The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCANNERY VILLAGE S.A.P*NEW FILE* CANNERY VILLAGE S.A.P I 1 t i I f W � \ z I�oJo IN, D12 aK \ / pA I / \ IN I <q,C v s x PORTo Ac �, coo 40, Av � V -._ e EE�� Qo• s , �) ar_l � Y�TTF ' ' ' ++ � i lk lI �i ♦ I + `� c,� '}� Oc �C� I ib 6� 1 -' ti� / CIO �) 1� �� - — t — PQQCEG 2 lb 1„�° C� • �\ Age NlY / GCr m6pypo,e7- _ �I____CEL / \ �, 4V��1y9J' �0+ o �+ AC` ,/� o \ 0 � 10 Ll to 60 P lb pip i' n 7 z¢91)o' I i l rl �1 p 04 1 qcq 1 � Ins6r 7V opoRTO o� w V�<<9 r i } 1 I i 1 I t i I i 'y \ i . I I f \ I 41010 Apo pqRC, lb e_ ,1 VID —-- 1.4 h 4hE, II II i II i 11 I a ow% ii jlD I M � �rF G¢' 4 I YJ� PARCE-- — — ,' QI r N ^ • 4o, �1�� — r L 2 ae 4 I PgQGEL `\ _ 50 �� -- \--- so ----- — 50 gyp: \ 5D � ^ 50 � o j \ G � �P J NEWPORT HARBOR ENSIGN - 7/29/71 Newport Beach city council- Hd said that a workable al - men approved the changing of ternative.fo widening Lafayette Lafayette Ave, and Villa Way Ave. would be the creation of in Old Newport from two-way the one-way couplet through to one-way streets Mondayo the area involving Lafayette night. Ave, and Villa Way. Under terms oftheresolution He said this plan would be Lafayette Ave. would become a a likely substitute for what one-way street northbound from could be a very costly and 28th St. to Lido Park Drive disruptive widening project. and Villa Way a one-way south- Mr. Devlin said the one-way bound street from 32nd St. to plan has the basic potential of 28th St, improving traffic flow in the Public Works Director Jos- area, increasing safety for eph T. Devlin told the Council drivers and pedestrians, and that the current city serving as a substitute for the •master street and highway plan clas- obviously difficult and 'costly sifies Lafayette Ave. as a sec- widening project. ' ondary street with 4 traffic The Council also directed the lanes and parking on both sides. staff to initiate proceedings set - However, he said, under the plan ting public hearings to deter - a significant widening of the mine if Lafayette. Ave. should' street with acquisition of con- be removed from the master siderable commercial property street and highway plan. would be required. ! NEI9PORT HARBOR ENSI.G�7 7HURSDAY, DULY 1, I971, ' Fl RST SECTION -- Page 6 '' COROHIA OEL MAR; CALIF. Iu�� 1 A plan to establish a 2-hour parking regulations, saying it parking limit on the north side ' would hurt their business. of Lafayette Ave., between 28th ' Mr.' Rogers also suggested ;and 30th streets, and on both that the staff bring back a plan sides of 29th Street between to establish one way traffic on Lafayette Ave, and Villa Way Lafayette Ave. and Villa Way was scrapped by the Newport ,bejween 29th and 32nd streets. Beach City Council Monday until' businessmen in the area could agree on a plan. Vice Mayor Howard Rogers suggested the plan be killed after some businessmen pro- tested the parking limit. Another resolution, that would prohibit parking on both sides of 29th, 30th and 31st Streets between Villa Way and Newport Blvd, between 3 a.m. and 5 p.m., was also continued indefinitely. ' Five businesses in the Can - !nary Village Assn, opposed the 9 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 'Z/ CALIFORNIA 92660 �trsoRN�� city Hall 3300 Newport BIvd: December 6, 1977 (714X?3� JO 640-2137 Mr. Bryant T. Brothers Wilbur Smith and Associates 5900 Wilshire Boulevard - Suite 2950 Los Angeles, California 90036 Dear Mr. Brothers: This letter is intended to express my great dissatisfaction with the presentation by Wilbur Smith and Associates of the draft report of the Parking Study on Central Newport Beach at the Planning Commission meeting of December 1, 1977. In my estimation, the presentation was disorganized, unprepared and inept. Consequently the value of the report, which con- tains much vital and well -presented information, was completely destroyed by the poor presentation. To begin with, the slides used in the presentation had not been properly positioned in the slide tray and had not been reviewed to assure that they would be shown correctly. This small and easily corrected error caused a delay in the -pre- sentation of nearly one-half hour and caused considerable embarrassment to the Planning Commission before a group of concerned citizens. After the slides were presented it became quite clear that the balance of the presentation had not in any way been rehearsed and that neither Mr. Hurrell nor Mr. North were prepared to answer questions or to draw con- clusions from the statistical information in the report. The report itself does not clearly draw conclusions as to the problems which have been identified in the parking study. It is much better not to present a report than to do it so poorly. It is my expectation that we will get together before any future presentations to assure that nothing of this kind will happen again. You may call me at your convenience to review the problem. Very truly yours, DEVELOPMENT Planning Commission Meeting Study Session Agenda Item No. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH August 18, 1977 August 10, 1977 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Department of Community Development SUBJECT: Cannery Village/McFadden Square Specific Area Plan Background At the August 4, 1977 Study Session, the Planning Commission reviewed the Phase II Cannery Village/McFadden Square Report and Concept Plan I. The Planning Commission directed staff to prepare additional Concept Plans in connection with their discussion and report back at the August 18, 1977 Study Session. At the August 4, 1977 evening meeting, the Planning Commission set the Cannery Village/McFadden Square Specific Area Plan for public hearing at the evening meeting of September 1, 1977 to consider the adoption of a Specific Area Plan - Concept Plan and directed staff to notify all interested parties including property owners, merchants and residents of the area. The purpose of the August 18, 1977 Study Session is to allow the Planning Commission an opportunity to review and make such changes to the additional Concept Plans as they deem appropriate. Concept Plans - Discussion Attached to this report are copies of the three Concept Plans developed by staff at your direction. The attachments include a map depicting each concept, a statistical summary of the concept, the development intensities of each land use category depicted on the Concept Plan and a summary of the major features of each concept. Concept Plan I: There are no changes to this Concept Plan from that which was shown in the Phase II Report and discussed at previous Planning Commission meetings. Concept Plan II: Concept Plan II differs from "CP-I" in that lands designated on CP-I" for "Industry and Marine Related Uses" are designated on "CP-II" for "Commercial/Office" uses with a development intensity incentive for properties developing marine -related uses. This Concept Plan would allow the property owner to develop commercial/ office uses on his property to a maximum of .5 x the buildable area. An additional incentive of .5 x the buildable area would be allowed on a parcel for marine -related uses only and a maximum 1.0 x the buildable area would be established. Concept Plan III: Concept Plan III differs from the previous concepts in that -only those parcels immediately adjacent to the bay would be restricted to marine -related uses. The remainder of the land designated on "CPI" for "Industrial and Marine Related Uses" would be designated for "Commercial/Office" uses with the development incentive provision for marine -related uses described in "CPII" above. TO: Planning Commission - 2 Retail Sales Office Marine/Industrial Restaurant Hotel/Motel Residential STATISTICAL COMPARISON - CONCEPT PLANS "CPI" 212,245 sq. ft. 100,310.8 sq. ft. 245,100.8 sq. ft. 35,874.0 sq. ft. 13 Rooms 403 Units "CPI I" 299,255.5 sq, ft. 165,950.3 sq. ft. -0- 35,874.0 sq. ft. 13 Rooms 403 Units "CPIII" 272,743 sq. ft. 145,950.8 sq. ft. 199,162.05 sq. ft. 35,874.0 sq. ft. 13 Rooms 403 Units Tourist/Commercial I 37,200 sq. ft, I 37,200 sq. ft. I 37,200 sq. ft. NOTE: 1Statistics indicate total floor area unless otherwise noted. 2A portion of the floor area allocated to retail sales and to office uses in "CPII" and "CPIII" would be restricted to marine -related uses only. Land Uses - Discussion At the August 4, 1977 Planning Commission Study Session, the Planning Commission asked staff to prepare a list of typical uses proposed for each land use category shown on the Concept Plan. The following list is offered as a starting point for Planning Commission discussion, realizing that the Commission may deem it appropriate to expand or delete various uses during the course of the P1-an's preparation. Additionally, during Phase III of Specific Plan preparation, when detailed ordinances will be introduced, the Planning Commission may wish to vary or modify the permitted uses, .prohibited uses, subject many uses to use permit requirements or may wish to vary permitted uses from one sector to another. Retail Sales and Service: Boat sales, marine supply sales, general reta 1 sales, auto sales and repair, animal hospitals, gasoline service stations, grocery markets, outdoor sales establishments, pet shops, public garages, theatres, used car lots, professional service establishments, appliance stores, banks, barber shops, beauty parlors, book stores, department stores, drug stores, food stores, hardware stores, nurseries, radio stores, antique stores, shoe stores, studios, tailor shops and specialty shops and other uses which, in the opinion of the Planning Commission, are of a similar nature. Office: General Offices that provide direct service to the general public such as, but not limited to, banks, savings and loan associations, doctors, lawyers, accountants, engineers, architects, yacht brokers, documentation services, planners, real estate, insurance, dentists, photographic studios, and other uses which, in the opinion of the Planning Commission, are of a similar nature. Marine Related: Boat lettering, boat registration, boat rentals, boat yards, marine canvas and upholstery, marine carpentry, and wood work, charters, compass sales and service, documentation services, marine electrical and generating equipment and repairs, marine electronic sales and service, marine engine sales and service, fiber glass repairs and supplies, fishing supplies and equipment, flags, emblems, trophies, fuel docks, marine hardware equipment and supplies, holding tank installation and service, sailing/boating instruction, marine insurance, launching and hoists, boat leasing, boat maintenance and repair, mast and rigging supplies and service, nautical charts, nautical instruments, nautical decor, marine plumbing and water systems, publications - nautical, fabrication and maintenance of pulpits and rails, marine surveyors, underwater services, yacht brokers, yacht clearance, propeller sales and repair, r3 , • TO: Planning Commission - 3 and other uses which, in the opinion of the Planning Commission, are of a similar marine -oriented nature. Tourist/Commercial: Restaurants, outdoor restaurants, drive-in/ take-out restaurants, drive-in facilities, launderettes, food sales, hotels, motels, room -for -rent, theatres, specialty commercial shops, outdoor markets, beach equipment rentals, boat/charter rentals and other uses -which, in the opinion of the Planning Commission are of a similar nature. Finally, it should be noted, the Planning Commission may wish during Phase III of Specific Plan preparation to establish development, standards that vary for the same use from area to area or between land use categories within the same area. Suggested Action If desired, make such changes and refinement McFadden Square Concept Plans ("CP-I", "CP-II" for presentation at the Planning Commission September 1, 1977. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT R. V. Hogan, Director By % i o Ae Fred TaTarico Senior Planner to the Cannery Village/ and "CP-IPI") as desired evening meeting of FT:jmb Attachments: 1) Cannery Village/McFadden Square Concept Plan I - "CP»I" 2) Cannery Village/McFadden Square Concept Plan II - "CP-II" 3) Cannery Village/McFadden Square Concept Plan III "CPIII" CANNERY VILLAGE/MCFADDEN SQUARE SPECIFIC AREA PLAN CONCEPT PLAN I A Retail/Office with Incentive B Retail Sales C Office D Residential oil Pp,p{VIG OGFM► Retail/Residential Parking (Public Off -Street and Private Off -Street with Agreements) Landscaped Areas Tourist Commercial Industrial and Marine - Related Uses STATISTICAL SUMMARY - "CPI" Retail Sales Office Industrial Restaurant Hotel/Motel Residential Tourist Commercial 212,245 Sq. Ft. Floor Area 100,310.8 Sq. Ft. Floor Area 245,100.8 Sq. Ft. Floor Area 35,874.0 Sq. Ft. Floor Area 13 Rooms 403 Units 37,200 Sq. Ft. Floor Area DEVELOPMENT INTENSITIES - "CP-I" Residential Retail Sales Office Industrial Restaurants Hotel/Motel Tourist Commercial Commercial/Residential Commercial/Office "Per Existing Zoning" .5 x Buildable .5 x Buildable 1.0 x Buildable (Existing Uses) (Existing Uses) .5 x Buildable 1,000 Sq. Ft. Per Parcel (Existing) 1 DU Per Parcel (Existing) .5 x Buildable • ' ' Y WV 3 MAJOR FEATURES - "CPI"' 1) The separation of existing residentially -zoned and developed areas from the commercial areas, in order to encourage their revitalization and stabilize their character, would be accomplished by buffering the duplex areas with landscaping and land uses compatible with both residential areas and adjacent uses to the greatest extent possible. Further, it is suggested that through - traffic be eliminated from residential streets where feasible. Public rights -of -ways would be planted with approptifate street trees. 2) Concept Plan I would provide for the preservation of existing marine -related uses (by rezoning these parcels to a Specific Plan District zone that would prohibit non -marine service and repair uses). This preservation of marine uses is consistent with the goals for the Cannery Village area established by the Land Use Element of the General Plan. 3) Concept Plan I would restrict those parcels immediately adjacent to the beach to tourist -related activities. This also would be accomplished through a specific plan zoning designation. The tourist -related zone would require sensitive consideration of the special opportunities and constraints exhibited by these beach visitor related areas. 4) Concept Plan I ("CP-I") would attempt to provide for the revitalization of the specialty commercial uses in the Cannery Village. This would be accomplished through a rezoning to provide for an economically -viable redevelopment of many of the marginal uses. This commercial/residential zoning should also provide an interesting contrast to other specialty shopping areas and alterna- tive life styles for both residential and commercial tenants. 5) Concept Plan 1 would call for investigating possible changes to the circulation system and the establishment of public off-street parking, perhaps utilizing a parking district approach. The circulation system changes might include the closing and landscaping of 21st Street between Ocean Front Avenue and Balboa Boulevard, the possible closing of 29th and 30th Streets to through -traffic between Newport Boulevard and Balboa Boulevard, and the inclusion of the end of the streets adjacent to Newport Boulevard in off-street parking lots. The provision of off-street public parking would encourage the redevelopment of many of the small lots in the Cannery Village area. 6) Concept Plan I also assumes the implementation of Circulation Element plans for the Cannery Village/McFadden Square area. This involves improving Newport Boulevard to a major roadway between 30th Street and 32nd Street and improving 32nd Street to a secondary roadway between LaFayette Avenue and Newport Boulevard. 32nd Street would be improved on the southeast side between LaFayette Avenue and Villa Way and on the City Hall side from Villa Way to Newport Boulevard. Precise alignments Would be developed during Phase III of the Specific Area Plan. Z?� CANNERY VILLAGE/MCFADDEN SQUARE SPECIFIC AREA PLAN CONCEPT PLAN II A Retail/Office with Incentive B Retail Sales C O.ffice D Residential Retail/Residential Parking (Public Off -Street and Private Off -Street with Agreements) Landscaped Areas Tourist Commercial Industrial and Marine - Related Uses �� i Fps.®► �. PIw1114, 041A13 STATISTICAL SUMMARY - "CP-II" Retail Sales Office Industrial Restaurant Hotel/Motel Residential Tourist Commercial DEVELOPMENT 299,255.5 Sq.•Ft. Floor Area 165,950.3 Sq. Ft. Floor Area -0- 35,674.0 Sq. Ft. Floor Area 13 Rooms 403 Units 37,200 Sq. Ft. Floor Area INTENSITIES - "CP-II" Residential Retail Sales Office Restaurants Hotel/Motel Tourist Commercial Commercial/Residential Commercial/Office Commercial'/Office with Incentive "Per Existing Zoning" .5 x Buildable .5 x Buildable (Existing Uses) (Existing Uses) .5 x Buildable 1,000 Sq. Ft. Per Parcel (Existing) 1 DU Per Parcel (Existing) .5 x Buildable .5 x Buildable and additional .5 x Buildable for Marine - Related Uses 4. MAJOR FEATURES - "CRII" 1) The separation of existing residentially -zoned and developed areas from the commercial areas, in order to encourage their revitalization and stabilize their character, would be accomplished by buffering the duplex areas with landscaping and land uses compatible with both residential areas and adjacent uses to the greatest extent possible. Further, it is suggested that through - traffic be eliminated from residential streets where feasible. Public rights -of -ways would be planted with appropitfate street trees. 