he pointed out that Mr. Nichols foregoing concerns are addressed in the nine required standards. Commissioner Edwards indicated that there is an attempt to assist the small businessman, and he stated that if the operator violates the Ordinance then that operator would be required to apply for a use permit. In response to comments that were made by Mr. Nichols with respect to use permits, Mr. Laycock explained that the use permit fee is $867.00. Commissioner Pers6n indicated concerns that he has previously expressed with respect to residential uses immediately adjacent to commercial areas. He explained that the "Specialty Food" Ordinance limits the gross square footage. Commissioner Pers6n emphasized that the proposed Ordinance is a good, workable Ordinance and if there are problems in the future, then the Ordinance can be revised. Mr. Nichols described personal encounters caused by restaurants that are adjacent to residential areas in Corona del Mar. -33- 'COMMISSIONERS 6c .p AQ.F O.O yOQyi��yN�^99 G10j, 0j 'f���y0 0 June 8., 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES ROLL CALL INDEX Commissioner Winburn and Commissioner Pers6n discussed the 1,200 square feet or less of gross floor area that would be required for the "Specialty Food" restaurant. Mr. Laycock explained that 1,200 square feet is the typical size of take-out restaurants that maintained certain criteria that have been approved by the Planning Commission where all of the parking had been waived. Commissioner Edwards requested a clarification for Section 20.72.060A, "Off -Street Parking" and how the standards would affect the proposed Ordinance. Mr. Laycock explained that inasmuch as "specialty food" is considered to be comparable to retail use, the same parking standards would apply, including nonconforming buildings that do not require parking. Commissioner Pers6n suggested that the Ordinance be continued for two weeks to ask the City Attorney's Office to provide an amendment that a use permit might be required. He stated that he was under the impression that a use permit would be required in the event parking was not provided, and that a nonconforming building would render it necessary to have a use permit. Commissioner Pers6n and Mr. Laycock discussed the establishments where use permits were approved for take-out restaurant facilities with small gross floor areas where parking was either waived entirely or in -lieu parking spaces were required only for employees. Commissioner Di Sane stated that he could not support the Ordinance as it is currently worded. He referred to previous concerns expressed by the Planning Commission with respect to a "string" of. restaurants in a block, and because of the number of nonconforming buildings in the City, he said that each establishment should be considered on a case by case basis. Commissioner Pers6n pointed out that the foregoing Section 20.72.015 addresses concerns that have previously disturbed residents,"and if an operator does not comply with the standards, then a use permit would be required. Chairman Pomeroy stated that an attempt to set up a category that would separate "specialty food" restaurants from "take-out" restaurants is a legitimate consideration, and it is not appropriate to require a small business that -34- 30 COMMISSIONER$ E MINUTES ,tune 8, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL. CALL INDEX complies with very specific regulations to apply for a use permit. He explained that the proposed Ordinance is written in a manner that would protect the surrounding area. Mohan * Motion was made and voted on to recommend Amendment No. 679 Ayes * * * to the City Council, MOTION DENIED. Noes **** Motion was made to continue Amendment No. 679 for further Motion * review. Commissioner Edwards stated that he had concerns with respect to Section 20.72.060, "Off -Street Parking" inasmuch as many of the complaints that have been heard by the Planning Commission have been directly related to parking. Commissioner Debay and Commissioner Persdn discussed the proposed parking standards. Commissioner Persdn pointed out that "specialty food" restaurants are typically walk- in, non -destination establishments. Commissioner Persdn stated that the proposed Ordinance would take the burden off of the City to waive perking. Commissioner Merrill stated that under the use permit procedure, the Planning Commission may choose not to waive parking if there is not adequate parking in the area. He commented that parking should be considered from a planning standpoint, Commissioner Edwards stated that he would support a motion to continue the proposed Amendment. He stated that the off-street parking section of the proposed Ordinance is written ambiguously. Chairman Pomeroy suggested that a use permit could be required if a parking ratio requirement was not met. Motion Commissioner Debay withdrew her motion to continue Withdrawn Amendment No. 679. Commissioner Di Sano made a motion to deny Amendment No. Motion * 679. He explained that applicants are not being refused Ayes * * * * an opportunity through the use permit procedure, and that Noes * the fat for a use permit is not prohibitive. Motion voted on, MOTION CARRIED. -35- 0 •ATTACH ENT NO. 3 CALIFORNIA 92661 Gary W. Pomeroy, Chairman Newport Beach Planning Commission Newport Beach City Hall P. O. Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA 92658-8915 Dear Mr. Pomeroy: July 15, 1989 At our regularly scheduled monthly Balboa Peninsula Point Association Board Meeting this past Thursday evening, there was much discussion as regards the Specific Area Plan for Balboa. It was determined that we should write you to state our position which is as follows: We are most adamant about having a "Specific Area Plan" in place before the granting of any use permits for 'ahy business in the downtown Balboa area, particularly when a variance from the parking ordinance is involved. We feel this is necessary to preserve'the flavor and quality of life 'in the downtown area as well as to lend'a continuity to the look. We also wish to go on record as strongly opposing a "specialty food ordinance that would preclude any restaurant from having to secure a use 'permit if they were 1200 square feet or -less. The negatives that could result from this lack of control are endless and could very well pose potential liability situations for the City of Newport Beach. CC: Mayor Donald A. Strauss City Manager Robert 'L. Wynn BPPA Board Kind�ees�t� regards, Dayna Pettit President For the Board of Directors r` p��rinii�!i �l 00•..,,.gn7 ,;� JU�191989'" LAW - a* 6 r CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING DEPARTMENT 04 August 1989 TO: Rich Edmonton, Traffic Engineer FROM: Bret B. Bernard, Associate Planner SUBJECT: Central Balboa S.P.A. — Parking and Circulation Study Pursuant to our conversation this Wednesday morning past (02 August 1989) I have listed below the additional points raised during our group discussion which were deemed to have sufficient merit to be considered in the Central Balboa Specific Plan Area -- Parking and Circulation Study. In drafting the scope of services for this consultant study, please include: 1) Turn -a -rounds (cul-de-sacs) for Balboa Boulevard 2) Implementation of a trolley (shuttle) service 3) Signage improvements (such as "Peninsula Ends - NO Access to P.C.H.!", etc.) 4) Reversible traffic lanes 5) Balboa Boulevard's potential for widening 6) Weekend and summer afternoon exiting programs I might also remind you that there was a consensus amongst us that perhaps "residential permits" (point I.C. in your outline) should not be included in this study. I believe that both Jim Hewicker and Bob Lenard would like to review your draft "scope of services" before we hold a general public meeting concerning same and/or we seek bids for this independent circulation/parking study. If you have any queries regarding the above suggested study addition, please contact me at your earliest convenience. My City telephone extension is #: 3225. xc: James D. Hewicker, Planning Director Robert P. Lenard, Advance Planning Manager Don Webb, City Engineer F:\WP50\BRET\CBCIRCST.MEM • 6 CENTRAL BALBOA PARKING AND CIRCULATION STUDY I. PARKING A. AMOUNT 1. ADDITIONAL LOTS 2. REWORK BALBOA PIER LOT 3. RESIDENTIAL OPPOSITION VS MERCHANT SUPPORT B. OPERATION 1. REDO ONSTREET - 1/2 HR, 1 HR, LOADING ZONES, ETC 2. PIER LOT - RATES, VALIDATION, PERMITS (C. RESIDENTIAL PERMITS' &LT II. CIRCULATION A. MAIN STREET - PEDESTRIAN MALL B. ONE-WAY STREETS - EXISTING AND ADDITIONAL C. PIER PARKING LOT ENTRY/EXIT s y C�c _n� - ,�rC — �uruv^q-1lCUvD✓>� D. FERRY LINE f 6>/c,r/�f SE7�Tc�/Tt/otu�/ E. EXITING PENINSULA 47, SsF„v45F Sw>pppvF.n gn>T CiFwWl- &4*4 S.A. RN. /Ifvf�sT3tF �q>vi. /s) AIZAr ,S7TP3: /%N4of RT/>/�DaN P.'�.�P4f'F A DPdrY ``.Xot.� es S'C'rY. 6 '. Z),efv. e.1 { wmmw .fv !T,v Hsf. ' 46/7,re ABr• .2r 3) ,(een / a,-v)s%r 7' 'rar eavexmv. zw. S. IUTDfi✓s/Y/J •- i✓Tr.",v>-74�- .7. AF>EAiVdv✓�tvF.f. KfND rkNA/.£XTT mat _.AWA?_ ZF-3f -Gd1m4$ _� r _ G•L�.Y4�tla:�i- - ��`1� c4.vs� P'R'� _ _��_lrB��-._ s41LJ$� X� _ lti7�s 3ftvg6t � - -- _— 9t INTEREST GROUPS CONCERNS -------------------------- b) More 'Locals' Estab- lishments -------------------------- c) "Downzone" to Residen- tial use ------------------------- d) Cap "Boating" -------------------------- e) Use Permit Requirements *=Comnercial "Building° ­ Standards a) Height/Bulk ------------------------- b) Setbacks 7) Streetscape a) Special Lighting -------------------------- b) Main Street Pedestrian Mall -------------------------- c) Improved Signage -------------------------- d) Undergrounding Utili- ties 8) Assesment for Improvements 9) Architectural Review 10) Skateboards J� Balboa Improvement Association Not sure if would be successful; would require addressing parking questions Perhaps on the extended arms of the specific plan area only! Should allow us to increase the height and bulk to encourage redevelopment (especially if going to enforce parking standards) -------------------------------------------------- Would be ameanible to different setbacks which would encourage landscape treatments and beautify Encourage "Tivoli" type lighting to encourage up- grade of area and make it a 'neighborhood' A good idea, but question if it would work with the existing or revised circulation system Would improve physical ambience of area Willing to pay to limited degree, if (and only if) City also supports financially Enact an ordinance against these in the commercial area Balboa Peninsula Point Association ------------------------------------------------- Need more service businesses with on -site parking Feel viable and encourage because "residential Land worth more than commercial there"; and too many businesses as it is Cap the number of charter/fishing/etc. boating businesses in the area, and require parking on- site/off-Balboa for what there now ------------------------------------------------- Require use permit for commercial uses to provide support for 'upland" (parking, etc.) uses Decrease the bulk already in existence! -- so re- sidents can see the bay and ocean again; suggest allow increase in residential standards -------------------------------------------------- -------------------- Lukewarm to the idea ------------------------------------------------ More and more dramatic to warn people off before they arrive at the Central Balboa bottleneck For special focus upon waterfront uses Central Newport Beach Community Association -------------------------------------------------- Need more local type business with on-site/street- side parking provided Want to see water through view corridors -- provi- by less bulk Look at setback standards to decrease size and open up streets INTEREST GROUPS --> Balboa Improvement CONCERNS Association -------------- T) Parking ------------ a) On -Site Requirements Need to relax Cif not etiminate) or Oren" re- __________________________ developm . will occur (i.e.; "no incentive") _-________--_-___-___________________________.____ b) Provision of Addition Moat definitely; need to coordinate expamion of Municipal Parking -- on beech lot (most likely "A" Street) with change in the Beach circulation pattern of Pier tot to increase the number of spaces c) Provision of Additional Question if really feasible, would hurt business; Municipal Parking -- also query municipal S support; is a possibility off the Peninsula for employee shuttle program (combined with per- sit/short matter systes) -- but question how would enforce --- ------------`---__---- d) Combine a) and b) - -`----" ---'-"--' ---`- -`-'-- - ' ---' Best solution -_-_-_-______-____-______-__________ __________________________ e) Charge the deter Pro- ------------- O.K. if make it short term for business, as lag great as additional parking avatiable elsewhere for toper tern commercial users -- would actually -------------------------- provide More street -side parking ----------- —____---""`---______________________ f) Resident "Permit" Park- Only if combined with other solutions ing Program ------------------- ------ g) In -Lieu Program __-_-____-__________________________________--__-_ Keep what have now and do not raise the fees as- __________________________ sesed for each space --------------------------- -________________-_--_ h) structure As parcels became svetfable, City should combine and build a structure for more parking support 2) Tram Service Question if really fe"Ibte, would hurt business; also query municipal S support, is a possibility for employee shuttle program (combined with per- sit/short meter system) 3) Circulation Pattern Design so not a 4traisht in shot" (i.e., force turn -*-road of cruisers); also, radeaigh present ferry loop so more efficient and not take spaces away from Pier lot 4) Cruifing Neva to decrease; effects business -- especially restaurants; query if "planning" can charge the oc rrance 5) Commercial Activities a) *Schlock" businesses Too many t-shirt, fast food types; these "ter to the *wr=g clientel" trying to attract, *specialty at night Balboa Peninsula Point Association NEVER III -- this will attract additional tourists and boat users Recognize that "boat users" hurt the other coewer- ciat business b/ occupying many of the tot spaces suggest requiring all boaters be required to park off -Balboa L shuttle on with beschers No [because of a)) Like the idea; would provide for sore use of area by Locals; suggest a different (Seattte/London) system for tot Metering Would force tourists off the streets and into the lot where they should be (recognize would work on- ly If force boaters out of the Pier lot by limi- ting the hours could use) "Scrap the prograil" -- it has only extended the parking Problem Yes, for boaters and beach- goers; if no too cost- ly! Improve circulation pattern to counter cruising; pay for an INDEPENDANT study for "fresh" reeomaen- dationa ---------------- The biggest probleMl; this affects quality of residential life; `rot getting $Is worth from the Police manpower used (in -consistent enforcement) Too each schtock; eaet an ordinance to Limit the ramber and type of businesses Central Newport Beads Community Association NEVER III Necessary 0 No [because of a)I Limit the time can use a Meter; beef up the meter- maid/tow-a-way, enforcement; tilt tot use to a 3-4 how maximum Idea has potential, but question if this would not just increase %gridlock' at critical times Yes, for boaters and beach- goers; if no too cost- lyi • Get traffic in and out! Clearly the coat important Lemuel If Limit the number and type, this will address and help eliminate the cruisers ti INTEREST GROUPS CONCERNS------------- I� ---------------------------- 1) Parking a) On -Site Requirements -------------------------- b) Provision of Additional Municipal Parking -- on the Beach -------------------------- c) Provision of Additional Municipal Parking -- off the Peninsula d) Combine a) and b) -------------------------- e) Change the Meter Pro- gram -------------------------- f) Resident "Permit" Park- ing Program -------------------------- g) In -Lieu Program -------------------------- h) Structure ---_-------------'------------ ----------------------------- 2) Tram Service -----------------------'----- ----------------------'-'--- 3) Circulation Pattern 4) Cruising ---------------------------- 5) Commercial Activities a) I'Schlock" businesses Balboa Improvement Association Need to relax (if not eliminate) or "no" re- development will occur (i.e.; "no incentive") ------------------------------------ Most definitely; need to coordinate expansion of beach lot (most likely "A" Street) with change in circulation pattern of Pier lot to increase the number of spaces ------------------------------------------------- Question if really feasible, would hurt business; also query municipal $ support; is a possibility for employee shuttle program (combined with per- mit/short meter system) -- but question how would enforce Best solution O.K. if make it short term for business, as long as additional parking avaliable elsewhere for longer term commercial users -- would actually provide more street -side parking Only if combined with other solutions Keep what have now and do not raise the fees as- sesed for each space -------------------------------------------------- As parcels become avaliable, City should combine and build a structure for more parking support ------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------- Question if really feasible, would hurt business; also query municipal S support; is a possibility for employee shuttle program (combined with per- mit/short meter system) -------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------- Design so not a "straight in shot" (i.e., force turn -a -round of cruisers); also, redesigh present ferry loop so more efficient and not take spaces away from Pier lot Have to decrease; affects business -- especially restaurants; query if "planning" can change the ocurrance Too many t-shirt, fast food types; these cater to the "wrong cliental" trying to attract, especially at night Balboa Peninsula Point Association -------------------------------------------------- NEVER !!! -- this will attract additional tourists and boat users -------------------------------------------------- Recognize that "boat users" hurt the other commer- cial business by occupying many of the lot spaces -- suggest requiring all boaters be required to park off-BaLboa & shuttle on with beachers No [because of a)] ------------------------------------------------- Like the idea; would provide for more use of area by locals; suggest a different (Seattle/London) system for lot metering -------------------------------------------------- Nould force tourists off the streets and into the Lot where they should be (recognize would work on- ly if force boaters out of the Pier lot by Limi- ting the hours could use) -------------------------------------------------- "Scrap the program!" -- it has only extended the parking problem -------------------------------------------------- Yes, for boaters and beach- goers; if no too cost- ly! Irtprove circulation pattern to counter cruising; pay for an INDEPENDANT study for "fresh" recommen- dations The biggest problem!; this affects quality of residential life; "not getting $Is worth from the Police manpower used (in -consistent enforcement) ======= ------------------- Too much schlock; enact an ordinance to limit the number and type of businesses Central Newport Beach Community Association NEVER !!! Necessary No [because of a)] -------------------------------------------------- Limit the time can use a meter; beef up the meter- maid/tow-a-way enforcement; limit lot use to a 3-4 hour maximum -------------------------------------------------- idea has potential, but question if this would not just increase `gridlock' at critical times Yes, for boaters and beach- goers; if no too cost- ly! ------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------ Get traffic in and out! Clearly the most important issue! If limit the number and type, this will address and help eliminate the cruisers • is INTEREST GROUPS --> Balboa Improvement CONCERNS --------------'------'------ Association -------------------------'-----'-'----'------'- -------------------------- b) More %LocaLs' Estab- -------------------------------------------------- Not sure if would be successful; would require lishments -------------------------- addressing parking questions -------------------------------------------------- c) "Downzone'l to Residen- Perhaps on the extended arms of the specific plan tial use area only! -------------------------- d) Cap "Boating" -------------------------------------------------- -------------------------- e) Use Permit Requirements -------------------------------------------------- 6) Commercial "Building" ------------------------------------------- , Standards a) Height/Bulk Should allow us to increase the height and bulk to encourage redevelopment (especially if going to -------------------------- enforce parking standards) -------------------------------------------------- b) Setbacks Would be ameanible to different setbacks which would encourage Landscape treatments and beautify --------- —----- ------ ----------------— ---------- ---- ---------------------- 7) Streetscape a) Special Lighting Encourage "Tivoli" type Lighting to encourage up- grade of area and make it a 'neighborhood' -------------------------- b) Main Street Pedestrian -------------------------------------------------- A good idea, but question if it would work with Mall the existing or revised circulation system -------------------------- c) Improved Signage -------------------------------------------------- -------------------------- d) Undergrounding Utili- -------------------------------------------------- Would improve physical ambience of area ties 8) Assesment for Improvements Willing to pay to Limited degree, if (arid only if) _===_==_=____=-===__=_ City also supports financially ----------------------------------------- 9) Architectural Review ----------- —---- ------------------------- 10) Skateboards Enact an ordinance against these in the commercial area Balboa Peninsula Point Association ------------------------------------------------- Need more service businesses with on -site parking -------------------------------------------------- Feel viable and encourage because "residential Land worth more than commercial there"; and too many businesses as it is -------------------------------------------------- Cap the number of charter/fishing/etc. boating businesses in the area, and require parking on- site/off-Balboa for what there now -------------------------------------------------- Require use permit for commercial uses to provide support for "upland" (parking, etc.) uses Decrease the bulk already in existence! -- so re- sidents can see the bay and ocean again; suggest allow increase in residential standards ------------------------------------------------- Lukewarm to the idea -------------------------------------------------- More and more dramatic to warn people off before they arrive at the Central Balboa bottleneck -------------------------------------------------- For special focus upon waterfront uses Central Newport Beach Community Association -------------------------------------------------- Need more local type business with on-site/street- side parking provided -------------------------------------------------- Want to see water through view corridors -- provi- by less bulk Look at setback standards to decrease size and open up streets • r OFFSTREET PARKING COMMITTEE NEXT MEETING: MAY 5, 1989 9:00 AM PLANNING CONFERENCE ROOMI AGENDA ITEMS 1. Central Balboa Specific Area Plan a. The cruising problem b. Update on plan 2. Corona del Mar Parking Meters a. Meter rates b. Permit parking 3. Additional Business ` Plat 7 tr E D i AP�2�1989 �„ N Clrr or F�• SJu�S --tom d� 'Yd�'a':t riFi ��&v • ut=/s&�►,�Srrs/c�os�d� �sct �J � I7 et%f�27G'c MuNr. e bT ` r'�p f� Crpr • y¢rr`�Rn( - vtI -- t-', 'W PuX• - I�DP3r�f -� 5iZALj C _ --77 - �-�5�-'__�a,__r,�.�W7 '�7_`y'iK, IS�r�__Cs��.•± _ wqy so% - NO � fi7rr�d. 4�f!' -f'� �FsQ-y �lnbT ac+�— � CyNiT - f - --- w xul-D po -(i4TS 114N!7 C/Ycr�C'✓, i—�� svrZi,P �SS�r4 DF ���A--�I�ut-- .�zs�r`.� . -tr--va�e3T_ 'Poi_--�8�c__�°__---•A ------ Pptt A 7vp�, 9$4v - -_ {��fr---trnvh- 1�f�Alr�.T��cq7s.�.1 Dam • 17,�r J�d ---- --- ----- --- �A-�-- _SST• 1 _���.-.. �a-��--! �N9ot��--��4•d - byPfin_�-_rs��.7� v3a4r �n�s Ya9sp-- AICU - zF 740T L-rKr=7 Crc� wi . ✓rii85 !rM4T7r AW11 QN_ _ friYS. 1_�F Ll�c�jYdD�_�.4Y7i� �TiD t'GrdSS VF 0 6V7-v� -w)F 0 ''r'A ��C'iY — —� p• ��!i7ov�j- '-�_- L�=• �� i�d .-Qrl/-sTTii% '/ .� err f x Zsr/tr *6T Rf ACP7 Q 6ovD S r w 4t T Cd nrr 50 t uo AJ 4-TW J � 7 a� vS '' vic���'c a i • Iy A 07 "TF'a gvRV . Fvffit -F4fe prF - yVrr 1 ONFIRM '5T. xAl - Z/Yy CdT 0 F'F 'Aw, TY VLS VO ik- �4 e-b' TA4t AWd a�7 APWA - - - a�fr 7 lkbb�rrJal�`l �_7�17u_ -_tiv �aTj. Q Yhp��£ r, �SAld vKyf�r. -- '`� •t7ad ? �,� C�k1vwl,4DrL S�r7�i� �y� �fiFirS avJcx v - -- .NAIaE a-j T7tje,/7• c�C Ln T N A4i f 28 March 1989 THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Planning Department CENTRAL BALBOA SPECIFIC PLAN AREA Parking Study During the 1987-8 General Plan Update program, Staff prepared an up-to-date database of existing land use information. This data was gathered on a parcel by parcel basis for all "commercial" areas of the City, including Central Balboa, and then organized into both parcel and block reporting denominations. Subsequently, the Planning Department was also asked, by the City Council, to prepare a parking inventory for the Central Balboa Specific Plan Area. Current parking code requirements, and the existing on -site (off-street) provided parking were determined for each parcel within the area. In addition, on -street parking spaces were also counted, but on a block -by -block basis only. This information has been `attached' to the existing database and is similarly organized into both parcel and block reporting tables. The attached Central Balboa Specific Plan Area "Parking Summary" and "Parking Study" tables detail the results of this parking inventory on a block -by -block and parcel -by -parcel basis (respectively). A map of the Central Balboa, delineating the specific plan area, the block identifiers, the individual parcel street addresses, and the number and location of the 'area' municipal parking lots, is also included for your reference. This information indicates that there is a severe parking shortage in the Central Balboa area, and can be summarized as follows: # of Code Recuired Parking spaces 2,169 # of Parking Spaces "On -Site" 363 # of Parking Spaces "On -Street" 150 DEFICIT # of Parking Spaces (1,656) Of the 113 individual parcels in Central Balboa, only 28 presently satisfy the number of "off-street" parking spaces required by the current parking code. And, of the 27 blocks, only two (2) (L -- developed with the Great American Savings Association building, and S -- developed with mixed general commercial uses) meet these same parking "on -site" parking standards. If we provide for the number of parking spaces located in the three (3) area municipal parking lots -- 804 spaces, then this "deficit" is decreased to only 852 spaces. However, this summary does not take into consideration the parking demand created by the beach and pier users, or the 'Catalina Flyer' and other charter boats operating out of Newport Landing and the Fun Zone. Our best estimate is that they number in excess of 1,588 passengers. Based upon the existing land uses in the Central Balboa Specific Plan Area, and the number of "In -Lieu" spaces which have been sold to commercial interests in the area -- 256 (please see the attached "In -Lieu Parking Requirements"); at least 1,550 parking spaces have either been waived or are not provided CENTRAL BALBOA Parking Study (page #2) "on -site" either because a building was constructed prior to the City's current parking code requirements and is a legal/non-conforming use ("grandfathered"). Respectfully submitted, PLANNING DEPARTMENT JAMES D. HEWICKER, Director B B. ERN Assi Attachments C:\WP\CNBALPRK.STD "Y n CENTRAL BALBOA SPECIFIC PLAN AREA 9, �r yoT Y FR�� Kii`C oc%a' P $GCS e Sp��ys l � av Pu$LIc pE,gK N pARK �aa N O / � $FAGS 1 PUSyi , I C 1\ C I F C P A oA s PIER • CENTRAL BALBOA SPECIFIC PLAN AREA -- Parking Summary by "Block" designation Existing Provided -------------------------------- Off-Street On -Street TOTAL Required SURPLUS / Block Parking Parking Parking Parking (DEFICIT) Designation [# sp.] [# sp.] [# sp.] [# sp.] [# sp.] A 4 6 10 274 (264) B 17 12 29 51 (22) C 0 6 6 126 (120) D 9 9 18 338 (320) E 6 3 9 37 (28) F 16 13 29 46 (17) G 3 2 5 10 (5) H 17 5 22 44 (22) 1 14 7 21 29 (8) K 10 0 10 26 (16) L 23 3 26 17 9 M 15 2 17 25 (8) N 9 6 15 41 (26) P 6 3 9 26 (17) Q 0 2 2 38 (36) R 11 12 23 70 (47) S 29 16 45 37 8 T 9 11 20 109 (89) U 13 4 17 59 (42) V 47 6 53 78 (25) W 45 0 45 66 (21) X 10 8 18 263 (245) Y 12 0 12 153 (141) Z 24 6 30 57 (27) AA 10 0 10 99 (89) AB 4 8 12 50 (38) AC 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL(s)v27 363 150 513 2,169 (1,656) .0 CENTRAL BALBOA SPECIFIC PLAN AREA -= Parking Study by Parcel EXISTING REQUIRED Off -Street Off -Street Street Street Block Parking Parking Number Name Designation •(# spaces) (# spaces) ------------- 503 -------------------- EDGEWATER AVE E ------------ A ---------------- 4 ----------- 90 301 PAIR ST A 0 31 309 PALM ST A 0 153 100 MAIN ST AA 0 41 104 MAIN ST AA 0 8 106 MAIN ST AA 0 35 806 OCEAN FRONT E AA 2 3 808 OCEAN FRONT E AA 4 3 810 OCEAN FRONT E AA 2 3 812 OCEAN FRONT E AA 2 3 814 OCEAN FRONT E AA 0 3 710 BALBOA BLVD E AB 0 6 712 BALBOA BLVD E AB 0 8 716 BALBOA BLVD E AB 0 7 711 BAY AVE E AB 4 2 205 MAIN ST AB 0 24 207 MAIN ST AB 0 3 100 BALBOA PIER AC 0 0 501 BAY AVE E B 2 5 503 BAY AVE E B 0 2 505 BAY AVE E B 8 6 209 FAIR ST B 7 38 600 EDGEWATER AVE E C 0 126 700 BAY AVE E D 0 38 706 BAY AVE E D 9 12 700 EDGEWATER AVE E D 0 1 703 EDGEWATER AVE E D 0 12 301 MAIN ST D 0 54 303 MAIN ST D O 42 400 MAIN ST D 0 179 807 BAY AVE E E 0 2 809 BAY AVE E E 4 2 811 BAY AVE E E 2 3 813 BAY AVE E E 0 3 815 BAY AVE E E 0 3 300 MAIN ST E 0 10 304 MAIN ST E 0 14 300 BALBOA BLVD E F 0 5 302 BALBOA BLVD E F 2 5 304 BALBOA BLVD E F 2 3 306 BALBOA BLVD E F 3 9 310 BALBOA BLVD E F 0 11 320 'BALBOA BLVD E F 3 3 324 BALBOA BLVD E F 3 5 328 BALBOA BLVD E F 3 5 330 BALBOA BLVD E C 3 5 205 CYPRESS ST C 0 5 404 BALBOA BLVD E H 0 11 406 BALBOA BLVD E Ei 4 3 408 BALBOA BLVD E Fi 2 19 410 BALBOA BLVD E If 3 5 • page #2 40 EXISTING REQUIRED Off -Street Off -Street Street Street Block Parking Parking Number Name Designation, (# spaces) (# spaces) ------------- 412 -------------------- BALBOA BLVD E ------------ H ---------------- 4 • --------- _ - 3 416 BALBOA BLVD E H 4 3 204 ADAMS ST J 4 3 206 ADAMS ST J 4 3 208 ADAMS ST J 4 3 500 BALBOA BLVD E J 2 20 510 BALBOA BLVD E K 10 14 207 PALM ST K 0 12 600 BALBOA BLVD E L 23 17 608 BALBOA BLVD E M 15 25 209 WASHINGTON ST M 0 0 700 BALBOA BLVD E N 0 3 702 BALBOA BLVD E N 0 14 704 BALBOA BLVD E N 0 24 206 WASHINGTON ST N 9 0 202 MAIN ST P 0 19 204 MAIN ST P 6 7 810 BALBOA BLVD Z Q 0 38 301 BALBOA BLVD E R 0 9 311 BALBOA BLVD E R 0 48 313 BALBOA BLVD E R 7 7 315 BALBOA BLVD E R 2 3 317 BALBOA BLVD E R 2 3 403 BALBOA BLVD E S 2 9 407 BALBOA BLVD E S 4 9 409 BALBOA BLVD E S 0 2 411 BALBOA BLVD E S 6 2 413 BALBOA BLVD E S 3 3 415 BALBOA BLVD E S 3 3 417 BALBOA BLVD E S 5 3 421 BALBOA BLVD E S 3 3 423 BALBOA BLVD E S 3 3 501 BALBOA BLVD E T 0 5 503 BALBOA BLVD E T 0 2 505 BALBOA BLVD E T 9 2 507 BALBOA BLVD E T 0 9 509 BALBOA BLVD E T 0 7 511 BALBOA BLVD E T 0 12 109 PALM ST T 0 72 500 OCEAN FRONT E U 2 5 502 OCEAN FRONT E U 3 2 504 OCEAN FRONT E U 2 2 506 OCEAN FRONT E U 2 3 508 OCEAN FRONT E U 2 3 510 OCEAN FRONT E U 2 3 105 PALM ST U 0 41 600 BALBOA BLVD E V 23 17 601 BALBOA BLVD E V 0 10 605 BALBOA BLVD E V 3 8 615 BALBOA'BLVD E V 21 43 600 OCEAN FRONT E W 45 66 701 BALBOA BLVD E X 0 7 • page #3 EXISTING REQUIRED Off -Street Off -Street Street Street Block Parking Parking Number 'Name -------------------- Designation, ------------ (# spaces) (# spaces) ----------- ------------- 703 BALBOA BLVD E X ---------------- 2 25 705 BALBOA BLVD E X 4 23 707 BALBOA BLVD E X 0 147 709 BALBOA BLVD E X 4 61 105 MAIN ST Y 0 144 700 OCEAN FRONT E Y 4 3 702 OCEAN FRONT E Y 4 3 704 OCEAN FRONT E Y 4 3 801 BALBOA BLVD E Z 22 45 813 BALBOA BLVD E Z 0 9 815 BALBOA BLVD E Z 2 3 TOTAL(s) 113 27 363 2,169 IN -LIEU PARKING REQUIREMENTS (as of 2/6/89) APPLICATION NAME ADDRESS NO. OF SPACES UP 931 Balboa Inn 105 Main Street 66 UP 1053 Le Biarritz 414 N. Newport Blvd. 3 UP 1460 Beach Ball 2116 W. Ocean Front 11 UP 1476 (Amended) Studio Cafe 100 Main Street 37 UP 1581 (Amended) Red Onion 2406 Newport Blvd. 3 UP 1606 Perry's Pizza 2108 3/4 W. Ocean Front 3 UP 1717 (Amended) Rick Lawrence 2106 W. Ocean Front 12 UP 1757 (Amended) El Ranchito 2800 Newport Blvd. 5 UP 1778 (Amended) Hemingway's Rest. 2441 E. Coast Hwy. 2 UP 1783 (Amended) Rumplestilskins 112 McFadden Place 18 UP 1816 Beachcomber's 2633 W. Coast Hwy. 7 UP 1832 Seaview Gardens 810 E. Balboa Blvd. 15 UP 1852 Hassan's 3325 Newport Blvd. 8 UP 1854 T. K. Burger 2119 W. Balboa Blvd. 2 UP 1865 B.J.'s 106 Main Street 22 UP 1872 Mamie Van Doren 428 31st Street 5 UP 2045 (Amended) Bubbles Rest. Ill Palm Street 231 UP 3031 Stop -In 703 E. Balboa Blvd. 4 UP 3034 (Amended) Newport Sea Shack 110 McFadden Place 4 UP 3042 Balboa Bakery 301 Main Street 3 UP 3046 Stuff'd Bun 704 E. Balboa Blvd, 4 UP 3058 The Place 2920 E. Coast Highway 132 'The City required that 23 in -lieu parking spaces be provided. However, the Coastal Commission required that $7,140.00 be deposited in the City's In -Lieu Parking Fund on an annual basis. 