Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3.1_Megonigal materials recd after packet delivery_2Material(s) received after the Planning Commission packets were distributed, or received at the meeting. These material(s) were distributed to staff, Commissioners and made available to the public. From: Henry Acuff (mailto:Hacuff @apllc- oc.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 3:49 PM To: rhawkins @earthlink.net Cc: jcampbell @newportbeachca.gov Subject: Megonigal House Dear Mr. Hawkins, My wife and I have been residents of Corona Del Mar for over 29 years and have known the Megonigals for the past 19 years. I understand that their application for the construction of a small 3 bedroom home on a lot they own in Corona Del Mar is going before the Planning Commission this Thursday November 19th for project and EIR approval. I will not be able to attend the meeting. However, I would like to express my full support of this project and belief that the Megonigals have done everything possible to meet the building requirements for this property. Best Regards, Henry & Joann Acuff 115 Shorecliff Rd. Corona Del Mar, CA Phone: (949) 760 -1566 Email: hacuffta.aollc- oc.com No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - wvvw.avg.com Version: 8.5.425 /Virus Database: 270.14.71/2510 - Release Date: 11/17/09 19:26:00 RECEIVED BY PLANNING DEPART "ENT NOV 17 2009 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH From: Bob Elliott [mallto:bobe65 @roadrunner.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 4:11 PM To: rhawkins @earthlink.net; jcampbell @newportbeachca.gov Subject: Proposed Megonigal Home Gentlemen: As a Newport Beach resident of nearly 30 years I am writing to express my support for the proposed home by the Megonigal family. These plans were previously approved 7 to 0 by the planning commision. From my understanding the Megonigals are not asking for any variances and are within code. The citizens of Newport Beach should have their personal property rights protected and be able to build a home which conforms to all applicable laws and regulations. Please approve this requested home. Thank you. RECEIVED BY PLANNING DEPARTMENT Nov 17 2M9 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH From: Mark Coleman [mailto:mcoleman@tfpgroup.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 3:50 PM To: rhawkins @earthlink.net Cc: jampbell@newportbeachca.gov Subject: Megonigal Property Hearing Dear Messrs. Hawkins and Campbell — I am a resident of Corona del Mar, near the property owned by the Megonigals. I am also an acquaintance of Kim and Carolyne Megonigal. We live at 210 Orchid Avenue in CdM, and often use Bayside Drive as a means of traveling to west Newport and beyond. As a result, we are very familiar with the subject property. My wife Joan and I fully support the efforts, and the right, of the Megonigals to build the home that they have presented to the City Council et al over the past year or two. Our understanding is that such new home will be within existing codes, and that other relevant matters such as a passing EIR have been complied with. To us this seems to be a "no- brainer ", and complies with the right of every American to have their personal property rights be protected. We appreciate your care and concern over this and similar matters, and strongly support the Megonigals' efforts and their rights. Mark Coleman I CEO I Training Funding Partners I mcolemanna,tfpgroup.com 714 - 259 -7320 (direct 1173 Warner Ave I Tustin ] CA 192780 1 www.tfpL-roup.com "Celebrating our 15` year of bringing training funding to great companies across the U.S." RECEIVED BY PLANNING DEPARTMIFNT Nov 17 2009 CPPY OF NEWPORT BEACH From: Jim Gianulias [mailto:jcg @gcompanies.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 4:22 PM To: rhawkins @earthlink.net Subject: Kim Mcmonigalhas every right to build his dream house. What an outrage for him to put up with this pettyness4 RECENED BY PLAN1,00 DEPARTMENT Nov 17 nos CITY OF NEWPORT BEACi1 From: Vance Mape [mailto:vmape @westernrealco.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 3:42 PM To: rhawkins @earthlink.net Cc: jcampbell @newportbeachca.gov Subject: Megonigal Residence, Corona del Mar Dear Sir — I have been a resident of Newport Beach for 37 years. I have been following the painful process that the Megonigal's have been forced to endure to build a modest residence that is designed to City codes on a lot that is zoned for residential development. I strongly support their effort and urge the Planning Commission (agenda for 11119) and City Council to approve their application. To do otherwise would be a violation of their property owner's rights. Vance Mape WESTERN REALCO 949 - 720 -3787 VMapeQl WestemRealco.com www.westemrealco.com RECEIVED BY pLANNING DEPARTMENT NOV 17 2009 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH - - - -- Original Message---- - From: kirk @elliottequities.com [ mailto:kirk @elliottequities.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 3:31 PM To: rhawkins @earthlink.net Cc: jcampbell @newportbeachca.gov Subject: Megonigal Home -CDM Gentlemen: I'm writing in favor of the Megonigal project. I have known the Megonigal family for over 30 years, they are quality people and are only interested in building their home on an approved residential lot they've owned for the past 15 years, not asking for anything outside the building code or a variance. Please allow them to build their home. Kirk S. Elliott 12 Jupiter Hills Drive Newport Beach, California 92660 RECEVED BY PLANNING DBPAR'I'MEW Nov 17 2009 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH From; Mr. John Duley [mailto:jduley @land- scapes.net] Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 4:29 PM To: rhawkins @earthlink.net Cc: jcampbell @newportbeachca.gov Subject: Megonigal Project I have been watching this project with interest for some time. It is difficult to understand why the City Council has intervened and usurped the Planning Commissions' authority to make decisions within the City's Planning Guidelines. The Megonigals have designed a tasteful and size appropriate residence that is a benefit to the that location. When compared to the other 'monstrous' homes right down Pacific, I believe the community is fortunate to have the Megonigal's proposed residence rather than another'McMansion' in the neighborhood! The few naysayers do not have the right to impede this project from going forward. It seems that the property owners have been quite generous with the concessions already given. As a 50+ year resident of Newport Beach and as a business owner conducting business in this city, I am in favor of the approval of this project. John B. Duley President Land Scapes 700 W. 16th Street Costa Mesa, CA 92627 (949) 574 -7147 (949) 574 -7150 fax RECEIVED BY PLANNING DEPARTMENT NOV 17 2009 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH From: Michael Brewer [mailto:mbrewer @cbrewer.