2) Concept Plan II would provide for the preservation of existing marine -related uses by providing for development intensity incentives for those parcels providing marine -related uses. This preservation of marine uses is consistent with the goals for the Cannery Village area established by the Land Use Element of the General Plan. 3) Concept Plan Ilwould restrict those parcels immediately adjacent to the beach to tourist -related activities. This also would be accomplished through a specific plan zoning designation. The tourist -related zone would require sensitive consideration of the special opportunities and constraints exhibited by these beach visitor related areas. 4) Concept Plan II ("CFII") would attempt to provide for the revitalization of the specialty commercial uses in the Cannery Village. This would be accomplished through a rezoning to provide for an economically -viable redevelopment of many of the marginal uses. This commercial/residential zoning should also provide an interesting contrast to other specialty shopping areas and alterna- tive life styles for both residential and commercial tenants. 5) Concept Plan IIwould call for investigating possible changes to the circulation system and the establishment of public off-street parking, perhaps utilizing a parking district approach. The circulation system changes might include the closing and landscaping of 21st Street between Ocean Front Avenue and Balboa Boulevard, the possible closing of 29th and 30th Streets to through -traffic between Newport Boulevard and Balboa Boulevard, and the inclusion of the end of the streets adjacent to Newport Boulevard in off-street parking lots. The provision of off-street public parking would encourage the redevelopment of many of the small 16ts in the Cannery Village area. 6) Concept Plan Ilalso assumes the implementation of Circulation Element plans for the Cannery Village/McFadden Square area. This involves improving Newport Boulevard to a major roadway between 30th Street and 32nd Street and improving 32nd Street to a secondary roadway between LaFayette Avenue and Newport Boulevard, 32nd Street would be improved on the southeast side between LaFayette Avenue and Villa Way and on the City Hall side from Villa Way to Newport Boulevard. Precise alignments would be developed during Phase III of the Specific Area Plan. CARY VILLAGE/MCFADDEN SQUARIP SPECIFIC AREA PLAN CONCEPT PLAN III 1 A Retail/Office with Incentive B Retail Sales C Office J 1 D Residential F Retail/Residential Parking (Public Off -Street and Private Off -Street with Agreements) Landscaped Commercial Industrial and Related Uses STATISTICAL SUMMARY - "CP--III" Retail Sales Office Marine/Industrial Restaurant Hotel/Motel Residential Tourist Commercial 272,743 Sq. Ft. Floor Area 145,950.8 Sq. Ft. Floor Area 199,162.05 Sq. Ft. Floor Area 35,874.0 Sq. Ft. Floor Area 13 Rooms 403 Units 37,200 Sq. Ft. Floor Area DEVELOPMENT INTENSITIES - "CP�III" Residential Retail Sales Office Industrial/Marine Restaurants Hotel/Motel Tourist Commercial Commercial/Residenti.al Commercial/Office Commercial/Office with Incentive "Per Existing Zoning" .5 x Buildable .5 x Buildable 1.0 x Buildable (Existing Uses) (Existing Uses) .5 x Buildable 1,000 Sq. Ft. Per Parcel (Existing) 1 DU Per Parcel (Existing) .5 x Buildable .5 x Buildable and Additional .5 x Buildable for Marine - Related Uses MAJOR FEATURES - "CP-III" 1) The separation of existing residentially -zoned and developed areas from the commercial areas, in order to encourage their revitalization and stabilize their character, would be accomplished by buffering the duplex areas with landscaping and land uses compatible with both residential areas and adjacent uses to the greatest extent possible. Further, it is suggested that through - traffic be eliminated from residential streets where feasible.- Public rights -of -ways would be planted with appropriate street trees. 2) Concept Plan III would provide for the preservation of existing marine -related uses (by rezoning those parcels immediately - adjacent to the bay to a Specific Plan District zone that would prohibit non -marine service and repair uses). Additionally, those parcels presently zoned industrially and not restricted to marine service and repair uses would be given development intensity incentives for providing marine -related uses. This preservation of marine uses is consistent with the goals for the Cannery Village area established by the Land Use Element of the General Plan. 3) Concept Plan III would restrict those parcels immediately adjacent to the beach to tourist -related activities. This also would be accomplished through a specific plan zoning designation. The tourist -related zone would require sensitive consideration of the special opportunities and constraints exhibited by these beach visitor related areas. 4) Concept Plan III ("CP-III") would attempt to provide for the revitalization of the specialty commercial uses in the Cannery Village. This would be accomplished through a rezoning to provide for an economically -viable redevelopment of many of the marginal uses. This commercial/residential zoning should also provide an interesting contrast to other specialty shopping areas and alterna- tive life styles for both residential and commercial tenants. 5) Concept Plan III would call for investigating possible changes to the circulation system and the establishment of public off-street parking, perhaps utilizing a parking district approach. The circulation system changes might include the closing and landscaping of 21st Street between Ocean Front Avenue and Balboa Boulevard, the possible closing of 29th and 30th Streets to through -traffic between Newport Boulevard and Balboa Boulevard, and the inclusion of the end of the streets adjacent to Newport Boulevard in off-street parking lots. The provision of off-street public parking would encourage the redevelopment of many of the small lots in the Cannery Village area. 6) Concept Plan III also assumes the implementation of Circulation Element plans for the Cannery Village/McFadden Square area. This involves improving Newport Boulevard to a major roadway between 30th Street and 32nd Street and improving 32nd Street to a secondary roadway between Lafayette Avenue and Newport Boulevard. 32nd Street would be improved on the southeast side between Lafayette Avenue and Villa Way and on the City Hall side from Villa Way to Newport Boulevard. Precise alignments would be developed during Phase III of the Specific Area Plan. Planning Commission Meeting Study Session Agenda Item No. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH May 9, 1977 June 2, 1977 3 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Department of Community Development SUBJECT: Cannery Village/McFadden Square Specific Area Plan -- "Phase II - Report" Attached is a copy of the "Phase II - Report" on the Cannery Village/McFadden Square Specific Area Plan. Phase II of the CV/MS Specific Area Plan program includes the development of a concept plan for the overall CV/MS planning area. Once approved by the Planning Commission, this "Phase II - Concept Plan" will establish overall land use, circulation, and development intensity policies upon which more -detailed Specific Area Plans for each of the four sub -areas will be developed. The approval of this overall concept plan does not require formal public hearings and adoption, since the concept -plan will serve only as a "working guide" to the preparation of the more -detailed Specific Area Plans; formal public hearings and adoption by the Planning Commission and City Council will be required for each of the four sub -area Specific Area Plans. These detailed sub -area Specific Area Plans will comprise Phase III of the Specific Area Plan, and will include the zoning regulations, and individual circulation, parking, and public improvements plans for each of the four sectors. The "Phase II - Report", based on the research information developed in the first phase of the CV/MS planning project, analyzes the development potential of the Cannery Village/McFadden Square planning area and indicates forecasted development for the area. The report indicates the projected intensity of development, by land use category, for the existing zoning, as projected by Development Research Associates in 1971, and a revised trend forecast (trend '76), developed by staff in 1976, based on City permits and approvals from 1971 to 1976 and projected development phasing. Finally, the "Phase II - Report" outlines an initial concept plan for the Planning Commission's consideration. It is intended that this Concept Plan be used only as a starting point for Commission discussion. It is based on the adopted policies of the General Plan as they relate to the planning area and the information provided in the "Phase I - Research Report". Staff would suggest that the Planning Commission, after initial discussion of the Phase II report at this Study Session, place the Phase II Report on a future Study Session agenda so that the Commission might revise and refine the concept plan to an acceptable form. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT R. V. Hogan, Director By. LZ02 Q� Fred Talarico Senior Planner FT:jmb Attachments: 1) Cannery Village/McFadden Square "Phase II - Report" 2) Cannery Village/McFadden Square Specific Area Plan program. CANNERY VILLAGE/MCFADDEN SQUARE SPECIFIC AREA PLAN • 0 CANNERY VILLAGE/MCFADDEN SQUARE PHASE II REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Introduction------------------------------------------- 1 Background - "Development Potential"------------------- 2 Existing Development--------------------------------- 4 Existing Zoning ------------------------------ ------ 7 Lido Peninsula--------------------------------------- 10 D.R.A. Projections----------------------------------- 12 Projected Development - "Trend 77"-------------=------- 16 Development 1971-77---------------------------------- 18 Development Phasing "Trend '77"---------------------- 21 Land Use and Statistical Forecast - "Trend '77"------ -23 Concept Plan ------------------------------------------ 26 INTRODUCTION The goal of Phase II of the "Cannery Village/McFadden Square" Specific Area Plan project is the development of an overall area - wide, concept plan. It is intended that the concept plan be limited to overall land u'se, development intensity and circulation. It is suggested that, after public discussion, the Planning Commission approve one overall concept plan, to be used as the basis for development of detailed Specific Area Plans fo-r each of the four individual sectors within the Cannery Village/McFadden Square area. The detailed Specific Area Plans for each sector will be developed during Phase III, and will include zoning regulations, individual circulation plans, parking and public improvement programs for each sector. These Specific Area Plans will be adopted by the Planning Commission and City Council after appropriate public hearings. Phase I of the Specific Plan process dealt with the development of a "Research Report" which outlined the existing environmental -conditions of the overall area and the urban features of each _ individual sector. The information developed in Phase I has been refined and utilized to prepare. the concept alternatives of Phase II. -1- 0 BACKGROUND The Cannery Village/McFadden Square Specific Area Plan area is located west of the Rhine Channel, north of 19th Street, east of the public beach and McFadden Square, southerly of 24th Street, east of Balboa Boulevard and south of 32nd Street. For the purpose of data collection and development of detailed Specific Area Plans, the overall area has been divided into four sectors as indicated on the preceding page. The Lido Peninsula area was included in the "Phase I Report" to allow for consideration of the impact of Lido Peninsula in the discussion of the Cannery Village/McFadden Square area. 32�a/1 l� LM 6dI60 4 1904,1 e �d Balboa Boulevard Pacific Ocean yc� CANNERY VILLAGE/MCFADUEN SQUARE SPECIFIC AREA PLAN PHASE II REPORT "Existing Land Use - 1976" 1. Retail Sales and Service lA Marine Related TB Other 2. Office 2A Marine Related 2B Other. 3. Industrial . 3A Marine Related 3B Other 4. Restaurants 5. Hotels/Motels 6. Residential 7. Other - RAFqr• �e U r il!!III� 7PVrie, Oe fh+4 K9 J Existing Development. Existing development within the overall planning area is predomi- nantly retail sales and service in nature. Along with retail sales, office, industrial and restaurant uses occupy a majority of the structure space within the planning area. The following is a statistical breakdown for the area and the map on the preceding page indicates land use allocation: � Existing Development: Sector "A" Land Use (Sq. Ft.) Retail 74,793 Office 52,248 Industrial 63,767 Restaurant 9;000 Hotel/Motel 0 Residential 39 DU's Other. 0 Art Museum Etc. Pvt. Club Theater Churches Sector "B" (Sq. Ft.) 40,528 22,960 11,670 17,172 0 68 DU's 0 Sector "C" (Sq. Ft.) 23,529 4,429 0 21,965 0 213 DU's 13,582 Sector "D" (Sq. Ft.) 71,436 10,281 0 4,240 13 Rooms 77 DU's Totals of Remainder Sectors A, Lido of Central .B, C & D Penn.. Newport (Sq. Ft.) (Sq. Ft.) (Sq. Ft.) 210,286 0 101,203 89,918 5,831 140,845 75,437 37,662 0 52,377 2,760 16,799 13 Rooms 30'Rooms 0 397 DU's 360 DU's 13,582 4,000 9,000 (2) Total (Sq. Ft. 311,489 2354#4 113,099 71,936 43 Rooms 757 DU's 13,582 4,000 9, (2) Marine -Related Development: Sector "A" Sector "B" Sector "C" Sector "D" Land Use (Sq. Ft.) (Sq.,Ft.) (Sq. Ft.) (Sq. Ft.) Retail 27,673 23,101 941 4,286 Office 6,270 918 0 0 Industrial 22,956 11,670 0 0 Totals of I Sectors "A", JIB", IICIJ & I'D" 56,001 7,188 • 34,626 01 Potential Development - "Existing Zoning" The Cannery Village/McFadden Square Specific Area Plan area is divided into several zoning districts (see Cannery Village/ McFadden Square Phase I Report, Page 32). The following chart indicates the maximum levels of development intensity for each zoning district: District Intensity (F.A.R.) District Intensity (F.A.R.) C-1 2 times buildable R-2 1 duplex per lot C-2 (1) R-`3 1 unit per 1,200 sq. ft. C-0 3 times buildable R-4 1 unit per 800 sq. ft. M-1 3 times buildable Based on the above levels of development intensity, the maximum potential intensity for the Cannery Village/McFadden Square Specific Area Plan area was developed. Because many different uses are allowed within each of the above commercial and industrial zones, it is impossible to predict exactly what will occur; however, a rough estimate can be made by projecting .future uses in the same proportion as current uses. This method provides the following figures: Retail Sales 1,537,289.2 Sq. Ft. Office 658,838.3 Sq. Ft. Industrial 533,345.3 Sq. Ft. Restaurant 376,479.0 Sq. Ft. Hotel/Motel 105 Rooms Residential 260 Units l(fl The C-2 zoning district does not prescribe a maximum level of development intensity. For the purpose of this statistical analysis, two times buildable w.as assigned to C-2 zoned parcels. The following map indicates the total maximum possible:development by block for the Cannery Village/McFadden Square Specific Area Plan area: -8- FA 3's3G1f 8�s 9g .y /d3 yEkpo'22s .T Rr ............ d � . - ,: I b R �ivod f q C 9� N � N � 7 `w,411.2 _I2 D.U. -9- Potential Development - "Lido Peninsula" The existing residential and re.staurant uses along Lido Park Drive with the exception of the motel appear stable, thus it is assumed that no additional development will occur in this portion of Lido Peninsula. While the existing motel use may convert to condominiums or offices, this appears to be the only change that should be anticipated in the planning timeframe. A discussion of the potential development of the remainder of the peninsula is difficult in that neither the existing zoning nor the General Plan limit the extent of possible commercial and industrial development. The Land Use Element contains the following reference: "Lido Peninsula: The Lido Peninsula is a unique area of the -City with a wide variety of existing and potential uses. It is particularly suited to planned development concepts if and when substantial changes in existing uses are undertaken. Meanwhile, all existing uses should be allowed to continue and be upgraded, but any substantial changes should be subject to an approved area plan. "It is desirable that the commercial area in future - planned development include marine and recreation oriented commercial uses, with emphasis on marine repair and service uses in association with boat sales, restaurants, hotels, motels, and specialty shops. The planned development may include residential uses as well as the uses stated above. That part of the area devoted to residential development should not exceed fifteen dwelling units per gross acre. The proportion of land area devoted to existing resi- dential use including the mobilehome parks, as compared to land area devoted to other uses, should not be increased. "It is proposed that: 1) Existing uses be continued, and that repairs, replacements, and remodeling that upgrade and are consistent with those uses be encouraged; provided, however, that when such repairs, replacements, and remodeling enlarge the scope or change the character of such -10- E uses, a use permit shall be required; and 2) The area be designated as a Planned Development district in which substantial changes in existing uses shall comply with'an area plan to be pre•paryd by the owner(s) and approved by the City." Because; as the preceding indicates, the Land Use Element limits only the residential development, it is not possible to project maximum commercial development. However, it is possible to make certain assumptions, based on other recreational and marine commercial areas and current market place demands. The following statistics indicate trend growth for the peninsula area: Retail Sales and Service Office Industrial Restaurants Hotel/Motel Residential 0 5,831 Sq. Ft. 37,662 Sq. Ft. 2,760 Sq. Ft. 30 Rooms 527 Units The above statistical analysis is based on the premise that existing market place demands for residences in the City now indicates that any change from residential development to commercial industrial and/or other uses on the Lido Peninsula should not be anticipated. However, this does not assume the maintenance of existing use. The . existing marine -related services and facilities provided on the peninsula appear extremely. stable viewed in relation to the remainder of this industry within the harbor; therefore, no changes were antici- pated. 