2Eight additional in -lieu parking spaces will be required if the 8 off - site parking spaces on the abutting properties are not maintained. E In -Lieu Parking Requirements Page 2 UP 3065 UP 3076 UP 3095 SPR 36 and 41 Woody's Wharf Newport Landing China Palace Turnstone Corp. 2318 Newport Blvd. 10 503 E. Edgewater P1. 253 2800 W. Coast Hwy. 134 2431-2439 W. Coast Hwy. 14 + 45 UP 3129 Bangkok 3 101-103 Palm Street UP 3158 (Amended) The Grill 105 Main Street (in the Balboa Inn) UP 3188 Balboa Thai 209k Palm Street *UP 3240 *SPR 43 UP 3063 (Amended) UP 3287 City Agreement Blue Beet Commercial Bldg Office Building Britta's Cafe Doan Trust 107 21st Street 3519 E. Coast Hwy 2800 Lafayette Ave 205 Main Street 12 24 3 4 4 10 3 476 * In -Lieu Parking fees are not required as of this date, since the commercial use is not in operation, or has not expanded. 3Required by the Coastal Commission as long as tandem parking spaces are needed to meet the parking requirements. 4Parking permits were required on an annual basis and not in -lieu parking spaces in this particular case. SThe Coastal Commission required 4 additional in -lieu parking spaces for the development. However, the City will permit said 4 spaces in the Mariner's Mile Municipal parking lot on a temporary basis only. The applicant will have to provide the parking spaces elsewhere at a later date. 6The City has entered into an agreement that permits the Doan Trust an option to purchase up to 47 in -lieu parking spaces in the Cannery Village Municipal Lot until April 7, 1990. Said spaces may be applied to satisfy the parking requirements for any development on the former Cafe Lido Restaurant property and the adjoining Pelican Market site, but only between the hours of 5:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m, daily. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH --- Planning Department - 20 March 1989 TO: Aziz M. Aslami, Associate Planner FROM: Bret B. Bernard, Associate Planner SUBJECT: Immediate Graohics' Needs for the "Central Balboa Specific Area Plan" As -you know, Robert P. Lenard, Advance Planning Manager, and I will be responsible for the "Central Balboa Specific Area" planning process. We hope to begin the public forum segment of this process as early as the Monday after next, 27 March 1989. To facilitate communication with the public and the various "associations", we hope to draw upon your skills with the mapping portion of "Geobase" in producing a number of exhibits. On the same scale as the base "C.B." map that you have already generated, we would like to have (for mounting): 1) a `clean' version of the "Data Map" that you have already produced, and M .j 2) a map of the "General Plan Designations" *, andKIV 3) a map of the "Zoning Designations" *, and 4) a map-'highligb`ing' those parcels .with "conflicting" land use designations (i.e., differences between the Zoning and General Plan designations) *, and 5) a map showing, the various "street directions" and overall circulation scheme; including, the routing of traffic through the Balboa Pier parking lot for access to the ferry *, and ! 6) another plain "Base Map" *; please see attached, small scale version that I have already generated. To assist you, particularly in the production of map #5, we should be receiving a new aerial photograph of this area sometime this week. By the by, Bob and I have decided to show the "park" area between the small municipally metered parking lots east of the Balboa Pier. Wouldyouplease -- --indicate-game on the aforementioned maps. - There is a "time crunch" involved in producing these products. As I mentioned above, we will (hopefully) begin the public participation next week; and, as a result, we need to have these exhibits completed and mounted 7 Central Balboa Maps memorandum (page #2) - - - - - by this Friday (24 March). Bob has indicated that this effort should be given top, but not necessarily exclusive, priority. If you have any questions regarding the scheduling of your workload, please contact Bob. If you have any other queries or suggestions regarding the contents of these maps, please communicate with either one of us. A BRFY Y. B TARD xc: Robert P. Lenard, Advance Planning Manager C:\WP\CENBALGH.MLM CENTRAL BALB OA SPECIFIC PLAN AREA Jf?Cr6Tzj 441vo dtE _NEWPORT w 19, wlamawl �•'l�yRONt (•uRAs'� 3uMr) eft cli ems•• p $ •�- gEel PUBLI $ L�� PAgKING LOT HEALS 6 spAcEs ) "t 1,09 H EApx YUBLIc, _ �F1C 11� BALBOA P . PIER V 1_J _j- ,Yv .LL R mil_ L, , -�t, 1J 01 .li. t� w IZ f I W V p.. V PEA shy' ?LL 3LD� uSt L.U. TAM ST. F Ilk. T, 0, PaRG15f6 AAGZtLt �•P ZUFt. AAA 11sE ax j03LO045 300 BALBOA BL. E T R R 2 2400 RES 3 158 03 0 103LOO41 302 BALBOA BL. E TFR R-2 2400 RES 3 158 03 2 103L0037 304 BALBOA BL. E TFR R-2 2400 RES 2 4I 158 03 0 03L0033 306 BALBOA BL. E TFR R-2 2400 RES 6 S` 158 03 3 :33LOO27 310 BALBOA BL. E TFR R-2 4800 RES 11 5�158 03 0 = 0023 320 BALBOA BL. E TFR R-2 2400 RES 2 44P158 03 3 :03LOO19 324 BALBOA BL. E TFR R-2 2400 RES 3 4dff158 D3 3 03LOO17 328 BALBOA BL. E TFR R-2 2400 RES 3 4dw158 03 3 103L0013 330 BALBOA BL. E TFR R-2 2700 RES 3 410 158 03 3 !03L0011 205 CYPRESS ST TFR R-2 2632 RES 3 440158 03 0 D3KOQ25 30J BRLBOA BL. E GEI C-1 2400 OFF 1000 280158 D3 0 03K0025 30 BALBOA BL. E GEI C-1 0 RES 3 4c 158 03 0 03KO017 311 BALBOA BL. E G C-1 12000 OFF 12000 280158 03 0 113K0009 313 BRLBffl"L. E--- -- _ E C-1 2400 OFF 500 280158 03 4 33K0009 31 BALBOA BL. E BET C-1 0 RET 500 1W 58 03 3 03K0009 31 BRLBOR BL. E L RET C-1 0 RES 2 W 158 03 0 33K0005 315 BALBOA BL. E C-1 2400 RES 2 4dP158 03 2 03K0001 317 BALBOA BL. E TFR C-1 2400 RES 2 440158 03 2 03POO21 404 BALBOA BL. E TFR C-1 2900 RES 7 5�15B 03 0 03POO19 406 BRLBOA BL. E TFR C-1 2714 RES 2 0 158 D3 4 03P0017 408,BRLBOR BL. E TFR C-1 2507 RET 550 13P 158 03 2 D3P0017 408 BALBOA BL. E TFR C-1 0 RET 800 2P I58 03 0 03P0013 41BALBOA BL. E TFR C-1 2320 RET 600 lPM 58 03 3 D3P0013 414 BALBOR BL. E TFR C-1 0 RES 1 3 158 03 0 ,D3P0009 412 BALBOA BL. E TFR C-1 3597 RES 2 40158 03 4 ;03P0001 416 BALBOA BL. E TFR C-1 3547 RES 2 158 03 4 0300037 403 BALBOA BL. E RET C-1 6555 RES 6 W 158 03 2 0300029 407 BALBOA BL. E RET C-1 2850 RET 2200 150158 03 4 10300025 409 BRLBOR BL. E RET C-1 2850 RES 1 3 158 D3 0 0300021 411 BALBOA BL. E RET C-1 2850 RES 1 3 158 03 6 D300017 413 BALBOA BL. E RET C-1 2850 RES 2 4l158 03 3 �0300013 415 BALBOA BL. E RET C-1 2850 RES 2 40 158 03 3 0300009 4171BALBOR BL. E RET C-1 2850 RET 150 150158 03 3 0300009 417 BALBOA BL. E RET C-1 0 RES 1 3 158 03 2 0300005 421 BALBOA BL. E RET C-1 2650 RES 2 W 158 03 3 /0300001 423 BRLBOR BL. E RET C-1 2850 RES 2 41Pg�,�15�8g 03 3 103R0001 503 EDGEWATER AVE. RET C-1 9000 RET 3595 �fR, 03 4 D3R0003 500 BAY AVE. E RET C-1 4400 MSC 4400 103 0 �83R0005 504 BAY AVE. E RET C-1 2100 MSC 2100 .18 03 0 `0R0007 301 PALM ST. RET C-1 5400 OFF 7565 158 03 0 03B0009 309 PALM ST. RET C-1 12000 RET 6147 1 158 03 0 '03R0009 309 PRLM ST. RET C-1 0 RET 3533 11F15B 03 0 '03S0001 209 PALM ST. RET C-1 6750 RET 2900 190158 03 7 103S0003 505 BAY AVE. E RET C-1 4500 RES 4 4w 158 03 8 103S0005 503 BRY AVE. E RET C-1 2250 RES 1 3 158 03 0 103S0007 501 BAY AVE. E RET C-1 2250 RES 3 4w'158 03 2 150013 S0009 208 ADAMS ST. RET C-1 3000 RES 2 44W158 D3 4 SO011 206 ADAMS ST. RET C-1 3000 RES 2 4d0158 43 4 204 ADRMS ST. RET C-1 3000 RES 2 4dw158 03 4 03SO015 500 BALBOA BL. E RET C-1 5000 RET 1000 200158 03 7 0350017 510 BALBOA BL. E RET C-1 8400 RET 3500 1S/158 03 10 10330019 207 PALM ST. RET C-1 3000 RET 3000 13W158 03 0 03T0001 109 PALM ST. RET C-1 5415 RET 5011 190158 D3 0 03T0003 105 PRLM ST. RET C-1 5415 RET 1300 19VI59 03 0 03T0003 105 PALM ST. RET C-1 0 RET 1200 19PI59 03 0 03T0003 105 PALM ST. RET C-1 0 RET 600 19P159 03 0 03T0003 105 PALM ST. RET C-1 0 RES 7 5+ 159 D3 0 03T0005 5111SALBOR BL. E RET C-1 2565 RET 2400 1910159 03 0 03T0005 511 BALBOA BL. E RET C-1 0 RES 1 4 159 03 0 03T0007 510 OCEAN FRONT E TFR R-2 2565 RES 2 4�159 03 2 �03T0009 5091yBRLBOA BL. E � RET C-1 2565 OFF 1000 28*159 03 0 509lBALBOA BL E RET C-1 0 RES 2 WP 159 03 0 ---03T0olv 508 OCEAN FRONT E -TFR R-2 2565 RES 2 40 159 03 2 5071BRLBOR BL. E RET C-1 2565 OFF 800 284159 D3 0 ;03T0013 507 BALBOA BL. E RET C-1 0 RES 3 4 ,"159 03 0 03T0015 506 OCEAN FRONT E TFR R-2 2565 RES 2 44IP159 03 2 03T0017 505 BALBOA BL. E RET C-1 2565 RES 1 3 159 03 9 D3T0019 504 OCEAN FRONT E TFR R-2 2565 RES 1 3 159 D3 2 !03T0021 503 BRLBOR BL.E RET C-1 2565 RES 1 3 159 03 0 03T0023 502 OCEAN FRONT E TFR R-2 2565 RES 1 3 159 03 3 ;03T0025 501 BALBOA BL. E RET C-1 2565 RES 3 4, 159 03 0 �03T0027 500 OCEAN FRONT E TFR R-2 2565 RES 3 4 159 03 2 :0300001 615 BALBOA BL. E RET C-1 12825 RET 2975 19WI59 03 21 0300003 605 BALBOA BL. E RET C-1 2565 RET 2000 190159 03 3 0300005 603 BALBOA BL. E RET C-1 2565 RES 1 3 159 03 23 D300007 601 BRLBOR BL. E RET C-1 2565 RET 2500 190159 D3 0 O 00009 600 OCEAN FRONT E SFA C-1 20520 RES 44 �5 d' 03 45 ;D3V0001 209 WASHINGTON AVE RET C-1 3000 MSC 3000 2 1 03 0 03V0003 210 PALM ST. RET C-1 5710 MSC 5710 52 15 03 0 iD3V0005 206 PALM ST. RET C-1 2850 M5C 2850 -52& 03 0 103V0007 600 BALBOA BL. E RET C-1 7949 off--44E4 4070 28%159 03 23 D3V0009 608 BALBOA BL. E RET C-1 10100 ""R'ET 6050 15/I59 03 15 03W0001 600 EDGEWATER RET C-1 33700 RET 6243 190159 03 0 .D3W0001 600 EDGEWATER RET C-1 0 RET 3469 2009159 D3 0 j03W0001 600 EDGEWATER RET C-1 0 RET 7628 15VI59 03 0 ;D3W0001 600 EDGEWATER RET C-1 0 OFF 400 28a159 03 0 'D3W0003 700 BAY AVE. E RET C-1 3000 RET 3000 190159 03 0 ID3W0005 703 EDGEWATER RET C-1 3000 RET 3000 03 0 D3W0007 705 EDGEWATER RET C-1 3000 MSC 3000 D3 0 103W0009 706 BAY AVE. E RET C-1 3000 RET 3000 '` 159 03 9 03WO011 700 EDGEWRTER RET C-1 3000 RET 140 16#159 03 0 lD3WO013 400 MRIN ST. RET C-1 17500 RET 12750 19g59 03 0 D3W0Q13 400 MAIN ST. RET C-1 0 RET 500 2 59 03 0 103WO013 400 MRIN ST. RET C-1 0 RET 4250 160159 03 0 03WO015 3031MAIN ST. RET C-1 6300 RET 6000 15I159 03 0 03WO015 303 MAIN ST. RET C-1 0 RES 12 5 �159 D3 0 103WO017 301MAIN ST. RET C-1 2700 RET 2600 20W 59 03 0 03WO017 3011MAIN ST. RET C-1 0 RES 1 3Jr 159 03 0 D3X0001 205JMAIN ST. RET C-1 3000 RET 1000 ISsIS9 03 4 j03X0001 205 MRIN ST. RET C-1 0 RET 1400 20 59 03 0 jD3X0003 710 BALBOA BL. E RET C-1 4800 RET C-1 059 03 0 03X0003 712 BALBOA BL. E RET C-1 0 RET 1B00 15159 03 0 DU 0003 716 BALBOA BL. E RET C-1 0 RET 1600 1 59 03 0 D3X0005 700 BALBOA BL. E RET C-1 2500 OFF 1000 28%159 03 0 D3X0005 702 BALBOA BL. E RET C-1 0 15001500 20►159 03 0 03X0007 704 BALBOA BL. E C-1 3000 RET 3000 D3 0 :03X000S 206 WASHINGTON AVE. C�Er C-1 5000 MSC 5000 03 9 I.1 03Y0001 709 BALBOA BL. E RET C-1 7695 RET 2000 59 03 0 103T0001 709 BALBOA BL. E RET C-1 0 RET 1700 15P159 D3 0 103T0001 709 BALBOA BL. E RET C-1 0 RET 1200 15 159 03 0 03Y0001 799 8ALBOR BL. E RET C-1 0 . RES 6 5dw159 03 4 03T0003 105 MRIN ST. RET C-1-Z 12825) BET 2773 19-159 03 0 03Y0003 105 MAIN ST. RET C-I-Z 0 OFF 1946 280159 03 0 ;D3Y0003 105 MAIN ST. RET C-1-Z 0 RET 1600 150159 03 0 !D3Y0003 105 MAIN ST. RET C-1-Z 0 RET 800 2Ii 159 03 0 ID3Y0003 105 MAIN ST. RET C 1-Z 0 RET 34 100159 03 0 03Y0005 707 BRLBOA BL. E RET C-1 5130 RET 440 26w159 03 0 D3Y0007 705&pqBALBOR BL. E RET C-I-Z 2565 OFF 1500 284159 03 4 D3Y007 705WBALBOR BL. E RET C-1-Z 0 RET 850 29F 159 03 0 'D3Y0009 703 BRLBOR BL. E RET C-1-Z 2565 RET 1018 ISPI 59 D3 0 ;03Y0009 703 BALBOA BL. E RET C-1-Z 0 RES 1 3 159 D3 2 103YO011 70loBALBOR BL. E RET C-1-Z 2565 RET 1200 190159 D3 0 �03T0011 701. $AL,6on f5L. a RET C-1-Z 0 OFF 500 284159 03 0 +D3YO013 704 OCEANFRONT E RET C-1-7 2565 RES 2 4dW159 03 4 03TUDI5 702 BALBOA BL. E RET C-1-7 2565 RES 2 40159 03 4 03TOO17 700 OCEAN FRONT E RET C-1-Z 2565 RES 2 4P159 4 4 03Z0001 815 BAY AVE. E TFR R-2 2550 RES 2 4dW159 03 0 03Z0003 813 BAY AVE. E TFR R-2 2700 RES 2 4f 59 03 0 103Z0005 811 BAY AVE. E TFR R-2 2550 RES 2 4 59 03 2 D3Z0007 809 BAY AVE. E TFR R-2 2700 RES 2 59 03 4 03Z0009 807 BAY AVE. E TFR R-2 2700 RES 1 3---159 D3 0 jD3Z0011 304 MAIN ST. RET C-1 2700 RET 2700 1EP159 03 0 03Z0011 304 MAIN ST. RET C-1 0 RES 2 4d§P159 D3 0 '03Z0013 300 MAIN ST. RET C-1 2700 RET 2500 15=159 03 0 S 810 BALBOA BL. E 1 3414 RET 4000 19i159 03 0 D3Z001 204 MAIN ST. car -1 3000 GEI 1700 39i459 03 6 202 M,-riQ Si. C-1 3010 RET 3500 1WR59 03 0 iO3Z0019 2021MAIN ST. RET C-1 0 RES 3 4+�159 03 0 D3AA001 815 BALBOA BL. E TFR R-2 2565 RES 2 4f 159 03 2 D3AR003 814 OCEAN FRONT E TFR R-2 2757 RES 2 4d&159 03 0 ;03PROOS 813 BALBOA BL. E RET C-1 2565 RET 2200 1SO159 03 0 D3AAO07 812 OCEAN FRONT E TFR R-2 2373 RES 2 4M159 03 2 D3AROO9 801 BALBOA BL. E RET C-1 15390 RET 3600 198459 D3 22 I03AA011 810 OCEAN FRONT E TFR R-2 2565 RES 2 4aP159 03 2 03PRO13 808 OCEAN FRONT E TFR R-2 2565 RES 2 4 awl 59 03 4 03AA015 806 OCEAN FRONT E TFR R-2 2565 RES 2 4wP159 03 2 03AR017 106 MAIN ST. RET C-1 2430 RET 2430 IV 159 03 0 !D3RN021 100 MAIN ST. RET C-1 2835 RBET C-1 2430 ET 2835 00 ip 159 03 0 • vb�5 0 R0 5�� 0 5 Q; 3 0! 9 0' 11 Qi 5 0! 5 0 5 QI 4 0' 5 0 48 2 2 3 3 3 11 3 36 2 3 3 9 9 2 2 0 3 1 2 3 00 0 138 15 38 6 2 5 3 3 20 14 72 18 9 3 11 10 2 3 4 3 3 4 5 3 2 2 2 2 5 5 83 2 66 0 0 0 17 25 23 70 31 36 02 12 1 260 17 24 i8 52 2 60 6 8 7 3 28 55 0 40 7 5 99 8 7 16 34 147 6 23 2 5 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 31 10 78 14 5 3 3 9 35 3 3 35 8 41 1 0 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 CENTRAL BALB OA SPECIFIC PLAN AREA NEWPORT BB A '1(j��_'�'' mi 7 IU t A E C », ,o w.,,,, 1 I 1 I �. t+ 1}�IsoNr Mt p ♦ ooll pU$LIc, poll $EACB BUOA PIER I CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Planning Department 24 February 1989 TO: Aziz Aslami, Associate Planner FROM: Bret B. Bernard, Associate Planner SUBJECT: Generation of Maps from "Geobase" Per our previous conversations, I am in need, in the immediate to near future (as noted), of several maps generated from 'DeltaMap "Geobase"' to assist me in several (unrelated) projects. Please note the following maps required (at this juncture): 1) an "Annexation" map (akin to the one produced for Jim Sinasek) -- for the United States Bureau of the Census annual "annexation" update. [requested immediately] 2) several ("blown -up") maps of "Central Balboa", specifically the 'specific plan area' and its immediate environs -- for 'process initiation' of the Specific Area Plan; detailing: a) the existing/planned land uses (i.e., the General Plan designations), and b) the existing/planned circulation system (i.e., from the Master Plan of Streets and Highways); and, any other maps which you feel are relevant. [requested at your earliest convenience] 3) the "desktop scale" versions of the Land Use Plan and the Master Plan of the Streets and Highways -- for personal reference. [requested when convenient] I know that many demands have been placed upon you of late for map formulation and production; so let me thankyou in advance for your timely assistance in assembling these maps for me. C:\WP\A2MAPREQ.MEM .1. !,IX- y LoCd[ cLdSr4L RaN: Central Balboa Specific Area Plan ,65�rOn Lrrµ of er AL DrS.rh -Vertu. REr� eMd JEAvICf Clstw.erf,�CrAL Co��l�',rerAL �?FSIDfwirT,4G DlSTh.Y¢rse.✓ • nw- F+�ur FP.StoEvnWL Yv54rf ,evo ���rn'�tW4L 7+CSshNI"iTp.{/ ,fFG,�,6{7R44! ayD f- yym" _ .✓FrdL AvLN S1f Cf OTN6Y � L7f.5Th�v4rSON iMlY.FD uJf 4/4-4 �IlAwIA11�1�f1�1 • 10 Ln n i • -ECIFIC:`AREA ACTION SRO I P.O. BOX 4185 BALBOA CA. 92661 PHONE # 714-673-8070 MARCH'811989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 3300 'NEWPORT BLVD. NEWPORT BEACH CALIFORNIA. OFFICE OF THE MAYOR MAYOR DON STRAUSS ALL DEPARTMENTS THE BALBOA IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION HAS APPOINTED THE BELOW - NAMED PERSONS AS REPRESENTITIVES IN THE CITY SPECIFIC AREA PLAN.PLEASE CALL ANYONE OF US TO WORK WITH THE CITY ON THIS PLAN. TELEPHONE BOB BLACK CPS 400 E.MAIN BALBOA 6754 444 DOUG CAVANAUGH RUBY'S BALBOA.PIER 631 8555 MEL FUCHS 700 E.BALBOA BL 675 8120 PHIL TOZER 400 E MAIN 675 1905 HOVIK ABRAMAIAN STUDIO CAFE 675 7760 BRITTA KVINGE BRITTAS CAFE 205 EMAIN 675 8146 KENT MADDI BAY ARCADE 706 E.BAY 675 8902 CHARLIE BAUMAN .673-8070 Copy City All Depts. APPROVED BALBOA IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION Britta Kv nge e res City Council Meeting February 13, 1989 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Agenda Item No. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH City Council Planning Department H-1 Proposed Revisions to the In Lieu Parking Ordinance Request to amend Title 12 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code pertaining to the City's In Lieu Parking Program. INITIATED BY: City of Newport Beach Suggested Action If desired, adopt Ordinance 88-47, amending Section 12.44.125 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Application This is a request to amend Section 12.44.125 of the Municipal Code, Commer- cial In Lieu Parking Fees, as suggested by the City Council Off -Street Parking Committee. Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission, at its meeting of December 8, 1988, discussed the proposed changes to the in lieu ordinance and recommended to the City Council that at a minimum, the sale of additional in lieu spaces should be discontinued. Background Over the past 18 months, the City Council Off -Street Parking Committee considered several alternatives to the In Lieu program, including establish- ing a fee that was equal to the cost of actually purchasing land and providing additional public parking spaces. After considerable discussion it was determined that it was unlikely that the City would pursue the acquisi- tion of more land for public parking lots. It was therefore determined that the appropriate course of action was to raise the rate $75 each year for five years, and every year thereafter raise the rate commensurate with the Consumers Price Index, with the fees collected to be used to improve public parking or transportation services or other public facilities. The Off Street Parking Committee reported their findings in the report dated November 28, 1988 (attached). At the November 28, 1988 City Council Study Session, based on the recommen- dations of the Off Street Parking Committee, the City Council directed staff to prepare a draft ordinance for the meeting of December 12, 1988. An ordinance was introduced at the City Council Meeting of December 12, 1988, and passed to second reading on January 9, 1989 (copies of the December 12th and January 9th staff reports are also attached). At the January 9, 1989 City Council meeting the ordinance was modified and reintroduced for second reading on February 13, 1989. TO: City Council - 2. Revised Ordinance At the January 9th City Council meeting staff was directed to re -notify the participants in the In Lieu Parking Program. Notices were sent to all parties currently purchasing spaces, and also to those who are entitled to thru Use Permit approvals or other agreements. The changes made to the proposed ordinance are as follows: 1) The fees for 1989 would be reduced from $225 to $150. 2) The section regarding use of the funds has been modified to limit use to "improving public parking and parking facilities." 3) Since there are businesses which are entitled to purchase In Lieu Spaces thru Use Permits or other Agreements that are not currently purchasing spaces. Language was added to clarify that these businesses would be entitled to purchase In Lieu spaces thru the time period allowed by their approval or agreement. Discussion Actual Value of In Lieu Parking Space. At this time a parking space in the Central Balboa area can cost as much as $19,500, assuming that 300 square feet of land is necessary at $65 per square foot for a parking space. By raising the annual $150 per space fee by $75 per year for the next five years as suggested, the businesses are still paying a small fraction of the actual cost of providing a parking space. Although the In Lieu Program does not provide for exclusive use of parking spaces, the current and proposed rate structure offer a significant financial benefit to those businesses participating in the program. Current Users of In Lieu Program The City is currently obligated to provide In Lieu Parking amounting to 451 spaces Citywide, based on Use Permit approvals and agreements. The break- down by area is as follows: Balboa 256 spaces McFadden 67 spaces City Hall 60 spaces Corona Del Mar 27 spaces Miscellaneous 3 spaces Some of the 451 obligated spaces have not yet been purchased, and it has also come to staff's attention that some businesses are currently not paying for their required In Lieu Spaces. Following is a breakdown: Existing Users (paying) 204 Existing Users (not paying) 184 Future Obligation 63 TO: City Council - 3. Staff will be contacting those businesses who should currently be paying but are not, and indicating that Use Permit revocation proceedings will be initiated if payment is not received. The attached "In Lieu Parking Requirements (as of 2/6/89)" indicates both current participants and future obligations for the program. Central Balboa Specific Plan Area Parking_ Deficiencies During the General Plan Update program staff prepared up-to-date existing land use information, on a parcel by parcel bases, for Central Balboa as well as all the other commercial areas of the City. Since the January 9th City Council meeting a parking inventory was conducted for the Central Balboa Specific Plan Area. Current parking code requirements and the on - site parking provided were determined for each parcel within the area. In addition on -street parking spaces were counted on a block -by -block basis. The attached "Central Balboa Parking Summary" and "Central Balboa Specific Plan Area" map indicate the detailed results of this parking inventory. The information can be summarized as follows: Code Required Parking 2,169 Provided On -Site 363 Provided On -Street 150 Municipal Lots 804 ...Parking Deficit (852) FACT tow"r#t)5?7rb This deficit does not take into consideration any parking demand created by beach users or the Catalina Flyer and- charter boats out of Newport Landing and the Fun Zone, which account for 1,588 passengers. Based on the existing land uses in the area, and the 256 In -•Lieu spaces which have been sold, 1,550 parking spaces have either been waived or are not provided on -site because a building was constructed prior to the City's current parking requirements and is legal non -conforming (Grandfathered). Respectfully submitted, PLANNING DEPARTMENT JAMES D. HEWICKER, Director By��V✓"1 EL4 Robert P. Lenard Advance Planning Manager Attachments: 1. In Lieu Parking Requirements (as of 2-6-89) 2. Central Balboa Parking Summary 3. Central Balboa Specific Plan Area Map Attachments for City Council Only: 4. January 9, 1989 City Council Staff Report. 5. December 12, 1988 City Council Staff Report 6. November 28, 1988 Off -Street Parking Committee Report. CCSR\INLIEU#3.213 HtcacrnaenL i IN -LIEU PARKING REQUIREMENTS (as of 2L/89) APPLICATION UP 931 UP 1053 UP 1460 UP 1476 (Amended) UP 1581 (Amended) UP 1606 UP 1717 (Amended) UP 1757 (Amended) UP 1778 (Amended) UP 1783 (Amended) UP 1816 UP 1832 NAME Balboa Inn Le Biarritz Beach Ball Studio Cafe Red Onion Perry's Pizza Rick Lawrence E1 Ranchito Hemingway's Rest Rumplestilskins Beachcomber's Seaview Gardens ADDRESS 105 Main Street 414 N. Newport Blvd. 2116 W. Ocean Front 100 Main Street NO. OF SPACES 66 3 2406 Newport Blvd. 2108 3/4 W. Ocean Front 2106 W. Ocean Front 2800 Newport Blvd. 2441 E. Coast Hwy. - 112 McFadden Place 2633 W. Coast Hwy. 810 E. Balboa Blvd. 11 37 3 3 12 5 2 18 7 15 UP 1852 Hassan's 3325 Newport Blvd. 8 UP 1854 T. K. Burger 2119 W. Balboa Blvd. 2 UP 1865 B.J.'s 106 Main Street 22 UP 1872 Mamie Van Doren 428 31st Street 5 UP 2045 (Amended) Bubbles Rest. 111 Palm Street 231 UP 3031 Stop -In 703 E. Balboa Blvd. 4 UP 3034 (Amended) Newport Sea Shack 110 McFadden Place 4 UP 3042 Balboa Bakery 301 Main Street 3 UP 3046 Stuff'd Bun 704 E. Balboa Blvd. 4 UP 3058 The Place 2920 E. Coast Highway 132 1The City required that 23 in -lieu parking spaces be provided. However, the Coastal Commission required that $7,140.00 be deposited in the City's In -Lieu Parking Fund on an annual basis. 2Eight additional in -lieu parking spaces will be required if the 8 off - site parking spaces on the abutting properties are not maintained. I In -Lieu Parking Requirements Page 2 UP 3065 Woody's Wharf 2318 Newport Blvd. 10 UP 3076 Newport Landing 503 E. Edgewater Pl. 253 UP 3095 China Palace 2800 W. Coast Hwy. 134 SPR 36 and 41 Turnstone Corp. 2431-2439 W. Coast Hwy. 14 + 45 UP 3129 Bangkok 3 101-103 Palm Street 12 UP 3158 (Amended) The Grill 105 Main Street 24 (in the Balboa Inn) UP 3188 Balboa Thai 20911 Palm Street 3 *UP 3240 Blue Beet 107 21st Street 4 *SPR 43 Commercial Bldg. 3519 E. Coast Hwy. 4 UP 3063 (Amended) Office Building 2800 Lafayette Ave. 10 UP 3287 Britta's Cafe 205 Main Street 3 City Agreement Doan Trust - - - - - 476 * In -Lieu Parking fees are not required as of this date, since the commercial use is not in operation, or has not expanded. 3Required by the Coastal Commission as long as tandem parking spaces are needed to meet the parking requirements. 4Parking permits were required on an annual basis and not in -lieu parking spaces in this particular case. SThe Coastal Commission required 4 additional in -lieu parking spaces for the development. However, the City will permit said 4 spaces in the Mariner's Mile Municipal parking lot on a temporary basis only. The applicant will have to provide the parking spaces elsewhere at a later date. 6The City has entered into an agreement that permits the Doan Trust an option to purchase up to 47 in -lieu parking spaces in the Cannery Village Municipal Lot until April 7, 1990. Said spaces may be applied to satisfy the parking requirements for any development on the former Cafe Lido Restaurant property and the adjoining Pelican Market site, but only between the hours of 5:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. daily. • • Attachment 2 CENTRAL BALBOA PARKING SUMMARY BLOCK EXISTING ON -STREET TOTAL REQUIRED SURPLUS LETTER PARKING1 PARKING PARKING PARKING (DEFICIT). A 4 0 4 -243 1 (239) B 0 6 1 6 31 (25) _zD y � z Z O y Jo HARDING Si ■ x:i .ui7i�vg: 1 IJ RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL GEIF A -A -A-& SPECIFIC PLAN AREA BOUNDARY CENTRAL BALBOA SPECIFIC PLAN AREA ( 56 SPACES ) BEACH PARKING LOT ( 6-20 SPACES ) PUBLIC BEACH ROOM, �- +• F, pARK PARKING L! H �- w W y PARK � IN ITT-OF NEWPORT BEACH ADVANCE ll L NMG DM510N JEBROARP 1■e■ k • Attachment 4 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: City Council Meeting January 9. 1989 Agenda Item No. H-1 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH City Council Planning Department Proposed Revisions to the In Lieu Parking Ordinance Request to amend Title 12 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code pertaining to the City's In Lieu Parking Program. INITIATED BY: City of Newport Beach Suggested Action If desired, adopt Ordinance 88-47, amending Section 12.44.125 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Application This is a request to amend Section 12.44.125 of the Municipal Code, Commer- cial In Lieu Parking Fees, as suggested by the City Council Off -Street Parking Committee. Background The City Council Off -Street Parking Committee has been discussing a variety of proposals pertaining to revisions to the City's In Lieu Parking Ordinance over the past 18 months. At its Study Session of November 28, 1988, the City Council directed staff to prepare a draft ordinance based upon the recommendation of the Off -Street Parking Committee. The Planning Commission, at its meeting of December 8, 1988, discussed the proposed changes to the in lieu ordinance and recommended to the City Council• that at a minimum, the sale of additional in lieu spaces should be discontinued. This Ordinance was introduced at the City Council Meeting of December 12, 1988, and passed to second reading on January 9, 1989. Copies of the draft ordinance and Planning Department staff report were distributed to the City Council at the December 12, 1988 meeting. Respectfully submitted, PLANNING DEPARTMENT JAMES D. HEWICKER, Director By CHRIS GUSTIN Senior Planner CG:WP:CCSR12 • Attachment 5 114N FROM SUBJECT: City Council City -Council Meeting December 12, 1988 Agenda Item No. F-1(a) CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Planning Department Proposed Revisions to the In Lieu Parking Ordinance Request to amend Title 12 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code pertaining to the City's In Lieu Parking Program. INITIATED BY: City of Newport Beach Suggested Action If desired, introduce Ordinance No January 9, 1988. Application and set for public hearing on This is a request to amend Section 12.44.125 of the Municipal Code, Commer- cial In Lieu Parking Fees, as suggested by the City Council Off -Street Parking Committee. Back round The City Council Off -Street Parking Committee has been discussing a variety of proposals pertaining to revisions to the City's In Lieu Parking Ordinance over the past 18 months. At its Study Session of November 28, 1988, the City Council directed staff to prepare a draft ordinance based upon the recommendation of the Off -Street Parking Committee. Discussion At the Study Session of November 28, 1988, the City Council directed staff to contact other coastal cities to determine how they have addressed this issue, and to address concerns raised by businessmen in the Central Balboa area and the Peninsula Point Association. Other Cities: The City of San Clemente currently hasa program that permits the sale of in lieu spaces for commercial uses, bed and breakfasts, restaurants, and retail uses only. At this time, the cost for each space is a one time fee of $10,000, with revisions proposed that will raise the rate to approximately $14,000. This cost is directly related to the actual cost of land to provide a parking space. The City has procedures for arranging financing TO: City Council - 2. for over two spaces, with interest paid at the rate of 10% per year. Approval of a use permit by the City Council is required. In Laguna Beach, the sale of in lieu parking spaces is limited to the downtown area. The Planning Commission may approve the sale of up to five spaces, and the City Council may approve the sale of any number greater than five spaces. The cost of each space is a one-time fee of $8,500. In Huntington Beach, the in lieu program is administered by the City's Redevelopment Agency, and is treated on a case by case basis as a variance. No specific standards are used, nor is there a set fee. In Seal Beach the program is also limited to the downtown area of Main Street. An applicant may request any number of spaces, and the request is processed as an application for a variance. The annual fee for each space is $100. The Planning Director has indicated that Seal Beach Planning Staff is trying to have the program abolished, primarily as a result of the overselling of spaces and the inability of the City to acquire additional spaces to meet the demand resulting from the sale of too many in lieu spaces. The City of Long Beach is in the process of instituting an in lieu parking program in the Belmont Shores area only. At this time no fees have been established nor have procedures for the sale of the spaces been developed. Peninsula Point Association Concerns: The Peninsula Point Association has suggested that consideration of the revisions be tabled until work commences on the Central Balboa Specific Plan. Inasmuch as the sale of in lieu spaces is a city-wide program, staff is of the opinion that the City Council should go forward with consideration of the revisions at this time. A speaker at the Study Session of November 28, 1988, indicated that Mr. Charlie Bauman had in his possession a plan to increase the number of parking spaces in the Central Balboa area. To date staff has not seen this plan, nor has staff discussed any specific proposals to increase the number of public parking spaces in the area, although there have been several meetings where general concepts were discussed, including the idea of building a subterranean parking garage at the Balboa Pier. Central Balboa Businesses Concerns: The owner of Bubbles Balboa has indicated that many of the smaller busi- nesses in the Central Balboa area cannot pay any higher rate and remain in business. It is important to note that virtually all of the current users of the program were put on notice within the Conditions of Approval of their Use Permits that the fees were to be raised. Staff has also met with the owners of several of the small businesses in Central Balboa and indicated that the procedures for amending their Use Permits were available to them, %G TO: City Council - 3. if they desired to have a Condition of Approval changed or deleted. To date, staff has not received any applications to amend a Use Permit Condi- tion of Approval pertaining to in lieu parking spaces. Bubbles Balboa was required by the Coastal Commission to pay a higher in lieu fee as a condition of the Coastal Development Permit. At this time a fee of approximately $310 per space is required. This means that Bubbles will not be subject to the revised fees until 1991. It is important to recognize that the majority of the businesses currently benefitting from the program were put on notice at the time their use permit applications were approved that the rate would be increasing at some time in the future. These businesses have been granted approval to operate without having to provide the required amount of off-street parking. At this time a parking space in the Central Balboa area can cost as much as $19,500, assuming that 300 square feet of land is necessary at $65 per square foot for a parking space. By raising the annual $150 per space fee by $75 per year for the next five years as suggested, the businesses are still paying a small fraction of the actual cost of providing a parking space. The current and proposed rate structure is in fact a parking subsidy for these busi- nesses. Analysis The Off -Street Parking Committee considered several alternatives to the In Lieu program, including establishing a fee that was equal to the cost of actually purchasing land and providing additional public parking spaces. After considerable discussion it was determined that it was unlikely that the City would pursue the acquisition of more land for public parking lots. It was therefore determined that the appropriate course of action was to raise the rate $75 each year for five years, and every year thereafter raise the rate commensurate with the Consumers Price Index, with the fees col- lected to be used to improve public parking or transportation services or other public facilities. The following describes the major points of the proposed revisions to the In Lieu Fees Ordinance: 1. Discontinue the sale of any new in lieu parking spaces as of the effective date of this ordinance. 2. Raise the fees for the existing users of the program $75 per year as follows: a) 1989: $225 b) 1990: $300 c) 1991: $375 d) 1992: $450 e) 1993: $525 TO: City Council - 4. 3. At the sixth year, 1994, the fees shall be increased annually commen- surate with the annual increase in the Consumers Price Index. 4. All fees collected pursuant to this Ordinance shall be used for purposes of improving public parking or transportation services, or other public facilities Respectfully submitted, PLANNING DEPARTMENT JAMES D. HEWICKER, Director By CHRIS GUSTIN Senior Planner CG:WP:CCSR12 I %� • • Attachment 6 City Council Meeting November 28,1988 Study Session Agenda Item No. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: OFF-STREET PARKING COMMITTEE SUBJECT: PROPOSED REVISIONS TO THE IN LIEU PARKING ORDINANCE Background The Off -Street Parking Committee has been discussing various alternatives to the City's In -lieu Parking Ordinance (Section 12.44.125) for the last 18 months. The following represents a summary of the alternatives discussed and analyzed and the advantages and disadvantages of each: Option 1 Abolish the program altogether. Advantages: The current fee of $150/space per year is essentially a subsidy to existing users in the form of parking at a cost significantly lower than the actual cost of providing parking. Those businesses that provide all of their required off-street parking do not receive the benefits of this subsidy, therefore an inequitable situation has been created by the City. The program has been used primarily to intensify the use of legal nonconforming buildings that do not provide the required amount of parking, and has created additional demand for the available parking spaces without increasing the number of spaces. Abolition of the program will not only terminate the inequities caused by the subsidy, but will also result in a reduction in the future demand on the limited parking resources by eliminating the potential for intensification of use without providing additional parking spaces. Disadvantages: There is some economic incentive for a property owner to convert an existing nonconforming building to a more intensive use such as a restaurant with the existing in lieu program available to provide all of the required parking at a cost that is significantly lower than the actual cost of providing those spaces. Given the high cost of land and buildings in the City, without some form of subsidized parking it is likely that there will be less intensification of legal non -conforming buildings in the older areas if property owners face the prospect of having to buy additional land to provide the required amount of off-street parking. �3 Option 2. Raise the in lieu fees to fair market value. This option would establish the cost of an in lieu space at a level that is commensurate with the actual cost of providing a space. For example, if the cost of land on the peninsula is $65 per square foot and approximately 300 square feet of land is necessary .to provide a parking space, the cost of creating that new parking space is approximately $19,500. This then becomes the cost of an in lieu parking space. Advantages: The City would generate sufficient funds to actually provide additional public parking, alleviating at least a portion of the existing and future deficiencies. Development on non -economic grounds will be inhibited. Development of higher intensity uses would be facilitated, increasing the sales tax revenue to the City. The overall quality of the older areas of the City would improve as a result of the redevelopment of older legal nonconforming buildings. The City's in lieu program would be more consistent with other beach cities. Disadvantages: There would be a significant financial hardship placed on the small user, which would probably force many out of business. It would force the City into purchasing additional public parking, which would be acceptable to the business community but may be considered undesirable by the residents. Option 3 Raise the in lieu fees for new participants in the program to fair market value and adjust the rate for existing users to a rate which is something _less -than fair market value. Under this option all new participants in the program would be required to pay full fair market value for each space, with the existing users paying a percentage of the full value. Advantages: The advantages of this option are essentially the same as those listed under Option 2. Disadvantages: A form of subsidy would still exist for the current users, inasmuch as they would not be paying fair market value for each space. 1� Insufficient funds would be generated by the existing users to purchase additional public parking. Recommended Action Based on extensive discussions of the these three options with property owners and current participants in the existing program, the Off Street Parking Committee suggests that the following program be adopted as the basis for the in lieu parking program: 1. Discontinue the sale of additional in lieu spaces as of the effective date of adoption of the revised ordinance. 2. For all of the current participants in the existing program, the in lieu fees will be raised pursuant to the following schedule: a. The fees will be raised $75 each year for the first five years, as follows: current fee: $150 year 1: 225 year 2: 300 year 3: 375 year 4: 450 year 5: 525 b. At the sixth year from the date of adoption of the revised ordinance, the fees will be increased annually commensurate with the annual increase in the Consumer Price Index, commencing with the sixth year after adoption. For example, should the C.P.I. increase in the sixth year be 5%, the base fee of $525 would be increased by 58 to $551.25. 3. All fees collected pursuant to this ordinance would be used only for purposes of improving public parking or transportation services, or other public facilities. FILE: REVNL00: November 18, 1988 �< ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH AMENDING SECTION 12.44.125, COMMERCIAL IN LIEU PARKING FEES. WHEREAS, Section 12.44.125 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code current- ly provides for the sale of Commercial in Lieu Parking Permits at an annual fee of $150 per space; and WHEREAS, the Newport Beach City Council Off -Street Parking Committee has discussed a wide variety of alternatives to the existing program and recommended the Council revise the current program WHEREAS, the current annual fee of $150 per space is significantly less than the actual cost of providing an off-street parking space; and WHEREAS, it is not feasible to raise the cost of an in lieu parking space to an amount that would generate sufficient funds to purchase addi- tional land to create new public parking lots,; and WHEREAS, even if sufficient funds were to be generated through the sale of in lieu parking spaces to provide additional public parking, it is unlikely that adequate land could be purchased to construct parking lots with sufficient capacity to alleviate the existing shortage of parking; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to raise the cost of an in lieu parking space so as to generate additional revenues that would be used solely for purposes of improving public parking and parking facilities; and WHEREAS, it is the desire of the City Council to not issue new in lieu parking permits. NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: Section 12.44.125 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 12.44.125 Commercial in Lieu Parking Fees. A. As of the effective date of this ordinance, there shall be no new in lieu parking spaces sold, except in the case of previous approvals or contracts. B. Permits in effect as of the date of this ordinance may be reissued subject to the following: 1. Permits for the years 1989 through 1993 may be issued upon payment of the following annual fees: 1989: $150 1990: $300 1991: $375 1992: $450 1993: $525 2. In 1994 and each year thereafter, the fee for each in lieu parking space shall be changed to reflect the increase or decrease in the Consumer Price Index during the previous year. The new fee shall be equal to the fee for the previous year (base fee) adjusted by an amount equal to the percentage increase or decrease in the CPI multiplied by the base fee. 3. All fees collected pursuant to this ordinance shall be used for purposes of improving public parking and parking facili- ties. - 1 - This ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach held on the 12th day of December, 1988, and was adopted on the day of 1989, by the following vote, to wit: AYES, COUNCIL MEMBERS NOES, COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT COUNCIL MEMBERS MAYOR ATTEST: CITY CLERK CG:jm ORD\FIN-LIEU.FEE 2 - P.O. BOX Robert L. Wynn City Manager City of Newport P. O. Box 1768 Newport Beach, Dear Mr. Wynn: Beach CA 92658-8915 IA 92661 February 10, 198 RE OVEN FE.B 131989II� city Manager City of il.W • 3eaeh The Balboa Peninsula Point Association is most anxious for the City to begin the process toward implementing the Balboa Specific Area Plan as soon as possible. We understand that you have already done some preliminary studies. We feel it has been postponed longer than necessary since we were under the impression at the time of General Plan implementation that it would follow immediately. We would be pleased to hear from you, Bob, on the issue and of course would appreciate your assistance toward moving forward since we feel the timing is critical. Thanks very much. CC: Mayor Donald A. Strauss City Councilmembers BPPA Board K313dest regard bDayna ettit, President For the BPPA Board :�7�' RECEIVED I,, Planning 4 !(_ De1arLrerd FEB 131989 7� CITY Of ` hcN'POf?r :.EACH, a a� Q PFtc. 9� J -�/ 6 T34t . sia'�i/v• /Y PA�, O/Md• .4-1 W, �f�f. ; • > oaf v f•C•� �•'?p A..r1. 9c/urC. f- irw+ Rtrv�f✓orb eovm.4s . • 0 CENTRAL BALBOA Specific Area Plan INITIATION: ,e) Gather together pertinent existing materials, including -- In-Lieu Park. Ord. staff report (13 Feb. '89) Existing "data base" for L.U.E. [check w/ P.L.T. if any updates] "Commercial area" file folder Relevant mapping materials �> A' 016WIMrf AU-4 dtsw-vP Man AxnS. `64V. Abe. 1 w4Y ✓. Talk w/ Scot abt. digitizing relevant area a.s.a.p.! A Talk w/ Chris abt. procedures/steps, etc. 4) Read statues dealing w/ SAPs 5) Talk w/ Sandy abt. this w/ regards to new zoning -- "May want use this as lead-in for r.s.c. areas" 6) Beg. to formatt a timeline for planning purposes Become familiar w/ area -- /raffia layout/problems „Varking provided, ixisting uses (by parcel) 8) When finish 7), can commence to est. meets. w/ area people to ascertain their needs, wants, desires designated for Recreational and Environmental Open Space to allow the continua- tion of the existing use. The site allocated 20,000 sq.ft. of development. 6. Central Balboa (SAP). The Central Balboa area is bounded Newport Bay, A Street, the Ocean Beach and Adams Street, plus the lots fronting on Balboa Boulevard be- tween Adams Street and Coronado Street. The area is designated for Retail and Ser- vice Commercial land use, with some areas shown for Single Family Attached, Two Family Residential and Governmental, Educational and Institutional Facilities. The Rendezvous Condominiums are shown for for Single Family Attached and are allocated 24 dwelling units, which reflects the existing use. Two Family residential require2,375 sq.ft of buildable lot area for duplex development. No subdivision which will result in additional dwelling units is allowed. Areas which are designated for Retail and Service Commercial or Governmental, Educational and Institutional land use are allowed a maximum floor area of 0.5/1.0 FAR. Separate residential uses are prohibited. Residential development is permitted on the second floor in conjunction with ground floor commercial up to a total floor area ratio of 1.25.One dwelling unit is allowed for each 2,375 sq.ft. of buildable lot area with a minimum of one unit allowed per lot. The area is allocated 223 dwelling units. Central Balboa Residential. The balance of the Balboa Peninsula is designated for Single Family Detached, Single Family Attached, Two Family Residential or Multi - Family Residential land use. In Single Family Detached areas, one dwelling unit is, allowed on each subdivided lot, with no subdivision permitted which will result in ad- ditional dwelling units allowed. Single Family Attached developments are not al- lowed any additional dwelling units. Two Family Residential requires 2,000 sq.ft. of buildable lot area for duplex development. No subdivision is allowed in Two Family Residential areas which will result in additional dwelling units. Multi -Family Residential areas allow one unit for each 1,200 sq.ft. of buildable lot area. The area is allocated 2,368 dwelling units. In • ESTIMATED GROWTH FOR STATISTICAL AREA D2, D3 & D4 Residential (m du's) Commercial (in sq.ft.) Faosting Gen.Plan Projected Existing Gen.Plan Projected 111/87 Projection Growth 111M Projection Growth 1.Island Avenue 5 8 3 9,670 10,800 1,130 2. Library/FS -0- -0- -0- 7,200 11,250 4,050 3. Bay Island Parking -0- -0- -0- -0- -0- -0- 4. Ebel Club -0- -0- -0- 2,800 4,200 1,400 5. Newport Harbor YC -0- -0- -0- 17,000 20,000 3,000 6. Central Balboa SAP 219 319 100 226,866 299,105 72,239 7. Central Balboa (R) 1,924 2,368 444 -0- -0- -0- TOTAL 2,148 2,695 547 263,536 345,355 81,819 Population 4,253 5,336 1,083 Central Balboa Area (Statistical Areas D2, D3 & D4) 1. Island Avenue. This small commercial are is located on Balboa Boulevard west of Is- land Avenue. The area is designated for Retail and Service Commercial land use and is allowed a maximum floor area of 0S/1.0 FAR Separate residential uses are prohibited. Residential development is permitted on the second floor in conjunction with ground floor commercial up to a total floor area ratio of 1.25.One dwelling unit is allowed for each 2,375 sq.ft. of buildable lot area, with a minimum of one unit al- lowed per lot. 2. LibrarylFire Station. This area is located on Balboa Boulevard easterly of Island Avenue. The area is designated for Governmental, Educational and Institutional Facilities and is allowed a maximum floor area of 0.5 FAR. 3. Bay Island Parking. The site in the corner of Island Avenue and East Bay Avenue used for the Bay Island parking structure is designated for Recreational and Environ- mental Open Space to preserve this lot for the support parking use of Bay Island. 4. Ebell Club. This site is located on Balboa Boulevard across from the Island Avenue commercial area, and is designated for Governmental, Educational and Institution- al Facilities. This site is allocated a maximum development of 0.5 FAR. 5. Newport Harbor Yacht Club. The Newport Harbor Yacht Club and its support park- ing is located bayward of Balboa Boulevard, between 7th and 8th Streets. The site is -36- U 4 0 • ,EDtrrr✓/ BALBOA PENINSULA AREA (STATISTICAL DIVISION D) For planning purposes, the Balboa Peninsula area includes all of the Peninsula east of 19th Street.!" ° . The policies for -Balboa Peninsula include provisions for rationalizing res- idential land use "patters", and limiting the size of residential structures to preserve community character. Following are the major land use policies for the Balboa Peninsula: Policies for Statistical Division D 1. Central Balboa Commercial Area: it is proposed that a "core" area of commercial uses be pre- served by: 1) rezoning certain blocks and portions of blocks on the fringe of the commercial district to residential; 2) prohibiting the encroachment of residential uses and separate office building uses into the remaining commercial core area (to maintain continuity of shopping, contiguity of mutually - supportive uses, and the long-range viability of commercial uses); and 3) the development of a Specific. Area Plan to resolve problgms of access, orientation, and parking, and to enhance the visual environments 2. The beach and the Newport Beach Elementary School shall be rezoned to the OS - Open Space District; the City -owned proper- ty at Marinapark shall continue as a mobile home park until such time as that use is phase out, at which time the property shall be rezoned to the OS - Open Space District. 3. No variances shall be granted which would permit an additional unit on undersized lots. 4. Commercial Uses at 15th Street: It is proposed that the commercial uses at 15th Street be maintained. These include a service station, market, and coffee shop which provide needed convenience goods and services for both the visitor and nearby residents. Marinapark: Marinapark shall continue as a mobile home park until such time as that use is phased out, at which time the property shall be rezoned to the OS - Open Space - District. 5. Commercial Uses on Balboa Boulevard near Island Avenue: The property on the northerly side of Balboa Boulevard west of Island Avenue, currently zoned and developed for commercial purposes, may remain in a commercial zoning district until such time as commercial use of the property is discontinued or the W a I J, Ate. CJF' IC BALBOA 15LAIVO r, 000 ffj • rb. .• LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL LOW DENSITY RES./OPEN SPACE H TWO-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM -DENSITY RESIDENTIAL MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LCP LAND USE PLAN WSJ C J_zv ___4f J RECREATIONAL B MARINE COMMERCIAL iiiiiiiiiii1f WALKWAY/BIKEWAY/ACCESSWAY RETAIL B SERVICE COMMERCIAL i ACCESS POINT ADMIN.. PROFA AND FINAM. COMMERCIAL RESTROOM FACILITY RECREATIONAL S ERVIN. OPEN SPACE NmmmNear COASTAL LONE BOUNDARY GOVERN., EDUCAT. AND INSTIT. FACILITIES 11 [IN or BALBUA PhNiiN�ui, Island Avenue (MO10). The Island Avenue area *sists of a commercially developed'block and one block occupied by the Balboa Branch Library and the Balboa Peninsula Fire Station. Land use designations reflect the commercial and institutional uses and include a proposal to construct a restroom facility in the vicinity of the Balboa Branch Library. Central Balboa (Map 11). Central Balboa consists of the commercially developed area between A Street and Coronado Street. This area is a unique mixture of visitor -oriented and neighborhood -oriented retail and service uses, including coastal -dependent visitor uses such as sport fishing establishments, day -boat rentals, ferry service, fishing docks, and the historic Balboa Pavilion. Those areas which are near the bay and oceanfronts are shown for a mixture of "Retail and Service Commercial" and "Recreational and Marine Commercial" uses. Those areas which line East Balboa Boulevard have been designated "Retail and Service Commercial." It is the intent of these land use designations to encourage continuation of the neighborhood and visitor -serving orientation of the area and to prohibit office uses at ground level. In those areas designated for retail uses, residential and office uses will be permitted on the second level or above when the ground level is occupied by a primary use which provides goods or services directly to the public. Balboa Peninsula Point (Map 12). Balboa Peninsula Point consists of the residential neighborhood between A Street and the harbor entrance on the Balboa Peninsula. The area is designated primarily for "Low -Density Residen- tial" with some areas designated for "Multiple -Family Residential" uses. The public oceanfront beach and the beach at N Street on the bay have been des- ignated "Recreational and Environmental open Space." New proposals for this area include the addition of a restroom facility at the West Jetty park (The Wedge). 44 Central Balboa (Map 11). Central Balboa consists of the conuercially developed area between A Street and Coronado Street. This area is a unique mixture of visitor -oriented and neighborhood -oriented retail and service uses, including coastal -dependent visitor uses such as sport fishing establishments, day -boat rentals, ferry service, fishing docks, and the historic Balboa Pavilion. Those areas which are near the bay and oceanfronts are shown for a mixture of "Retail and Service C mTercial" and "Recreational and Marine Cannercial" uses. Those areas which line East Balboa Boulevard have been designated "Retail and Service Conu ercial." It is the intent of these land use designations to encourage continuation of the neighborhood and visitor -serving orientation of the area and to prohibit office uses at ground level. In those areas designated for retail uses, residential and office uses will be permitted on the second level or above when the ground level is occupied by a primary use which provides goods or services directly to the public. Balboa Peninsula Point (Map 12). Balboa Peninsula Point consits of the residential neighborhood between A Street and the harbor entrance on the Balboa Peninsula. The .area is designated primarily for "Low -Density Residential" with some areas designated for "Multiple -Family Residential" uses. The public oceanfront beach and the beach at N Street on the bay have been designated "Recreational and Environmental Open Space." New proposals for this area include the addition of a restroom facility at the West Jetty park (The Wedge). [ i. :�• � •�• a �� Balboa Island (Maps 13, 14). No changes to the existing land use pattern on Balboa Island are proposed. The Marine Avenue and Agate Avenue camercial districts are shown for "Retail and Service Commercial" to encourage continuation of the existing patterns. Office and residential uses shall be prohibited on the ground level, but may be allowed on the second level where the ground level is occupied by a primary use which provides goods or services directly to the public. The submerged areas utilized by the ferry landing and fuel docks have been designated "Recreational and Marine ConTmrcial." Only ooastally dependent uses will be permitted on these bay sites. Coast Highway/Bayside Drive (Map 23). This site is currently developed with three major restaurants (the Reuben E. Lee, Reuben's, and McFadden's Landing), as well as a yacht brokerage and parking for the docking facilities. This area has been designated for "Recreational and Marine Camiercial." In addition, the area to be vacated upon completion of the Newport Bay Bridge shall be utilized for a boat launching facility. Devleopment shall not preclude construction of a marina office. Beacon Bay (Maps 13, 15). The Beacon Bay area is a City-aaned parcel which is currently leased and used for both residential and marine com ercial uses. The LCP Land Use Plan designations reflect existing uses. It is the intent of the land use designations to preserve existing land use patterns. Bayside and Marine (Map 15) . This vacant site at the entrance to Balboa Island is shown for "Recreational and Marine Comrn_rcial." It is the intent of 43 • Page 137 SP DISTRICT Chapter 20.60 S P E C I F I C P L A N D I S T R I C T - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Chapter 20.60 SPECIFIC PLAN DISTRICT Sections: 2.0.60.010 Authority and Scope. 20.60.020 Effect of Chapter. 20.60.030 "SP" Combining District - Uses Permitted and Development Standards. 20.60.040 "SP" Individual District - Uses Permitted and Development Standards. 20.60.050 Adoption or Amendment of Specific Plans and Application of the "SP" District. 20.60.010 AUTHORITY AND SCOPE. The Planning Commission may, or if so directed by the City Council shall, prepare specific plans based on the general plan and drafts of such regulations, programs, and legislation as may in its judgment be required for the systematic execution of the general plan and the Planning Commission may recom- mend such plans and measures to the City Council for adoption accord- ing to the provisions of California Government Code Sections 65450 through 65550 which are incorporated herein by this reference as if fully set forth. Such specific plans may include: (a) Regulations limiting the location of buildings and other improve- ments with respect to existing or planned rights -of -way. (b) Regulations of the use of land and buildings, the height and bulk of buildings, and the open spaces about buildings. (c) Street and highway naming and numbering plans in order to estab- lish the official names of streets and highways, to remove conflicts, duplication and uncertainty among such names, and to provide an orderly system for the numbering of buildings and properties. (d) Such other matters which will accomplish the purposes of this chapter, including procedure for the administration of such regu- lations. (e) Such other measures as may be required to insure the execution of the general plan. (Ord. 1500 5 1 (part), 1973). Oge 138 SP DISTRICT Chapter 20.60 20.60.020 EFFECT OF CHAPTER. The following regulations shall apply to all property within a District where the District symbol is combined with the "SP" - Specific Plan Symbol and all property within the "SP" - Specific Plan District, when applied as a separate district. In all cases the "SP" symbol shall be followed by a number to designate the Specific Plan (e.g., SP1: Specific Plan Number 1) and the development that shall- be permitted subject to provisions of the designated Specific Plan and the regulations of this chapter. (Ord. 1500 S 1 (part), 1973). 20.60.030 "SP" COMBINING DISTRICT - USES PERMITTED AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. The "SP" symbol may be applied as a combining district (e.g., CNH-SP) where the Specific Plan regulations are intended to apply only to specific uses and development of land. In these cases, where the Specific Plan regulations may differ from the regulations of the base district, the regulations of the Specific Plan shall apply. (Ord. 1500 S 1 (part), 1973). 20,60.040 "SP" INDIVIDUAL DISTRICT - USES PERMITTED AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. Any use or development of property within an "SP" District where the "SP" symbol is not combined with another District shall be in compliance with the regulations of the referenced Specific Plan. (Ord. 1500 S 1 (part), 1973). (E 20.60.050 ADOPTION OR AMENDMENT OF SPECIFIC PLAN AND APPLI- CATION OF THE "SP" DISTRICT. Specific Plans shall be adopted and amended by ordinance pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 20.84 of this Code. (Ord. 1500 S 1 (part), 1973). • • 1.30 LAND USE PLANNING 54 • PART D - SPECIFIC PLANS 1.30 AUTHORITY FOR PREPARATION AND ADOPTION The enabling legislation, relative to the adoption and administra- tion of specific plans, is contained in Gov. C. 65450-65553. A city or county planning agency may, and if so directed by the legislative body shall, prepare specific 'plans based on the general plan and drafts of such regulations, programs, and legislation as may in its judgment be required for the systematic execution of the general plan and the planning agency may recommend such plans and meas- ures to the legislative body for adoption. Gov. C. 65450. 1.30[1] Not Applicable to Charter Cities. The enabling provisions relative to specific plans is not applicable to charter cities except to the extent that the same may be adopted by charter or ordinance of the city. Gov. C. 65700. 1.31 CONTENT OF SPECIFIC PLANS Specific plans shall include all detailed regulations, conditions, programs, and proposed legislation which shall be necessary or con- lvenient for the systematic implementation of: each mandatory ele- ment of the general plan. Gov. C. 65451. Specific plans may also include all detailed regulations, conditions, programs, and proposed legislation which may be necessary or convenient for the systematic implementation of each permitted element of a general plan. Gov. C. 65452. Such regulations, -conditions, programs and proposed legisla- tion may include the following. 1.31 [1) Location of Various Types of Land Use, including housing, business, industry, open space, agriculture, recreation facilities, edu- cational facilities, churches and related religious facilities, public buildings and grounds, solid and liquid waste disposal facilities, to- gether with regulations establishing height, bulk and set -back limits for such buildings and facilities, includi6g the location of areas, such as flood plains or excessively steep or unstable terrain, where no building will be permitted in the absence of adequate precautionary measures being taken to reduce the level of risk to that comparable with adjoining and surrounding areas. Gov. C 65451(a). 