1 ICi,tyi',of,-Newpo,rt`BeaEl ch�.Land Use• ement,,=Pages �13 .and 14. -11- D.R.A. Pro-iections In conjunction with the preparation of the City's General Plan, the firm of Development Research Associates was contracted to establish statistical development trends for the City. The information developed by the consultant was utilized in the preparation of critical General Plan elements, primarily the Land Use, Residential Growth and Circulation Elements. The consultant projected growth within each statistical area of the City. D.R.A. made the following projections for Statistical Division B-5 of which the Cannery Village/McFadden Square Specific Area Plan area is a part: -12- • D.R.A. PROJECTIONS NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN STATISTICAL AREA LAND USE SUMMARY STATISTICAL AREA B5 (LAND AREA IN ACRES - "A", STRUCTURE SPACE IN THOUSANDS - "K") Hotel Retail Restaurant3 Gen. Svc. Comm'1 Wholesale Comm'1 Recreation Light Industrial Marine - Related Insti- tutional Transp., Comm., Util. Public Office TOTALS 19721 19804 19904 Land Structure Land Structure Land Structure, Area Space Area Space Area Space .5 43R 2.8A 1.2OR 3.4A 15OR 14.8A 207K 14.8A 214K 14.8A 272K 5.2A 2100S 5.5A 2200S 5.9A 2300S 2.6A 58K 2.7A 61K 3.1 69K .6A 18K .3A 9K - - .6A 9K .6A 9K .6A 9K 1.8A 50K 1.8A 50K 1.8A 50K 9.6A 87K 10.7A 97.K 17.6A 117K 1.7A - 1.7A - 1.7A - - .2A - .2A - 2.2A - 4.7A 68K 5.4A 84K 6.7A 111K 6.5A 146K 7.6A 169K 8.8A 196K Notes 1Categories and 1972 totals utilized are adjusted versions of those developed by Newport.Beach C.D. staff for land use inventory element of General Plan. 2Includes hotel/motel at number of rooms. 3Includes restaurants and bars at number of seats. 4figures are cumulative totals, not increments. -13- • ' • D.R.A. PROJECTIONS NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN STATISTICAL AREA LAND USE SUMMARY STATISTICAL AREA B5 (LAND AREA IN ACRES - "A", STRUCTURE SPACE IN THOUSANDS - "K") 19721 19802 19902 Dwelling Units 609 609 618 Population 956 956 1174 Employment 1774 2038 2424 Notes• 1Categories and 1972 totals utilized are adjusted versions of those developed by Newport Beach C.D. staff for land use inventory element of general plan. 2Figures are cumulative totals, not increments. -14- • STATISTICAL COMPARISON - CENTRAL NEWPORT - (STATISTICAL AREA B,5) EXISTING LAND USE AND D.R.A. FORECAST D.R.A. Capacity Forecast Existing '76 Remaining Over Retail Sales 350,000 Sq. Ft. 311,489 Sq. Ft. 38,511 Sq. Ft., •Office 196,000 Sq. Ft. 235,924 Sq. Ft. 39,924 Sq. Ft Industrial 167,000 Sq. Ft. 113,099 Sq. Ft. 53,901 Sq. Ft. Restaurant 34,500 Sq. Ft. 71,936 Sq. Ft. 37,436 Sq. Ft Hotel/Motel 150 Rooms 43 Rooms 107 Rooms Residential 618 DU's 757 DU's 138 DU's PROJECTED DEVELOPMENT - "TREND 77" In order to provide a basis for the analysis of future land use concepts, staff has attempted to revise the development projections made in 1971 by D.R.A., based on current information. This revised forecast will provide the Commission with an indication of what could be expected to occur if the existing zoning is not changed. This section includes the following: 1) A review of the most recent development (1971-77) within the CV/MS planning area; 2) An indication of the probable timing of redevelopment within the area; and 3) A land use and development intensity forecast for the area. J�l I 0 CANNERY VILLAGE/MCFADDEN SQUARE SPECIFIC AREA PLAN PHASE II REPORT Development and Redevelopment 1971 - 7631 0 Development and Redevelopment Under Construction April/1977 Approved/Not Under Construction R 0 Past Development: "1971-77" In order to illustrate development trends in the CV/MS area, recent major instances of development and redevelopment for the planning area have been charted for the past five years. (See map on preceding page:) This information was then utilized to develop trend forecasts ("Trend '77) for the study -area. Major instances of development and redevelopment between 1971 and 1976 are indicated on the preceding map. This map further indicates developments that have been approved by the City and where construction is imminent. As indicated by this map, there is no overall pattern of redevelopment, rather, such redevelopment has been scattered throughout the overall area. This redevelopment has occurred in response to the private market as has been greatly influenced by lot and ownership patterns. Other influences are the City's zoning and the Coastal Commission. In terms of land use the development of specialty restaurants ("dinner houses") has been the most significant trend in redevelopment, including three "dinner house" restaurants and two smaller restaurants. Office space redevelopment has also been significant. Also, there has been a recent approval for an additional restaurant facility in the "Newport/Balboa Boulevard's Triangle" sector and an office complex along the Rhine in the "Cannery Village" sector. Another recent approval is the construction of a retail sales/ office structure on Newport Boulevard and 30th Street, within the "Cannery Village" area. Office space of this proposed structure (2nd floor) will be used by the owners for corporate headquarters. This type of development (first floor/retail sales; -18- second floor/office) is,a mirror of development in the area within the couplet formed by north and southbound Newport Boulevard. CANNERY VILLAGE/MCFADDEN SQUARE SPECIFIC AREA PLAN PHASE II REPORT "Projected Trend Development - Phasing" r�lrt& ocfoAA Category I Existing and Approved Uses and Structures Projected Stable 1976 - 2000 Category II Projected Development and Redevelopment 1977 to 1990 Retail Sales 92,842 Office 55,120 Restaurants 41,315 Sq Residences 172 DU's Category III Projected Development and Redevelopment 1985+ Retail Sales 86,633 Office 41,320 Restaurants 17,000 Residences 52 DU_' s _ Ft. K • Projected Development Phasing "Trend 77" In order to develop•a land use and development intensity projection for the planning area, staff has divided the area into categories relating to redevelopment potential. This approach will illustrate the redevelopment pressures within the area and will indicate opportunities to utilize these pressures for implementation of the Specific Area Plans. This analysis was accomplished through a review of the information provided in the "Phase I - Research Report" on structural permanence•, land values and structure values. All property within the planning area was divided into the following three categories: Category I: This category contains properties that are relatively stable and permanent. Major redevelopment of these properties is not anticipated within the next twenty-five years. Category II: This category contains property where development is most eminent. These areas are projected to develop or redevelop within the next fifteen years. Category III: This category contains property that is not anticipated to redevelop within the immediate future, but that which will develop within the next twenty-five years. N N PA111FIG 61&CAN CANNERY VILLAGE/MCFADDEN SQUARE SPECIFIC AREA PLAN PHASE II REPORT TREND DEVELOPMENT "Land Use" A Restaurants g R/ S G Office D Residential Hotel/Motel 9 E 'Land Use and Statistical Forecast - "Trend 77" The map on the preceding page is the projected "Trend 77" development. It is based on the data provided in preceding sections on past development 1971-76 and projected development phasing. The following chart is a statistical analysis of the phasing of development and the estimate of build -out conditions for the planning area. 1976-1990 (Category II) Development Land Use Anticipated Retail Sales 92,842 Sq. Ft. Office 55,120 Sq. Ft. Restaurants 41,315 Sq. Ft. Residential 172 DU's Hotel 0 1985-2000 (Category III) Projected Development Build Out Anti-cipated Total'' 86,633 Sq. Ft. 270,249 Sq 41,320 Sq. Ft. 139,665 Sq 17,000 Sq. Ft. 124,516 Sq 52 DU's 358 DU's 0 13 Rooms Ft. Ft. Ft. -23- E Retail Sales Office Industrial Restaurant Hotel/Motel Residential Other CANNERY VILLAGE/MCFADDEN SQUARE SPECIFIC AREA PLAN AREA STATISTICAL'SUMMARY Existing Land Use - 1977 210,286 Sq..Ft. 89,918 Sq. Ft. 75,437 Sq. Ft. 52,377 Sq. Ft. 13 Rooms 397 Units 13,582 Sq. Ft. Potential Development Existing 'Zoning 1,537,289.2 Sq. Ft. 658,838.3 Sq. Ft. 533,345.3 Sq. Ft. 376,479.0 Sq. Ft. 105 Rooms 260 Units 0 Revised Trend 'Forecast ' 270;249 Sq. Ft. 139,665 Sq. Ft. 0 124,516 Sq. Ft. 13 Rooms 358 Units 0 CANNERY VILLAGE/MCFADDEN SQUARE SPECIFIC AREA PLAN PHASE II REPORT "DEVELOPED PROPERTIES" r3 Existing Developments Projected as Stable IM Areas of Anticipated New Developments and/or Redevelopment 000 PardFta cW^9 01 •1 CONCEPT PLAN The following pages describe and depict a cgncept plan for the overall Cannery Village/McFadden Square Specific Area Plan area. This alternative has been developed as a starting point for the discussion of land use and development intensity standards for the overall planning area. The development of the concept plan was based on the assumption that many of the major existing land uses will continue into the foreseeable future. These uses were identified in previous sections of this report dealing with timing of anticipated development and redevelopment. Category I sites and the properties are shown on the preceding map. Discussion The staff -prepared, initial draft Concept Plan includes the following features: 1) The separation of existing residentially -zoned and developed areas from the commercial areas, in order to encourage their revitalization and stabilize their character, would be accomplished by buffering the duplex areas with landscaping and land uses compatible with both residential areas and adjacent uses to the greatest extent possible. Further, it is suggested that through - traffic be eliminated from residential streets. Public,rights- of-ways would be planted with appropriate street trees. 2) Concept Plan 1 would'provide for the preservation of existing marine -related uses (by rezoning these parcels to a Specific Plan District zone that would prohibit non -marine service and repair uses). This preservation of marine uses is consistent with -26- the goals for the Cannery Village area established by the Land Use Element of the General Pla6. 3) Concept Plan I•would restrict those parcels immediately adjacent to the beach to tourist -related activities. This also would be accomplished through a specific plan zoning designation. The tourist -related zone would require sensitive consideration of the special opportunities and constraints exhibited by these beach/visitor related areas. 4) Concept Plan I ("CPI") would.attempt to provide for the revitalization of the specialty commercial uses in the Cannery Village. This would be accomplished through a rezoning to provide for an economically -viable redevelopment of many of the marginal uses. This commercial/residential zoning should also provide an interesting contrast to other specialty shopping areas and alternative life styles for•both residential and commercial tenants. 5) Concept Plan I would call for investigating possible changes to the circul.ation-system and the establishment of -public off-street parking, perhaps utilizing a parking district approach. The circulation system changes might include the closing and landscaping of 21st Street between Ocean Front Avenue and Balboa .Boulevard, the possible closing of 29th and 30th Streets to through -traffic between Newport Boulevard and Balboa Boulevard, and the inclusion of the end of the streets adjacent to Newport Boulevard in off-street parking lots. The provision of off-street public parking would encourage the redevelopment of many of the small lots in the Cannery Village area. 6) Concept Plan I also assumes'the implementation of Circulation -27- Element plans for the Cannery Village/McFadden Square area. This involves improving Newport Boulevard to a major roadway between 30th Street and 32nd Street and improving 32nd Street to a secondary roadway between LaFayette Avenue and Newport Boulevard. 32nd Street would be improved on the southeast side between LaFayette Avenue and Villa Way and on the City Hall side from Villa Way -to Newport Boulevard. Precise alignments would be developed during Phase III of the Specific Area Plan. Statistics The following is a statistical summary of the projected land use under Concept Plan I and the development intensity assumptions used in making these projections. • • STATISTICAL -SUMMARY - "CPI" Retail Sales Office Industrial Restaurant Hotel/Motel Residential Tourist Commercial 212,245 Sq. Ft. Floor Area 100,310.8 Sq. Ft. Floor Area 245,100.8 Sq. Ft. Floor Area 35,874.0 Sq. Ft. Floor Area 13 Rooms 403 Units 37,200 Sq. Ft. Floor Area DEVELOPMENT INTENSITIES - "CPI" Residential Retail Sales Office Industrial Restaurants Hotel/Motel Tourist Commercial Commercial/Residential Commercial/Office "Per Existing Zoning" .5 x's' Buildable .5 x's Buildable 1.0 x's Buildable (Existing Uses) (Existing Uses) .5 x's Buildable 1,000 Sq. Ft. Per Parcel (Existing) 1 DU'Per Parcel (Existing) .5 x's Buildable -29- CANNERY VILLAGE/MCFADDEN SQUARE SPECIFIC AREA PLAN PHASE II REPORT "CONCEPT PLAN" J�/ RESPONSE PAUI P t o 00,6-ti Retail Sales Office Industrial and Marine - Related Uses Residential Retail/Residential Parking (Public Off -Street and Private Off -Street With Agreements) Landscaped Areas Tourist Commercial sips 40 CANNERY VILLAGE/MCFADDEN SQUARE RESEARCH REPORT . Covers entire Cannery Village/ McFadden Square Area, plus Lido Peninsula . Includes "Descrip- •tion of existing. environ mental conditions" Staff Report to Planning Commission February 1977 Specific Area Plan Program AREAWIDE GENERAL CONCEPT PLAN . Land Use . Development Intensity . Circulation To be discussed at public study sessions 'and approved by Planning Commission, only as a basis deve- lopment of individual sector plans Staff Report & Draft Concept Plan to -Planning Commission 19y7 PRELIMINARY SPECIFIC PLANS - By Sectors Includes: 1. Circu- lation, Parking', Public Improve- ments 2. Zoning . . Start with. Cannery Vil- lage (Area "All) PUBLIC REVIEW OF . PRELIMIN-'. ARY SPECIFI PLAN . Public hearings before Planning Commis- sion FINAL SPECIFIC PLAN . Revis- ion's and referen- ces based on public hearings . Includes environ- mental impacts, mitigation measures, alterna- tives, (as required by CEQA) PUBLIC REVIEW OF FINAL SPECIFIC PLAN AND ADOPTION . Public hearings before Planning Commission and City Council . Circu- lation, Parking, Public Improve- ments Plan Adopted - by Reso- lution Zoning Adopted by Ordinance L? LT Is CITY OF NEWPORT .BEACH CALIFORNIA March 22, 1977 Mr. James C. Person, Jr. Attorney at Law Delaney's Restaurants P.O. Box 86 Costa Mesa, California 92627 Dear Mr. Person: City Hall 3300 Newport BIvd. (714)(0-2UR 640-2137 Your letter of February 8, 1977 to the Mayor and City Council regarding the parking situation in the Cannery Village area has been referred to me for reply. Ile are now working with the Planning Commission on a Specific Area Plan for that area. During the time of consideration of the Specific Area Plan, the park- ing problem and the parking requirements for all of the land uses in the area will be taken into consid- eration. Property owners will be notified of the times and places of public hearings and will be given ample opportunity to participate. We know of your interest and concern and sincerely hope that you will make your views known to the Planning Commission during the time of planned development. Very truly yours, DEPARTMEIT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT r ' D1rector RVH/kk - ' _ CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER March 1, 1977 TO: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR FROM: City Manager Attached is a letter from DeLaney's Restaurant re- questing the Council to take action to require off-street parking for new development in the Cannery Village. The Council referred this to the Planning Commission for study. Attachment ROBERT L. WYNN C 05 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH I RnI I COUNCILMEN MINUTES 9� 9 OON�•� G�s��9ff ��CAI I \ February 28, 1977 inincv (c) Proposed Ordinance No. 1717, being, AN Newport ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Shores AMENDING SECTION 20.61.060 OF THE NEWPORT Specific BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE TO REQUIRE A USE PERMIT Area FOR RESTAURANT USES WITHIN THE AREAS DESIG- Plan NATED FOR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE 0-1717 NEWPORT SHORES SPECIFIC AREA PLAN, Planning Commission Amendment No. 485, a request initiated by the City of Newport Beach. (Report from the Community Development Department) 2. The following resolutions were adopted: (a Removed from the Consent Calendar. (b) moved from the Consent Calendar. (c) Res o ution No. 9015 authorizing the Mayor and Traffic City erk to execute a cooperative financing Signal agreeme t between the City of Newport Beach R-9015 and the ty of Costa Mesa for modification of traffic ignal at Irvine Avenue and Westcliff Dr ve. (Report from the Public Works Departme t) (d) Resolution No. 90 6 authorizing the Mayor and Traffic City Clerk to exec e a cooperative financing Signal agreement between th City and the State of R-9016 California, Department of Transportation, in connection with the con ruction of a traffic signal at Coast Highway a 4 Prospect Street. (Report from the Public Wor s Department) (e) Resolution No. 9017 authorizin hbittal Coast Hwy of an application to the Southeornia Bikeway Association of Governments (SCAsting R-9017 S.B. 921 facility funds for conn of Coast Highway Bikeway adjacent ores. (Report from the Public Works D \Associat (f) Resolution No. 9018 authorizingor nd OrCo City Clerk to execute an agreemeen Airport the City of Newport Beach and Vsociat R-9018 for consulting services in connection with Orange County Airport. (Exhibit) (g) Resolution No. 9019 authorizing the Mayor Mar' apark and City Clerk to execute a consent to sale :R-901 of Mobilehome and Trailer Space in Newport Marinapark (Tredick and Scott). (Report from the City Attorney) 3. The following communications were referred as indicated: lea (a) To the Planniniz Commission, a letter to Cannery Mayor Dostal from James Person, Jr., attorney Village �= for the Delaney's Restaurants, requesting that Council take action to require off- Parking street parking for the various small industrial lJ concerns in the Cannery Village area. (Copies mailed to Council) (b) Removed from the Consent Calendar.,�„�--^^""� Volume 31 - Page 52 C*Y OF NEWPORT BENCH COUNCILMEN pp�G\n C p N F i yy� ■-Tow February 28. 