1.31[21 Location and Extent of Existing or Proposed Streets and Roads, their names or numbers, the tentative proposed widths with 55 SPECIFIC PLANS 1.31 reference to prospective standards for their construction and mair nance, and the location and standards of construction, maintenai and use of all other transportation facilities, whether public or vate. Gov. C. 65451(b). See also Precise Plan of Proposed State Hi ways, §1.31[7]. 1.31[31 Standards for Population and Building Density, includ lot size, permissible types of construction, and provisions for wZ supply, sewage disposal, storm water drainage and the disposal solid waste. Gov. C. 65451(c). 1.31 [4] Standards for the Conservation, Development, and Utiliza- tion of Natural Resources, including underground and surface waters, forests, vegetation and soils, rivers, creeks, and streams, and fish and wildlife resources. Such standards shall include, where applicable, procedures for flood control, for prevention and control of pollution of rivers, streams, creeks and other waters, regulation of land use and stream channels and other areas which may have a significant effect on fish, wildlife and other natural resources of the area, the preven- tion, control and correction of soil erosion caused by subdivision roads or any other sources, and the protection of watershed areas. Gov. C. 65451(d). 1.31 [5] Implementation of the Open Space Element of the General Plan. Gov. C. 65451(e). Every local open space plan shall contain an action program consisting of specific programs which the legislative body intends to pursue in implementing its open space plan. Gov. C. 65564. 1.31[61 Other Additional Measures as may be necessary or conven- ient to insure the execution of the general plan. Gov. C. 65451(f). 1.31[71 Precise Plan of Proposed State Highways. Whenever the State Department of Transportation has laid out and surveyed a pro- posed state highway in any county or city, it shall prepare a map of such. highway sufficient to show the location of the highway on each parcel of land to be traversed or otherwise occupied by the highway when constructed. Sts. & Hy. Code 740.2. The department shall transmit a copy of the map, insofar as it relates to the land within a county, to the planning commission of the county. The planning commission of such county shall thereafter prepare a precise plan showing the planned right-of-way in conformance with Gov. C. 65600 and the governing body of the county shall thereafter adopt such a 1.31[81 LAND USE PLANNING 56 transmittal of a copy of the map to the city planning commission or governing body and its effect on applications for building permits within the proposed right-of-way. See Sts. & Hy. Code 740.5-742. 1.3118] Area Covered by Specific Plans. The legislative body or the planning agency may designate areas within a city or a county for which the development of a specific plan will be necessary or conven- ient to the implementation of the general plan. The specific plan need not apply to the entire area covered by the general plan. The . planning agency may, or if so directed by the legislative body shall, prepare specific plans for such areas and recommend such plans to the legislative body for adoption. Gov. C 65450.1. 1.32 PROCEDURE FOR ADOPTING AND AMENDING SPECIFIC PLANS Government Code 65500-65507 sets forth the procedure for adopting and amending specific plans. These procedures do not apply to charter cities except to the extent the same may be adopted by charter or ordinance of the city. Gov. C. 65700. 1.32[1] Planning Commission Action. If the city or county has a planning commission, the commission shall hold at least one noticed public hearing before recommending to the legislative body that it adopt a specific plan or regulation or any amendment to a specific • I plan or regulation. The hearing may be continued from time to time. Gov. C. 65500. The recommendation of any specific plan or regula- tion or any amendment thereto, shall be by resolution of the plan- ning commission carried by the affirmative vote of not less than a majority of its total voting members. Gov. C. 65501. A copy of any specific plan, regulation, or amendment recommended by the com- mission shall be submitted to the legislative body and shall be accom- panied by a statement of the planning commission's reasons for such recommendation. Gov. C. 65502. If the city does not have a planning commission, the only procedural steps required for the adoption of a specific plan or regulation or amendment thereto shall be those pro- vided for action by the legislative body. Gov. C. 65505. 1.32[2] Legislative Body Action. Upon receipt of a copy of any proposed specific plan or regulation or amendment thereto, the legis- lative body may, by ordinance or resolution, adopt the plan or regu- lation. Before adopting the proposed plan or regulation, the legislative body shall hold at least one noticed public hearing, which may be 57 SPECIFIC PLANS 1.33 1 shall be designated as a specific plan or regulation. Gov. C. 65503. If the specific plan or regulation has been recommended by the plan- ning commission, the legislative body shall not make any change or addition in the proposed plan, regulation or amendment until the proposed change or addition has been referred back to the planning commission for a report and a copy of the report has been filed with the legislative body. Failure of the commission to report within 40 days after the reference, or such longer period as designated by the legislative body, shall be deemed to be approval of the proposed change or addition. It is not necessary for the planning commission to hold a public hearing on the proposed change or addition. Gov. C. 65504. The above procedure for adopting and amending specific plans, does not apply to the adoption or amendment of any ordinance by the legislative body, whether or not the ordinance may relate to the subject of the contents of a specific plan, except ordinances expressly adopting or amending a specific plan initiated pursuant to Gov. C. 65450-65553. Gov. C. 65506. 1.32[31 Initiating Specific Plans and Amendments. Normally specific plans and amendments thereto are initiated by the planning agency or planning commission. However, an alternative method for initia- tion of plans or amendments by the legislative body is specifically provided. Legislative bodies of counties or cities may, when it deems it to be for the public interest, initiate and adopt an ordinance or resolution establishing a specific plan or an amendment thereto. The legislative body shall first refer such proposal to establish a specific plan or amendment to the planning commission for a report. Before making a report, the planning commission shall hold at least one public hearing. The commission shall report within 40 days after the reference, or within such longer period as may be designated by the legislative body. Before adopting the proposed plan or amendment, the legislative body shall hold at least one noticed public hearing. Gov. C. 65507. 1.33 IMPLEMENTATION OF SPECIFIC PLANS The legislative body may determine and establish administrative' rules and regulations for the application and enforcement of specific plans and regulatioris, and may assign or delegate such administrative functions, powers, and duties to the planning or other agency as may be necessary or desirable. Gov. C. 65550. The legislative body nmpnripq_hnarda of-revipw anneal. and adjustment, and provide for other officials, and for funds for the cdmpensation of such officers, employees, and agencies and for the support of their work. Gov. C. 65551. 1.33[l] Street Improvements — Conformity with Plan. If the city or county has adopted a specific street or highway plan, no street shall be improved and no sewers or connections or other improvements authorized in the street, unless the matter has planning agency been referred to the a report as to conformity with such specific street or highway plan and a copy of the report has been filed with the legislative body, unless one of the following conditions applies: for (a) The street has been accepted, opened or has otherwise received the legal status of a public street prior to adoption of a plan. (Ct corresponds with streets shown on the plan. (c t corresponds with streets shown on a subdivision map or rec- ord of survey approved by the legislative body or planning commission. Gov. C. 65552. 1.33[2] Improvements Required to Conform to Open Space Specific Plan. If the city or county has adopted a specific plan regulating the use of open space land, no street shall bd improved, no sewers or other improvements laid, or public building or works including school buildings constructed within the territory of the plan, until the matter has been referred to the planning agency for a report as to conformity with such specific plan, and a copy of the report has been filed with the legislative body, and a finding made by the legis- lative body that the proposed improvement, connection or construc- ion is in conformity with the specific plan. This section does not ppI in the case of a street which was accepted, opened or had tPj se received the legal status of a public street prior to adoption f such a specific plan. Gov. C. 65553. 11.34 LEGAL EFFECT OF SPECIFIC PLANS General plans do not directly affect property rights. See Selby alty Co. v. City of San Buenaventura (1973) 10 Cal. 3d 110. How- ar, specific plans can be developed and implemented in such a man- r that, upon imposition, they become regulations directly affecting )perty rights. Although they are designated as "plans" in the sense it they are based on certain policies and seek certain objectives, sy can be, in truth and in fact, regulations directly affecting how 9 in what manner an individual may use his property. Although there is separate enabling legislation relative to zoning (Gov. C 65800-65907), a specific plan for a given area, can be very similar to, and in fact could be, a zoning ordinance, in that the plan may specify the location of various types of uses, regulate height, bulk and set -back limits for buildings, and establish standards for population, population density and building density, including lot size. Gov. C. 65451(a)—(c). However, in People v. County of Kern (1974) 39 Cal. App. 3d 830, the effect of a specific plan was mini- mized. The property owner contended that by virtue of the approval of a tentative subdivision map and the adoption of a specific plan, the owner acquired a vested right to continue with a project, unimpeded by any future action by a county pursuant to its zoning power. The court rejected this contention, pointing out that the county retained discretion to approve or disapprove an application for a zone change and that a previous approval of a tentative map and the specific plan was not the final exercise of the county's authority over the project. The court stated, at page 838: "The filing of a map showing streets, lots and blocks in no way prevents a county under its zoning power from changing the zoning uses ... Nor did the adoption of the specific plan irrevocably commit the county to amend the zoning ordinance. The specific plan was prepared by the planning commission pursuant to the authority contained in Gov. C. 65450 et seq. to assure that the development would be in furtherance of the county's general plan. The adoption of the specific plan was made subject to the rezoning of the property to conform to the tentative maps, and Eastco was advised by the planning department that the re- quested zone change involved a'greater degree of responsibility and control' over the project than did the specific plan or tenta- tive tract approvals." (People v. County of Kern, p. 838.) v 1.26141 CALIFORNIA LAND USE REGULATIONS 1985 SUPPLEMENT 1.34 visors (1981) 123 C.A. 3d 334, 347-352, wherein the court identi- fied specific deficiencies in the land use, housing, and noise ele- ments, in reviewing and finding a general plan inadequate forfail- ure to substantially comply with statutory requirements. For other new developments in determining legal adequacy of a general plan element, see § 1.21 [3]. 1.26[4] Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies. Gov. C. 65009 now sets forth new provisions relative to exhaustion of administra- tive remedies and statute of limitations in actions attacking decisions under the Planning and Zoning Law. For a discussion of these new provisions, see §2.181 [4]. A Court of Appeal has recog- nized the standing of a "concerned citizen and taxpayer who served on two successive citizen advisory groups organized by the city council to participate in the development of a general plan," to petition the courts for a challenge to the plan. Karlson v. City of Camarillo (1980) 100 C.A. 3d 789, 800. See also §2.22[4] and §2.177. PART D — SPECIFIC PLANS The provisions relative to the preparation and procedures for specific plans have been renumbered and certain substantive changes have been made. See now Gov. C. 65450-65457. 1.30 AUTHORITY FOR PREPARATION AND ADOPTION OF SPECIFIC PLANS 1.30[2] Cost of Preparation [NEW]. The legislature has declared its intent to encourage counties and cities to undertake the work and responsibility for development of specific plans. Accordingly, counties and cities are now authorized to defray the cost of devel- oping specific plans by charging a pro -rated special fee for govern- mental approvals required to be in conformity with the specific plan. Gov. C. 65456(a). Fees charged for specific plan administration shall not exceed the reasonable cost of providing the service for which the fee is charged. Gov. C. 65456. 1.30[3] California Environmental Quality Act [NEW]. All resi- dential projects, including rezonings and subdivision approvals, which are undertaken pursuant to an adopted specific plan for which an environmental impact report is certified after January 1, 1980, are exempt from the requirements of CEQA. Underspecified circumstances, a supplemental EIR may be required to be certified for the specific plan before the city or county approves such an exempt residential project. Gov. C. 65457. The adoption of a specific plan is a legislative act subject to refer- endum. Further, the prioradoption of a local coastal plan and imple- mentation of the plan by way of general plan amendment and specific plan adoption, does not preclude local referenda on the specific plan. Sufficient discretion exists with cities and counties such that the local government is not acting as an administrative arm of the state relative to the Coastal Act and therefore does not exempt specific plan adoption, even byway of implementation of the Coastal Act, from voter review. Yost v. Thomas (1984) 36 C. 3d 561. 1.34 LEGAL EFFECT OF SPECIFIC PLANS. CONSISTENCY. The City of Los Angeles' approval of a condominium complex complied with Subdivision Map Act requirements that tentative maps be consistent with its general and specific plans. The evi- dence supported the city's finding that the map was consistent with the specific plan. Where the specific applies it controls the general, and, therefore, the general plan and less specific policies were not applicable. Markley v. City Council (1982) 132 C.A. 3d 656. Any specific plan applicable to the same areas or matter affected by a general plan amendment shall be reviewed and amended as necessary to make the specific plan consistent with the general plan. Gov. C. 65359 and 65454. No local public works project may be approved, no tentative or parcel map may be approved, and no zoning ordinance adopted or amended within an area covered by a specific plan unless it is consistent with the adopted specific plan. Gov. C. 65455. 36 i 37 GENERAL PLAN POLICIES The major land use policies for the Central Balboa commercial area are set forth in the Land Use Element of the General Plan (page 16) as follows: "It is proposed that a "core" area of commercial uses be preserved by: 1) rezoning certain blocks and portions of blocks on the fringe of the commercial district to residen- tial; 2) prohibiting the encroachment of residential uses and separate office building uses into the remaining commer- cial core area (to maintain continuity of shopping, contigu- ity of mutually supportive uses, and the long-range viabil- ity of commercial uses); and 3) the development of a Specif- ic Area Plan.to resolve problems of access, orientation, and parking, and to enhance the visual environment." The General Plan Land Use Map designates all of the waterfront areas adjacent to the Newport Bay for "Retail and Service Commercial" uses. With the exception of those areas designated for "Two -Family Residen- tial" use at the westerly and easterly boundaries of the Specific Plan area and the block between Palm Street and Washington Street adjacent to Ocean Front, all of the remaining area is also designated for "Retail and Service Commercial" uses. The Land Use Element (page 6) describes the "Retail and Service Commercial District" as follows: "It is intended that business uses in this category be limited to retail sails, personal and professional services, hotels and motels, and commercial recreation, with offices permitted only if they are ancillary to, and on the same lot as, another primary use which provides goods or services directly to the public. In those areas designated as Retail and Service Commercial only, separate corporate office buildings would be prohibited in order to (1) assure conti- nuity of shopping and contiguity of mutually supportive businesses, and (2) limit the potential traffic volumes in those areas (large office buildings are heavy traffic generators; this office traffic may interfere with shopping traffic, adversely affecting the economic viability of commercial areas). In other areas, where appropriate, a mixture of Retail and Service Commercial and Administrative, Professional and Financial/Commercial is indicated on the Land Use Plan." The Land Use Element describes the permitted uses in the two-family residential areas as follows (page 5): "This sub -category includes residences where two dwelling units are constructed on one lot, either attached or de- tached." Local Coastal Program, Land Use Plan Policies The Certified Local Coastal Program, Land Use Plan (page 43) provides the following description of the area and the intended pattern of development: "Central Balboa consists of the commercially developed area between A Street and Coronado Street. This area is a unique mixture of visitor -oriented and neighborhood -oriented retail and service uses, including coastal -dependent visitor uses such as sport fishing establishments, day -boat rentals, ferry service, fishing docks, and the historic Balboa Pavilion. Those area which are near the bay and oceanfronts are shown for a mixture of "Retail and Service Commercial" and "Recreational and Marine Commercial" uses. Those areas which line East Balboa Boulevard have been designated "Retail and Service Commercial." "it is the intent of these land use designations to encour- age continuation of the neighborhood and visitor -serving orientation of the area and to prohibit office uses at ground level. In those areas designated for retail uses, residential and office uses will be permitted on the second level or above when the ground level is occupied by a primary use which provides goods or services directly to the public." The L.C.P. provides the following description and range of permitted uses for the "Recreational and Marine Commercial" and "Retail and Service Commercial" designations: "Recreational and Marine Commercial. It is the intent of this designation to delineate a priority system to guide development approvals on building sites on or near the bay. it is further the intent of this designation to encourage a continuation of marine -oriented uses, maintain the marine theme and character, encourage mutually supportive busi- nesses, and encourage physical and visual access to the bay on waterfront commercial and industrial building sites on or near the bay. Uses permitted are as follows: I. Permitted uses: highest priority uses, not requiring a use permit. A. Incentive uses: uses that, when they occupy at lease 50% of a site, may be combined with uses under II.C. 1. Boat haul -out facilities 2. Commercial fishing facilities 3. Sport fishing establishments and fishing docks 4. Marinas 5. Marine construction 6. Boat rentals and charters - 2 - 7. Retail marine sales S. Marine service businesses 9. Dry boat storage B. Other permitted uses: 1. Marine -related offices where services are offered to the general public. II. Uses which require a Use Permit: A. Incentive uses: uses that, when they occupy at least 40% of a site, may be combined with uses under II.C. 1. Manufacturing of marine uses 2. New boat construction 3. Marine service stations and gas docks 4. Yacht clubs B. Other uses: 1. Social clubs 2. Commercial recreation 3. Drive-in facilities 4. Hotels and Motels S. Restaurants C. Uses which must be in conjunction with an incen- tive use occupying at least 40$ of the site. 1. General retail and service commercial uses 2. Professional and business offices 3. Light manufacturing The City shall design standards for density, height and parking incentives to developments utilizing a mixed -use concept that includes provision or maintenance of an incen- tive use which is coastal -dependent in nature upon review and approval of a Use Permit. These coastal -dependent uses include: boat haul -out facilities, sport fishing establish- ments, fishing docks, marinas, marine construction, boat rentals and charters, marine service stations, and gas docks. Such standards shall be formulated to ensure no adverse impacts of such bonuses on public access, or public views. On non -waterfront lots, the requirement to provide incentive uses in conjunction with certain specified uses shall not apply. Retail specialty shops shall be permitted. Residen- tial uses shall be permitted on the second level or above where the ground floor is occupied by a permitted use, subject to review and approval of a Use Permit. - 3 - 0 Retail and Service Commercial. The primary uses in this designation are limited to retail sales, personal and professional services (e.g. banks, realtors, architects, lawyers, etc.) hotels and motels, restaurants, and commer- cial recreation, in order to assure contiguity of shopping and mutually supportive businesses. office uses which do not provide services directly to the public shall be prohib- ited on the ground level, but may be permitted on the second level or above where the ground level is occupied by a primary use. Existing Zoning There are currently three area: C-1, C-1-2, and R-2. variety of commercial uses al and business offices, a Restaurants, hotels and of permitted by use permit, as pertains to the off-street less restrictive than zoning BALSAP zoning districts within the in the C-1 and C-1-Z Dis are permitted including reta nd neighborhood and visitor her commercial recreation are residential uses. The ' parking requirements, whic h - 4 - PRELIMINARY RECOMMENDATIONS L.C.P. 1. Amend the L.C.P. so as to change the land use designation from "Retail and Service Commercial" to "Two -Family Residential" between Coronado Street and Adams Street, south of Balboa Boule- vard, as in the General Plan. 2. Amend the L.C.P. so as to delete the "Recreational and Marine Commercial" mixed -use overlay on those sites where it currently exists, retaining the "Retail and Service Commercial" desig- nation. Expand the range of permitted uses in the "Retail and Service Commercial" designation to include marine service facil- ities, the Balboa Angling Club, yacht brokers, boat rentals, etc. 3. Create "Retail and Service Commercial" zoning district and apply to all non-residential areas as shown on General Plan. This district should preclude separate office buildings and emphasize visitor and neighborhood commercial uses. 4. Encourage mixed commercial/residential dev o_pment per Cannery Village Village by granting addi-thional floor area. /h "►rol �+"�.� '�t�.O 5. ESL lish 1.0 F.A. . except in residential areas. avvli" 1 6. Permit Transfer of Development Rights per Cannery Village. 2"n Traffic and Circulation Issues 1. Balboa parking lot operation and circulation pattern. a. Check with- Ray Garver for latest information on fees, capacity, usage patterns, etc. b. Request direction from Off -Street Parking Committee? 2. Main Street a. Auto -free zone? b. Parking on -street? 3. Over-all parking management plan. a. Raise rates at meters? b. Meter all commercial areas, if not now? C. Collect meter maps from Traffic Engineering. d. No suitable site for additional public parking; probably politically impossible to structure Balboa lot. e. Raising in -lieu fees could be difficult without at least a chance of providing additional/new parking. Public Improvements I + 14, • 1. Cohesive landscaping theme along Balboa, Main, Bay, Washington, Palm, Adams, and pier area. 2. Pier area is satisfactory, but review condition of gazebo. 3. Review street drainage with Public Works Department. 4. Bulkhead height? 5. Boardwalk and bicycle trail: perhaps route bike path around parking lot? BALSAP s set� G`-�) e."V" Pn -- �. Auk ac-9 sv.tA-d-, - . 4. -� C i -eu- cc) &jl �"v 0 0 OrY OF NEWPORT B&CH COUNCIL MEMBERS a, Gay 'o 1G� �F d' October 12, 1987 (b) Memor m from Traffic Affairs Committee ly to William Wiseley's concerns arding feasibility of towing vel sew parked in front of fire hydrant MINUTES (c) Report from the Planning„De�artment on the SCHEDULING AND FUNDING of _the CENTRAL BALBOA SPECIFIC AREA PLAN. (d) Report to the City Manager regarding ACTIONS TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON SEPTEMBER 24, 1987. 10., VBLIC HEARING SCHEDULING - October 26, 1 7: (a) CERTIFICATE OF CONVENIENCE AND ECESSITY - For: (Memo from siness License Supervisor) Diamond Cab Company 17300 Mt. Herrmann Street ountain Valley, CA 92708 11. TRACT N0. 1 43 - Accept the public improvements onstructed in conjunction with Tract No. 11043 (intersection of Camelback Stre t and Bison Avenue); authorize the C ty Clerk to release the Faithful Perform ce Surety (Bond No. 392131); and rele se the Labor and Materials Surety ( and No. 392131) in six months provided o claims have been filed. (Report from ublic Works Department) 12. ENCROACHMENT PERMIT - U hold staff's recommendation to approv issuance of an encroachment permit for a isting retaining and garden wall ocated along the Seaview and Carnation A enues frontage; request of Llongs f Newport, the brokers for 2511 Seaview Avenue. (Report from Public Works Depa tment) 13. BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA/SEA BASE Support staff's interpretation of the Fai Share Ordinance that the proposed new bo t storage shed at the Sea Base does n t intensify the use on the site and generate any new trips; and therefor will not be assessed a Fair Share fee. (Report from Public Works Department) Volume 41 - Page 378 (85) Bal Pln Cmsn Co. 11043 t/ (65) Boy Scouts/ Sea Base (74) COUNCIL MEW OTY OF NEWPORT OACH MINUTES r, . October 12, 1987 14. SPECIAL EVENTS PERMITS - Uphold staffs recommendation for approval for the following: (Report from Business License Supervisor) (a) Application #87-256 - Temporary Road Closure for Parks, Beaches and Recreation BK-Footrace at Back Bay Drive, Saturday, November 10, 1987, 8:00 - 9:30 a.m. Permits/ Spcl Evnta (65) (b) Application #87-284 - Apli#87-284 Temporary Road Closure for Lions UCI Eye Bank at Fashion Island 6 Newport Center Drive on Sunday, November 8, 1987) 7:30 - 1Ot00 a.m. (c) Application #87-325 - Temporary Road Closure for American Heart Association Bike Ride at Back Bay Road on Saturday, October 24, 1987, 8:00 - 10:00 a.m. 15. BUDGET AMENDMENTS - For approval: BA-032, $980 - Transfer in Budget Appropriations to provide for Balboa Peninsula special refuse collection; General Services -Refuse Fund. (Memorandum from General Services Director and request from Balboa Peninsula Point Association) BA-033, $900 - Transfer in Budget Appropriations for Operating Expenditures for Citizen's Environmental quality Affairs Committee; Nondepartment- al/Special Departmental Expense Fund. BA-034, $17,200 Increase in Budget Appropriations for purchase of a 4-wheel Drive Vehicle with lightbat, shotgun, shotgun rack and spot lights for canine unit; Police -Patrol Fund. BA-035 - Removed from the Consent Calendar. volume 41 - Page 379 (25) 0 0 • C J TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Background City Council Meeting October 12, 1987 Agenda Item No. F-9(c) CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH City Council Planning Department Central Balboa Specific Area Plan Recently the City Council has received correspondence from the Balboa Improvement Association, the Balboa Peninsula Point Association, and other individuals concerning the status of the proposed Specific Area Plan for Central Balboa. As a part of the preparation and adoption of the city's General Plan in 1973, certain policies were incorporated in the Land Use Element to guide the orderly development of the various areas and neighborhoods of the City. The policies for the Central Balboa area are as follows: "It is proposed that a 'core" area of commercial uses be preserved by: 1) rezoning certain blocks and portions of blocks on the fringe of the commercial district to residential; 2) prohibiting the encroachment of residential uses and separate office building uses into the remaining commercial core area (to maintain continuity of shopping, contiguity of mutually supportive uses, and the long range viability of commercial uses); and 3) the development of a Specific Area Plan to resolve problems of access, orientation, and parking, and to enhance the visual environment." In 1978 the boundaries of the proposed Specific Area Plan area were expanded westerly to Coronado Street to include those properties fronting on Balboa Boulevard. The City Council, in conjunction with the adoption of the City Budget in July of 1985, budgeted $50,000 for the preparation of a Specific Area Plan for Central Balboa. In January of 1987, Staff began the process of identifying all of the existing land uses and their square footage within the boundaries of the Central Balboa Specific Area Plan. This data collection is the first step in the process of preparing a land use plan. However, because of other tasks with a • • TO: City Council - 2. • higher priority, work on the Specific Area Plan was ter- minated in March of 1987. Staff has subsequently been concentrating its efforts on updating the General Plan, which will include revisions to the Land Use Element and Circula- tion Element. It will also be necessary to revise portions of the Zoning Code to ensure conformity with the various elements of the General Plan and the Local Coastal Program, Land Use Plan. It is currently anticipated that these tasks will be completed around January of 1989. The revisions to the General Plan, Local Coastal Program, Land Use Plan, and Zoning Code will effect the Central Balboa Area in several ways. At a minimum, the current inconsisten- cies between the various land use designations in these documents will be rectified. It is also expected that floor area ratios for the entire City will be established, includ- ing the Central Balboa area. Upon completion of the revisions to the General Plan and other documents, staff will commence work on the Central Balboa Specific Area Plan. As set forth in the General Plan • Land Use Element, the Specific Area Plan will address the problems of access, orientation, parking, and the enhancement of the visual environment. Respectfully submitted, PLANNING DEPARTMENT JAMES D. HEWICRER, Director By CHRIS GUSTIN Senior Planner C:\CCSR\CEN-BAL.SAP Attachment: Map of the Central Balboa Specific Area Plan Boundaries )a i Plan � City Council Meeting October 12, 1987 Agenda Item No. F-9(c CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH TO: City Council FROM: Planning Department SUBJECT: Central Balboa Specific Area Plan Background Recently the City Council has received correspondence from the Balboa Improvement Association, the Balboa Peninsula Point Association, and other individuals concerning the status of the proposed Specific Area Plan for Central Balboa. As a part of the preparation and adoption of the City's General Plan in 1973, certain