1977 MINUTES (a) To staff, a letter from C. P. Avery regarding Dredging undercutting damage to City property caused by dredging operations for the Marina at 3300 Via Lido. (Copies mailed to Council) (d) To staff for inclusion in on -going study, a Balboa - letter from W. Merting regarding the leasing Newport of the pier concessions at both the Balboa Pier Newport piers. (Copies mailed to Council) Concessions taff for reply, a letter from Mrs. Jean Animal owaky regarding the reason for being late Regulations aying her dog license and asking that the be waived. (Copies mailed to Council) taff for reply, a letter from H. Scott Speed sen, the principal of the Anderson School \Ch)To Limits ted at 1900 Port Seabourne, protesting possibility of an increase in the posted ad limit on Port Seabourne from 25 MPH. its mailed to Council) v from the Consent Calendar. he ty's representative to the League, a SB 164 letter f m the Orange County Division of the League of ities requesting support in oppos- ing Senate ill 164, proposing compulsory and binding arbi ration in labor disputes. (Copies mailed to Cou il) (i) To the City's r resentative to the League, a League of letter from the ange County Division of the Calif League of Californ a Cities, regarding Cities vacancies on State eague Advisory Committees Cmtes for Administrative S ices and Employee Relations. (Copies led to Council) (j) To the City's represents ive to the League, a League of letter from the Orange Co my Division of the Calif League of California Citie requesting dele- Cities gates be ready to vote on t e issue of sales tax origin and strikes by fa workers during harvest season. (Copies with esolutions from the cities of Orange and rba Linda mailed to Council) (k) To pending Legislation and Ethics ommittee, Water a resolution from the City of Place tia Conservation encouraging the use of water saving evicea. (Copies mailed to Council) (1) To the Water Committee, a letter from t Water California Water Resources Board requesti g financial support for informing the public and the policy -makers regarding programs to provide California with adequate water supplies. (Copies mailed to Council) (m) To staff for inclusion in ongoing study, a Senior letter from Ron Yeo commenting on the Master Citizens Plan for the Senior Citizens Center. (Copies Center mailed to Council) Volume 31 - Page 53 Mailing Address: Post Office Box 86 Costa Mesa, California 92627 �Y RESTAURANTS 637,IDO PARK DRIVE, NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92663 TELEPHONE: 675-2565 February 8, 1977 JAMES COLEMAN PERSON, JR. Attorney at Law Milan Dostal, Honorable Mayor of the City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92663 Dear Mayor Dostal: Recently, as a representative of Mr. Francis M. Delaney, I attended a meeting of citizens to discuss the parking situation within the Cannery Village area of Newport Beach. Included among those present was Mr. Richard Hogan a Director of Community Development of our City. Mr. Delaney and I feel that this group can be of great assistance tothe City with reference to the rather critical parking situation within the Cannery Village area. it is my plan to take an active part on behalf of Mr. Delaney to do what we can to help to rectify this rather critical situation. During the course of the meeting, Mr. Hogan gave us an overview of the City's policies concerning parking within the area. Mr. Hogan, during the course of the discussion, noted that with reference to new small industrial uses within Cannery Village, there are no requirements for off-street parking. Quite actually, I was somewhat astounded by this policy in view of the rapidly changing nature of the Cannery Village area. �An inquiry as to the reasons for this from Mr. Hogan indicated that the policy was set by the City Council some years ago in an effort to attract small industry into the area. I inquired as to whether or not this policy is sound plan- ning and came away with the impression that there may be some ques- tion as to whether or not it is. It certainly appears that such a policy might be discriminatory against commercial business within the area who have to satisfy the requirements for off-street parking. I believe that Mr. Hogan's position is that he is to implement the policy as set by the City Council. I understand this as his responsibility, however, I question as to whether or not the policy as set by the City Council is in the best interest of the community. R om00 e t OeNeOe 11� Milan Dostal, Honorable Mayor of the City of Newport Beach Page -2- February 8, 1977 I would appreciate a reevaluation of this situation by the City Council, With new commercial uses being implemented in:the area on a daily basisr I certainly feel that the off- street parking situation is critical for all businesses, whether commercial or industrial. As I previously mentionedr I will continue, on behalf of Mr. Delaney and the Delaney Organization, to work with the citizens group and the City in trying to find solutions to this problem. I would appreciate the Council giving due consideration to the question proposed within this letter and would be happy to discuss same with you any time. regard, Thank you for your anticipated cooperation in this Very truly, your I t , James C. Person,�,Jr. JCP/kh cc: Mr, Richard Hogan, Director of Community Development Mrs, Trudi Rogers, Councilwoman a . . The Rev. John P. Ashey 11, P,cctor salr2t tames episcopdL church 3209 VIA LIDO • NER'PORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92663 (71-1) 675-0210 November 9, 1976 Mr. Richard Hogan Director of Community Development City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, Ca. 92663 Pear Neighbor: As you know a number of people having an interest in the problems of inadequate parking in the Lido Peninsula -Cannery Village area have been discussing the matter in the last few weeks with us. It would now seem profitable for a few of those interested to meet together to exchange information and hopefully begin the task of solving the problem. Such a meeting will be held at the Cannery Restaurant on Tuesday, November 30, 1976, at 7:00 A.M. A no host breakfast will be offered. Please phone the Church office by November 29, 1976 to make a reservation. Phone (71-4) 676=0210. ' A breakfast meeting was chosen so that attendees can get on to their day's responsibilities by at least 9:30 A.M. Very truly yours, William Frederickson, Jr. Convenor W 1mmm CO. r cc: Newport Beach City Councilwoman, Mrs. Howard Rogers =+ e �� • N�? CRP �f• � P� OSED PARKING DISTRICT AD0SS LIST Michard ?Logan Director of Community Development City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, Ca,•92663 (714) 640-2137 'Am. Frederickson, Jr. 2133 Channel Road Balboa, Ca. 92661 (714) 673-7265 ST. JAMES EPISCOPAL CHURCH REPRESENTATIVES Frank H. Trans 2018 E. Bay Front Balboa, Ca. 92661 (714) 675-2674 Eileen Hudson 36 Pine Valley Lane Newport Beach, Ca. 92660 (714) 644-0322 Bruce Blackman 3408-1 Via Oporto Newport Beach, Ca. 92663 (714) 673-9334 FIRST CHURCH OF CHRIST SCIENTIST REPRESENTATIVES Doreen Marshall 367 Via Lido Soud Newport Beach, Ca. 92663 (714) 673-48'26 Jack Zaremba 1263 Rutland Road Newport Beach, Ca. 92660 (714) 642-8359 548-2011 Richard Elliott Koll Company 1901 Dove Street -rt;yP ,tyawkll, Newport Beach, Ca. 92660 (714) 833-3030 Edward Migge Orange Coast Developers 3650 Cherry Avenue Long Beach, Ca. 90801 (714) 846-9611 Fred McLaren, Hughes Markets 2716 San Fernando Road Los Angeles, Ca. 90039 (213) 227-8211 Roger Rendell Hughes Markets 2716 San Fernando Road Los Angeles, Ca. 90039 (213) 227-8211 Francis Delaney Delaney's 632 Lido Park Drive Newport Beach, Ca. 92663 (714) 675-2565 Robert Shelton Robt. Shelton, Inc. 500 Newport Center Drive Newport Beach, Ca. 92660 (714) 644-5900 Bill Hamilton Cannery Restaurant 3010 Lafayette Avenue Newport Beach, Ca. 92663 (714) 675-5777 Robert Norris Manager, Bank of Newport 32nd at Lafayette Newport Beach, Ca. 92663 (714) 675-6333 DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Department of Community Development June 14, 1974 City Manager Community Development Director Specific Area Plan for Cannery Village In response to your memo asking when we propose to do the Specific Area Plan for Cannery Village, I have attached a copy of the projects and the.tentative schedule of the Advance Planning Division. The project list has been considered and approved by the Planning Commission. This does not mean that it is unalter— able, but it is the Commission's preference at the present time. The Cannery Village Specific Area Plan is listed as No. 3 under future projects. i hope we will be able to begin our work on it before the end of the calendar year. R. V. HOG AN RVH/kk 3 MAYOR COUNCIL MANAGER ASST. MGR. , ADMIN. ASST. 0 ATTORNEY CITY CLERK COMM. DEV•, , 0 FINANCE 5 0 FIRE , GEN. SERVICES LIBRARY MARINE SAFETY ACTION & DIS FILE INFORMATION • nFVIEW d COMMENT Al, -?,I) PUBLIC RELATIONS May C. AVO O PUBLIC RELATIONS•1077 WEST BALL ROAD•ANAH Mr. Robert Wynn City Manager City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, Ca. 92660 Dear Bob: As a followup to our conversation I am sending you a copy of the Public Relations proposal submitted to the Cannery Village Merchants Association. This correspondence basically covers some of the points of our talk. Thank you again for your time and interest. Special commendation should go to Mike Wilson of the Display Ad- vertising department at the Daily Pilot. Mike has spent two years attempting to "get it'together" so that the individual merchants would do some advertising for the area. He has recently succeeded and the ad is now running weekly in his newspaper. Mike's dedication to the future of this area and his perseverance has now made it possible, I believe, to further help this group of independent businessmen join together. And, I seem to think that during the 13 weeks of scheduled advertising will be the best time to approach them. I certainly know that you are vitally interested in the future of the Civic Center area of Newport Beach. And, you will probably agree with me that this basic approach used by Mike is the only way the Cannery Village will grow naturally, namely: independent support (each advertising is on a separate contract) in a joint effort. If you can think of any way I can be of service to the City of Newport Beach in this endeavor, please let me know. Sincerely, - / - - - ----- - - - - R1ch�C. Gavotto _ U President PGBLIC RELATIONS RCG/me cc Mike Wilson - RICHARD C. GAVOTTO 1077 WEST BALL ROAD ANAHEIM, CALIF. 92602 (714) 772.0144 CONSULTANTS FOR EFFECTIVE PUBLIC RELATIONS CONSULTANT'S FOR EFFECTIVE PUBLIC RELATIONS COUNCILMEN P� �� p0 �� f cmp ROLL CALL T v N N CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH February 11, 1974 MINUTES INDEX authorizing execution of an amendment to the off- si agreement between the City of Newport Beach and Rolly u'aski-8 ssociated, Inc. for Balboa Inn, was adopted. _ CONSENT CALENDAR: Motion x The following items were approved by one motion affirming Ayes x x x x x x the actions on the Consent Calendar: Absent x 1. The following resolution was adopted: Resolution No. 8195 designating one-way streets in Cannery Cannery Village (portions of 30th and 31st Street). (A Village report from the Public Works Director was presented.) One-way rs R-8195 The o owing communications were referred as indicated: Referred to staff for inclusion in Transportation Plan/anstudy, letters from Spencer Crump and Irvine Terracen Community Association favoring a bypass of the Plan Corona del Mar segment of Coast Highway. Referred to the Planning Commission for inc Sion in General study on General Plan, letter from Eastblu Home- Plan owners Community Association opposin a draft Circulation Element of the General PI Referred to the Pending Legislation Committee, reso- OrCo lution of the City of San Juan C istrano recognizing Health action of the Orange County ealth Planning Council Plug relating to Resolution No. 73-11-26-3. Council Referred to Pending e.TS gislation Committee, resolution Pres of the City of San Glemente'expressing dissatisfaction Nixon's and disapproval nd voicing opposition to certain Property action as take - by the Orange County Board of Super- Appraisal visors requ sting State Board of Equalization to con- duct a sp cial appraisal reevaluation for property taxatio valuation purposes of the President Richard Nixo residence and parcel in the City of San Clement eferred to Pending Legislation Committee, reso- Police & lution of the City of Seal Beach opposing Assembly Firemen Constitutional Amendment 67 (which would amend the house rule provisions of the California Constitution to take away from local government and give to the Legislature ultimate authority to provide procedures for hiring, promotion, discipline and dismissal of ' policemen and firemen in charter and general law cities). i Volume 28 - Page 46 February 11, 1974 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO. H-2 (a) TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: Public Works Department SUBJECT: CANNERY VILLAGE AREA ONE WAY STREET SYSTEM RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a resolution designating 31st Street one-way westerly between Lafayette and Villa Way and 30th Street one- way easterly between Lafayette and Villa Way. DISCUSSION: Street construction in the Cannery Village area has reduced the travel way on 30th and 31st Street to a width of twenty eight feet between curbs. This travel width is inadequate to accommodate parking and two directions of traffic. The businesses on the streets were contacted and the majority of the businesses approved the one-way street installation. The businesses on 31st Street concurred with the proposed one way street system on 31st Street extended to Newport Blvd. The staff considered this request and contacted the businesses on 31st Street between Villa Way and Newport Blvd. Eight of the ten businesses contacted were against an extension of the one way street system. The City Staff Traffic Affairs Committee has reviewed the proposed one-way street system and recommend 31st Street be designated one way westerly between Lafayette and Villa Way and 30th Street be designated one way easterly between Lafayette and Villa Way. Bill E. Darnell Traffic Engineer BED:edc 5�6 r 3� 3/sr 30 ar ST .-Ow S71, --♦► o 74 2Bx` 5i�a� 5r. liQ\.oq P LEGEND, EXISTING RECOMMENDED CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH DRAWN -1- DATE 7-5-'7,9 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT APPROVED A o 6* CANNERY VILLA TRA"� ONE WAY SYSTEM DRAWING NO. COUNCILMEN P� \IrP — o NFZ PO N-A OROLL CALL P N 9C vm CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH August 27. 1973 MINUTES INDEX `"—One-E-9uiip�ment Mechanic II in the General Services Departmenf-toiil-La position now vacant. One Refuse Crewman in the General Sezv`ices..De_ ap_rt ment to fill a position now vacant. 