policies were incorporated in the Land Use Element to guide the orderly development of the various areas and neighborhoods of the City. The policies for the Central Balboa area are as follows: "It is proposed that a "core" area of commercial uses be preserved by: 1) rezoning certain blocks and portions of blocks on the fringe of the commercial district to residential; 2) prohibiting the encroachment of residential uses and separate office building uses into the remaining commercial core area (to maintain continuity of shopping, contiguity of mutually supportive uses, and the long range viability of commercial uses); and 3) the development of a Specific Area Plan to resolve problems of access, orientation, and parking, and to enhance the visual environment." In 1978 the boundaries of the proposed Specific Area Plan area were expanded westerly to Coronado Street to include those properties fronting on Balboa Boulevard. The City Council, in conjunction with the adoption of the City Budget in July of 1985, budgeted $50,000 for the preparation of a Specific Area Plan for Central Balboa. In January of 1987, Staff began the process of identifying all of the existing land uses and their square footage within the boundaries of the Central Balboa Specific Area Plan. This data collection is the first step in the process of preparing a land use plan. However, because of other tasks with a TO: City Council - 2. higher priority, work on the Specific Area Plan was ter- minated in March of 1987. Staff has subsequently been concentrating its efforts on updating the General Plan, which will include revisions to the Land Use Element and Circula- tion Element. It will also be necessary to revise portions of the Zoning Code to ensure conformity with the various elements of the General Plan and the Local Coastal Program, Land Use Plan. It is currently anticipated that these tasks will be completed around January of 1989. The revisions to the General Plan, Local Coastal Program, Land Use Plan, and Zoning Code,will effect the Central Balboa Area in several ways. At a minimum, the current inconsisten- cies between the various land use designations in these documents will be rectified. It is also expected that floor area ratios for the entire City will be established, includ- ing the Central Balboa area. Upon completion of the revisions to the General Plan and other documents, staff will commence work on the Central Balboa Specific Area Plan. As set forth in the General Plan Land Use Element, the Specific Area Plan will address the problems of access, orientation, parking, and the enhancement of the visual environment. Respectfully submitted, PLANNING DEPARTMENT JAMES D. HEWICRER, Director By CHRIS GUSTIN Senior Planner C:\CCSR\CEN-BAL.SAP Attachment: Map of the Central Balboa Specific Area Plan Boundaries 0 IN' Plan 0 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH COUNCIL MEMBERS September 14, 1987 COMMUNICATIONS - For referral as indicated: MINUTES To Marine Department for response, Marine Dpt/ letter from Ruth Hulsman concerning Surfing boogie boards used in surfing on (51) beaches. (b) City Attorney for inclusion in Legislation t records, letters from Mr. and (48) Mrs Jerry M. Plancich and Tom and Lind Cooper regarding "new pit bull egislation." (c) To City ttorney for response, Planning/ letter fr m S. R. Willford Lido Vlg regarding'Lido Village Parking Pkg Structure. V 1(68) (d) To City Attor y for inclusion in Offshr Oil the records, le ter and attachments Lease Sale from Roger R. St nton, chairman of 95 Orange County Boa d of Supervisors (87) regarding Southern alifornia Offshore Oil Lease ele 95. (a) To Business License Su ervisor for Business response, letter from Shirley License/Vlg Packard regarding loud maQic at the Inn Bar Village Inn Bar on Balboa Bland. (27) (f) To Public Works Department r PW/Boy Scout report back, letter from Boy couts Sea Base Sea Base located at 1931 W. Co t (74) Highway, requesting the City wa e the fair share assessment fee. (g) To Planning Department for McFadden Sq inclusion in the records, letter Assmts from John W. Shea regarding (68) proposed assessment district for McFadden Square area. \1 (h) To Planning Department for report Planning/ en back; letter from Balboa Pinsula Centrl Bal Point Association regarding_Central Spcfc Area Balboa Specific Area Plan. (68) (i) To Public Works Department for PW/McFadden response, letter from McFadden Sq M/P & Square Community Association Npt Pr Toi- regarding McFadden Square Master let Fac Plan and Newport Pier Toilet (74) cil,ity. 5. COMMUNICA NS - For referral to the City in inclusion in the records: None. Volume 41 - Page 343 COUNCIL MEMI CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES September 14, 1987 CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES - For denial and confirmation of the City Clerk's referral to the claims adjuster: (a) Lyn J. Belasco alleging personal injuries as a result of fall on street while approaching sidewalk on Diamond Avenue near Bay Front 1 walk on August 19, 1987. Allstate Insurance Company, on behalf of Margaret Blanco and Percy Cottle, alleging personal injuries and property damage to vehicle as a Ahult of collision with City icle on July 71 1987, at Irvine A nue and 17th Street. (c) Har ey Chernack alleging he drove over spilled white paint on street whic damaged underneath of automdWe on August 14o 1987, at Irvine venue between Bristol and 17th St eet. (36) Belasco Allstate Ins Co/ Blanco Chernack (d) Albert a Hilda Cole alleging Cole police of car broke claimant's bell box o lock of iron gate on August 10, 987, at 1121 White Sails Way. (a) Joel A. Copps and Robert E. Brain Copper/ seeking indemn ty from claim filed Brain by George Murdo k on August 2, 1985 concerning oil re, at 44th Street and Balboa Boule rd. (f) Paul Evans allegin excessive, Evans abusive, and unnece nary force by City police officers on June 4, 1987, in the area of amboree Road near San Joaquin Hill Road. (g) Kathryn Glass claiming roperty Glass damage and personal inj ies, as claimant's vehicle was a ruck by another vehicle who had b an hit by a City vehicle, on July 7, 1987, at Irvine Avenue and East 17t Street. (h) Kay Gooding alleging her veh cle Gooding hit on passenger side by City police vehicle, on August 19, 987, at Main Street and Ocean Front. Volume 41 - Page 344 COUNCIL AGENDA NO.. F-4(h) 0 • • i P.O. BOX 826 r, Mayor John C. Cox, Jr. City Council Members Newport Beach City Hall P. 0. Box' 1768 Newport Beach, CA 92658-8915 92661 August 13, 1987 Dear Mayor Cox and City Council Members: r * � IIEaNEO =amt 0#41 M18* It is our Association's understanding that our City is about to start on the Central Balboa Specific Area Plan early this fall, and that constructive input from groups representing the citizens affected by this plan will be sought. As you are aware, the Balboa Peninsula has a serious traffic problem. Much of this is brought about by the high intensity of land use in the "Fun Zone/Balboa Pier" area. This problem is augmented because of the attraction of the beach and the desire to be "seen" in the Balboa Pier area. This is further accentuated .because it all takes place on about a two mile long cul-de-sac. The City and our Police Department have done an admirable job in finding solutions to the beach and cruising traffic problems. We recognize that it will never be perfect, but things are getting significantly better. That portion of the traffic and parking problem brought about by the high intensity of land use in the area has never, to our knowledge, been addressed in.a comprehensive manner. In order to develop a feasible Specific Area Plan for Central Balboa, it will be necessary to evaluate the current situation, understand how we got to where we are today and then incorporate mitigating measures into the final plan. The Balboa Peninsula Point Association Board of Directors strongly recommends that, as the initial phase of the planning process, the City authorize a Parking and Traffic study. The parking portion of the study should include such historical data -as: 1. The number of parking spaces currently existing. 2. The number of spaces which would be required per the current City ordinance for the existing uses. 3. How each business has satisfied their parking requirement. 4. What effect has the "in lieu fees" had on our parking problem. 5. How many spaces are designated for beach use. 344 f R • The traffic portion should address how best to keep the cars moving while not forcing drivers to go past Main Street when they do not want to. Requiring them to make u-turns in residential neighborhoods is not an acceptable solution and it is against the law. During the period between now and the time we have an approved Central Balboa Specific Area Plan, the Balboa Peninsula Point Association Board of Directors wish to go on -record as being OPPOSED TO ANY LAND USE THAT WILL INCREASE TRAFFIC OR PARKING BEYOND WHAT THE CURRENT USE REQUIRES, WITHOUT REGARD TO EXISTING ZONING. Your consideration of the above request would be greatly • • 3_r CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER September 15, 1987 I TO: PLANNING DIRECTOR FROM: City Manager SUBJECT: CENTRAL BALBOA SPECIFIC AREA PLAN Attached is a letter concerning the Central Balboa Specific Area Plan alleged to commence in early Fall 1987. The Council refer- red this letter to the Planning Department for review and report back on the scheduling and funding of this Specific Area Plan. This report should be placed on an evening agenda no later than October 12th. This will permit you to review the correspondence with the Planning Commission if you desire. Attachment I R OBERT L. YNN •• J^ \/ JCC7Cr�G� . C� � 3 er , 1987Se September 2 CC: CG(l P To: Newport Beach City Council As a resident of the Balboa Penninsula (Peninsula Point), member of the board of Directors of the Balboa Penninsula Point Associa- tion,.and the Balboa Improvement Association, I would like to take this opportunity to encourage your support for the McFadden Square and Cannery Village Redevelopment plan submitted to the City Council by the Newport Beach Planning Department for approval at the next City Council meeting, Monday, September 28, 1987. The Penninsula as a whole needs many improvements, including traffic flow studies, street resurfacing and realigning, sewer and sidewalk repairs, landscaping, improved restroom facilities, and better utili- zation of the municipal parking lot in downtown Balboa and metered areas all along the penninsula and McFadden Wharf area. Without the much needed improvements in the McFadden Wharf and Cannery Village area, I am told that the Planning -Department would have ,to drop its idea for the Specific Area Plan in the downtown Balboa•section which has been promised for two years now. Downtown Balboa is in need of many improvements. Some improvements have already been made by the private developers. More is needed. Without the Specific Area Plan, traffic, parking, and road conditions will only get worse. These matters must be addressed, because it not only affects the business community, but also.spills over into the residential community. I know in the past you have received many letters from the Balboa Penninsula Point Association condemning any improvements which might bring more tourists into the area. Please be aware that these letters expressed views of individuals only, and were not approved through the Board of Directors or the members of the association. Improvements to the area are not intended to attract more tourists, but to better facilitate those who visit our city, and try to eliminate the problems which now exist. Lets fact it, we do live in a very desirable area and people from inland cities and out of town tourists will always come down to our beaches. We may never solve our traffic problems, however, as elected officials, you do have an obligation to the residential and business communities to meet, plan, and implement changes and improvements where needed. Please support our Planning Department and approve their recommend- ations. Sincerely, Barbara T. Regan .2101 Granada Ave. Balboa CA 92661 rAay City Ne��p°� K' �n `� Mayor John C. Cox, Jr. O FFI OF T°-' City Council Members Newport Beach City Hall COPIES SENT 1, P. 0. Box 1768 "°'I.en Newport Beach, CA 92658-8915 p"t,°�, `o it Ch a Dear Mayor Cox and City Council Members: RECENED CV CLERK AUG 29.MT It is our Association's understanding that our City is about to start on the Central Balboa Specific Area Plan early this fall and that constructive input from groups representing the citizens affected by this plan will be sought. As you are aware, the Balboa Peninsula has a serious traffic problem. Much of this is brought about by the high intensity of land use in the "Fun Zone/Balboa Pier" area. This problem is augmented because of the attraction of the beach and the desire to be "seen" in the Balboa Pier area. This is further accentuated because it all takes place on about a two mile long cul-de-sac. The City and our Police Department have done an admirable job in finding solutions to the beach and cruising traffic problems. We recognize that it will never be perfect, but things are getting significantly better. That portion of the traffic and parking problem brought about by the high intensity of land use in the area has never, to our knowledge, been addressed in a comprehensive manner. In order to develop a feasible Specific Area Plan for Central Balboa, it will be necessary to evaluate the current situation, understand how we got to where we are today and then incorporate mitigating measures into the final plan. The Balboa Peninsula Point Association Board of Directors strongly recommends that, as the initial phase of the planning process, the City authorize a Parking and Traffic study. The parking portion of the study should include such historical data as: 1. The number of parking spaces currently existing. 2. The number of spaces which would be required per the current City ordinance for the existing uses. 3. How each business has satisfied their parking requirement. 4. What effect has the "in lieu fees" had on our parking problem. 5. How many spaces are designated for beach use. city of Newport Deaoh, Calif. S r The traffic portion should address how best to keep the cars moving while not forcing drivers to go past Main Street when they do not want to. Requiring them to make u-turns in residential neighborhoods is not an acceptable solution and it is against the law. During the period between now and the time we have an approved Central Balboa Specific Area Plan, the Balboa Peninsula Point Association Board of Directors wish to go on record as being OPPOSED TO ANY LAND USE THAT WILL INCREASE TRAFFIC OR PARKING BEYOND WHAT THE CURRENT USE REQUIRES, WITHOUT REGARD TO EXISTING ZONING. Your consideration of the above request would be greatly appreciated. S'�incerelyy,,% Gam' / G' 4 /0 `-� cc: Mr. Robert L. Wynn, City Manager William A. Wren President 117 15th Street Newport Beach, California 92663 January 30, 1987 Mr. Chris Gustin Planning Department City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92663 Dear Mr. Gustin: Please place my name on your notification list for information and meetings regarding the Balboa Specific Plan. Thank you. Very ly yours z Grace Secke a s R p aRniV E pi Da � b FEe2 %nt 6 & S 8 �1w �AUF �ICbj �� N JUIY 17, IM THE NEWPORT ENSIGN/COSTA MESA NEWS/IRVINE TODAY hp p Sue Kauth e"Oimed from pope b era, and they still serve the best pizza in town. The Balboa Branch of the Newport Beach Library, estab- lished in 1920, is naturally my library of choice. I have many middle-aged friends who used to study there when they attended Harbor High. The librarians have pride in the place, and time to chat about community affairs. The children's book section is superior to any I've seen. I could wear my old chenille robe in this library to get to a mystery novel, and no one would bat an eye. The books rest on generic shelves, and a little notice from the 1960's warns "Bal Week" teens not to change into their swimsuits in the bathroom. ("Bal" is short for "Balboa" for all you newcomers.) My little girl's preschool is housed —you guessed it —in an old coastal church with big old windows and a wooden -panelled social hall for the kids to nap in. The toys are well used and a bit scruffy. The children come home a little grimy and very much hugged. Here I have no worry about creeping moderni- zation; the only things creeping are the hampsters in the quad. Perhaps my hidden agenda is that I'm soon to be 40. Maybe I'm starting to like longevity, to respect it even more than ever. Facelifts may be great for us residents. I am considering one myself. But I prefer my neigh- borhood with some character lines. Newport —stay old! Susan Kauth is a licensed therapist and counselor at Uni- versity High school in Irvine. The mother of a three-year old girl, she lives in Newport Heights. She may be contacted i in care of the Newport Ensign. i Sue Kauth Dressing up the Peninsula I have a new relative by marriage who dresses plainly at best. He tends to old wool shirts and hobnailed boots. That's when he's dressing up. I can't imagine him in a suit. Although his ambiance is laughable by Atrium Court standards, I have grown t like him a lot. The longer I know him, the more endearing he becomes. I feel the same way about the older Coastal buildings. They seem to improve with age. My p affection for older buildings " began when I was a teen attend- ing Long Beach Wilson High School. The school's very lon- gevity, with its well -used halls of bilious pink, merely added to our reverence for the place. I feel 6 a similar comfortable attitude 6 emanating from Newport Har- bor High. Both schools have staying power. I pity students at brand new (20-years or newer) high schools, where tradition is C equated with rituals established in the 70's. Their school plants had no choice, of course, except to be modern. Neither did U.C. Irvine, a lovely school -where I felt trapped -by angular concrete and neophyte trees. I am, therefore, worried by a trend I see developing along the Peninsula. Some of my favorite old buildings have become the an old friend: goes upscale victims of what I cann the Nouveau Awning syndrome. In an effort to modernize and go upscale, tourist -attracting awn- ings and brand new paint jobs have popped up on places like mushrooms. The Studio Cafe, one of my favorite hangouts for food and jazz, used to be a weathered wood affair with a three -item menu. You got great local jazz in the evenings, and a little piped -in Mozart in the after- noons. Now it is turquoise with awnings. There are waiters who reel off ten dining items of the day. We just nod and say, "Lemon chicken, please." The Mozart has dematerialized. Pretty soon there will be girls selling roses. I feel like an old friend of mine has suddenly started to hang out with a faster crowd. Luckily, many other favority spots have not succumbed to this ominous trend. Mutt Lynch's, for example, had a perfect chance to upscale itself. Once a raucous dive by the Balboa Pier, it was destroyed by a fire. It has relocated at the Newport Pier, where it is still a raucous dive. Don't let the awning fool you; inside are the usual "muttly crew" of pool -players and revel - continued on pope 12 PROJECT SUMMARY BALBOA PARKING LOT EXPANSION BACKGROUND: The ongoing effort to enhance the Balboa Peninsula com- mercial district has proved successful in many aspects. During the past few summers, it has become painfully apparent that the economic survival of small business in the area hinges on increased parking. The BALBOA IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION, led by president Charlie Bauman and past president Mel Fuchs, has therefore spearheaded an effort to cause the expansion of the municipal parking lot located at the base of the Balboa Pier. Peter McRae, financial consultant, was retained to conduct a feasibility study and make certian recommendations. The re- sulting study was prepared with the combined help and imput of The Blurock Partnership and members of the community. These conclusions and findings are outlined in this summary. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The existing municipal parking lot consists of the main lot with approximately 490 spaces. There are three other lots with 64 metered parking spaces. The proposed improvement would have TWO LEVELS and nearly double the lots capacity to approximately 1,000 spaces. Careful attention has been paid to preserve the aesthetics of the community and have only a positive impact on the surrounding area. The proposed structure would be less than three feet higher than the existing lot so as not to impair ocean views. TRAFFIC: As always in Newport Beach, traffic is of major concern. The emphasis of the project is to create CONTROLLED PARKING for the benefit of the local business community and alleviate the current on - street congestion. The intent is NOT to increase beach going traffic, rather simply provide parking for patrons of the Balboa Business Dis- trict. Traffic routes would be redesigned to create better flow in and out of the lot. It is our firm belief that this project would lessen traffic in the immediate area and have little or no impact in other areas of the city. SECURITY: The proposed structure is not completely subterranean in nature. Eye level, open air views, combined with ample lighting pro- vide the sense of security not found in underground parking. Again, CONTROLLED PARKING is essential to the security of the lot. COST PROJECTION: Costs surveys of comparable projects have ranged from $7,500 to $9,000 per space. The total projected cost of the pro- ject is NINE MILLION DOLLARS ($9,000,000), although projected income would support more debt. FINANCING: Issuance of Tax Exempt Municipal Revenue Bonds would be most preferable. Repayment of the obligation can be customized to suit the ability of the project to do so. CONCLUSION: This project is necesary for the economic survival of the area. Diligence and sensitivity have brought this project to this stage, and it is our sincere conviction to make this much needed im- provement, FIRST CLASS in every aspect. FINANCIAL SUMMARY BALBOA PARKING LOT EXPANSION THE FOLLOWING ARE SOME FACTS AND ASSUMPTIONS WITH REGUARDS TO THE BALBOA PIER PARKING LOT: TOTAL SPACES IN MAIN PARKING LOT 490 AVERAGE GROSS REVENUES 1984 & 1985 375,000 AVERAGE NET REVENUES 1984 & 1985 325,000 ANNUAL INCOME PER SPACE 663 AT THE LAST CITY COUNCIL MEETING, PARKING FEES WERE RAISED FROM $3.00 PER DAY PEAK SEASON TO $5.00 PER DAY PEAK SEASON. THIS IS A 60% INCREASE. OFF SEASON REMAIND AT $1.00 PER DAY. PEAK SEASON GENERATES AROUND 65% OF THE ANNUAL INCOME. THEREFORE IT COULD BE ASSUMED: PROJECTED INCOME PER SPACE/PEAK SEASON (1.60 X .65 X $663) 636 PROJECTED INCOME PER SPACE/OFF SEASON (1.0 X .35 X 663) 232 TOTAL PROJECTED ANNUAL INCOME PER SPACE 868 IF THE EXISTING PARKING LOT IS EXPANDED TO APPROXIMATELY 1,000 SPACES, THEN THE FOLLOWING INCOME COULD BE PROJECTED USING THE SAME BASIC OCCUPANCY: TOTAL PROJECTED ANNUAL INCOME (1,000 SPACES X $868 PER SPACE) 868,000 SO FAR I HAVE NOT ADDRESSED THE 'IN LIEU OF PARKING' FEES, WHICH I'M SURE MOST OF YOU ARE PAINFULLY AWARE OF. IN MY CONVERSATIONS WITH THE MARINE DEPARTMENT, WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PARKING LOT, THEY INDI- CATE THESE FEES GO INTO THE GENERAL FUND TO BE USED FOR PARKING IMPROVEMENT THROUGHT THE CITY. PRESENTLY I'M NOT SURE WHAT BEARING OR EFFECT THESE FEES COULD OR SHOULD HAVE ON THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PARKING LOT. CONTINUED PAGE 2 DEVELOPMENT COST- COST ESTIMATES FOR UNDERGROUND PARKING STRUCTURES HAVE RANGED FROM $7,500 PER SPACE TO $9,000 PER SPACE. THEREFOR THE PROJECT COULD COST UP TO NINE MILLION DOLLARS ($9,000,000). THESE FUNDS WOULD MOST LIKELY BE PROVIDED THROUGH THE ISSUANCE OF TAX-EXEMPT REVENUE BONDS. THE PROJECTED INTEREST RATE FOR A TWENTY (20) YEAR REVENUE BOND WOULD BE APPROXIMATELY 8%. THEREFORE: TOTAL PROJECT COST 9,000,000 ANNUAL DEBT SERVICE (.08365) 752,850 ANNUAL IMCOME 868,000 CASH FLOW 115,150 PLEASE REALIZE THESE PROJECTIONS ARE OF A PRELIMINARY NATURE, AND A MORE INDEPTH STUDY WOULD BE APPROPRIATE. HOWEVER, I HAVE ATTEMPTED TO ESTABLISH SOME BASE FROM WHICH TO WORK FROM. May 8, 1986 0 DEVELOPMENT TEAM BALBOA PARKING LOT EXPANSION CHARLIE BAUMAN PRESIDENT, BALBOA IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION PRESIDENT, BALBOA PENINSULA POINT ASSOCIATION P.O. BOX 825 BALBOA, CALIFORNIA 92661 714-673-8070 MEL FUCHS PRESIDENT EMERITUS, BALBOA IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION 700 EAST BALBOA BOULEVARD BALBOA, CALIFORNIA 92661 714-675-8120 PETER G. McRAE FINANCIAL CONSULTANT 3190 PARK NEWPORT NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92660 714-720-9704 WILLIAM E. BLUROCK THE BLUROCK PARTNERSHIP ARCHITECTS and PLANNERS 2300 NEWPORT BOULEVARD NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92663 714-673-0300 TO: BALBOA PENINSULA/RESIDENTS r I have lived on the Balboa Peninsula for 51 years. I an ashamed to say that during that period of tine I have attended only 2 City Council meetings. I am a Real Estate Developer and it seems I have spent half my life in Council and Planning Commission meetings in Huntington Beach seeking approval for W various projects. This has left me with no desire or energy to look after problems of zoning or planning in my own city. The recently encountered traffic problems on the Peninsula have led me to believe that we have been pushed too far. We can and we will do something about itt Cities get their power to zone, downsone etc. from the police power granted to then in the Constitution. The cities, to protect the health, safety and morals of its citizens can zone and otherwise control the use of property. Some of the methods used by the cities to control growth, etc. I do not think would stand a constitutional test. Most of these devises have been used against me and other developers in various cities in the state. These same powers are the ones we are going to use io slow it down on the Peninsula. I want to allow beach access to all who want to use our beaches. All of the available parking spaces are taken by 12:00 or 1:00 o'clock on Saturday and Sunday, the beaches are not overcrowded and everyone leaves by 4:00 to 5:00 p.m. This is not a contest against people who do not live at the beach, it is not rich against poor or have against have not. We want to allow everyone access to the beaches. We want to provide commercial services to these people that are scaled to the size of our community and the street we must use for ingress and egress. When I was in grammer school here in the 40's only one home in five housed a permanent resident. Your out of five homes were summer homes or vacation rentals. This place was a ghost town in the winter. It was appropriate that we had all of the commercial establishments in downtown Balboa to entertain local residents and summer renters. The situation has changed. Most homes now house permanent residents and Balboa has become the entertainment capital of Orange County. Most of the commercial activities are worthwhile, healthly and reasonable in coat. The question then becomes: Is the magnitude of these activities appropriate in scale for a small residential beach community served by only one street? I plan to eat together sons people in this community who went to do something about this problea. our lifestyle is th ar toned! our property values e threstenedl Our health Apt safety and morals are threattntdl I have spent sours time talking to the City planners in our city vho share some of the same concerns. They are caught between the business eamenmity interests and the homeowner interests. In view of the numbers in each campy can you predict who might prevail in a showdown? one of the planners said it has now become quite profitable to open a restaurant in Balboa, establish a good following and than sell at a profit. I support free enterprise, but not at the expense of gridlock in a small residential beach community served by one street. I hens shared W concerns vith•a few people. Ivory=* seers to be concerned. In a group we could put together in our community wa have people with brains, leaders* public speakers, attorneys (not that the attorneys don't hate ■ome of the proceeding qualities), people with away and political clout. If ve start the ball rolling, vithipI& far years we can restore order in our cassna4 1ty. I list below some of my ideas and suggestions. I ,rite this letter with soft haste and some anger, so excuse its rambling nature. Your ideas are needed an well as your time and perhaps some of your money. I am not a leader or a "setting" person, but I am willing to devote time, effort and away to this cauae. Some, of the ideas I propose below need further refinement, some are seditious and others may be unconstitutional. This, however, in a starting point. I as told there are other groups working on the ease problem. Let's team up. xet's change the make-up of the City Council and Planning Commission it it is necessary to gain the benefits of a wall planned and ran community. (1) I have found over the years that in Balboa residential property brings as such money an commercial property. Let us thenchsage the master plan and perhaps the soning to show the entire downtown as perhaps 1-2. Let the existing businesses continue to operate under the protection of a grandfather clause. Upon sale of change of business ownership, the property would revert to duplex zoning. In csse of severe hardship, let us put together the money to buy the property. I suggest we will lose E little or nothing by building a duplex for resale. This would put people on notice that the days of commercial use in Balboa are numbered. Some commercial zoning should be retained to serve our own residents, but not much. I personally do not object to the hotel operation or a Pew restaurants without entertainment permits. (2) Until zoning can be changed we have to allow uses that are permitted in the zone. But if discretionary permits for entertainment, unusual hours of operation etc. are sought, we should be at the meetings to see that they are not granted. I have long enjoyed the Balboa Theater and think it provides wholesome entertainment. Do we, however, have to allow horror movies to start at midnight primarily for the entertainment of out of town people? (3) I have grown up around the Pavillion and was a pinsetter there when they had a bowling alley during the war. This building provides not one off street parking spot. It runs a daily boat to Catalinathat routinely carries over 350 passengers. This means probably 200 cars. This organization has consistently resisted attempts to raise parking fees in the city. I have taken this boat to Catalina. It is a great entertainment value, but is it an appropriate commercial activity for a small residential beach community served by one street?' The Pavillian also has one or more restaurants and bay cruise boats. Do we also have to allow them to stage high school proms for inland cities? (4) I think we have the votes to re-establish order in this community. If we have trouble obtaining our goals through the jurisdiction of the rather sprawling and diverse City of Newport Beach, let's pull out and incorporate our own community. Let the attorneys among us tell me if this is a "hair brained" idea. (5) We had a chance about 10 years ago to get a 35 unit apartment house on the fun tone property. This project was shot down by a very small group of downtown businessmen. I knew at the time that I should have gotten people together to do something but I didn't have the time or interest. I blame myself. Would people caravan their cars down Balboa Boulevard on Friday or Saturday night to view 35 apartments? This project was attacked primarily on the grounds of the increased auto traffic it would create) M 0 • ti. (6) I read in the paper last week that the Balboa Bay Club was quietly granted a 30 year extension of their lease. A few years ago I talked to a member of our planning commission about the Bay Club (I was a charter member in 1948--no longer belong). I told him I felt they were granted an outrageous density and height variation. I said that if their lease was ever extended the City should require them to reduce their density by about 20. You should see their employees coming to work in the morning. Because of the lack of parking, all of the streets within blocks of the club are used for employee parking. Great traffic jams are created on the Coast Highway by functions at the Bay Club. It was indicated in the newspaper some time ago that members of the Council and Planning Commission are offerred free memberships in the Bay Club. Is this true? This situation should be looked into. (T) I was told by the previous police chief that few city employees can afford to live in Newport Beach. Does this mean that our city is berg planned and administrated by people who don't live here? (8) I understand the new Chief of Police lives on the Peninsula. Let's communicate with him. He tried to control traffic last Saturday night by turning "cruisers" around at 15th Street. No came under some fire for turning away some prom -goers. He has been handed a tough job. Let's pat him on the back for trying and give him our support. (9) I -understand that the Coastal Commission might well be in the middle of all of this,.Pushing. For beach access and supporting commercial activities. We too support these goals. The Coastal Commission is nbt sacrosanct. If they are unreasonable, let's use our politcal clout to change things. I find we have influence in both parties. (10) Memorial Day weekend I rode my bicycle to the Santa Ana river jetty. I am sure this is the worst weekend in the year for pedestrian traffic, but at 9:30 in the morning the entire boardwalk was a soo with bicycles, skate boards, skaters and pedestrians. This problem needs to be addressed. Property owners along the ocean front don't deserve this heavy concentration of people in their front yards. Perhaps if we didn't have so many . 4 N hot dog and hamburger stands, activity would fall off. I have heard proposed a different routing of the sidewalk. I was a Newport Beach lifeguard for three summers, but we didn't have the population pressure that we now have. This problem needs to be addressed. (11) I have run my ideas past a group of my friends who live here. All strongly support the efforts I propose. One Peninsula resident who has lived here for 20 years or so and was previously from Santa Ana nostagically remembers the traffic backing up to 15th Stree when he used to come down to the Rendezvous Ballroom. He states that the traffic tie ups now are no worse than back in the good old days. He thinks we have nothing to worry, about. While I honestly don't think he is any more senile than me, I must point our that Balboa Boulevard (then called Central Avenue) was only one lane in each direction with the railroad right of way in the middle. The traffic we are dealing with now is several times what we had in those days. I put this together quickly so we could hand it out at a tennis club get together. I tbknk you will agree we have all been lethargic. Let's get moving) Let's put together an organization based on more mature and carefully considered ideas than I have presented here, but let's do it soon. I talked to a chief planner at the city today. He encouraged me and said to put together a position paper and let the city know how you feel. LET'S DO ITlllll I predict that the downtown Balboa that we know today• will be a thing of the past in five to ten years. Very truly, non P. Jones Newport Beach City 3300 Balboa Blvd./ Newport Beach, CAS'? Steve Morris 1601 Port Stirling P1. Newport Beach, CA 92660 Gear City Council, ' WN OF UEVIPORT SUCH, Col t., APR 2 21985'l> REMOVED CITY C"EX Growing up in Newport Beach, I have held a great respect for the men who run our city. I have also been very interested in the affairs of the City Council ever since my father ran for a City Council position a few years back. More recently, he, has served on the local Coastal Commission. I consider myself lucky to be informed of city decisions as such to get a good understanding of the people who run the city I have grown up in. The reason I am writing this letter is to get a better understanding why there is so many delays in decisions made by the City Council of Newport Beach affecting the area known as the Fun Zone. The future of the area is something that I wonder about everyday: the fate of the Balboa Fun Zone and it's accompying area. Many rumors have surfaced describing the future of,this community value'd peice of land. There is apparent progress though; construction has begun on the North side of Palm Street known once as Art's Landing which shows definite improvement to the area. I feel I am in one of the best positions to ,fudge how the lack of progress in this area affects the community surrounding the Fun Zone, the people that visit the Fun Zone and how it affects the City of Newport Beach. The position that I hold is working on the Balboa Island Ferry as a collector, which means I come in contact with almost every person that passes by the Fun Zone. For the past two years, I have the seen the area deteriorate into a slum. I can call it a true slum because of a definition of a slum accepted in our society: a place where alcoholic bums sleep at night and solicit people on the boardwalk; a place where gangs hang out; and where drug deals happen every night; and even a place where it is sometimes not safe to walk at night. A place that was once a retail and food store haven, has turned into a place of nostalgia, that no one wants to see or remember. Restoration of the area would most likely cure the area. As I stated before rumors have canvassed the area, some good and some bad. If getting the building permit is a problem, then why not speed up the process, considering the area is one of the most tourist visited places in all of Southern California. If parking y the problem, then work with the contractors to find a viable Wjd 'on. yr Rfce1 pia VET ..;.,..:•.::,..:_::•.:.�;�. OLP lt APR q men !3 t A t�— `il NPoRT GF9esa. c C.:,IV Ci .' I have stated a few problems and solutions. The reason for stating a few is because I don't Know the problem. I am afraid that the community is not aware of the problems too. As a. person affected by the decisions of the Council and the Coastal Commission, I would like to get more involved. I would like to know what is actually going on. I would appreciate if the City Council would take time in writing me informing me of the status of the area. I would ,also appreciate suggestions in helping me get more involved in the sitiva.tion. Thankyou for your time, Steve Morris (714) 644-5785 It � 6 STATE CA-ITOL SACRAMENTO. CALIF09\I4 95614 (9I6) 445.7222 23961 ELTORO ROAD. SUITE 206 EL TORO. CALIFORNIA 92630 (714) 830.7474 704 EAST THIRD STPEET OCEANSIDT. CA' IFORNIA 92054 (714) 433.9000 RONALD CORDOVA ASSEMBLYMAN, SEVENTY-FOURTH DISTRICT ORANGE AND SAN DIEGO COUNTIES VICE CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY June 3, 1977 Mr. Max G. Dillman 801 East Balboa Boulevard Balboa, California 92661 Dear Mr. Dillman: COMMITTEES: ELECTIONS AND REAPPORTIONMENT JUDICIARY REVENUE AND TAXATION JOINT COMMITTEE - REVISION OF THE PENAL COOT SELECT COMMITTEE - CORRECTIONS Thank you for sending me a copy of your letter to the Newport Beach City Council. SI share your concern that present off-street parking facilities are inadequate for current use. The establishment of additional businesses will of course exacerbate the problem. The solution to that problem must, however, come from local government. If my office may in any way facilitate the city's problem solving efforts, we would be only too pleased to assist. Thank you again for sharing your views. I hope that you will continue to do so. Cordially, RONALD CORDOVA Assemblyman, 74th District RC:sd cc: Newport Beach City Council rdNewport Beach Planning Commission ory OF NEWPORT *ACH COUNCILMEN 90 y �p n i c��CV�p'A.V ROLL CALLkpp\ \ May 23, 1977 MINUTES INOFX (e) To the Pending Legislation and Ethics Com— OrCo mittee, a resolution from the City of Anaheim Airport expressing its opposition to the proposed study for the Chino Hills Airport site and urging all cities to withdraw from their support of said proposal and further urging support of Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 19 for a regional park in place of the proposed airport site. (Attached) (f) To the City's representative to the League, a OrCo League letter from the Orange County Division of the Calif Cities League of Cities advising of vacancies on Committees committees and commissions for any interested applicants. (Copies mailed to Council) (g) To the City's representative to the League, a OrCo League letter from the Orange County Division of the Calif Cities \ League of California Cities regarding reso- 4utions to be reviewed on June 9 with final action to be taken on those with Statewide significance on July 14. (Copies mailed to Council) (h) To the"?,ending Legislation and Ethics Com- Water mittee, a letter and sample resolution from the California Water Resources Association requesting the Congress to resist and override any attempts\to halt vital California water projects. (Copies mailed to Council) (i) To the City's representative to the County Waste - Sanitation District\No. 5, the documents in water connection with the Orange County Wastewater Management Program (Draft EIS/EIR and Appendices and/or Summai"). Hearings will be held in June, 1977. (Att shed) (The four booklets are on file in th City Clerk's office) 4. The following communications were referred to the City Clerk for filing and -inclusion ix,� e records: (a) A letter from Esther Globenfelt expressing appreciation for the help rendered her, ate husband by the paramedic crew. (Attached) (b) A letter addressed to the General Services , Director from Julia Matcha expressing appreci- ation for the sidewalk repair in front of her. home. (Attached) \� (c) A letter and newspaper clipping from J. Allen Bentley regarding the cause of taxes and water shortages. (Copies mailed to Council) (d) A letter from The Balboa Inn regarding the in lieu parking fees. (Copies mailed to Council) (e) A letter from Max Dillman regarding the traffic and parking congestion problem at Balboa Boulevard and Main Street and the Y C FR 0 over —crowded condition of the City parking RFFFRRFj) 0 INC_U,;ICA I lot on the beach. (Copies mailed to Council) FILING AN' IN R'S i Volume 31 - Page 139 • - 0 CITY OF NEWPORT l EACH CALIF0RNIA May 17, 1977 Mr. Max G. Dillman 801 East Balboa Boulevard Balboa, California 92661 Dear Mr. Dillman: 92664 3 CiLY14211 • 3300 Newport Blyd. (714)6a-2' i0c . 640-2137 Thank you for the copy of the letter dated May 5, 1977 which you sent to the City Council. Both the Planning Commission and the City Council are aware of the traffic problems which exist on the Peninsula and the increase in traffic'congestion that occurs in the summer. You can be assured that the Staff recommendations for any new developments will be consistent with the Code requirements as they relate to parking. The leasing of the parking spaces in the public lots for business use is presently an approved method of providing business parking. •The City Council has directed that the Planning Commission make further study of this provision, particularly as it pertains to the parking fees charged and the reservation of spaces for the use of business -customers. This study will begin in the near future, and we will try to keep those property owners who are in the vicinity of the parking lots informed as to its progress. Very truly yours, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT J2: kk HOGAN•, Director RVH/kk 801 E, L at baa Blvd. &LLoa, CR. 92661 rmj, 5,1977 Rew,w,U Bead. C Ut p Couac U 3300 ReLgwAt BLud. Rewpor., Beach, CR.92663 To The Vembeu of the Rewpo rt Beach. Clbj. CouLci,L: Befo2e the. adum.t of Me dtmne& 6eadon, 9 fezt ;t. tV. octant. to dytuu� to ;tout attentioa, the. thtL,f c con4e,6.Pi.on pAotder, we now have on ,the peVin4mLa. At ptedent, there ate d tx rwao& &,mtautar.t4 Lt'Wvm a dpan o% two dhotf btockd on 32,thoa Blud. and fair St. The appWximate deaf rw, capcUV. fat these. te4tawLatt4 t4 7,100 and tho tGta.L street packTruk spaced amount to a raa 30. Thera pqu&w do not .include two beet balm, e � ath.e� food edta."hr,_mtd, deue�zL d-Lg aeeb* b0at4, a 4po2t -A. h i 4 Aeet, and a 34 doom. hote . Th.ete .id nn park i 4 apace fat ar4 of tJ.eda buddnedd e4tait,14hmer - Con s,idel&b4 the. fact, tlzmt a tatya ma rro,,&t4 ar th,eae platen teak on out a f town cudtom_elrn -&,t thsit heveamp, tt. does pAwenL a fiza on caace&n. To e (Vince-6ome. of owl pazkin, pto,&tzn4, the Utel of Reupo&,t Beach ha4 .Leaned patVP4 spaced Z& the. run lc [p .Lot. TU4 lord proved moat .to troth..the .Lessee and wwtomet, due .to the phvxim.,i t* of the pack inn .tat :to .the bud.inedd area. Ph oveacwtoded condWan. abwadk e_ lAto to the .Lot, a s tt -td uaed bk people oa the pw&Uc. beached. 7ht4 condttoa can an4 become mote severe, tkeot a!:tet ekeat ape,?, teat. Ulth th..ede facts tm mtnd, R hope. uuou wJ,L take. de)Lom candtdelc- atian of the aituaUon, bep,tA ?A4u w,, any. nelr buAtneda -Lteen4ee. 3f out ptedent off sheet pwckin f code wets 4tliict4 adi.ehed to, d t wou)-d aLLewiate. cuuk AttuAs q wuxth a-,P the na ,t p to.&t en. J,C the e- coded hied &eo1L erLfonced ad tmt-it tem in the. pant, the. ptedenf ,ittuatton wrout.d not have. developed. Uith Deep Concehn, raic 11%%,brm cG: CaLLfd&Lta Coa taL Com &Lmton cc: Richard Ragam Revpo2L Beach. f'.tanrwus DULectwz cc: ;tan Cordova p.j4e%w rir m cc: aenruy CaYpenteit State Senatat cc: Patboa PO4Rf flddactatian cc: Bztbaa .lap wvement. R44octWwrz. 1.l[' co \� Crr 0 6 PART 3: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 76-3-C An amendment to the Land Use Element adjusting and clarifying Specific Area Plan boundaries for the Cannery Village/McFadden Square and Central Balboa Specific Area Plans. Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission recommended adoption of General Plan Amendment 76-3-C, as follows: (a) Cannery Village/McFadden Square Specific Area Plan. The revised Specific Area Plan area would include the commercial and residential area southeast of 32nd Street and northeast of Balboa Boulevard, and the commercial and residential properties between the existing boundary and 19th Street (as shown on the attached map). (These revisions are intended to encompass areas with problems of mixed uses and circulation which are adjacent to the existing Specific Area Plan boundaries.) (b) Central Balboa Specific Area Plan. The Central Balboa Specific Area Plan boundaries would be modified to include the commercial usesland commercial zoning on Balboa Boulevard west of the existing boundary where the General Plan indicates "Multi -Family Residential" (as shown on the attached map). In addition, it is recommended that an 8-1/2" x 11" map of the Central Balboa area be added to the Land Use Element report to precisely identify those areas and parcels within the Specific Area Plan boundaries and, thus, subject to Site Plan Review. Background This proposed amendment was suggested by staff to evaluate current Specific Area Plan boundaries and revise these boundaries where appropriate, and to identify more precisely the areas subject to Site Plan Review under the provisions of Section 20.01.070 of the Zoning Ordinance. Large scale land use and zoning maps will be on display at the public hearing. 1 Attachments: 1) Cannery Village/McFadden Square Specific Area Plan Map. 2) Central Balboa Specific,,Area Plan Map. 3) Central Balboa Precise Boundary Map. -17- r \tz e F�$c- �'�-� N cH •` z ` .. ........ .....:.. �a / 444(YGl1.YG CCUP � � C- GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 76-3- C GEMCP,64L FjN-R, k 6KCUHL PrP�• Pt-� osA E;445-rI N4 I�OUWPN'rf city or Newport Beach p p 8pp SCALE IN FEET; A ry a 0 COUNCILMEN •F� g �m y2 pG a� ROLL CALL CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH November 12. 1973 MINUTES INDEX Motion Mayor Pro Tem Rogers made a substitute motion to 0-1540 Ayes Absent x x x x x x introduce Ordinance No. 1540, as presented, and to for public hearing on November 26, 1973, which motion led. Motion x The Development Stan s Citizens Advisory Com- Ayes x x x x x x mittee was requested to reco a for the purpose of Absent x making specific recommendations on arking inequities in the R-3 and R-4 Districts, the space options and the elimination of reference to "stories" in the R-1 and R-2 Districts. 4. A letter from Allan Beek urging the immediate re- Central Balboa paration of a Specific Area Plan for Central Balboa was presented. Specific Area Plan Motion x Councilman Croul made a motion to refer Mr. Beek's letter to the staff for study and recommendation. Allan Beek addressed the Council and urged the Council to place a No. 1 priority on the preparation of a Specific Area Plan for Central Balboa. Ayes x x x x x x A vote was taken on Councilman Croul's motion, which Absent x motion carried. Motion x The Council reaffirmed its policy of its No. priority Ayes Absent x x x x x x x being the completion of the General Plan within a specific time frame; and upon completion of the General Plan, its top priority will be the preparation and approval of a Central Balboa Specific Area Plan. 5. A report from the Environmental Quality Control Gene Citizens Advisory Committee regarding Conservation an of Natural Resources Element of the General Plan Motion Ayes x x x x x x x was amended to add a new paragraph, "Study tr is patterns and speed limits based on consider ion of Absent x fuel conservation;" and the amended re t was referred to the Planning Commissi� for inclusion in ongoing studies of the General lan. Motion Ayes x x x x x x x 6. Proposed amendments the Residential Growth Element and the L • Use Element of the General General Plan Absent x Plan were set r public hearing on December 17, 1973. 7. A eport was presented from the Community Develop- Big Canyo, ment Department regarding an amendment to the PC Planned Community Development Standards for "Big Amendmt Canyon' by reducing the densities in Areas 1, 6, 10 and 14, located north of San Joaquin Hills Road, west / of MacArthur Boulevard, south of Ford Road and east of Jamboree Road, Planning Commission Amendment No. 386. Volume 27 - Page 286 ALLAN SEEK November 6, 1973 Honorable ],ayor and City Council 3300 New:ort Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92660 Gentlemen: ��` •� �� John Konwweiser, owner of the Fun Zone property, has iven an exclusive listing for 60 days•to the Charles Dunn Company, 000 Westerly Place, Newport Beach. This company is attempting to put together a plan for development which will be acceptable to the City. The embarassing fact is that the City still has made no progress on the Specific Area Plan for Central Balboa, and there- fore is in no better position than it was a year ago to guide prospective developers; nor is it any better equipped with•criteria or standards with which to compare proposals brought" before it. Yet it appears that within two months there will be a proposal before the City, to which an answer must be given. It is within the ability of the staff to complete the Specific Area Plan within this two months period, expecially as the concerned homeowners associations have already held a meeting on the subject and made their views known. However, this diversion of staff time would delay completion of the General Plan by about one month. The purpose of this letter is to urge you to instruct the staff to prepare the Specific Area Plan immediately, because there is no element of the General Plan :-which is of higher priority. Central Balboa is the heart :of the "charm and character" tnat you have pledged to protect. If it is lost, they are lost. If it is successfully renovated, it will set the tone for the rest to follow. Please, this time let the City be 'prepared to lead, not merely follow. Very truly yours, Allan Beek QUALITY ORIGINAL (S) CENTRAL BAI PLANNING PRI DEPARTMENT OF CIT NEWPORT BEACH, C BOA IJECT f PLANNING ILIFORNIA TABLE OF CO TENTS I INTRODUCTION A. Location of Study Area B. History of Balboa. II PHYSICAL AND•SOCIAL CHARACTERIS FICS A. Population and Housing B. Existing Land Use C. Existing Zoning D. Assessed Valuation and Ownership E. Economic Characteristils" F. Condition of Structures G. Circulation H. Parking I. Public Utilities III CENTRAL BALBOA - PROBLEMS AND POTENTIALS A. Circulation and Parking w- • B. Land Use C. Structural Deterioratidn D. Edgewater Walk and Bay ront • E. Aesthetic Imprqvements LIST OF TABLES ' I0 -Table 1 - Population and Housing Estimates for Newport,Beach and Central Balboa, April 1960, Februaary 1966 and June 1969. Table 2 - Age and Sex Distribution - Newport Beach and Balboa 1966. Table 3 - Median Family Income - Newport Beach and Balboa 1959. Table" 4• Land Use - Central Balboa. Table 5 Existing g Zonin Statistics - Central Balboa, Table 6 - Land Use Absorption -by Zone Classification.. Table 7• - Assessed Valuation and Ownership. Table 8 - Assessed Valuation by Land Use Classification. i Table 9 -• Assessed Valuation by Zone Classification. Table 10. - Quarterly Taxable Sales - Central Balboa. Table 11 - Condition of Structures - Central Balboa. Table 12 - Balboa.Boulevard Traffic'Volumes and Practical .Cappcities, I 0' I F LIST OF FI Figure 1 - Figure 2 - Figure 3 - Figure 4,. Figure 5 - Figure 6, - Figure '7 - GURES and Use on4ng tatistical Areas ondition of Structures arking Inventory" raffic Circulation, Proposal raffic Circulation Proposal, a, ' 0 • 9 I. INTRO[ UCTION u As one of the oldest areas of Newport Beach, the Central Balboa Area has begun to experience the process of -rehabilitation and i redevelopment. Recognizing the pos',sibility of increased change in the future, the Planning Department began studies to deter- mine the detailed character of the area. Should these studies reveal specific problems, then corrective courses of action can be recommended as part of a master elan for the'area.- A master plan would also direct future changes so that the area would develop in a well-balanced manner in harmony..with the existing . character of Balboa. This would also aid the public sector in I planning for the proper public facilities. To insure that all facets regardinglBalboa's development would be included, the study has involvedlinter-departmental person - net in a series of meetings and discussions. It has also in- volved numerous outside meetings wi h civic'associations and Individuals in the Balboa Area. A. - Location. of Study Area The Central Balboa Area is a di§tinct area unique from the surroupding.neighborhoods. This is largely due to - 2 - 0 • Central Balboa's location toward the end of the Balboa. ' Peninsula,, the predominance of commercial and higher density residential uses and Balboa's distinct character resulting from its unique histo y. These character- istics were used as the major c iteria in determining the Study Area boundaries. From the central core an attempt was made to move out- ward through any zones of transition into the surrounding residential neighborhoods. The north and south bound- aries were fixed as natural water barriers. The western boundary was established at Corpnado. Street,_and•the eastern boundary at "C" Street. B.- History.of Balboa Prior to 1890, Newport Bay was ' sportsman's paradise with bountiful stores of shellfish and teeming flocks I of ducks. The majority of all persons using the bay ' were duck hunters. This changed with the arrival of, Edward J. Abbott in.1891, the first real settler in 'the Balboa area. A traveler and outdoorsman, he became interested in the Balboa area in connection with his hobby and business of collecting and preparing shells for sale. Shortly after his arrival he built a small ' I shack and pier at Palm Street, where the ferry landing' is now situated: This area, then known as Abbott's • Landing, marked the beginning Balboa's settlement. 9 • -3 • Until 1900, most of Balboa's vlo Iitors were small groups of summer vacationists came to the bay to sail small boats and enjoy the �beachatmoslphere. Shortly after 1900 a number of {people became inter- ested in the development potential of the eastern peninsula. , Some of these.peopl!e organized and formed the Newport Bay Investment Company in 1904. The company consisted largely of prIoperty owners from the Balboa area. The Newport Bay Investment Company ultimately played a major role in the development of the Balboa area. The Balboa Tract was filed in M • marked the true beginnings of B The final tract extended from C E. J. Louis, vice-consul for Pe later became a landowner in the for Balboa's name. u y of 1905, and lboa's development. press to "L" Streets. u at the time, and who. area, was responsible As development was begun before the automobile era,, access to Balboa watRd. rhe nearest transporta- t i o n route was *'�azi-f I e- E4 � 2�� 1 ire= o-4a-ia-6.i.n-e., which connected McFadden Landing with +Santa Ana. H. E. Huntington, owner of the railroaad, was induced by the East Newport Town Company and Newport Bay Investment Company to extend:his line from.Newport to Balboa, two miles :further east. Huntington was given the right-of- -way and a cash bonus of $19,000 • -4-I 0 • The Balboa Pavilion, with the Balboa Pier and the Balboa Hotel, were built in time for the first train into Balboa on July 4, 1905. The arrival o�f the train, which was attended by many visitors, destined Balboa to become a center for recreation and tourism. The most significant of the above developments is th'e Pavilion which has been responsible for the image charalcteristic of Balboa.• It contributes significantly to the visual importance of the bayfront and -to Main Street. The Balboa Island Ferry is another important landmark., Since 1906 the ferry, with few interruptions, has pro- vided a transportation link between Central Balboa and • the adjacent shore of Balboa Island. Although it is not as important a visual contribution as the Pavilion, the ferry has provided much of the character typical of Balboa. The Balboa Chamber of Commerce, which rivaled the Newport Chamber in the promotion of the Balboa Peninsula, was formed in 1919. 0 During the 1930's, the Rendezvous •Ballroom and the Balboa Inn complemented one another in forming the area's importance as the dance capital of the Southern Calif- ornia Area. This is also the period during which the Fun Zone began operation. The combination of the Fun ,Zone and the availability of dancing and night clubs 0 • -5- helped further tourist activities throughout the 1930's, 140's and into the '50'6. it must be noted that the above activities' contr buted to the area's highly seasonal characteristic. 0 The 1950's marked the beginnings of a transition in Balboa's character. The Rendezvvous Ballroom began to lose its significance as an attractoi of the "big bands" of the 130's and '40's. This, in 'turn, affected the occu- pancy rates of the Balboa Inn and many of the clubs along Main Street and Balboa Boulevard. Balboa continued to change during the 1960's. Traffic congestion on the Peninsula during peak demand periods . reached the point where access became seriously impaired. This significantly reduced the +'ttractiveness of the area for visitors. The 1960's also witnessed increased demands for housing. This has +ad the tendency toI reduce the seasonal nature of Balboa, although these is still considerable demand for summer rentals. In the.summer of 19669 the Rendezvous Ballroom was destroyed by fire. This event abruptly ended Balboa's trait as a dance center. Soon after the fire, the Balboa Inn was converted into a private school. To- gether, these events.with the t end toward year-round apartment rentals,, have had,a major effect on, the • changing character of Central Balboa. It is the purpose of this report to identlify Balboa today and 1•ook to its future; however, an ly future plans for Central Balboa should include_ t1he preservation and enhancement of Balboa's Pavilion', ferry, pier and the Balboa Hotel. These historic landmarks offer unique- ness by their singularity; they reinforce and 'establish the identity 'of Balbod'. I•. '. l r1 40. II. PHYSICAL AND SOC A. Population and Housing Table 1 illustrates population CHARACTERISTICS d housing estimates for Newport Beach and' Central Balboa for April 1960, February 1966 and June 1969. Perhaps the most significant charac- teristic to be observed is the abnormally high vacancy rate for, Newport Beach and especially for Central Balboa. These rates are partially due to the seasonal nature of the City (the census enumerations were conducted during the off season months). Another reason for the high vacancy rates is due to the Bureau o.f the Census' defini= 1 tion of a vacant household.• According to the Census, a household is considered vacant if it is occupied by the same person or persons for lessithan six months out of the year. Thus, where the Bureau of the Census would consider Balboa's vacancy rate to be quite high, others might claim that it is relatively low at any given po ant in time, but that mobility,in the area might be consider- ably higher than for other areas of Newport Beach. As it was extremely difficult to vacancy factor, the population i estimated assuming no vacancy ri would'be indicative of Balboa's of peak demand such as -summer ai termine a.representative f Central Balboa was te.' These estimates population during periods., d Easter vacations. 0 TAB[ E 1 POPULATION AND HOUSING- NEWPVBEACH AND CENTRAL BALBOA T b1� j Newport Beach - -Total Occupied Percent "Year Dwelling Percent Dwelling Population Total Population Units Vacant -Units Household Population Increase 1960 1 13,939 28.0 '-9,972 2.66 26,564 --- 1966 2 19,258 24.9 14,453 2.64 37.,798 29.78 -1969 3 21,006 18.2 17,187 2.64 45,375 16.69 Central Balboa _ 1960•, -,490 43.2" 278 _. 1.93 _- 539 --- -1966 576 41.4 �� .335 1_96 -657 17.96 015 1969 584' 41.4 .340 .1 .96 : " 668 - 1.65 s 67- -- _��—y ` Central Balboa - Assuming No Vacancy Rate 1960 490 0 490 1.93 946 --- 1.966 576- 0 -576 1.96 -:1,129 --- 1969 584 0 584 1.96 1,145 --- - .-a-969'*� -30f3 ---8— S�--=•�--------1-:16 ^83 . _ Central Balboa is defined as that portion of the •Balboa Peninsula between Cor"onad'o and St. ....{+ .In... ..SF.. 0... -. n..n nl n.-..:-C<..n+t ...... •. - �..xtc ra ✓� _,, 1960 U.S. Census of Housing ' - - 32 1966 Newport Beach Special Census of Population and Housing q3 Newport Beach Planning Department Estimates, June 1, 1969. EMS/kk = .� 2/18/70 0 -B- i U g The percentage population incre Balboa indicate that developmen ,Ase for Newport Beach and E and population i-n-migration are occurring at much slower rates in Balboa than for the City as a whole. Much of the new construction in Balboa is a result of redevelopment rather than the development of vacant land. In comparisons nearly all new housing construction in Newport Beach takes place on previously unused land. Table 2 depicts age and sex distributions for Newport Beach and Balboa. The diagram indicajes that Newport Beach, and especially Balboa, have comparatively low birth rates. Both areas contain relatively few children of preschool age. A pyramid for an area attaining its majority of growth through natural increasef would be considerably wider at the base. The subsequent growth through the t school years of 5-19 may be largely attributed to in - migration. The preponderance o) males and females aged 20-24 in the Balboa area may be�due to heavy influxes of young married couples and/or college students. The de- crease of the 25-40'age group in Balboa may similarly be i attributed to out -migration and%or students leaving the area. There is a significant exception to a general trend of out -migration in the 40-44 age group which is the second largest category. The decrease )I in the age.groups from 45 apd older is characteristic of•the normal aging.process', a, 1 .r:� ;�,•;_i i; '1',,i '•i.,!r,',''}ii ,f,:,l t'•° `'''� . •,?^'. •,,' .'', er' , .. ,•,•^ '?,:1':,..' r �� `D • ,(,%lu;•',d4 '':. �:�;' i;; r •�,: :. • .11;" f ,:� ;4r>;M: ,�f,r r.; l": �:I r.�,,p,'�: •�!,' :;''', ., i ;; ,''rl��t.'A;l• •1, r; J 'r11•�I : ' r '�irrl','%}'��.1 ,.y':; ... ir:.: �';:'; ;,• ':,:+ir 'Y 1'!%>.:ii: 'tt '•S f ii !�' ! 1' '\ ,' r , I ' /.ri :, .• „ 1,1�.1• • fr:.•5r1, • , :.,.r.i.