6. The request of property owners to utilize rock salt Cannery sidewalk finish on portions of Lafayette Avenue and Village' Lido Park Drive was approved. (A report from the T'r Public Works Director was presented:) 7. The following Harbor Permit Application was approved Harbor subject to prior approval of the U.S. Corps of Engi- Permi neers and conditions recommended by the Joint Harbor Committee: Harbor Permit Revision Application #143-31 for Mr. B. Cunningham, #31 Harbor Island, to replace non -conforming pier, ramp and floats with a,90' x 5I U-shaped slip requiring maintenance dredging. f report from the Marine Safety Director was pr sented.) 8. The staff was authorized to execute an eng' - eering Traffic services agreement with Herman Kimme & Assoc., Signal Inc. for design of traffic signal at Cro7 Drive North and San Joaquin Hills Road. (A reporst from the Public Works Director was present d.) ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CO SENT CALENDAR: 1. Proposed Ordinance No. 12, being, Dist Map 37 AN ORDINANCE p THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH REZON NG PROPERTY AND AMENDING DISTRICTING AP NO. 37, Planning Co fission Amendment No. 380 regarding request of Lain Development Company of Los Angeles to/ mend a portion of Districting Map No. 37 from a CAN-H District to an R-3 District and to Negative Declaration on property located on h side of Bayside Drive westerly of Marine and the Balboa Island Bridge, was presented. /accept was presented from the Community Develop - rector. Motion X Ordinance No. 1512 was introduced and set for public 0-1512 Ayes xxxxx&<x hearing on September 10, 1973. Volume 27 - Page 214 August 27, 1973 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO. H-7 TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: Public Works Department SUBJECT: REQUEST OF PROPERTY OWNERS TO UTILIZE A ROCK SALT SIDEWALK FINISH ON PORTIONS OF LAFAYETTE AVENUE AND LIDO PARK DRIVE RECOMMENDATION: That the use of a rock salt sidewalk finish be approved. DISCUSSION: Several property owners in the Lido Park Drive -Lafayette Avenue area have expressed an interest in using a rock salt finish on new sidewalk to be constructed in the area. The construction of most of this sidewalk is being funded by the adjacent property owners, with a portion adjacent to the Rhine channel being funded by the City. A contract for street and storm drain work in the area is expected to be awarded at the Council meeting of September 10, 1973. Some of the proposed sidewalk work will. be included in that contract, and other sidewalk construction by individual property owners is anticipated both before and after the City contract. tions: Recommendation for approval is based on the following considera- 1. Rock -salt finish is easily controlled in the con- struction stage. 2. Cost differentials are relatively small. 3. Maintenance problems are not significant. 4. There are no pedestrian safety problems. 5. There are enough property owners in the area interested in the concept to achieve continuity of treatment and a meaningful aesthetic improve- ment. eph Devlin tic Works Director hh CITY COUNCILMEN Z CPOcOm OvT p3 � ROLL CALL April 23 • OF NEWPORT BEACH 1973 MINUTES I 3. A report was presented from the Community Develop- Tract 7989 ment Department regarding Tentative Map of Tract 7989 (Revised) and Environmental Impact Report EIR/NB 72-029, request of Leadership Housing Systems, Inc, to subdivide 40.257 acres into five lots for condominium development, portion of Lot A, Banning Tract, located northerly of 19th Street and westerly of Whittier Avenue, zoned Unclassified. Motion x Tentative Map of Tract 7989 (Revised) was ap- Ayes x x x x x xed, subject to the conditions recommended by Absent x Planning Commission. po was presented from the Community Develop- Tract 7989 t Dep tment regarding the Final Map of Tract , reque of the Leadership Housing Systems, to subdivi a 40.257 acres into five lots for ominium dev opment, portion of Lot A, Banning \37t ct, located nort erly of 19th Street and westerly hittier Avenue, zo ed Unclassified. Motion xFinal Map of Tract 79 was approved, subject Ayes x x x x x xe conditions recommende by the Planning Com- Absent x ion; and Resolution No. 79 authorizing the R-7966 ution of an agreement with Lea ership Housing ems, Inc. , Subdivider, for the c improvements in Tract No. 7989, was5. \opted. A report was presented from the ParkBicycle Recreation Commission regarding BicTrails Committee appointments.Cmte Motion The report from the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Ayes x x x x x Commission was referred to the Council Appointments Absent x m Committee for review and recommendation. 6. A report was presented from the City Manager Cannery regarding special street signs for the Cannery Village Village Area. Motion x The special Cannery Village street name signs were Ayes x x x x x x approved, and the City was authorized to absorb one - Absent Ix third of the cost in the amount of $100. CONSENT CALENDAR: Motion The following items were approved by one motion Ayes x x x x x x7'i'r ing the actions on the Consent Calendar: Absent x The followin dinance was introduced and set for public hearing on 1973: Proposed Ordinance No. 1499, bei an ORDINANCE Dist Maps OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH RE NG 22 & 22-A 0-1499 Volume 27 - Page 92 :VI -ow Pr DAILY PILOT - 4/25/73 Signs ApproW "' So" *�b oj=ftwwaaIoaft.a "To CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH OFFICE OF THE CITY.MANAGER April 23, 1973 STUDY SESSION NO.7 COUNCIL AGENDA NO. G-6 TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: City Manager SUBJECT: SPECIAL STREET SIGNS FOR THE CANNERY VILLAGE AREA RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve of the special street name signs with the understanding that the City will finance $100 of the cost and the Cannery Village Association $200 of the cost. DISCUSSION: Mr. Arthur Tunnell, President of the Cannery Village Associa- tion, has requested by letter that the City's street name signs in the Cannery Village area be modified to indicate "Cannery Village", as well as the street name. A replica of the actual sign will be shown at the study session of April 23. The area designated by the Association is situated between Newport Boulevard and Lafayette Street and between 28th and 32nd Streets. There are 30 street name signs posted in the designated area. The City's sign shop can fabricate the requested signs at a cost of approximately $10.00 per sign, including materials, labor and overhead. The presently posted street name signs in the Cannery Village are approximately two years old and have an estimated additional four year life. Therefore, one-third of the estimated life of a street sign has been used, leaving two-thirds unused. It is proposed by the Associa- tion, therefore, that of the $300 replacement -cost they will pay two- thirds, or $200, and the City will absorb the remainder, or $100. The "Cannery Village" street name sign will cost approximately $1.50 more to fabricate than does a conventional City street name sign. RLW:mm OBERT L. WYNN E COUNCILMEN pC+ S,� Pp 0 N NA 'fp ?i Om 22O .1 O ROLL CALL T4 pa a C'9� CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH November 20, 1972 MINUTES INDEX CURRENT BUSINESS: 1. A report was presented from the City Manager re- Marine garding marine preserve patrol. Refuge Patrol The marine tide pool refuge patrol program as out - Motion x lined in Proposal 2 was endorsed; and the financing Ayes x x x of the patrol by a one-third contribution each from Absent x x t City, Orange County and the California State Dep tment of Fish and Game was authorized, with the un rstanding that the program would move ahead as rapidl as possible. 2. A report was p sented from the City Manager re- Insurance garding requirem t of a uniform certificate of City - insurance for bodily ' Jury and property damage and Owned a hold harmless provisi Property Resolution No. 7875, approvin a uniform "Certificate R-7875 Motion x of Insurance for Lease of City operty" and estab- Ayes x x x x lishing insurance requirements for es sees or users Absent x x of City property, was adopted. 3. A report was presented from the Public Wo s Di- Reloca- rector regarding the Relocation Assistance Pr ram tion required by California Assembly Bill 533 adopteB s Assistan Chapter 1574, Statutes of 1971. Program Motion x Resolution No. 7876, in connection with establishment 7876 Ayes x x x x of Relocation Assistance Program, was adopted. Absent x x 4. A report was presented from the Public Works Di- Lafayette rector regarding an agreement for the improvement Ave of portions of Lafayette Avenue. ImprvmtE Resolution No. 7877, authorizing the execution of an R-7877 agreement between the City and Western Canners, Motion x Ltd. , for the cost of design and construction of cer- Ayes x x x x tain street and storm drain improvements of portions Absent x x as a of Lafayette Avenue, wdopted; 5. A report was presented from the Public Works Di- West Npt rector regarding grading of West Newport Park at Park the Greenville -Banning Channel, C-1477. Motion x Re tion No. 7878, awarding a contract for grading R-7878 Ayes x x x x of West ort Park at the Greenville -Banning Absent x x Channel, C-147 as adopted. Volume 26 - Page 334 ce • November 20, 1972 G-Z/ TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: Public Works Department SUBJECT: AGREEMENT FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF PORTIONS OF LAFAYETTE AVENUE RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the subject agreement with Western Canners, Ltd. DISCUSSION: The subject agreement provides for fulfilling certain condi- tions of approval for Use Permit No. 1521 for development of the "Cannery" site at the southeast corner of LaFayette Avenue and Lido Park Drive. The agreement requires the developer, Western Canners, Ltd., to bear the cost of the design and construction of the street and storm drain improvements as shown on the attached sketch, and the City agrees to construct the improvements. These improvements are to be included in a project for the improvement of: Lafayette Avenue between 29th Street and 32nd Street; 31st Street between Villa Way and Lafayette Avenue; and Lido Park Drive from Lafayette Avenue to 300 feet easterly of Lafayette Avenue. The design of this project was authorized by the Council on December 27, 1971. Funds for construction of this project are provided in the current budget. Construction is scheduled for next spring. lin )i rectory Att. r,� �' ' xeW Sww. ' S`•,;•y , l/GtitSwu ;` . '9 g L • C' i �YCW TfA.It A� i «G ena �� O!sHAOEa AREAS /N4/CslTB /MPROYt=MENT3 . P�Q -To. B.E` F�4lO'-.�o.¢ Qy •7�/.�'STc^RN .; 4 CITE' OF NEWPORT BEACH DRAWN -R•6-2- DATE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT APPROVED _c{.}'ii/�'JT''ri 'F__- /MPRQi/ElY74rNT5 PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR a,Y LRfAY Y.T. ::flYC./ L/Do P,q.TK QRIYE/ R.E. NO. ........ DRAWING NO. R-: 5,?01 "L COUNCILMEN P� �� p0 � O o m 'fO ?i n'm ZZp0 N.� O ROLL CALL T� �'a m f' 1 pm CITY OF NEWPORT June 26. 1972 BEACH MINUTES INDEX ioxit fiat for view sites, park sites and bicycle trails in the lan, which properties are in imminent danger ofbei g dtveed, and report back to Council on July 10 with possible me financing said priorities. 5. A report was presented from the Marine Safety Old Department regarding the application of Burgess- Cannery Donovan, Inc. for Harbor Permit No. 221-3010 to Property construct a pier and float parallel to the bulkhead Harb bayward of Block 429, Lancaster's Addition, Lots Perm 1 - 7 (Old Cannery Property), and to construct a public pier bayward of the 30th Street street -end. Motion x Harbor Permit No. 221-3010 was approved with the Ayes x x x x x x x condition that the 30th Street pier will not extend beyond the U. S. Pierhead Line, and subject to the conditions recommended by the Marine Safety Depart- ment. Roy Woolsey, attorney representing Marinapark�11_esseMarina- requested the City to keep Marinapark as a mobpark park and suggested that the City obtain an raisal of the property to determine its true va Mayor McInnis adj ed the meeting at 11:08 P. M, Volume 26 - Page 173 „W{LL{HM U. GLHI'CI r'LHIVIV t1V V/HRUI'111CUIVAC 444 tV. IVCVVYun 1 DUULCVFitt U. IVCVVYUt11 6CHUt1, WAUt'Ur51V1H CIGOOV June 9, 1972 Mr. Donald McInnes, Mayor and City Council Members City of Newport Beach Newport Beach, California 92660 Mr. Mayor and Gentlemen of the Council: E� %I R om 09 t Deg p pt. 1g�2f� G og�,eN, C\F�G �'\F• I I was certainly unimpressed with the article that appeared on Page 1 of the "Daily Pilot” May 31, 1972. I feel it was very presumptuous of the paper to print this without review or per- mission of the parties involved. Since my personal statement and disappointment in regard to the Cannery Village has been exposed by the press, I intend to follow through by demonstrating how strict parking regulations can be a deterrent in the development of prime area. When I have completed my research and report, I shall present it to the council for review. 'The format of my report will parallel the Newport Beach general plan policies in that I propose the character and village -like atmosphere and quality be maintained. Sincerely, William C. Clapet WCC:rs JUN 13 1972 Date.. ..........� COPIES fE IT TO: I Mayor Siunugcr �—•, ;7j •Atamm} � Pu<6, World Director Ylan nlnk director Ulher coancumm WEji . Today's N.Y.-Stocks- VOL'. 65, NO. 152, 5 SECTIONS, 64 PAGES ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA WEDNESDAY, MAY 311 1972 N TEN CENTS Old Newport: Is It a Hiogh'Rise Graveyard9 Old Newport is going to become a "high,rise graveyard" if city councilmen maintain their present attitude in zoning concepts, a Newport Beach architect charged today. Likening councilmen to ostriches, William C. Clapet let fire at both the pro- posed height limit ordinance now before planning commissioners and the council's reaction to an innovative development plan for the Cannery Village area. He was also critical of council adoption of strict off-street parking regulations in the Old Newport -Cannery Village area. Clapet had represented the Cannery Village Association outlining a proposal to redevelop the Old Newport area at a meeting of councilmen last week. Councilmen declined to e n d o r s e Clapet's plan, instead adopting the tough parking rules and telling Cannery Villages representatives to come back with a more specific proposal. "L personally feel the city is either avoiding, or ignoring, the individual needs of unique portions of the city, not only in the Cannery area but other areas," Clapet said in a letter to coun- cilmen. "I realize we only had time to present one segment of need in a specific area of Newport Beach," Clapet said, adding, "I also noted that the council did not show enough interest to suggest a task force of the Cannery Village Association and members of the city staff to continue along the limes of our presentation to develop goals so that solutions could be achieved. "How can progress be made whether it be slow, radicalorwhatever, if one•of the principal parties fakes the posture of the ostrich with its head in the sand hoping the problem will solve itself," Clapet said. Councilmen have not formally received Clapet's letter and Mayor Donald A. McInnis said this morning he will reserve comment on it until he has a chance to read it. Clapet, in his letter, said the new park- ing regulations, which require one off- street space for each 250 square feet of store space "is only going to drive out the investor and create a low level slum type area in the back yard of city hall. "Attacking the proposed height ordinance, which would allow buildings up to 50 feet tall, with use permits, in the Old Newport area, Clapet said: "It can only result in the beginning of a high rise graveyard. "I feel the area from the Arches to McFadden's landing and beyond should be maintained in a relative low rise development since this area is on the ac- tive Inglewood -Newport Fault," Clapet said. "Nat only from the standpoint of the fault, but the fact that the early city of Newport was formed in this area, I feel this is an important element that should be preserved," he said. Nil - it tY pgBT N ttarlusdrg tqt yL b..t "' ' _ . . U.f�. Okays flow Au Rem • -edy NixonWelcomed Date DelayBy Polish Crowd WAMMM a" - > fasw teartier ate•d, ge gsaerm.wrrt t. So Ih=CWW saese0nats, a to year delay In 1. w� a�ei trwaded to ralase The soft gave Me dit me M& Mf to meet mudis a tba omamt of earbn mmomide ar phefedemai l ao- idoo t in as air. !ft act teal #000 raa aaidM Hats tirtaNit I i ow L the Am ddres were w the dtirs Una attiweta twl6eeaoteoie The tagdatk� cam traQiQ as meet pa r move IS of ~yrabyy to PtateWen Agency an > to meet sk dommep toed• mandated IF the IM tm Ate Tire eke Gees Home Wfth area WARSAW (UPI) — President Nimm mn rived b it cdwU welcome in the capital d Poland todty far a final popover I F refurzkoQ home and reporting to Cameo and the American People an his hieteric elgit days at We mosmr. mom- Mixon mod his party flew to Warsaw from Tebrao. has, wbte his departure Was deA ] m by a aeries of bamAw — ae of ties sea a mmmma edame be late Lid a wrWb after the arm bed, ben checked. (See related story. poge y) The Presided Lassa Warsaw Tbarm. day, and after bra arrival L the evaeog he wM go dieeci(y Lam Andt"m Air Face Hase to the Cap M for a 4:30 p m. PVf report to a joint saelaa of 0e�w -lie mtrdaa to Moscow. 15e l/arsaw weather Was 8n — a the waarm *A Date warm an it a bkw sty — wbm Mmda �n •e••• a aide AL amLrd '+ ere an's prowess was "a rigs d PaLad9 a dmity in the wwkL- The President and his wife Pat waked sbwfy dawn the pLm Steps amd, at ft bStiom, was gtam bomgueL d rawer by tww M The =d reedw ed tFwN from both is reI The Wnne were smalft broadly ad appeared rmperbabed by the bomb mg Imo- cidmts in Tehran. The Nunn nob eade rote Lam tie Warsaw airport was alag a breads ea. apartareA bo>7db�p W Iht �' Town d(striri where fivepery houses were nbuflt to IMh Calory *4s. Ftww Fes I BONDS .. . .rtr.s CAT�N� FRY VAAGE ASSOCIATION 512 1�2 29 TH. 92660 .TUNE 5, 1972 MAYOR DONALD MC GINNIS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH DEAR MAYOR MC GINNIS: LAST WEEK YOU RECEIVED A LETTER FROM ARCHITECT WILLIAM CLAPET CRITICIZING THE COUNCILS DECISION ON OFF-STREET PARKING IN M- DISTRICTS, MR, CLAPET VOLUNTEERED MANY HOURS, WORKING ON THE CANNERY VILLAGE PRELIMINARY MASTER PLAN, HIS DISAPPOINTMENT WITH THE COUNCILS DECISION IS UNDERSTANDABLE, I WISH TO POINT OUT THAT WHILE MR, CLAPET SPOKE FOR THE ASSOCIATION DURING OUR PRESENTATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL, THE STATEMENTS IN HIS LETTER REFLECT HIS PERSONAL VIEWS AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THOSE OF THE CANNERY VILLAGE ASSOCIATION, 'S6CER EE , ROBERT C, KAUSEN PRESIDENT RK/LK W(LLIAM C. CLAPET PLANNING/ARCHITECTURE May 26, 1972 444 N. N Mr. -Donald McInnis, Mayor, and City Council Members City of Newport Beach ,Newport Beach, California t Mr:•,Mayor;and Gentlemen of the Council: NEWPORT BEACH, CALI I want to�thank you again for allowing me the time Monday,•May 22, 1972, to present to you the preliminary planning studies for the Cannery Village Association. I personally feel the. city is either avoiding,'or ignoring, the-lindividual needs of unique por- tions of the city,/�ot only in the Cannery area but other,areas. I realize we only had time to present ,one segment of need'in a specific area of Newport Beach. We also pointed out that this specific area has it's problems by, contributions from other ad- joining areas of the city. I also noted that the Council did not show enough interest to suggest a t sk force of the Cannery Village Association and mem- bers of the city staff to continue along'the lines .of our pre sentation t develop goals so that solutions could be achieved. .How can progress be made whether it be slow, radical, or whatever, if one of the principal parties takesjthe posture of the ostrich with its head in the sand hoping the vroblem will solve itself. I As a professional and businessman in the community, I would like to se some interest and action taken by the city in a construc- tive manner. A strict parking regulation jn this'area is only going,.to drive out the investor and create a low level slum type area i.n the back yard of City Hall! It will create the drop of land values to a point that the fast talking developer could swoop down and build ari aesthetic abortion that could be a total dis- 'appointme�t to the city. Since;this area'As in the area of a proposed 32/50 foot height limit zone, it can only result in the beginning of a high rise ..graveyard. I feel the area from the Arches to McFadden;s landing and beyond should be maintained in a relative low rise development,,' since this area is on the active Inglewood/Newport•Fault. .Not (• only from the standpoint of the Fault, but the fact that the'early', City of'Newport was formed in this area, I feel this is an important element that should be preserved. yor, i y Council Newport Beach j page 2 / 5/26/72 I expect to have additional appearances before the Council in the future, possibly along the same directions in the Caftery Village, possibly in regard to other projects or pro - .grams. I can assure you I shall be as well prepared, but possibly better prepared,with more provocative presentations. Respectfully submitted, Y William C. Clapet WCC:rs i cc; Robert Kausen i • I 1 ' ti '• I Date MAY 3 0 1912 COPIES SENT TO, m, Wr \ 11Nn YYlf i • t•io. ney 1'�nnn Work, Direct" 1•Innning mreoto[ 'LJ ' 1 t:OLLaCIImpy 1 �i rj' ��y r g RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO CONSIDER CERTAIN AMENDMENTS TO TITLE 20 OF THE NEWPORT BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE WHEREAS, the LaFayette Square, or Cannery Village area, and Lido Peninsula contain many parcels of property zoned M-1; and WHEREAS, said areas are rapidly developing into complexes of specialty shops which can generate large amounts of vehicular traffic; and 'WHEREAS, the M-1 district allows retail and wholesale stores as well as the more conventional light industrial uses with- out a use permit; and WHEREAS, the development of retail and wholesale shops in the M-1 district has caused and will continue to cause a serious parking problem unless a practical solution for the control of off- street parking for this area is devised; and WHEREAS, the City Council has requested the Planning Commission to consider amending certain sections of Title 20 of the Municipal Code to require use permits for all non -manufacturing uses in the M-1 district; and WHEREAS, Sections 20.54.020 and 20.54.030 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code provide that amendments to Title 20 thereof may be initiated by resolutions of intention of the Planning Commis- sion, and, if so initiated, the Planning Commission shall hold at least one public hearing thereon and give notice thereof by publication; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission intends to consider proposed amendments to Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code requiring use permits for all non -manufacturing uses in the M-1 district at a public hearing to be held on the 16th day of March, 1972, at the hour of 7:30 P.M. in the Council Chambers -1- • C1 of the Newport Beach City Hall, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Secretary of the Newport Beach -Planning Commission is hereby directed to publish notice of said hearing in accordance with•the requirements of Section 20.54.030 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Regularly passed and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach, State of California, on the 2nd day of March , 1972 . Secretary -2- AYES NOES: - ABSENT Chairman DON dm 3/l/72 WILLIAM J. SCHWORER and ASSOCIATES REAL ESTATE - PROPERTIES - INVESTMENTS - Phone 714 ORiole 3-2554 OFMM 1740ANAHEIMSTHEET COSTA MESA. CALIF. 926U MAIMNOAODREe4 P.O. Box 475. Balboa Island March 10, 1972 Newport Beach. Celllomla S2&fr2 ¢ity of Newport Beach Department of Community Development Attention: R. V. Hogan, Director Dear Mr. Hogan: Re: "Lafayette Square" Area Thank you for your reply and information about new ordinances and the meeting on April 6. I know some of the planners and know they mean well. However, the city staff usually points out the problem and suggests a solution, etc. The problem at "Lafayette Square" is not solved by the suggested ordinance because no parking spaces are added or created thereby. The property owners will not buy expensive lots to meet the subject parking ordinance for several economic reasons. The only solution is for the owners to work out their problems with their lessees as in the past. So, please drop the whole subject, and we in turn will try to have our lessees park their cars out of the area to leave spaces for customers. Maybe the employees could bicycle to their work. Thank you. r Willi 1 Schworer RED n tDeel, p'ni Dft )lent MAR 1 41yI?®a NEWPpRT TY of CALI BEACy, /� March 6, 1972 Mr. William J. Schworer Van Loon Enterprises 1740 Anaheim Street Costa 67esa, California 92627 Dear Mr. Schworer: The City Council has requested that I reply to your letter.of February 16, 1972. The shops which are under construction in a building in the "Lafayette Square" area are in the 1-1-1 Zone which permits com- mercial and industrial uses without requiring any parking. The present regulations have been in existence for several years. The Planning Commission, having become aware of the possible problems that could be caused by expansion of com- mercial uses in the area, recommended that the Council adopt an emergency ordinance which would require all new uses to furnish the required parking. The Council,, at its meeting of February 28, 1972, adopted an emergency ordinance which would require all non -manufacturing, i.e., commercial uses, to be approved by use permits to which conditions could be attached. The intent of that emergency ordinance is that new commercial uses will be required to furnish parking, either on their own property or at a nearby site which would be suitable. The emergency ordinance would be effective for a period of ninety days unless extended at that time by the City Council. The Planning Commission has initiated a permanent change to the M-1 ordinance to require either (1) that all new uses. furnish parking, or (2) that only commercial uses be required to furnish parking in the manner prescribed in the Council's emergency ordinance. The hearings before the Planning Commis- sion will be held on April 6, 1972, at 7:39 P.M. in the Council Chambers at City Hall. Mr. William J. Schworer - Page 2 Copies of the proposed ordinance changes will be sent to you prior to that hearing date. The Planning Commission will welcome any comments that you may have. I will be glad to discuss the proposed changes with you if you wish. Very truly yours, R. V. HOGAN, Director DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT RVH/kk CC: City Manager '0 March 6. 1972 • '. Mr. William J. Schworer Van Loon Ento.rprtsos 1740 Anaheim Street Costa Mesta, California 92627 Doer Mr. Schworer: The City Council has requested that I reply to ,your letter of February 160 1072., The shopx which, are under construction. in a building in the "Lafayette Square" area are in the M-l"Zone which p*rmits com- martial and industrial uses without requiring any pparkimg. The present regulations have been in existence for•se'veral 'gf years. The Planning, Commission, -having become .aware the possible problems that could be caused by expansion of com- marcial uses in the area, recommended that the Council adopt an emergency ordinance which would require all new uses to furnish the required parking. a The Council, at its meeting of _February 28, 1972, adopted an emergency ordinance which would require all non -manufacturing, w i.e., commercial usest to be approved by use permit's to which' conditions could be attached, The intent of that emergency ordinance is that new commercial uses.wi7l be required to furnish parking. either on their own property or at a near y ' site which would be suitable.. The'emorgeney ordinan'c6''wou d be effective for a period'of ninety days unless extended at . a that time by the City Council.' planning Commission has t:nitiated a permanent chahge,te the M-1 ordinance to require either (1') that all new uses' furnish parking, or (2) that only commercial uses be required r to furnish papking in the ;manner prescribed in the Council Is emergency ordinance. The hearings before the-Pi-Anning Commis- sion will be held on April 6. 1972. at 7:30 F.K. in the Council Chambers at City Nall. , TO: Mr..blftiiem J, Sohworor Page 2 Copies of the proposed ordinance changes will be sent to,you 44' prior to that hearing date, The Planning Commission will welcome any comments that y04 may have. I will be glad to discuss the proposed chamges with y04 if you wish,. r ` Very truly yours, R. Y. HOGAN Director DEPARTMENT bP COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT RYHIkk CC: City Manager a ' WILLIAM J. SCHWORER and ASSOCIATES REAL ESTATE - PROPERTIES - INVESTMENTS - Phone 714 ORiole 3-2654 OFFICE 1740ANAHEIMSTRUT COSTA MESA, CALIF. 92627 "UNO ADDRESS P.O. Boz475, Balboa Island Newmrt Boach, California 92662 February 16,1972 To the Honorable Mayor and City Council Newpoit Beach,California Gentlemen; I own and manage property at 29th and Lafayette Streets and twice during the past week my tenants have frantically phoned me re; proposed parking ordinaces etc. I wish to go on record that the parking situation in that area is no worse than other areas,and I have never had to park further than one or two blocks from my building in the past six years. Moving the fishing fleet to Dana Point has helped the situation during the week ends. MY TENANTS AND MYSELF DO NOT WANT METERS OR ANY CHANGES. Whoever allowed 28 shops•or studios to occupy one building, and no parking prov&ded,should be horsewhipped. I am attaching an article which generally reflects my feelings about the whole planning staff operations and feel the city actually suffers from their hasty ideas. Please have someone inform me of any proposed changes so I can object. Respectfully, Van Loon Enterprises ��j Manager S�-., 1)ifI9..F,E.B.., 2.?„1972 COPIES SENT TO: ❑ JlAyot - Alnnager ❑ %-lwncy 0 Yu}H, Nurk• 01r,ector �r'innnnryl INrec[or Vlhcr ❑ (:VtlGC1IlIIeai �f1 0 i v ' rte po- Geor, :—� . • ezpancled tary, �nentosty ing s , ' opme, 1 Unreasonable and almost paranoiac opposition to pro•' ledgeQ posed construction projects by groups of self-styled e}, Sen. perts in planning, zoning and construction, "as well as a chairm wishy-washy politicians,", is due to backfire before the Bank n year is out, according to a leading national real estate ban A ./ analyst. (• Sanfo•d R. Coodk'% +vhnse firm has offered advice Sen. Ro and market research involvinv some S26 billion in man of t American and foreign developments, warns that tactics tional C :'ye of extreme ecologists and environmentalists are trip- Martin, pling some projects. -Federal "Rabid ecologists and environmentalists who are pres- Roard surizinz planning commissions, city councils and county , boards of supervisors are making it virttiaily impossible ter, clip for even the highest quality builders to break ground in ident of ? -certain communities with the acute need for good hour- tional At ing within the economic reach of potential buyers," The he said. 1stroha Recentiv a builder bought a properly zoned for 40 apartment units prr acre. A shott time later, he got a Astrodo• i, LL 3>nl had been _Ov.•. r :_ zoned to a density of eight units per acre. exhibits "At the price the land cost him, this not only meant a cipation a sharp reduction in units, it meant down -zoning to eco- nomic disaster. gram e 1 Hypocrisy Showing theme tI • .themi "The backlash is coming because now the dishonesty tion Ind and hypocrisy of many extremists is shtnving for what it ternation s—a 'to hell with you newcomers' attitude artfully hid-=t;oartt [ deft under the 'guise of zeal to protect the environment. .. nLi'i[IPr' C;Pbp;m)Nre anti tlnliri GrC gill prrnpien for I m11 i5'i i; by MY i al actin he Fn;il. Goodkin, who has an excellent batting average in 1 forecasting industry trends for 14 years, said:�}�� 1 "The industry must and will get together to educate I=I e the public and city fathers that density is. not necessard- I c� i ly synonymous with slums, that good planning helps the s JUST 3S CUST, u i whole Cnmmnfty and that professionals should plan for ( AT AFFOROAI t +, land use not screaming laymen at hysterical. zoninggoer YARD r a y ! COURSE OF RE. • meetings, along with gutle,s politicians who accede to ,j COUNTRY C[US °j superheated pressures because they care more about ;j B-1-G 3 i i votes than land and environment." i $37,950 His advice to citdzens who want to do a'conscientious it '1 over sa.000 job at zoning hearings follows: �m i a"Aat ,n E> Get detaifed information before choosing sides. Visit i "ifs ;;e' 1 n. tr the builder's projects in other areas. Listen to •ar- v,S.r to guments; don't go to the meetings just to be "against." TAKE: Santa Consider that townhouses and apartments often attract i aernard;no Fr, more affluent people than R-1 zones. Don't be' stamped- 151 " thCon',vo Ed by leaders who are playing [o the Tess looking IOC'' Geen Posy-t[ F' g 1 �� Open Oaily `. headlines and for political attention. press, __ •� „Sfi I`! �i 1r 1'Y�`a _�.:`:�'-f'41 A4"4+Y: T �vTs"A1�^ - _ -n- . r ;r TO: FROM: SUBJECT: CITY- OF NEWPORT BEACH OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER January 24, 1972 MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL City Manager STUDY SESSION ITEM COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM # F-1 REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT - CANNERY VILLAGE AREA - POLICE FACILITY INTRODUCTION: During the study session of January 10, 1972, the Council requested ad- ditional information on the possibilities of constructing a police facility in concert with a general improvement program for the Cannery Village area.. The mechanics for this project could include: (1),A Redevelopment Agency utilizing federal and/or state programs; (2) A 1911 Improvement Act District; and/or (3) A Parking Authority. The discussion below provides generalized information about these possibilities. DISCUSSION: Redevelopment Agency. There are a number of federal programs that may be available to Newport Beach. A new program called "Neighborhood Development Pro- gram" is available to local public agencies authorized by state law to undertake projects