+, . i .;•;,%• ' +'::'1 �' 'F; ti' i :,J': '" ::;'f ' ;',: j, l't)'''' �i��"' .. (1, ,, �;t,',-" AGE & SEX DISTRIBUTION1966 • ,;°'` MALES ? FEMALES " '• 80-84 r .ii;'�'�.''•'1�:yt.'r' 75-79 66-59 ,50-54 45-49 .40-44 35-39 '� 'h 1•srr . .; • r.'1;' 30-34 r'Y4 rpi Crt'�ti: ` 10-14 '•,',i •t • ,i it 'f')t•'tl:• •Jf'rr� , r •lj,t il: ��r i• r!.1' t;ri 1,1 R., ilr:, 4tS "3jRr1:'�;Ifh:•,{r! ' I;'y;' •);rri lf, •r �u{{{{{{O {Cry!'fFllf s' mi■�iii �i■�mouiii�ONE on 10 9 8 '7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Percent'.: of T4 •r�r NBWPORT rdCN ";„• •' r ��` 'i11 t't'a�.,'f �A i'"n''i 1, e. ..II �.. ., fit• 'r,7' rr.!. r,>,r,•.tNy ,ri �,rli h'il:`4;JV"r'.�li ''•'fir dye.: ('(' .'t,r"i .: F.4fG 1.1 :,h ;v,r'f,r y:i�:.'.r y: i! ,'i •i1i.'#' 1 itf '.ai, I �,1(i:Y,�7,`r '1''' 1�,;';it'', „(�6! 7 r'r �,''r ;;l,''r•-;,•,� iY,l ffi�'•'�r finl' •��(::�(, q9 r �Yt' l,. '.fr: . r �('„i'r '1"t' 4•f r.}I lflil (4�ESff!7j'(L la�'S i!0l.dA h•(', I'f4 .+: • I••„n� -�ndt 0 ;1• 2 3 4 5. 6„7, 8. 9'10;.,' W Population '. ,r,l+i,.,. ♦,`�'li r!!)! i ..lf•Yr��: 'r'�,j1 �« '.^. It• ALY.lOA(: •; i'!''•';'.•,r''ft�fi\�rl`.;}`P'1�,',"'�',ia.r'�'I: ;;�:'•• .1. ';i,�if''•:'rr,.'I,!'.';,(•u�j,'j fin i1�7lrl:tida:'(•r!�'�l L,rr:: 'JI•r'r t.- �,1 ', s,.,lrf•.,:,5,!3ry+.li,tl•� rl••t"' I ,,'i ,' r°;)'Yt.•,r,,♦.,::': /y'1 t.Y•P, 1 : •) , /r i '�'.,. .(;Q .'•)'' � :' I'ii'•i.'•1'p(, ;li; i,., r •o Itwlagti^h .;^;�,,•ry� ,.: {: !r•. i. IiYC; r. f,l''. rl, rj%rvr: dl h f r,jl''1:}� fif'`I.,l(1. ri'�{If; •':',f�, ,I��i'7itr; 'i,, . �e' L:� Y' 'Si �) f;rrl{4:r R',�li. , .r' C�}Fr%'�V: �'"'Ir rn� 15��1 i'�". ,'r .'1171r : )i'I:�.r,•i.' jr''yi r 7•` '.'�•,; , "l Ail' •)i'r'1:f"•.Ji• i I �1'rl ��1 ,h,ir lrllrrl,a, l•,'il; .pl`'•t: h • - 9 u • Table 3 compares median family income for Newport Beach and for Sal -boa in 1959. Although the income data repre-, sent 1959 averages, they are significant in that.general trends are indicated. The middile income groups for.both areas are similar; however, Central Balboa is character- ized as having more families in, the lower income groups ($4,000 or less) and fewer families in the higher groups ($15,000 or greater) than is typical for the entire City.. It must be emphasized that Balb a is here defined as the portion,of the peninsula east of 15th Street. This area includes the Peninsula Point residential district which differs substantially from the Because the residents tend to groups, the Peninsula Point a ntral Balboa study area. from upper.socio-economic undoubtbdly exerts an 0 upward influence on Central Bal'boa's.income characteris- tics. Even in'view of this influence, median family income is lower in Balboa than for thel City. B. Existing Land _Use The corresponding areal statist Table 4. Approximately 69% of Area is devoted to the general j (Figure 1). Categories within comprising 28.913 of the land,• and public rights=of'way 21:,28% P j cs are depicted in he land within the Study tegory of public uses blic uses include beaches,, larks 5.77%, parking 12.97% 'Of the remaining 31'% of 0 TABLE 31 MEDIAN FAMILY INCOME - NEWPORT BEACH AND BA LBOA* 1959 r'I Ilr r • 'PERCENT ' NEWPORT BEACH BAL•BOA- Under, $1,000 '; 4.22% 6.55% " $1,000 ,._ .. 1,999 :; 3.67 „ 4.73 •1'I"�'s;:':,' 5.10 6..37 2,000 - 2,999: ..:,,.. '`-' .•;{ 3,000 - 3,999 .,.: :... ? 5.44 8.10 4,000 ,• - 4,999 y ", 4.76' 4 ' r, .' 5,000 5 999 7.30' 7.19 , 6,000. - 6,999 8.26 ., 9.92 000 7,999 7.1,6 7.10 MOO - 89999 r.::' ";= 7.16 , 6`.55 • 9,000 - 9,999 ";,.' 5.75 .7.73 . 10,000 - 14,999 ;' 19..00 ... 17.47 " 15,000 ,. - 24,999. ,': .!', 12.044 1' 8.10;•• $25,000 & Oven ;':;, ,a; 10.14:.: 5.46 s'. Total Number of Families 7552 -•: A. '100'.00%,•,109-9. 100..00% Median Family Income ', $8,571 =` $79340 •;,' *Balboa is defined as that portion o "the Balboa Peninsula east I5th.•Street. ,of „ ; ;'', :• EMS kk ",'.,: ,,`.,•, ''F_,, ,;. <; 2/19/70 9 0 0 RESIDENTIAL = SMLE FAMILY =2-4 FA IES 5 AND MORE FAMILIES TRANSE LODGM COMMERCIAL _ RETAILTRADE.PERSONAL AND PROFESSIONAL FIGURE EXISTING LAND USE =SERVICESTATIONS =CO�ERCIAL RECREATION PUBLIC AND QUASI PUBLIC MPARKING ®PUBLIC FACILRIE' ©V' PARKS =BEACHES UNDEVELOPED AREAS O VACANT LAND WATER PACIFIC Ut-r-/AIN SERVH 171 0 - 10 land area, residential land use is the largest category, ' occupying a total of"12.20 acres or 18.4%. Single- �Jamily and multiple -family uses tend to be interspersed among one another,in a random pattern. There are a total of 584 dwelling units in•i:he Study Area which rep- resents a net density of 54.53 dwelling units per acre. It should be noted that transient lodging, which accounts for 1.49 acres or 2.25% of the Study Area, is included in the residential land use category (Table 4). During th-e winter months many of the establishments .in the transi- ent lodging category become ren�ed on a more stable,basis. There are several instances wherle residential uses are • _ situated above commercial establfishments. These instances of mixed land use do not form-aidiscernable pattern. Commercial land uses occupy 4.76 acres,or 7.16% of the Study Area. The general patterof commercial -uses is linear along Balboa Boulevard f om Cypress Street iio "A" Street and also on both :sides of Main Street. A more, solid core of commercial use occupies the area between• Palm and "A" Streets. Vacant land occupies 2.84 acres or 4.28% of the Study Area. Approximately 25% of -the vacant land is.in the residential ,area* while 48% is in the commercial core. Its dispersed nature causes it to stand out.vi,sually on the land use map 0 e 0 W TABLE 4' - LAND USE - CENTRAL BALBOAI RESIDENTIAL ACRES PERCENT Single-family (40,22 units/net ac e) ;`'' 3.07, 4.63 2-4 'Family (40.60 units/net acre), 5.31, 8.01 5 and more family (64.15 units/ne acre) 2.33 3.51 Transient Lodging 1.49 2.25 . TOTAL Residential Land Use (�4.53 units/net-•r•:. acreA,dxcluding Transient .Lodging); " 12.20` 18.40 COMMERCIAL `. , .•, Reta*1 and personal services "' " 1.89 2.85 .; Auto and boat service stations i `' 0.43 0.65 '�•• Finance, real estate, insurance & banks '''' -. .' 0..20 0.30 . Business services & repair servic ,•, s `•',: ,_..'', .._ .°, 0'.16 0.24" Commercial recreation "': ", 0.64 0.95 ' TOTAL commercial land use ;:', _ '' 3_32 Mixed commercial and residential 11.44 '= 2.17 TOTAL mixed &,commercial Tani -use 4.76 PUBLIC Public Utilities' `' 0.34 0.51 Schools 0.46 0.69 Parks 3.83 5.77 Beaches 19.17 28:91 Parking .' 8.60. 12.97 Rights -of -way 14.11 21.28, Vacant Land •4�l3S4 .84 4.28� Z� TOTAL LAND USE "'M U9 u nsa•;.w DlAn 4nn natlantmant. Central Ballboa Land" Us,e Surveys June 1969. E Is (Figure 1). The majority of vacant land is located between Balboa Boulevard and Ocean Front. The relatively small amount of vacant land is significant in terms of Balboa's future development. I,f substantial development is to occur in the future, it wiill largely represent a recycling of previously developed land.. C. Existing Zoning The zoning pattern in the Central Balboa Study Area was examined in much the same manner as the land use analysis for purposes of comparison. Figure 2 and Table 5 provide, graphic and statistical data relative to existing zoning. The first attempt to zone Newport Beach occurred in 192.7. Numerous public hearings were held and due to conflict- . i ing arguments, the 1927 zoning ordinance was not formally," adopted for nearly ten years. iHence, the Central Balboa Area was, to a major extent, developed before a zoning ordinance was formally adopted.) Land zoned R-1, occupies primar and park or 44.38% of the Study is located between Ocean Front and is either vacant or" devoted exception of one parcel which i There is no land zoned•R-2 in t R-4,. multiple-family'residen.tia ly 29.43•acres of beach Area. All of this land alk and the Pacific Ocean to public use, with the occupied by the Balboa. Inn+ i2 Study Area. ' R-.3 and ,,zones,, represent. 11.70 E FIGURE 2 - ZONING \\ US R-4 �BAo .....Bar• � .... D \ EAST ~ yAR0 AVE S 2 \ \•_ 41 �tw.y1J 0 PACIFIC OCEAN '.' • pi TABLE-5 CA EXISTING LINING - CENTRAL BA BOA1 0 : 'ACRES ',' PERCENT R-1 '('Ineludes -all land south of' OceanFront)';..:,-, 29.43••• r 44.38 , R-3` 8.11 12.23 R-4s". 3.59 5.411 , C-1' 10.63 16.03 Streets and other land not zoned,"';'. ' 14:55 +"21.94 66.31 99.99 City of Newport Beach Zoning'.Map " � � 1 • � it r r, r ' , E - 12 - • • acres or 17.64% of the area. Of this total, R-3 is the dominant zone,'containing more than eight acres.,' i • There are two areas of R-4 zonei land representing approximately 3.6 acres. Both Iof these areas are located in, the eastern portfon,if the Study Area; one adjacent to the bay and the other adjacent to Ocean Front. Land zoned C-1, light commercial, accounts for 10.63 acres or 16.03% of the Study Area. The commercial zone extends solidly between the bay and Ocean Front and between "A" Street and Adams Street. It also extends one-half block deep on either side of Balboa Boulevard' between Adams Street and Coronado Street. A comparison of land use by zon possible nonconforming uses - and tion i-n-'each zone. Nonconformi any existing land use that is a use of the land than allowed by in which it is located. There nonconforming uses in the area. multiple -family dwelling units establishments, which -are R-4 c •R-3 zones. The amount of commercial .use in less than half of the total, are was done to examine the level of use absorp g uses were defined as i higher or more intensive ordinance for the zone re a few examples of These consist, of• nd transient lodging assifications, in the the C-1 zone represented s of" the zone., Other-, n - 13 - lJ uses in the C-1 zone are reside den.sities, public Utilities, pa The relatively low rate of comm dicates that the Study Area may commercial use. Multiple -family residential and occupy a total of 62% of the R- uses in these zones include vac lodging in the R-3 zone. The n zone is 36.49 units per acre, w the maximum density allowed by net density in the R-4 zone is which is also approximately the by the Zoning Code. The.net de units in the R-3, R-4 and C-1 z acre. This overall density, ac definition of the zoning ordina to an R=4 zone. The higher rate of residential and R-4 zones and the predomin in the C-1 zone indicate that underzoned for residential use tial - in varying ki.ng and vacant land. rcial absorption in - be overzoned for transient lodging and R-4 zones. Other nt land and transient• t density in the R-3 " ich is approximately he Zoning Code. The 2.20 units per acre, maximum density allowed sity for all residential, nes is 43.53 units per. ording to the general ce, would be equivalent bsorption in the R-3 ce'of residential units e Study Area may be D. Assessed Valuation and Ownership_ Table 7.presents dota•onassessld valuation and ownership, N E i ASSESSED VALUATION AND OWNERSHIP CENTRAL B'ALBOAJ, MARCH 19701;'' (ALL FIGURES REPRESEN FULL CASH VALUE). :. ASSESSED•VALUATION STATISTICAL' AREA LAND IMPROVEMENTS TOTAL 45 $3,7709680 $2,306,992'• ":,., $6,0779672 46 3,2469160 1,262,960 4,509,120 47 721,680 456,760 '., ; _1,178,440 ". Total Study Area •$7,738,520 $4,026,712 ;'y"-,$11,,7659232 ' ASSESSED"VALUATION PER NET ACRE L IT STATISTICAL' IMPROVEMENTS• AREA LAND .;, "•; ,:• TOTAL 45 $329,604 $201660 : '', '!:'", $531,265 46 345,704 ` 134'500 480,204 47 342,029 •' 216,473 :' ;`<';., 558,502 7otai Study•Area $337,338 $175,533. $512,869 OWNERSHIP • ' '`-, STATISTICAL : AREA • '•" 'RESIDENT OWNED2.+'. ABSENTEE OWNED3.. TOTAL 45 ''`' 68 '..:,.'45.03% . ,'. 83' ': 54.97% 151 ,, 100% 4,6 • 41;; '., 45.56% ..';:,;; 49'..; 54.44% ''` ;• • 90 100% , ' •, 47 21 63.85% 18.' 46.15%, 39, 100% Total Study Area 130 46.4"3% 150, i' 53.57% 280 100% '• ; I01 1 Data on assessed valuation were obtained from the`Orahge County Assesso.r.- 2 A resident owned parcel was defined as any parcel whose tax bill is sent to a Newport Beach City address. - 3 An absentee'owne,d parcel was defined as any parcel,whose tax bill is sent to an address outside Newport Beach. • -14-I • for Central Balboa. The total the Study Area is $11,765,232. of improvements in the area re than one-half the value of the describing assessed valuation more regularity in the assesse contrast to improvements. The for Statistical Area 46 appear than the average for the entir To a great extent this is expl of vacant land which are found It may be significant to note ments is less in Statistical A ately in the commercial core, shows the highest value of imp entirely in.residential use. ssessed valuation for The assessed valuation esented slightly more rea's land. The data r acre indicates far value of the land in alue of improvements to be significantly less Study Area (Figure 3). ned by the large amounts n Statistical Area 46. at the value of improve - a 46, which is predomin- ile Statistical Area 47 vements and is almost The data on ownership indicate that absentee ownership averages almost 54% for the entire Study Area. The ownership pattern in Statistical Areas.45 and 46 was very, similar., Statistical -Area 46, however, which is almost entirely residential, had consi�derably`1ess,absentee ownership than the•other two areas. Table 8 presents data on asses classification. Attention sho statistics on assessed' value'•p d valuation by land use dIbe''di-rected to the acre as these figures 71, FIGURE 3 - STATISTICAL- AREAS - - --. CENTRAL BALBOA _ _ - � •'_ � :fit.=: - =. - - 1 _ - _ _ _ _ i - I 1 - STAT AREA =STAT AREA STAAREA- T."4 1 46 %/ 1 i '47- 4 5. - �iy'� -_ .. ..._ - _:.- i'T .b_ •.bi_.� :'•.< _ .. 1. - 'J�-y.-.- r5�c..v.J. LL t .. -. ASSESSED VALUATION BY,LAND USE CLASSIFICATION (ALL FIGURES REPRESENT FULL CASH VALUE) LAND USE CATEGORY LAND AMPROVEMENTS, TOTAL Single Family Residen- , , . I,' ,I ti al -$1 ,069,960 1 ;;,;{, $401 0640 ' "'',$1 ,471 0600 2-4 Family Residential,,"' 1,880,160'''I" 102010792 3;0819952 .. ' 5 and More Family ;•,. ;.'' Residential 857,040 .".-986,200 1,843,240'' Transient Lodging 438,880 112,800 5510680 Commercial 2,347,440 1,040,160 3,387,600 Vacant 1 0006,640,., ',•, 4,120 , 1 ,0109760 Others (Publi,c and:{ :•`''^ "` _`' Quat'i Public) ,: .'"= -1-38;400 280,000 ;- 418,400 TOTAL ', $7,738,520 $400269712 ''$11,765,232 ASSESSED^VALUATION PERINET ACRE BY::USE LAND USE CATEGORY ;. ''.LAND "IMPROVEMENTS;,,",'' TOTAL Single Family Residenu- =:)r tial . '$348522 $130,827'' $479,348 2-4 Family Residential, .:,. 354:080 226,327 580,405 . 5 and More Family , ;, ;'• ' Residential ,' '.' + • ;. 367828' '''i'•:r• 423,261 '- 791,090 Transient Lodging 294:550 r`,'i.•.: 75,704 370,256 . Commercial- 493,159 "' 218,521. ;..' ,; 711,680. Vacant - 354,450 1,450•',• 3550901' Others•(Public and '- Quasi Public) 230;666 466,666. 697,333• ". TOTAL $,379,339. `C $197.0387'' $5.76'9727 "r , to • ., .• i� • - 15 I • • • compensate for variations in area among the different uses. Once again it is noticed that the major differ- ences in assessed valuation arel.In the improvements' category. The assessed value of improvements for tran- sient lodging establishments isi extremely low in relation, to the other categories. The exceptionally high value of the five and more family res�ident.ial units'category is due to one very large apartment development which is • • new to the area.. The high valuie for the "Others" cate- gory is,largely the result of improvements to the one- time Copre School, which is noJ, the Balboa Inn. The I value of improvements for vacant land is, in most cases, due to fences, driveways, paving on similar developments.." Table 9 depicts assessed valuali,on 'by zone classification. The R-1 Zone was not included in the table as it is used for public purposes and is tax exempt. The segmingl'y, high assessed value of R-4 land and improvements may be due to the proximity of these a!reas'to the beach and the bay and also due to the large aipartment complex which was previously mentioned. It is s•u'spected that this apartment development exerts substantial upward influence on the assessed value of improvements for the entire Study Area, The lower value of improvements in -the R-3 and C-1 Zones may be due to vacant land which is.far;.more common,in. these areas than in•the R-4 cones+ 0 I TABLE409 " ASSESSED VALUATION BY ZONE CLASSIFICATION (ALL FIGURES REPRESENT FULL CASH VALUE)' ZONE i LAND IMPROVEMENTS TOTAL ;..;' R-3 $22495,680 $1„274o880. ;.' $3,770,560; R-4 1,385,240'' 1,'028,320, ;; 2,413,560 ' • C-1, ,• ,• 3,857,600 ;. , '' 1 723 512 '. ;. 5,581 ,112 TOTAL $7r738,520-; $4,I026,712, $11,765,232;'r.' • 1. 1 • . 3 - - • . 1 ASSESSED VALUATION PER NET ACRE''BY'.ZONE r, ti Zone •t `• 'TOTAL 'LAND ' .'IMPROVEMENTS R-3 $. .3079729 •.,: ., $ 157,198 :':' ' . $ 464,927 R-4 385386.0 286,440 672,300r C-1 362,8971'62,1'37 5'25,035 TOTAL $„ 346,552",'.; •.` $ 180-;327 $ 526,880'', 1' •r 1 r • - 16 - • 61 n LJ E. Economic Characteristics, Economic information describing Central Balboa is, at best, limited due to the difficulty -of isolating and obtaining data for a small portion of the City. Infor- mation was -obtained describing lquarterly taxable sales for twelve businesses in Central Balboa for 1967 through 1969 (Table 10). The data was (obtained from the Calif- ornia State Board of Equalization which releases data for a maximum time span of three years. Unfortunately the three year time span is not long enough to permit general 1 izations with respect to economic trends. Insufficient• data for the City as a whol.e also prohibited economic comparison between Central Balbioa and Newport Beach. The only significant generalization which• could be made from the State Board of Equalization data was with regard to Balboa's seasonality.1.A marked increase in summer quarter sales was exhibilted in each of the 'three year's tabulations. This conf Balboa's popularity as a summe center. As the data covered o it was not possible to compare with past years. Additional investigation was al to obtain the general economic s earlier statements of tourism and recreation ly a three-year period, Balboa's economic data so conducted as an attempt character of Central Balboa., M STATE OF CALIFORNIA { �" �'�J'% -STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION GEORGE R. REILLY �"` /Y LTE . V( First District, San Francisco 20 INAM STREET, SACRENTO, CALIFORNIA JOHN W. LYNCH • .0, BOX 17", SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNLA 95808)' � � � Second District, Fresno ' ' • '• ' PAUL R. LEAKE • ' ' ' Third District, Woodland i RICHARD NEVINS r I Fourth District, Pasadena . NOUSTON 1. ROURNOY June 19 , , 1970 ! : Controller, Sacramento — ,> F. FREEMAN • • . , • t' ' , ,. - . lrsNWlrvfemlory •, to ' �` . Mr. Laurence Wilson Planning Director 3300 Newport Boulevard i Newport Beach, California 92660 ' Dear Mr. ;Wilson: li Following are'the quarterly taxable sales data for twelve businesses in Newport Beach for the last three years which you requested in your letter of June,17:. ' •' JAN-Mqe A?M -JUK ♦ oLY -SaPF 0G1`- Dv0 - ��S 1st qtr. 2nd qtr." 3rd qtr. " 4th qtr.. 1967 $238,000. $2640000 $444000 '•$2A4,000 i`:••' 1968 208,000 3160000 464:000 '272,000 1969 266,000 3340000 492,000 324;000 V '.;ie ,r As -previously mentioned, the charge for this data is 415 -as. shown• on the enclosed invoice. Sincerely, JI ✓ ',•' ♦.. .. - '• ''+• ;;;' � ,,. it .. . ), .I�+ : '" Theodore L. Olsen Research and Statistics' r ..TLO: jm . ., +,t i' •:,,, ,fin',,. �'� REc 1VED r G PLANNING DEPT. J02219701-- NEWPORT BEACH, . ,' ✓t, CALIF J • - 17 -� • . a n ,0 This investigation consisted of�communication'with members of the Balboa Improvemeit Association, the Newport Harbor Chamber of Commerce and a committee of the Newport -Costa Mesa Board of Realtors.. Meetings with individuals from the above organizations indicated that Central Balboa's economy is not as viable as that of the City as a whole. Furthe(more, mobility among commercial establishments in Ce tral Balboa is,'greater, than any other area in the entire city, 0 F. Condition of Structures The Central Balboa area was onelof the first neighbor- hoods to be developed in Newport Beach. The 1960 cen.sus data indicates that the area was substantially developed prior to 1940. Thus, the'majorty of structures are more than,thirty years old. The relatively low rates of development and redevelopmenf,in recent years, coupled, r with the age and condition of s tructures, provides an indication that many structures in Central Balboa are experiencing general deterioratjj+:on. A structural condition survey of Central Balboa was con- ducted by Staff members of the Manning Department. Figure 4 illustrates -the, condition of all structures in Central Balboa and Table.11 contains the corresponding statistics. Evaluation.s,of condition,were based'on'the J �ti::..;....I ..._....•.._. ,. __.._.rL_.._. ...-..l.u..,.'.....aJ�.....J�.�'.�I..'..,.� .__.J'-.�...,.._r.,Y i�.�..__• �_—•_—_.._.....:._..._.�J:_r_... _.. —. ._-�.. w�i.b.uMr�.,r:...r.+:....%G- •.:.•.i.J. �_7iS'�c:I lOYail•r .fd..:: „4_......_._._ aa.��_r '+�.@utic.YL_ Ars _46 �. w4.2l.6 12_' • 3�� I , I J 6 6 5_.,—Loo,o' 1. I 2� 1 4 "1.i� 'Z2:,6- 'loo.o__� oi"�ay�t 142:' ',r_ _$I' ^.II�35we ,,p, ..=�•'''. ... .... ,1' I. �I.CWQc.�ei.:Yl��c�h:� LG4b-YIU'� � .1JF.r"'w:1•J_�-.�._�-V��w-� :M1� r � . 1 710 tic, J 2 A. �. �.. ., ' r 1 r G '`'i i 1 ' rY, ' ' •^4'' 1 I�' `,r ' • r14 :J' :', li' _ .'i •'+t •,, ., lid• rJ I11,r .... . •. r � cif . 1, • i '' a„_r.-�._.__ •", ,.'• I '!Ji^ rY. `rrlr. ;�'.,;,I,. ;Y•r „r v;; •, f, r�,�R 1v ' 'n l' "t.,l ,'I'' �'I t, 't5i ,{.7••;r. r, ;.�r„ ,'I• r'..' r�- r.J , lid, I,Ir ..Y• .I r ,,r ,• ''t r:.iYlrar:.•1', '•'J ,,�,'_'" ,.J' �' rrl-�!.�.rYr.'i��•� _.�L-.. , i •p, :d� 'G �.r�4 ,:�/i �'i�'� ,',I 'rf r-i' 'i. ': :'4'..•.:ri?� ,fi .'�V?. y � ;<.,;: :I. r .. - 'f': •. r f�Y' tb) ,1' on' _ r, u_.:r� J.r •r .r' rr •'•' r'• .f. ,� �,(Y.:.r,.._a: 'uY.l+>w f' h' ':� ra:: .� , t r. :: �...+.-J�-.^a,M, .itr' r�+�-+�r:1'_r., �r.+...�e:�••1 _.:�_L •i.^� ^ � fr,Y r :�1J, ., , ±r r...:. �.. '_"'•"'-ti":f' � ,�,^_YY""r�' � ``.,' �`�, r ',dp �rl _. r` y, s'-"n'•W .5 r ;l•. ,,, i..`v, i' ....5,_I.ti. y".. 4y�. � V'Y r..._.--._n_�. '- rJ..'..�.lY.M JJ�_.Yr__ ,u�w1JJr •.I.. ,�. •' .r Y+�• .'Id. Y' !r' ;yi ,1'4�r"'.fir ��., .ln. If. 'f ':1 Y.• "1. •J`.iN'1: ' -. I`.:. ;• .. :1.�„ _, r ��,.V.�.,4.1Y—• ._-iY ;..L�•.. '•',�,tM_Jr.rL+�'e",^n_rrWu'i_,.�w.Juu,.rY•r�W'- ''� 'rr.w�I 'ur�_J.+_+_.--• r ,IJ__ill-�+.r�,- Y. ra. ' e.-,nrbJ 1 ��1-r.•,. .' ,'; r-;r ,v=j•r•^'i,:,'..�'. '. •. `, i,f;-rYYr.r�r_rr.ln...Jlti+^__rr��y._+M_.. , r 'a1J,4Y'i''t.: {'i /�'r Y{�Jj;^Wr.r '"�'� '. :,'�� 1'1. 1. (:� Ir I,'1 �t 'f.ri °�•:fr ' i• d:ij'tl, I,;ri'd .'J'• :r:i' • . . �iur: r 'I: lJ Yr t'..i ,I •,I �.Y'1�;r �+rl."�:::',`: ,tr 1'`:'. ,z, ti,.Y :,: �'''•:,�. 'r«, `, 'J:,, ill• tiaf.•,11, n1'ir ,;'.• .a.:;.,J :; r t�l•'r4o- Y{ J,u .N4'. ,1(`�: .i,, .. _...___;..._-t t i'{�Y rl - J, il, ,.�y l'�rl, '�i.ri'r,.'.V•1 �r .(, ��41 'r�'(1',:Yii 'il•r 1, li i 1. 11 1:, .!f, r.r 11�41 ,„�1 FIGURE 4 - CONDITION OF STRUCTURES OO M-M9 =SOUND z MOETERIORATING O O0 ENDLAPITATED R Li EAST ve S SUL Lit EAST BAL56A w SLID 10 PACIFIC OCEAN • 0 0 • - 18 1 N 0 system used by the United Stat 1,960: Census of Housing in SOUND - Structure shows n'o outward signs of deterioration. DETERIORATED - Structure shows outward signs of slight and intermediate defects: e.g., damage to porch or steps;!cracks or holes in walls, plaster or•masohry; slight to deep wear on stairs, floors or;doorsills; deteri- orated window sills)or frames; broken gutters or downspouts; lack of paint. DILAPITATED - Structure shows outward signs of critical deterioration: el.g., sagging walls, floor or roof; holes', open cracks or missing material over large areas+of floors, walls, roof or other parts of structure; damage by storm or fire. Figure 4 illustrates one concentrated area of structural deterioration.- This core of detterioration is comprised of the residences and transient lodging establishments which face Harding Street.' Bey�nd�this center of deteri oration is a zone of transitionlwhich extends outward into areas of mixed sound and deteriorating structures. r A localized area of sound structures was found along the bay front east of "A" Street. Other than this area of predominately sound structures Iand the previously iden- tified area of deteriorated structures, Balboa appears. to be comprised primarily••of mixed sound and deterior-: ating buildings with no discernible pattern. Dilapitated structures include lonly slightly more than one percent of the -total number of structures in the study area and therefore are not statistically signifi- cant. Until recently, Central Balboa !appeared to have been in a downward ,cyclic process.' As !the area has aged, with- out corresponding renovations, !it has experienced general deterioration. This has adversely affected its attrac- . tion to tourists, which .in turn has resulted in a reduc-. tion of commercial activity. Reductions in the intensity of commerce and tourism resulteid in higher vacancy rates which tend to accelerate the process of deterioration., • Future attention'should be directed toward efforts of reversing this downward processl. one such example has already taken place. The owners of both the Pavilion and Bay Department Store.have.invested in the rehabili- tation and remodeling of their !structures. These build- ings, which'were once deteriorating, are now creating new life and interest at the folot of Main Street. More recently, -the Balboa Theater and adjacent buildings fronting Balboa Boulevard have Ibeen,remodeled, also improving the looks of Central'Balboa. 6. Circulation The circulation system on the B lboa Peninsula was ' - 20 0 11 designed primarily to serve thejneeds of local traffic. Throughout its history the circ,'ulation system on the Balboa Peninsula has been subjel'cted to increasing numbers of automobiles. These 'increases have resulted mainly from the development process itself, the in- creasing attractiveness of the area as a recreational center, and the increase in automobile ownership which I s outstripping the population lincrease in Orange County: It is almost certain that increased demands will be exerted on the Balboa Peninsula circulation system even if residential development rema-ins the predominate use. Perhaps the most significant reason for this increase is the rising demand in the Southern California Region for recreational facilities. Whether Central Balboa is presently experiencing this.inc'reased demand is question- able. However, the Balboa Peninsula is experiencing this increased demand which is, therefore, affecting traffic to and from Central Balboa. The main traffic problem along the peninsula is caused by -the fact that -there are insufficient streets parallel I to Balboa Boulevard to augment 'circulation.. Balboa Boulevard functions as a two and one-half mile long cul-de-sac,.giving access to and from residences on the Peninsula, the retail centers and the recreation, facilities. Table 12 demonstrIes that Balboa 'Boule yard during peak demand periods Is carrying traffic, volumes in excess of i.ts, practical capacity. I - _ .G•-..•••r.7 �.v� :r1 ^a.fw «''s_ ^: �.lt lG..i._:ti ^_ir�+i ~�•! STREET PHYSICAL INVENTORY - 1967 Newport Beach Traffic Operation Study '• ` " `s-'_ - _ er`d _ __• -- `=_ "sue - - = = �- _ - = VOLUrAE- RIGHT- PAVE- _ Or- MENT NO.OF CURB DAILY SUMMER PRACTICAL CAPACITY _STREET _LIMITS ---.WAY - WIDTH - LANES USE VOLUME CAPACITY RATIO (feet} (feet) (vehicles) (vehicles) _- Newport'Blvd. Arche's-Via Lido 100-130 70 _ 4. "f IJP 40,300 . 30000 1.34- --- Via Lido-30th' 90-100 70 4 `' p '30;000 23,000 30th-Balboa - -- t00=1Z0 70-80 ^ 23,000 1.30 —'4 p ' 24,000 _ 1.04 Coast Hiway-32nd 65-80 54 4 32nd-Newport 65-100 -64-74 : p,-. 4 -_ :p 15;300 13;000 1.18 FBalboavd. 12;500 20;000 0.63 _ Newport -Alvarado 100 90 4 : p 25,000 20;000 1.25 -Alvarado-Main 70 58.1 4 P. - 18, 000 14, 000 1.20 Via Lido Newport -Via Oporto 100 74 4 Via Oporto-Brid a 70 56 -.4......, 118300 _ 20,000 0.57 ._ ... 32nd Street .9 _ .:: :::•.._:r:` ::r:•=ss_: .,500 _ 9. 14,000 0.68 Balboa-Newport 30-50 2 0-3 6 1-2 p: 8,000 6;000 1.33 Newport -Lafayette _._60-90 36-50 5,000 6,000 0.83 - Lafayette Ave. Via Lido-32nd 66 30 _ ' -"=_= -2 32nd-28th 40 302 NP 3,500 4,000 0.88 Bay Ave.- ^� p_ 4 000 0.63 . Main-8th .... 40-50 28-30 1 p 1;i00 4,000 0.28 8-15th .. . 50 3 6. _. _2 :, : : P 10100 60000 0.18 Seashore Dr: Orange-45th 40 ,32 _ ,.,. _... ; •..>...,,>, .. ::_:. �. , ,.:. _ ... 45th-34th °' 4b 2..: P_.r; - .+2;300 4,000 0.58 Lido Park Dr.' Lafayette-29th 30 622 2,400 4, 000 0.60 70 •'• 2 _"_•_P_ __ _ 3,200 10,000 0.32 • - 21 - • u • The traffic problems now being experienced in the study area are primarily'the result of: The The large volume of recreation traffic attrac-• ted by the combination of bay and oceanfront beaches and related marine facilities. The type of, traffic whichiis essentially slow -moving recreation traffic engaged upon sight-seeing and activities which do not necessitate speedy access!to destinations. i The inadequate circulation due to lack of para1'lel side streets to Balboa Boulevard. The deficiency in, or location of,'•off- street parking space which cause's drivers to circulate while looking for parking,spaces, thereby adding to congestion. I J. The lack of traffic controls along the entire length of Balboa Boulevard which results -in the congestion of traffic on -streets perpendicular to the Boulevard. The egress of visitors from the peninsula, after the afternoon sea breeze -causes the beach visitors to leave ii a,relatively, short span of time. , • Given the strain which is curr'ehtly'exerted on the circulation system; it is, imperrtive that land use controls be evaluated with respect to the existing system. The future development of Balboa will be seriously affected by the circullation system whether i or not it becomes altered.. Due to the nature of exist- ing land development in Central Balboa, it would be f• futile to propose major alterations to the existing circulation system without extensive property acquisi- tion and clearance. To provide these changes•could possibly destroy the environmental characteristics of the Study Area. .0 H. Parkin" Figure 5 is a complete parking (inventory for the Study Area. Curb parking and parking1provided by municipal lots account for more than 80% iof all parking spaces in the Study, Area. It is important to note that while curb parking is evenly distribulted throughout the Study Area, all except ten of the public municipal parking spaces are located south of Ocelan Front Walk. This in- equitable distribution of parking spaces is compounded by the barrier effect of Balboa Boulevard which separates the bay and ocean -oriented areas. Although Main Street: and Palm Street act as north-soiuth,linkages connecting' . a j 77 u RE . . . . . . . . . . Wz .8 A L B 0 A CFF 57wrr „. PRIJUE S-&9AL USE MWE MER E. TEXRM MUNICIPAL PUBLIC LOT NUMBER OF SPACES A= NUMBER CURB AND OFF-STREET 35 NUMBER OF SPACES NO PARW4 m =I FQ PARKING INVENTORY - m peNINSULA DISTRICT E 1967 r5u I • -23- • • the two areas, their effectiveni questionable. Thus, during -the parking spaces on the north sid tend to be in higher demand that ass in this capacity is summer months, the i of Balboa Boulevard ' i those south of the Boulevard. This appears to be -due to the commercial facilities as well- as the bay -oriented activities which together create heavy demands in the northern portion of the Study Area. The large municipal park-; ing lot is seldom used by shoppers during the summer because,of the fees which -are charged and the distance to most of the commercial establishments. During the winter months, the demand for parking spaces in Central I Balboa is not substantial and the large municipal park- - ing lot receives very light use However, the municipal parking lot does receive moderate to heavy use during summer weekdays and weekends, respectfully. The.greatest demand for parking spaces occurs at about noon on summer, weekends. The number of visitors using the municipal parking lots tends to stabilize 'between 11:00 A.M. .and 3:00 or 4:00 P.M. when the-aftenoon sea breezes cause, the visitors to leave the beach,. The pedestrian movement in Cen be closely related to its majo activities. Perhaps'the most trians are:Edgewater Walk betwe al Balboa appears to recreational and tourist )pular routes for pedes- an Adams.and "'A" Streets • -24- r] L and Main Street from the Pavili water'Walk attains -its attracti variety of bay -oriented activit the other hand, appears to deri the shops which front upon it a visual appearance created by th scaping and benches which toget desirable setting. n to the pier. Edge- eness mainly from the es. Main Street, on e its importance from. d from its pleasant Pavilion, the Land- er result in a highly Whereas pedestrians using Edgewater Walk and Main Street may be walking strictly for ple,sure, persons using , Palm Street, Balboa Boulevard and Ocean Front appear to be more destination -oriented. Palm Street receives much of its importance from the ferry which is a signi- ficant generator of pedestrian traffic. Pedestrian movement along Balboa Boulevard{tends to be related to. the commercial establishments which front upon 'it. Finally, persons using Ocean Front Walk are mainly 'in- volved in movement between diffirent areas of the beach'.. Much of thi.s traffic is generated by the three municipal parking lots located•south of Olean Front. I. Public Utilities The system of public' -utilities adequately meeting the demands 0 in Central Balboa is :hat are placed upon It. I0 • - 25 - • However, should substantial incheases in development take place, it would be necessaj4y to undertake thorough studies and.investigations to determine whether the system would have to be altered[ The system of overhead utility lines and poles in Central Balboa is aesthetically unappealing. The amount of public funds available for the undergrounding of exist- ing overhead utility systems in Newport Beach is limited. Thus, all undergrounding programs in areas such as Central Balboa -will largely depend on the ability and willingness of the property ownlrs'to fund such programs. 1. • III. CENTRAL BALBOA - PROB i AND POTENTIALS I Planning for the future in Central Balboa'it is, important that the planner not only direct his attention to -the seasonal i visitor but also to Balboa's,busines's merchants, residents and property owners. Recognition of these interest groups serves" to create a more comprehensive improvement program. It is right that all proposed improvement 'alternatives recognize the r forces which,have made Central Balboa one of Newport Beach's unique neighborhoods. Five topics fir discussion have been• identified: A. Circulation and parking „ B. Land use C. Structural deterioration D. Edgewater Walk and ba�front E. Aesthetic improvement proposals for Central Balboa. Each topic will be ,discussed, emphasizing present problems•,and• alternative programs for improvement. 0 A. Circulation and Park'i'ng Circulation implies totality of movement; thus vehicular girculation in Central Balboa should not be analyzed , • - 27 - a 0 without examination of transit throughout the lengths.• of .Newport and Balboa 'Boulevards; - There appears three readily identifiable traffic obstruc- tions which either slow or stop traffic flow at points along these two major boulevaPdi which lead into Central Balboa. Emphasis will be given,to traffic outflow, for it is during the summer,afternoons that the egress of_ I beach visitors creates traffic obstructions. As illustrated in the Wilbur Smith Traffic Study, the summer traffic problem is typical of the entire peninsula - i not just Central Balboa. Solutions aimed at increasing the traffic flow along the entire lengths of Newport and'. Balboa Boulevards are likely eft�ective improvements on the study area. Realizing that traffic problems the entire peninsula, the folloi 'be seriously considered: are characteristic of ling alternatives should Uninterrupted traffic flow at the Balboa Boule-, vard.- Pacific Coast Highway intersection and I, the Newport Boulevard -Pacific Coast•Highway r intersection. The proposedlPacific Coast Free- way construction should take care to design .I these intersections properly. Three proposals are possibilities for improlement'of circula- tion'at MacFadden, listed it order of,,des•irabillty; 0 -28- r n (1) an underpass or overpasls at the intersection," (2) signalization at the intersection, or (3) junction of Balboa Boulevard to Newport Boulevard one or two hundred yards west of the present junction to alleviate congestion near the park- ing lots. Separation of vehicular and pedestrian traffic at key intersections along Balboa Boulevard. Suggested pedestrian overcro(sings at 19th, 15th, 9th and•Main Streets. Signalization at key •intersections might be another option. Finally, an alternative to alto transit on the • peninsula should be considered. The construc- tion of large parking lots allong Pacific Coast Highway is the key to providing public transit onto the peninsula. There .are numerous questions: as to public reaction of such a proposal. A1sol, it must be kept in mind that the facility would probably only,receive maximum use during the summer season. n There are a number of localized circulation problems in i Central Balboa. In most cases, these problems are closely related to parking difficulties jvhich appear to have a',' direct.relation to the traffic c(ongestion,in the area. , 0 0 -29- e 0 Many vehicles travel the streets in Balboa in search of parking. This condition compounded by narrow streets and heavy pedestrian movement, creates definite circulation problems in Central Balboa. Next, we will look specifically at the study area's.traffic problems and suggest localized` solutions. The parking problem in Central Balboa appears to be the primary cause of poor circulation fn the area. Balboa does have the number of needed parking spaces; however, their location is such that they only receive maximum use on summer weekends. The need is not for more park- ing, but a logical distribution i•f parking lots to serve various areas within Balboa. This demand is confirmed by'the number of small public and private lots scattered th,roughout•Central Balboa (Figure 5). Economics dictates that it is, and will be, diffic0 t for.the City to justify' purchasing new parking lots especially when ample parking is available in the municipal lofts, albeit poorly located. There have been identified two possible solutions to the parking and related circulation problems in Central i Balboa. The first proposal requires the one-way routing of westward -bound traffic on Balboa Boulevard into the I 1•arge municipal parking lots vialPalm'Street (Figure 6). This plan is designed in order easy•parking for the visitors (1) provide quick and ;, (2') create a pedestrian FIGURE 6 - CENTRAL BALBOA STUDY AREA 1p• $01Y 9 s -30- 0 • atmosphere along Main Street between the Pavilion and > Balboa Pier. The loop road through the parking lots would lead to Balboa Boulevard via. "A" Street. A't the intersection with "A" Street, Balboa Boulevard would proceed one-way westward fo the short distance to Palm Street. An option withinithis proposal would continue to allow two-way traffic on Balboa Boulevard through Central Balboa; however, one or two right -turn lanes would be provided for access to the municipal lots. . • (Figure 7),. Thus, eastward-boundIitraffic on Balboa Boule- vard would have the option of turning into the parking lot.. A well -placed, aestheticalli-pleasing sign should point out in advance the location of the municipal lots. • In either case, it would be advantageous for traffic flow to prohibit on -street parking along Balboa' Boulevard within the study area. The two parking and circulation proposals call for the same changes to Palm Street and East Bay Avenue, north of Balboa Boulevard. Two north-bund lanes are designed for vehicular access'to the ferry,at the termination of Palm Street. One lane is provided for vehicles disembark- ing from the ferry onto Palm Street. East Bay Avenue is planned for two-way circulation p1�us parking on the north side within the forty feet of.pavement right-of-way. Parking as -.suggested along East Bay should be restricted as a loading zone for the adjacen commercial establish=•• ments. M FIGURE _7 - CENTRAL BALBOA STUDY AREA 0 I 0 - 31 E 9 n U • I ' Directly related to improving both vehicular and pedes- trian traffic in Central Balboa 'are well -placed, easily - understood and aesthetically -pleasing directional signs. I Such a sign, located at Palm Avenue and Balboa Boulevard, should direct visitors to the felrry 'and,municipal park- ing lots. In addition, the municipal lots ought to have theme signs directing the pedestrian to Main Street and the Pavilion'. To further improve vehicular as well as pedestrian circu- lation, pedestrian overpasses are recommended along Main Street at the "loop" road and Balboa Boulevard. Moreover, • I a ,signal is suggested at -Palm Street and Balboa Boulevard to regulate traffic flow at that potentially busy intersection.' As mentioned earlier, it is difficult, if not impossible, for the City under current policy and economics to purchase- . , additional parking lots 'in Central Balboa. 'Objection to the revitalization of the municipal lots may open the possibility of opening small parking lots near the Bay - priy ately financed through the establishment of assessment _districts. Operation of such districts would require the appointment of a board to -oversee the land purchasing and. ' upkeep, plus,the assessment of e4ch commercial or resi- dential participant. The problems of parking and circa closely related. These, in turn elation in Balboa are are influenced by changes • - 32 - in land use,. Any future planning) must carefully consider many interrelationships, cause and effect occurrences as they affect not only Balboa but allso the entire peninsula. 0 B. Land Use The zoning and land use characteristics of Central Balboa f were studied very carefully by the Planning Staff. Recom- mendations from these studies suggest that the City follow two developmental policies for Balboa: 1) Concentration of the C-1 Zone; 2) .the encouragement of high -density residential use in certain areas ment for the assemblage of subdil lof Balboa as an induce-• Tided parcels. Implementation of a policy supporting commercial zone con- centration, it is advised that the commercially zoned strips one-half block deep on either side of Balboa Boule- vard between Adams and Coronado Streets receive foremost consideration (Figure Z). Current developmental charac- teristics clearly indicate a large discrepancy between present use of the land and the potential use. Residential units predominate in this commercially zoned area. As a result, there is a mixture of residential and commercial buildings which is undesirable from a planning standpoint.- It.is likely that current economic conditions in Central 6PO(4. Balboa create conditions whereby commercial usages cannot survive on fringe locations; theiefore,•residential uses f, pervade4 NI 0 -33- 0 0 0. It is submitted that a commercii no be established in Central Balboa. This node would encompass all land area between Adams to "A" Streets from the ocean to the bay. All land outside this node be ing density residential uses. plan•to avoid conflicts of mix, pleasing neighborhood and add ity. e;yoted strictly to vary= It' is the aim of such .a d) uses, create a more Balboa's economic viabil- Special attention must be given 'to the parcels facing. Ocean Front Walk between Adams and "A" Street's. This area, while zoned C-1, is developed predominately in residential uses. Commercial uses currently occupy only the parcels adjacent to the northwest corner of .Palm Street•and Ocean Front Walk, and both corners nor,'h of Ocean Front Walk at Main Street. Attention must be given to the future development of this area.. White residential land use has predominated in the past, it is important to note that there may be pressure for change should the large municipal parking lots be redesigned. The attracting forces in Balboa and concen- tration of parking in the municipal lots may create a demand for commercial uses along Ocean Front Walk from 'Adams to 'A"•Streets.. Care must, be taken if such pressures• occur that future commercial es with nearby residential areas; character.of Balboa. ablishments•be compatible he adjacent beach and the i - 34 - • d L r1 L J 0 In many instances, small lot size and poor vehicular access act as obstacles to redevelopment in Central Balboa. Therefore; it is propos6d that high -density residential uses be encouragedin1portions of Balboa as' inducement for land assemblage and redevelopment in Balboa. At the outset, it is imperative that the impacts of such policy be fully understood prior to construction. A prime example of an area in Balboa experiencing the handicaps of small lot sizes and poor vehicular access is the'l.entire block -south of Balboa Boulevard between."A" and "B" Streets. There are moreivacant parcels within this block than any other block in Balboa. It is very likely'that many of the lots lie undeveloped because o'f their small size and lack of vehicular access. Develop- i ment• under the present R-3 zoning would provide only marginal return to the investor,1whereas R-4 would allow more units per -land area and therefore greater profit. The implementation of a procedure that would allow the construction of high -density dwelling units could be accomplished through either of the following alternativesi. 1) Proclamation of a policy ready applications of the cedure to designed area, u which' would, grant use permit pro-, or ' - 35 0 an amendment to the zoniing ordinance changing the zone in'specific.are'Ias of Balboa from R-3 to R-4. In the event that one of these pro- grams be adopted, it is`limportant that Balboa not'be overdeveloped solely in the name of economic and environment!l rejuvenation. C. Structural Deterioration The structural condition survey map reveals that deteriora- tion exists throughout Central BI alboa (figure 4). Struc- tural deterioration is not unique to Balboa but is -preva- lent throughout much of the Pen,ihsula -as the entire area, was developed during the same general time period. Structural deterioration generally conjures thoughts of extensive Code enforcement programs initiated by municipal agencies. Such programs are direct methods of upgrading I the structural conditions of an (area, but generally have. little popularity, particularly,hmong those affected .. owners. There may be need in -the future for Code enforcement in Central Balboa., but it is hoped That redevelopment will, evolve naturally through programs of economic revitali= zation. 11 • - 36 - • D, Edgewater Walk and Bayfront • Edgewater Walk, bordering the bayfront from the Pavilion I we'stward past the fun zone, offers an unparalleled oppor- tunity for beautification im Central Balboa. Currently the walkway has little aestheticicharacter and is in public as well as private owners�ip. Compounding the neglect of a potentially attractive area is the destruc- tion of smal•1 public beaches which extend from street rights -of -way. Any potential use of these desperately needed beaches is erased by the invasion of exposed storm drain pipes which empty into thelswimming areas. This contamination is announced by signs that•emerge from the water and visually pollute the bAy view. It is incumbent upon the City of!Newport Beach to open the sma11 beach to public use asIweII as upgrade Edge- water Walk not only for the visitor but also -as an i obligation to the full-time resident. Therefore, it is recommended that the City acquir� the pedestrian right of -way and upgrade the environment by tree planting and sign posting. E.• Nesthetic Improvements Balboa occupies a physically ple narrow neck of the Peninsula be ising location on the en the bay and ocean. r -37 0 �J This location coupled with the attractions of the Pier, Pavilion, Ferry, Main Street, andi Bayfront provides an unique assemblage of aesthetic assets. Unfortunately many potential assets are not developed to full capacity.' Due to age, deterioration and lick of maintenance, certain areas in Central Balboa are 'aesthetically un_-, appealing. The following are pr,oposals for upgrading, the aesthetic qualities of Central Balboa. I " * The City should place Central Balboa, as a priority area.for the undergrounding of overhead utility lines. lUndergrounding would immeasurably enhance Balboa's ; visual appearance. Public funds for undergrounding are.limite�d, but available, and Balboa should be designated a priority" area for undergrounding. * The City alone, or aided!by the area's I i interest groups, should i1nitiate tree planting projects along selected rights - of -way. As previously nd,ted, one of the i most pleasing qualities Of Central Balboa is the tree -lined Main Street. Other streets suggested for troIe planting and landscaping include East Balboa Boulevard, Palm Street, Edgewater and Ocean Front ,Walks. a J 0 e - 38 - * The history and development of the village - like atmosphere in Central Balboa is an important asset which should be fostered. j • It is suggested.that an a'^chite•ctural review board be established to encourage architectural styles that wilt enhance Balboa. August 31, 19.7.0 TAT/kk r r ' BALBR COMMERCIAL DISTRICT STUD STUDY AREA The study area is defined as the Pacific Ocean on the south, "C" Street as the easterly boundary, the bay as the northerly boundary and Coronado Street as the western boundary. OBJECTIVES OF STUDY This study should provide the following: 1. A brief description of the major functions of the area. 2. An insight of the forces which will influence its future. Further, this study should have the following objectives: 1. To examine and identify the causes of problems related to the Balboa Commercial District. 2. To consider approaches to solutions which may be currently available to the community in the process of correcting existing deficiencies. 3. To explore some approaches which may be inter- preted as long-range procedures worthy of con- sideration. POSSIBLE FUNCTIONS OF BALBOA COMMERCIAL DISTRICT 1. Neighborhood business district for Balboa Penin- sula, emphasizing convenience goods of the types most likely to be needed by resi'dents of the nearby neighborhood. 2. Ferry landing - bus terminal facilities. 3. Fun zone. (Desire to eliminate?) 4. Tourist services, including restaurants. 5. Specialized shops, including antiques, boutiques, art galleries, etc. 6. Marine services, docks, sport fishing facilities, etc. IMPROVEMENT OBJECTIVES 1. To serve as a proto-type for possible future development or redevelopment of other portions of the ocean shore of Balboa Peninsula. 2 - 2. To provide a handsome landscaped environment. 3. To provide parking for a) businesses in the vicinity b) residences in the vicinity c) visitors to the beach. 4. To provide suitable sites for a) recreational facilities to serve the adjacent community b) recreational facilities relating to the beach c) proposed boys' club d) possible concessions related to the beach. 5. To provide a plan and program for revitalization o.f the Balboa Commercial District. a) •determination of economic opportunities? b) condition.of existing structures, including compliance with Building Code, Fire Code and Zoning Ordinance c) appearance, including development of suggested architectural and landscaping themes d) traffic circulation and parking related to par- ticular commercial locations and activities e) pedestrian ways and bicycle paths d) land uses and zoning within and around the . business district. OBSERVATIONS OF FACTORS INFLUENCING THE BALBOA COMMERCIAL AREA 1. The nearby Peninsula Point Area contains a large purchasing power which could be considered almost a captive market even though seasonal and part-time characteristics of some of the residents may pose a problem. 2. Physical maintenance of improvements has been seriously neglected. A generally mediocre appear- ance of the environment characterizes the area. . - 3 - 3. New merchandising policies and techniques have lagged within the existing stores and most carry a limited selection of merchandise. Such stores cannot hope to attract much in the way of purchases from nearby high -income areas. 4. The area seems to have declined as a tourist attraction in recent years. To a la-rge extent this may be attributed to traffi-c congestion and parking problems. However, obsolescence and lack of glamour also are contributing factors. 5. The circulation system for automobiles and service vehicles is deficient. Vehicular parking is in- adequate. 6. Self-improvement is retarded by the inclination, on the part of many, to take advantage of deter- iorated structures as tax shelters, i.e., income tax "write-off." Absentee ownership, approxi- mating 56.5% may indicate a lack of concern for the impact of deteriorated facilities upon busi- ness enterprise in general. The distribution of property among multiple ownerships renders it difficult, if not impos- sible, to obtain full cooperation of all property owners and their business tenants for the necessary improvements and maintenance. 8. Anticipating absorption either for commercial or higher density residential uses, residential properties contiguous to the Central Commercial Area have been allowed to deteriorate. Inflated values of raw property vs. the condition of nearby existing structures discourage new development. 10. The City -owned Balboa Parking Lot is in a deteri- orated condition and has poor ingress and egress. Funds have been budgeted for the reconstruction of this lot. What is best course of action re circulation, size, landscaping, etc.? DAG/kk 7-10-69 0 EXISTING LAND USE Figure 3 is a land use map,for the Central Balboa Study Area. The corresponding areal statistics are depicted in Table 4, The largest amount of land in the Study Area, approxi- mately 69 percent, is devoted to beaches (2-8.9T%), parks '(5.77%), parking (12.97%) and public rights -of -way (21.28%). The area of parks and beaches south of Ocean Front accounts for 23 acres or 34,68% of the Study Area. All of'this land with the exception of one parcel owned by the Copre School is devoted to.public use. Of the remaining 31% of the area, residential 1•and use Is the largest category, occupy'i.ng a total of 12.20 acres or 18.4%, Single-family and multiple -family uses t'emd'to be inter- spersed among one another in a random pattern. There are a total of 684 dwelling units in the Study Area which represents a net density of 54.53 dwelling units per acre'. It should 'be noted that transient lodging, which accounts'for 1.49 acres or 2.25% of the Study Area, is included in the residential land use category. During the winter months many of the establishments in the transient lodging category become rented on a more permanent basis, There are several instances where residential uses are situated above commercial establishments. These instances of mixed land use do not form a discernable pattern, TABLE 4 - LAND USE - CENTRAL BALBOAI RESIDENTIAL ACAS PERCENT Single-family (40.22 units/ -net acre) 3.07 4.63 2-4 family'(40.60 units/net acre) 5.31 8.01 5 and more family (64.15 units/net acre) 2.33 3.51 Transient Lodging 1.49 2.25 TOTAL Residential Land Use (54,53 units/net acre) EXcluding Transient Lodging 12,20 18.40 COMMERCIAL Retail an.d personal services 1189 2.85 Auto and boat service stations 0.43 0.65 Finance, real estate, insurance & banks 0'•,20 0.30 Business services & repair services 0.16 0.24 Commercial recreation 0.64 0.95 TOTAL commercial land use 3,32 5.01 Mixed commercial and residential 1,44 2.17 TOTAL mixed & commercial land use 4.76 7.18 PUBLIC n Public Utilities 0.34 0.51 Schools 0'.46 0.69 Parks 3.83 5.77 Beaches 19.17 28.91 Parking 8.60 12'.97 Rights -of -way 14.11 21.28 Vacant Land 2.84 4,28 1 TOTAL LAND USE 66.31 99.98 Newport Beach Planning Department, Central Balboa Land Use Survey, June 1969. 2 Commercial land uses occupy 4.76 acres or 7.18% of the Study Area. The general pattern of commercial uses is linear along Balboa Boulevard from,Cypress Street to "A" Street and also on both, sides of Main Street. A more solid core of commercial use occupies the area between Palm and "A" Streets. The final major category of land use is vacdnt,land.' Vacant land occupies 2'.84 acres or 4.28% of the Study Area* Approxi- mately 52% of the vacant land is ,in the residential area, while 48% is in the commercial core. Its dispersed nature causes 1t to stand out visually'on the 1-and use map. The majority of vacant land is located between O"alboa Boulevard a-nd Ocean Front. The relatively small amount of vacant land is significant in terms of Balboa's futu-re development. If substantial develop ment Is to occur in the future, it will largelyrepresent a re- cycli•ng of previously developed 1,and. A •(T "� 177T C C m O c E A N FIGURE 1 — c>✓ryT�i- eAt-13045-CODY CR .OF NE n SUCH uuee awrc.....wev� T LuuO V� 1-1 1.1 QUALITY, ORIGINAL (S) 4 • LI �.a NNW as Mam" 9Tr nommin ftP"m � IN il4 aaf1lif ' " 4 wfr rNa■+i.ne �.. to 16 0.1 to 0-1-9 w YN Imal, u a w as WA am" Yeats lanai Saba% mufatMaw asmoa at Paths hacrias was Pmub t ton 16 i do spa Naar so par►. K. 196w 1 r N tare "M mile/ i apNta im leas of the object property. suss 00,1e heutes was a go pea - sir. rw is Mr appliati*a for taata4tW ti'Na eiu fsllwls6 aaaridea l" mmommots -0 ohests a wirer of tee oft- street Pandas Usually ro"I"d fsr a foal N%N pewtdod is Netisu 1101.31(e)(1) of ardinsosa r349's• ¢t pmmuLnete s recommended gproval of tee petitisa as raw& tee NW otNM/M/S applicationis effawtw the application .64 sted that tee fsllwisN osatmmsst an erserrt -00 approval of this nosier pecitior revs nst La aq Uq Smaraaao aatear K off -&tract parting for the propeaed Uses es aUh)aat psgorwo i dorlienst has indicated that it the swain petition to egg - eds +M Sill pail of os-oire parking smbr ioctioa 910i.31(c)(I) Uhisib read* as fousuos WCrM 9104.31. (c) the 9lasniws Commle*to& "my rsaaanasd par d * at! open til say approve. as petition *t tee /&gist., WNW, a adeao ad or *orNtise in off-street pscu#4 req""A by tin tatty of itch omeow NOW dw fillsulag conditions: (1) own a municipal parking lot If w located w to be 090" iw ooa*NN+ ties with the propoeed a" or *"a N the huildMN *ice w GLaU96 maim`u..v tha CMNLaeLes recawsade that the City Coma -At cancer is its ridioor. at�.?1 S tdi C�IJ. 9Na t `.: • :` Asps Clerk, Ciamma*a. CM*ILs. ►Lakes. Whlo. O'Nrisss N)SiaWt. 10 N t now Art NOW Mr worms Inge pay *spar of ohs C OIMS �b F L. L31M*tfr I t*sehy certify thot tee ahe*o la o Of" pat cornet report of eb "Vowed qg ad action of tie nasais{ CammUS644. stow of Newport Meth. Mapnssfall� Saw" /. Ll The wity \. . as "Its" t ,x t City of Newport •seat OM LOW 1 w I AM aw oar, as shorn on oistriet'lhp No. 11 referred to is laotift � Nswpart Beach Muaioipll Cods and mode a pert of Ae6i� Cods, be, and the salts is, hereby roamed from a C-1 mmidi C-1-L District, and said flap No. 11 is hereby smemded ge 1". seeing change. SECTION 2. The following described real propesty is 00" City of Newport Beach, County of Orange, hats of CaliDaemims IaYtd� The southeasterly 135 feet of Block "D", Mlbee lass o as shown on a sap recorded in Book 4, page it of UK*- celleneous naps, Records of Or=** County, &hGorrdm. as shown on District Map No. 11 referred to in SOCtiem $102.2 09 10 Newport Beach Municipal Code and nods a part of Article 11 of SO Cods, be, and the sass is, hereby rezoned from an R-1 fistgb* 0aelassified District, and maid Map No. 11 is hereisy SNON % leh`.. this zoning change. SECTION 3. The Planning Director of the City K Beach is hereby instructed and directed to chasgo UWA t 04 11 so as to show the zoning changes described is SGIUMS 1 M hereof, end, as said District Map shell have bow M same shall remain in full terse and of bet eatd be d o0 * a II of the Newport beach Nuaiatpel code. gRCTION 4. 'this ordtYM* *All be official newspaper of the city. OW the amp owl bb` We 9 days after the data of its *48PU . w 7*o d OCEAN F)mr f PRAPUSED FOR C-1,," IWUN; ,ZONING C- f PRUpASED FAR PR SENT ZWWNG R"I M 0— ry oF tEwpoRr B,E cm CALIF" vlawrY mAP AMFNDM V r f n rr e�.nafrurwiMMfiM7�."�MMIiYrrMr�m"r°°.M°�,�r ., VF77, q� �1 n dRDINANCE NO. 864 and Lot 27, Block I* Lots 12, ~A ORDINANQ;,.;nxA1�LCyINO-�' 20, 22, and 24, Block 139, in THE 'ZONING OF PERTAIN Re -Subdivision Of Corona del 52 PROPERTY. Mar, Recorded in Miscellan- _ The City Council of the City of eous Map Book 4, Page 67, Re - Newport Beach does ordain as cords of Orange County, as shown on Sheet No. 18 and SECTION 1. Section 9102.2 of Sheet No. 19 of the District Maps the Municipal Code of the City of attached to -Ordinance No, 635 and C Newport Beach is hereby amend- referred to in Sectioh 9102.2 of . ad as follows: the Municipal Code and made a That the following described Part thereof be, and it is hereby, property lying within the City of rezoned from an R-1 district to an Newport Beach, County of Orange, R-2 district. State of California, more particu- SECTION 5: Section 9102.2 of laxly described as follows: the Municipal Code of the City of �>Atss l- 9'in'clusive�Tract1026.,Newport Beach is hereby amended ;1 as recorded in Miscellaneous,Map as follows: t ' Book 33, pages 37-38 inclusive, Of- Lots 9 and 11, All except ficial Records of Orange County, the Northeasterly 10' of Lpt California, as shown on Sheet No. 13, Lots 17, 19, 21 and 23, A]]; { 19 of the District Map attached to except the Northeasterly 10 Ordinance No. 635 and referred to of Lot 25, Block 138 and Lots in Section 9102.2 of the Municipal 10, 14, 16, and 18, Block 139, C� V Code aHd made a part thereof be, M -Subdivision of Corona del ;} < and it is hereby, rezoned from an Mar, recorded in Miscellan- ytrict-to an-R-2-districts eous Map Book 4, Page 67, Re- N SECTION 2: Section 9102.2 of cords of Orange County, Cali- 1 the Municipal Code of the City of as shown on Sheet No. 18 and Newport Beach is hereby amended Sheet No. 19 of the District Maps •+ , <,- i as follows: attached to Ordinance No. 635 and That the following described referred to in Section 9102.2 of the ' property lying within the City of Municiliaj Code, and made a part % Newport Beach, County of Orange, thereof be, and It is hereby re. + ,State of California, more particu- zoned from an R-1 district to an +- laxly described as follows: R-2 district. Lot.1,--Block--13�- lboa-Tract_as. SECTION 6: That the City recorded in Miscellaneous Map gineer of the City y En t 'Book 4, Page 11, Records of Or- t of Newport ange County, as shown on Sheet Beach is hereby instructed and dim >+• ' •,/i� No. 12 of the District Map at- rected to change the above district . U tacked to Ordinance No. 635 and maps so In to show the zoning " referred to in Section 9102.2 of the described in Sections 1 through 5 Municipal Code and made a part hereof, and, as said District Maps . v I thereof be, and the same is hereby shall have been so i amended, the r rezoned from an R-3-district-to-a same shall remain in full force and C, Iadistrict,a effect and a Part of Ordinance No. p�y�c.. • 635 of the City of Newport Beach. SECTION 3. Section 9102.2 of and Section 9102.2 of he Muhici- ir. the Municipal Code of the City of pal Code of the City of Newport' 1 , i Newport Beach is hereby amended Beach. as follows: That the following described SECTION 7: This Ordinance'shall be property lying within the City of Published once in the !y Newport Beach, County of Orange, Newport Harbor Ensign, a news- ;4"' State of California, more rticu- Paper of general circulation, print - pa ' laxly described as more ed and published in the City of Lots 11 to 19 inclusive, Tract Newport Beach, and the same shall 444, as recorded in Miscellaneous be in force and effect 30 days Map Book 19, Page 29, Records of after this passage. 1 Orange County, as shown on Sheet The foregoing Ordinance was in- \ i `• Apti No. 6 of the District Map attached O'oduced at a regular meeting of « to Ordinance No. 635 and referrer} the City Council of the City of V t to in Section 9102.2 of the Munici- Newport Beach held on the 14th pal Code and made a part thereof day of January, 1952, and was fin - be, and it is hereby. rezoned from ally passed and adopted on the an R-2 district to an R-3 district. 28th day of January, 1952, by the SECTION 4: Section 9102.2 of following vote, to -wit: the Municipal Code of the City of AYES, COUNCILMEN: Finch, Newport Beach is hereby amended Ramsey, Greeley, air follows: Blue, Isbell - That the following described NOES, COUNCILMEN: None property lying within the City of ABSENT COUNCILMEN: None Newport Beach, County of Orange, . L. L. ISBELL State of California, more particu- Mayor. larly described as follows: Attest: The Northeasterly 10' of Lot C. K. PRIEST 13. and Lot 15- Rlnnle inst. +1,e Citv Clank -J