with federal assistance. Local Public Agencies (LPA) may be a separate public agency established by the City Council, or it may be a department of the municipal government. These programs for cities of over 50,000 population are funded two-thirds by the federal government. This particular program gives priorities to pro- jects in which over 50% of the project -area to be benefitted consists of low and moderate income housing. ,This criteria does not fit the Cannery Village area, but the second priority is the project whi.ch.will develop new employment opportunities, and this may apply to the Cannery Village area. The normal type of work authorized by this program is the acquiring and clearing of blighted areas and disposing of the land for redevelopment in accordance with planned uses. A project, however, may involve rehabilitation of structures in a deteriorated area by property owners accompanied by improvement of community facilities by the local government. The communityfacilities•could include street improvements and parking structures. While police facilities cannot be part of a project cost, credit can be given far the local financial share for any reconstruction or development of a police facility and/or city hall. The negative aspects of this program are that it requires an ap- proved "workable program for community improvement" and the average elapsed time from beginning, to the completion of the -planning stage is approximately two years. Implementation following planning could vary from one to ten years. Page -2- Redevelopment Agency - continued Another federal program is commonly called the "Code Enforce- ment Program." This program provides low interest loans (3%) to a property owner to rehabilitate structures, and grants of up to two-thirds of the project.costs for street and alley improvements. To be eligible a city must have a certified "workable program for community improvement" and the elapsed time from commencement to end of planning stage is approximately one year. An area selected fora concentrated. code enforcement program should be predominately residential in character and with building code violations in at least 20% of the buildings in the area. Eligible• costs in computing the federal grant may include expenditures for code administration, such as organizing and supervising a compliance program, inspect- ions, establishing and maintaining record systems, and demolition of unsound structures. Costs of public improvements which may be covered by the federal grant include repair and reconstruction of necessary streets, curbs, sidewalks, street lighting, tree planting and similar improvements. A number of -other programs do exist, but it appears from a brief analysis that the two explained above would have most application. An official from HUD has agreed to visit the area on the 25th and at that time be more specific'. This was the earliest date on which he was available. I received the impression from my telephone con- versation that HUD was interested, but that funds were limited and there is a backlog of projects. The conversation was cordial but pessimistic. I have had successful experiences with both programs, but must report that they are generally characterized with contro- versy and frustrating delays. The Health and Safety Code, commencing with Section 33000, es- tablishes a procedure for the creation and administration of a Re- development Agency. The Redevelopment Agency authorized by state law can do all of the things permitted under the federal program. The,limiting factor is the financing. Financing under the state law is provided by "tax increment" rather than a state grant. Basically, the tax increment is the difference between the old as- sessed values and the new assessed values after the redevelopment occurs. This program requires a fairly substantial sum to "prime the pump" and finance the Redevelopment Agency until the new as- sessed valuation is developed. The City of Long Beach has used the state redevelopment law with medium success, utilizing loans from the oil fund to "prime the pump." 2. 1911 Act. The City Council is familiar with the mechanics, advantages and disadvantages of this procedure. In the interest of brevity, this Act will not be,further explained. Hopefully, pictures and plans of a downtown improvement pro gject will be available at the study session to show the Council. Page -3- 3. Parking i922nity. There are a number of state acts designed to construct park- ing facilities and/or parking structures. They are explained in detail in Exhibits 1, 2 and 3. The land planners in the area having experience with parking facilities report that as a rule of thumb the land values should be between $7.00 and $8.00 per sq. ft. before an elevated parking structure is feasible. If land is less than $7.00 per sq. ft., it is more efficient and economical to purchase land And provide surface parking. City Hall property values as established by Cedric White's appraisal in 1969 is $4.43 per sq. ft. Attached are copies of reports from the Public Works Department and the Assistant City Manager concerning interim improvements and space avail- ability, respectively. RLW:mm Attachments 0at ROBERT L. V IYNN I .• Erg BIT 1 1 HICLc PO vtl G DISTRICT LAW OF 1943 Streets.and Eighways Code - Division 18 - Part i - Sections 31,500-31,933 The Vehicle Parking District Law of 1943 is a District Act under which the cost of acquiring and Lmproving parking lots is assessed upon the real property in the district benefited. It is the most widely used of any of the Acts available. Since the cost is financed by assessment rather than by future parkin.- revenues, free parking or parking at a very low rate may be provided. The proceeding is initiated by a petition from the owners of the property in the district of lands benefited and proposed to be assessed. The petition describes the boundaries of the proposed district and describes the property to be acquired and/or improved for parking. The petition must be signed by the owners of land in the proposed district,ovairg lands constituting more than - one-half of the area of all assessable lands. If the assessment limit to pro- vide the parking facilities is to be measured by the assessed value of land alone, then the petition must also be signed by owners owning lands of an assessed value or not less than 51% of the total assessed value. If the assess- ment is to be based upon land and improvements within the assessable district the petition must be signed by owners owning lands and improvements thereon of an assessed value of not less than 6(f/ of the total assessed value. The petition is then filed with the City Council and the City Council requires the staff to make an estimated spread of assessments upon which public hearings are conducted. A majority protest, from owners of more than one-half of the =°ea of property in the district forces the City Council to terminate the proceedings. An owner may sign such a protest even though he has originally signed the petition. At the hearing, among other things, the Council must find that all of the land in the district will be benefited by the parking improvements. If- land is to be purchased, the purchase price must be added to the estimated improvement costs. The Superintendent of Streets of the City then prepares an assessment roll and apportions an amount among the individual parcels in the district in accordance with the estimated benefits to be received from the project. The Act does not specify any particular formula for determining benefits and thus allows the assessment in each proceeding to be spread in light of the facts of that particular situation. In instances where each parcel is reasonably near to at least one parking lot the Superintendent might spread the assessment solely on tie basis of assesed value of land, area, frontage, or a combination thereof. Y.ow:ever, if somae parcels are a great deal closer to the parking lot than other parcels the factor of distance or proximity to the parking lot would ordinarily be taken into consideration in determining proportionate benefit. After tie proposed assessments are prepared the Council conducts a hearing on the proposed assess -tints to determin= if the assessments have been made in an equitable iaanner.� At this hearing the property owners have no right of majority protest, such as existed at the first hear-,..;. The purpose of this hearing is not to'deter ine whethar the parking facilities are needed but whether the assess- ments have been spread equitably. then the final assessment is recorded each property ow.:er has thirty days in which to pay all or part of his assessment in Exhibit I - Page 2 --- - -- - - - - --- : Vehicle Parkin- District La;a of 1943 — - cash, if he so desires. A bond is issued against each unpaid assessment or the unpaid balance thereof and these bonds are then sold by calling for com- petitive bids. The bonds must be sold for par. The interest and principal is then retired'in equal annual installments over a period of years determined by the original petition. The nura)ar of annual installmonts must not exceed twenty-five years. Vith the money raised by the sale of bonds, or other contributions, the. parking facilities are constructed. Thereafter,'the parking lot is controlled and operated by a Board of Parking Corm-issiorers. The members of the Board are normally appointed by the Mayor, subject to confirmation by the City Council. The City Council cannot itself act as the Board but an individual member or members of the Council -ay be appointed to it. Freedon is givan to the Board as to the riethod of operation. The parking lots can be free lots, can be operated with parking peters, or can be attendant operated. Lots can be leased to a private operator but the operator must maintain public parking facilities, and whether the parking lot is operated by a private operator or by the Board directly, the rates charged must not be higher than those fixed by the Board after a public hearing. All of the proceedings described herein are taken by the City Council as a City function. The parking facilities acquired are oc%med by the City and the Board of Parking Commissioners is a City Commission. EXHIBIT II WHICLE PARKTING DISTRICT LAW Or 1949 Streets and Highways Code - Division 18 - Part 2 - Sections 32,500-33,552 Under this statute the acquisition and/or improvement of parking facilities are financed by the issuance of bonds payable from revenues from the parking facilities. Sdhere this Act is used no taxes or assessments upon property are levied to pay the bonds. The bonds are issued and the parking facilities are provided by a parking authority which is a public corporation separate from the City. Normally, the area within which the parking authority has jurisdiction coincides with the total city area but there is a provision whereby the juris- diction of the authority can be limited to certain projects or to a certain area less than the whole city, it should be noted, however, that there is no provision for two or more authorities in the same city. The Act also provides that the city itself can through its City Council exercise the powers of an authority. When the City Council does this, however, it does it as a parking authority, not as a City Council. If the powers of the authority are vested in a body other than the five members of the City Council they are appointed by the Mayor with the approval of the City Council. Generally speaking, these revenue bonds cannot be issued by the authority until tha voters of the City have by majority vote approved the revenue bond method of financing parking projects, but_through a lease arrangement this reenirerxnt.maybe waived. The Act gives broid powers to the authority to pro- vide covenants and agreements for the protection and security of the bond holder. These would, of course, include a covenant to fix such fees, charges and rentals for the parking facilities so as to be sufficient to pay the principal and interest on the bonds as the same fall due. The authority itself has no juris- diction to place and maintain parking meters on the public streets, but for the payment -of any bonds issued by the authority the City Council of the City may pledge revenues from street parking meters installed and maintained by the City. At the present time this Act is being used principally in connection with the financing arran-ement under which the parking project is leased to the City. The rentals paid by -the City thus constitute the revenues from which the bonds of the authority are payable. As far as I know only one parking authority, Santa Monica, has issued bonds under this Act but undoubtedly there are others. J l • E�n13IT III VnzilC'i. ? MTKING DIST ICT LP.?•1 0? 1951 Streets and Highways Code - Division 18 - Part 4 - Sections 35,100-35,707 The are4 of property to be benefited is formed into a parking district pursuant to a petition from the property onners. The creation of this district is very similar to that described under the 1943 Act. Petitions are filed and hearings are conducted nuch in the same manner as previously described. In the petition for the formation of a district under the 1951 law, the property owners consent to an advalorem assessment to be levied only to the extent to which the revenues in a year have been or are expected to be insufficient to pay the principal and interest corning due the bond holder. The petition for the district states the time in which the bond will be retired and 'the time must not•exceed thirty-six years. The advalorem rate, to be applied in the event the revenue is insufficient, must not exceed 75(, per�$100 assessed valuation in any year. The Act properly used has several advantages; property owners who would be unwilling to assume an assessment for the full amount of the cost, as under the 1943 Act, mught well be willing to support a project under this Act if they are convinced the project is sound from a revenue point of view. If the project proves out it will be self liquidating and no assessment will be necessary. If the revenues are not as large as expected and an assessment becomes necessary the property owner knows in advance the maximum it will cost him as specified in the petition. The second advantage is that projects which could not be financed with straight revenue bonds mic& t-be financed under this Act because of the additional security which a limited assessment affords to the bond holder. On the other hand, it must be borne in'mind that any type of revenue financing will for the life of the bonds impose a duty to fix and collect parking charges on the parking facilities. In future years this may .mean that the business corm unity which has so financed its parking facilities may lose business to competing shopping centers which provide free parking. To avoid such a result, cities concerned with this feature use the 1943 Act, coupled with the use of on-streat and off-street revenues, to help pay the assessments, all as previously discussed. As in the case of the 1943 Act it should be borne in mind thsx the district formed undar, this Act is not itself a legal entity even though there is appointed a Parking Coa*nission. It does not itself make contracts or do any other act. The district is simply a designated area of the City which is benefited by the parking facilities. The proceedings are taken by the City as a City function. The parking facilities acquired or installed are owned by the City. I CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH -- DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Community Development Department SUBJECT: Off-street Parking in the M-1 District When the Municipal Code was amended to include parking require- ments for commercial uses (Section 20.08.191, Ordinance 1292§ 1; March 10, 1969) no provisions were made'to'include the M-1 District. The Code specifically states "off-street parking in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 20.38 entitled '-H' District' shall be required of all property in all commercial zoning districts which has not previously been in- cluded within a _Zr Z or -H' District" (emphasis added). This means that the A-P District, I District, and M-1 District are not subject to any parking requirements unless they have the 'rZ" or "-H" factor attached. This does not create a signifi- cant problem in the "I" District because there is. only one parcel within the City classified as "I" (the southerly side of 15th Street between Irvine Avenue and St. Andrews Road), and it is fully developed. There are several "A-P" parcels within the City, but they all have the "-H" factor attached. The problem is with the M-1.District. The La Fayette, or Cannery Village area and Lido Peninsula contain large amounts of property zoned M-1 (see attached zoning map). The Cannery- Village is developing into a retail complex of specialty shops which will generate a large amount of vehicular traffic. Because the M-1 District allows retail and wholesale stores, as well as the more conventional "light industrial" uses without a use permit, we are already faced with a serious parking problem. An example is the recent conversion of a two-story manufacturing building into 31 retail specialty shops with no off-street parking. Because of the fact that there are no municipal parking lots in the area (as compared to McFadden Square and Central Balboa), and very little on -street parking, the situation is rapidly becoming critical. (Off-street parking. spaces have been re- quired in the M=1•District only for uses requiring use permits such as restaurants'and professional offices.) , Staff feels that the M-1 District was omitted from the off-street parking requirement through an oversight, and we feel that it is imperative to.rectify this situation as soon as possible. For that reason, we recommend that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution setting a Public Hearing +o consider revisions to Section 20.08.191 of the {Newport Beach Municipal Code, specific- ally the inclusion of parking requirements for industrial dist- ricts. Td� f0loling revisions are recommended(the underlined words are "20.08.191 Parking Requirements for Commercial and Industrial Uses. A. REQUIRED PARKING. Off-street parking in accordance TO: Planning Commission - 2. with the requirements of Chapter 20.38 entitled ' "-H" District' shall be required of all property in all commercial or industrial zoning districts which has have not previously been included within a "-Z" or "-H" District. All properties in commercial or industrial districts which do not meet the requirements of this section shall be classified as nonconforming uses." "B. NONCONFORMING USES. The provisions of Chapter 20.44 entitled 'NONCONFORMING STRUCTURES AND USES' shall not be applicable to structures and uses which are nonconforming only because they do not comply with the parking requirements set forth in subsection A above, but instead the following regulations shall be control- ling: 1. Existing Uses and Structures. The lawful use of land or buildings or both in commercial or industrial zoning districts which do not meet the parking requirements set forth in subsection A above, which use -was in existence on the effective date of this section, may be continued or changed to a use requiring the, same or less on -site, parking without compliance with said requirements. games E/Nuzum Senior %fanner JEN:hh Attachments: Zoning Map of Cannery Village Area SEE MAP AV. ¢ bb% s C•I ip . b•a'• C-z C-z C-1 I C-2 C-1 M-I w 90 H ti q 9'e`''- P Pry .9 qCi • M"i z Q;q• _ � PyG. ST- SCALE OF FEET Zoo Oao boo Aoo SEE DISTRICTING W RnpT RF A f' w — e AGRICULTURAL RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DUPLEX RESIDENTIAL RESYD, MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ODMBNWG DISTRICTS MAP MULTIPLE RESIDENTIAL LIGHT COMMERCIAL GENERAL COMMERCIAL MANUFACTURING UNGLASSIFIED am= aw O MAP MO. Q rm-nwaG 20.38.010-20.38.030 PLANNING AND ZONING 11 i 20.38.030 Off -Street Parking Required —Schedule. 20.38.040 Off -Street Parking on Separate Lot. 20.38.050 Building Location. 20.38.010 Effect of Chapter. The following regulations shall apply in all C and M Districts with which are combined " ° H" Districts, in addi- tion to the regulation hereinbefore specified therefor, and shall be sub- ject to the provisions of Chapter 20.08; provided, however, that if any of the regulations specified in Section 20.38.020 and 20.38.030 differ from any of the corresponding regulations specified in this Chapter for any district with which is combined an "—H" District, then in such case the provisions of Sections 20.38.020 and 20.38.030 shall govern. (1949 Code § 9104.2 added by Ord. 635; December 12, 1950 as amended by Ord. 845; April 14, 1958). 20.38.020 Uses Permitted. The following uses shall be permitted in "—H" Districts: All uses permitted in the respective districts with which the "—H" District is combined, subject to approval as to design of buildings and design and location of parking lot; except, however, as provided in Sections 20.38.030 and 20.38.040. (1949 Code § 9104.21(part) added by Ord. 635;• 1 December 12, 1950 as amended by Ord. 901; December 28, 1959). ib 20.38.030 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: (a) Retail Stores: One parking space for each 250 square feet and one loading space for each 10,000 square feet of store floor area. (b) Office Buildings: One parking space for each 250 square feet of floor area. (c) Wholesale and Industry: One parking space for each 2,000. square feet of gross floor area and•one loading space for each 10,000 � square feet of gross floor area, but in no event shall there be less than 10 - '7 parking spaces for each such establishment. (d) Restaurants: One parking space for each three seats. (e) Public Assembly: One parking space for each five seats. (f) Theatres: One parking space for each five seats. (g) Hotels: One parking space for each two guest rooms. (h) Hospitals: One parking space for each bed, and in addition one parking space for each resident doctor and one for each employee. (i) Clinics: One parking space for each 250 square feet of floor area, '-" plus one additional space for each doctor and one for each employee i ll 446 20.38.010.-20.38.030 PLANNING AND ZONING 20,38.030 Off -Street Parking Required —Schedule, 20-38.040 Off -Street Parking on Separate Lot. 20.38.050 Building Location, 20-38.010 Effect of Chapter. The following regulations shall apply in all C and M Districts with which are combined "—H" Districts, In addi- tion to the regulation hereinbefore specified therefor, and shall be sub- ject to the provisions of Chapter 20.08; provided, however, that if any of the regulations specified in Section 20,38.020 and 20.38.030 differ from any of the corresponding regulations specified in this Chapter for any, district with which is combined an "—H" District, then In such case the provisions of Sections 20.38,020 and 20.38.030 shall govern, (1949 Code 9104.2 added by Ord, 635; December 12, 1950 as amended by Ord. 845; I April 14,1958). 20.38.020 Uses Permitted, The following uses shall be permitted In "—H" Districts: All uses permitted in the respective districts with which the ' =—H" DIstrict is combined, subject to approval as to design of buildings and design and location of parking lot; except, however, as provided in Sections 20.38.030 and 20.38.040. (1949 Code § 9104.21(part) added by Ord, 835; December 12, 1950 as amended by Ord. 901; December 28, 1959). 20.38.030 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: (a) Retail Stores: One parking space for each 250 square feet and' one loading space for each 10,000 square feet of store floor area. (b) Office Buildings: One parking space for each 250 square feet of floor area. (c) Wholesale and Industry: One parking space for each 2,000, square feet of gross floor area and one loading space for each 10,000 square feet of gross floor area, but in no event shall there be less than 10 parking spaces for each such establishment. (d) Restaurants: One parking space for each three seats. (e) Public Assembly: One parking space for each five seats. (f) Theatres: One parking space for each five seats, (g) Hotels: One parking space for each two guest rooms, (h) Hospitals; One parking space for each bed, and in addition one parking space for each resident doctor and one for each employee. (i) Clinics: One parking space for each 250 square feet of floor area, plus one additional space for each doctor and one for each employee, 446 LIZI to I y E3C?t"BIT 1 VEHICLE ? aI:w DISTRICT LAST Or 1943 Streets and F ig'rways Code - Division 18 - Part 1 - Sections 31,500-31,933 The Vehicle Parking District Law of 1943 is a District Act under which the cost of acquiring and improving parking lots is assessed upon the real property in the district benefited. It is the most widely used of any of the Ac4l available. Since the cost is financed by assessment rather than by future parkin.- revenues, free parking or parking at a very low rate may be provided. The proceeding is initiated by a petition from the owners of the property in the district of lands benefited and proposed to be assessed. The petition describes the boundaries of the proposed district and describes the property to be acquired and/or improved for parking. The petition must be signed by the owners of land in the proposed district,ow-,14 a lands constituting more than one-half of the area of all assessable lands. If the assessment limit to pro- vide the parking facilities is to be measured by the assessed value of lard alone, then the petition must also be signed by owners owning lands of an assessed value or not less than 51`/, of the total assessed value. If the assess- ment is to be based upon lard and improvemants within the assessable district the petition must be signed by owners owning lands and improvements thereon of, an assessed value of not less than 60% of the total assessed value. The petition is then filed with the City Council and the City Council requires the staff to make an estimated spread of assessments upon which public hearings ara conducted. A majority protest, from owners of more than one-half of the area of property in the district forces the City Council to terminate the proceadings. An owner may sign such a protest even though he has originally signed the petition. At the hearing, among other things, the Council must find that -all of the land in the district will be benefited by the parking improvements. If•lard is to be purchased, the purchase price must be added to the estimated improvement costs, The Superintendent of Streets of the City then prepares an assessment roll and apportions an amount among the individual parcels in the district in accordance with the estimated 'benefits to be received from the project. The Act does not specify any particular formula for determining benefits and thus allows the assessment in each proceeding to be spread in light of the facts of that particular situai: on. In instances where each parcel is reasonably near to at least one parking lot the Superintendent might spread the assessment solely on the basis of assesed value of land, area, frontage, or a combination thereof. However, if somme parcels are a great deal closer to the parking lot than other parcels the factor of distance or proximity to the parking lot would ordinarily be taken into consideration in determining proportionate benefit. After tie proposed assessr,.ents are prepared the Council conducts a heai-ing on the pro?osad assassments to determina if the assessments have been made in an equitable mannar.- At this hearing the property owners have no right of majority protest, such as existed at the firsb iieari:3. The purpose of this hearing is no- to'determine whether the parking facilities are needed but whether the assess- ments have been spread equitably. Mier.the final assessment is recorded each propor"y owner has thirty days in which to pay all or part of his assessment in Exhibit 1 - Page 2 Vehicle Parking D-i-strict faw o£ i9_6 cash, if he so desires. A bond is issued against each unpaid assessment or the unpaid balance thereof and these bones are then sold by calling for com- petitive bids. The bonds must be sold for par. The interest and principal is than retired in equal annual install.-ents over a period of years determined by the original petition. The nwroar of annual installments must not exceed twenty -five -years. With the money raised by the sale of bonds, or other contributions, the parking facilities are constructed. Thereafter, *the parking lot is controlled and operated by a Board of Parking Commissioners. The members of the Board are normally appointed by the Mayor, subject to confirmation by the City Council. The City Council cannot itself act as the Board but an individual member or members of the Council -ay be appointed to it. Freedom is give. to the*Board as to the mathod of operation. The parking lots can be free lots, can be operated with parking meters, or can be attendant operated. Lots can be leased to a private operator but the operator must maintain public parking facilities, and whether the parking lot is operated by a private operator o-r by the Bo -_d directly, the rates charged must not be higher than those fixed by the Board after a public hearing. All of the proceedings described herein are taken by the City Council as a City function. The parking facilities acquired are owned by the City and the Board of Parking Commissioners is a City Commission. E)MIBIT II XlEnICLR PARKE�G DISTRICT LAW OF 1949 Streets and Highways Code - Division 18 - Part 2 - Sections 32,500-33,552 Under this statute the acquisition and/or improvement of parking facilities are financed by the issuance of bonds payable from revenues from the parking facilities. Where this Act is used no taxes or assessments upon property are levied to pay the bonds. The bonds are issued and the parking facilities are provided by a parking authority which is a public corporation separate from the City. Womally, the area within which the parking authority has jurisdiction coincides with the total city area but there is a provision whereby the juris- diction of the authority can be limited to certain projects or to a certain area less than the whole city. It should be noted, however, that there is no provision for two or more authorities in the same city. The Act also provides that the city itself can through its City Council exercise the powers of an authority. Then the City Council does this, however, it does it as a parking authority, not as a City Council. If the powers of the authority are vested in a body other than the five members of the City Council they are appointed by the Mayor with the approval of the City Council. Generally speaking, these revenue bonds cannot be issued by the authority until tha voters of the City have by majority vote approved the revenue bond method of financing parking projects, but through a lease arrangement this reeuirement ma�be_coaived. The Act gives broad powers to the authority to pro- vide vide covenants and agreements for the protection and security of the bond holder. These would, of course, include a covenant to fix such fees, charges and rentals for tine parking facilities so as to be sufficient to pay the principal and interest on the bonds as the same fall due. The authority itself has no juris- diction to place and maintain parking meters on the public streets, but for the payment -of any bonds issued by the authority the City Council of the City may pledge revenues from street parking voters installed and maintained by the City. At the present time this Act is being used principally in connection with the financing arrangement under which the parking project is leased to the City. The rentals paid by tha City thus constitute the revenues from which the bonds of the authority are payable. As far as I know only one parking authority, Santa Monica, has issued bonds under this Act but undoubtedly there are others. . "0 E%hT9IT III VEHICIE ?A-'CK, -.G DISTRICT I,AN OF 1951 Streets and highways Code - Division 18 - Part 4 - Sections 35,100-35,707 The are4 of property to be benefited is formed into a parking district pursuant to a petition from the property owners. The creation of this district is very similar to that described under the 1943 Act. Petitions are filed and hearings are conducted much in the same manner as previously described. In the petition for the formation of a district under the 1951 law, the property owners consent to an advalorea assessment to be levied only to the extent to which the revenues in a year have been or are expected to be insufficient to pay the principal and interest coming due the bond holder. The petition for the district states the tine in which the bond will be retired and the time must not•exceed thirty-six years. The advalorem rate, to be applied in the event the revenue is insufficient, must not exceed 750 per $100 assessed valuation in any year. The Act properly used has several advantages; property owners who would be unwilling to assume an assessment for the full amount of the cost, as under the 1943 Act, mught well be willing to supporta project under this Act if they are convinced the project is sound from a revenue point of view. If the project proves out it will be self liquidating and no assessment will be necessary. If the revenues are net as large as expected and an assessment becomes necessary the property owner knows in advance the maximum it will cost him as specified in the petition. The second advantage is that projects which could not be financed with straight revenue bonds mig:.t-be financed under this Act because of the additional security which a limited assessment affords to the bond holder. On the other hand, it must be borne in mind that any type of revenue financing will for the life of the bonds impose a duty to fix and collect parking charges on the parking facilities. In future years this may .mean that the business coTnunity which has so financed its parking facilities may lose business to competing shopping centers which provide free parking. To avoid such a result, cities concerned with this feature use the 1943 Act, coupled with the use of on -street and off-street revenues, to help pay the assessments, all as previously discussed. As in the case of the 1943 Act it should be borne in mind that the district formed under this Act is not itself a legal entity even though there is appointed a Parking CoWiission, it does not itself make contracts or do any other act. The district is simply a designated area of the City which is benefited by the parking facilities. The proceedings are taken by the City as a City function. The parking facilities acquired or installed are owned by the City.