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 5:41 PM To: rhawkins @earthlink.net Subject: Planning Commission - Megonigal Mr. Hawkins, I will be brief; I am contacting you as a concerned citizen and resident of Newport Beach. It is my understanding that once again the issue of the Megonigal's proposed home to be located at 2333 Pacific, Corona Del Mar, Ca will be addressed in our Planning meeting on Thursday November 19'". I am contacting you in full support of the Kim and Carolyne Megonigal. It is my view that this is a property owner's rights issue, and the Megonigal's continue to meet the cities building code requirements and their plans should be approved. Regards, Michael Brewer 47 Royal Saint George Road Newport Beach, CA 92660 RECEIVED BY PLANNING DEPARTMENT NOV 17 2009 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH From: Cook, Edward (mailto:ewc @mccarthycook.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 4:46 PM To: rhawkins @earthlink.net Cc jompbell @newportbeachca.gov Subject: The Megonigal Residence, Corona del Mar Dear Mr. Hawkins, PLANNING DEPARTMENT NOV 18 2009 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH First, thank you for your public service and the difficult job you have to do. I am in the real estate business and know well the time and dedication it takes to make good planning decisions, especially with increasingly complex and restrictive laws and regulations affecting those decisions. We all benefit from good urban planning and responsible development and your efforts to make Newport Beach a better place are appreciated. I have been following the Megonigal's saga for some time now as our children play at the park in question with friends from that neighborhood. I am writing to express to you my strong support for the Megonigal's right to build their private home on a private lot as conferred to them by the entitlements they bought when the land was purchased. I have followed the modifications they have been willing to make and believe that the Megonigal's are being less selfish than their neighbors in seeking approval of the relatively modest, view sensitive home they have designed. Over the last few years, I learned a very valuable lesson of my own in a similar circumstance. We own a historic farm in Pennsylvania where there is a very active anti - growth and conservation easement movement Our family has been faced with the angst of a neighboring historic property going through a subdivision process for the development of 26 McMansions. My wise neighbor and friend (who himself owns a historic farm he has protected) heard my constant complaining about the development and what I was doing to thwart it After hearing enough of it, he looked me in the eye and said, "If you want to zone it, you have to own it.° He was dead right If I wanted to continue to look at bucolic open space then I needed to own it firs[ Otherwise I would simply be another selfish NIMBY looking to strip the land rights of a neighbor for my own selfish benefit. The Megonigal situation is no different. The protestations about the loss of a view shed they do not own is highly problematic. If the neighbors and community want the view, they should have bought the lot and donated it for the public good. These able bodied critics should be charged with the knowledge that this lot was a buildable lot even if they protest differently. Their enjoyment of the view these many years was a temporary benefit funded exclusively by the Megonigal's, not a unpaid for public right. Perhaps they could raise a fund, donate one of their homes for a below market price and demolish the structure so that others could enjoy the view that they privately possess. There is no adverse possession of the air rights above the land. The desire to deny the Megonigal home is nothing different than a public taking of a vested private right. It's no different than having a stakeholder buy into a right and then for non4nvested .protestors" or a government to change the rules later. Perhaps the worst aspect of this whole matter is that these selfish neighbors and fair weather antagonists are fighting an asymmetrical war while the Megonigal's must defend their rights conventionally according to City and State rules. Think about it. Anyone can protest this home development essentially for free and yet the Megonigal's are forced to spend untold sums of money and face ridiculous time delays all to perfect their legal right to build a home on land they paid for and have owned for years. The democratization of the planning process in California has hit a new level of absurdity. Only those in your position of power can referee this unfair fight and recommend a fair conclusion to those who must vote on it. Please do the right thing and allow this project to move forward. You will protect a more precious right than that sought by the antagonists: the rights of private property owners to create a private dwelling of their dreams on land purchased for that purpose and designed to comply with reasonable planning restrictions. Please make this decision with emphasis so that you give no quarter to the antagonists who seek to deny the Megonigal's their peaceful and happy existence as neighbors in their dream home. Good governance should not give the right to anyone — especially at no cost or liability —to exert undue control over a prudently and legally planned property of another without being invested in that property. Please take a moment to read what a poor boy —and even poorer and unsuccessful businessman later to become our President —had to say about the antagonists of his day: "Property is the fruit of labor... property is desirable... is a positive good in the world. That some should be rich shows that others may become rich, and hence is just encouragement to industry and enterprise. Let not him who is houseless pull down the house of another; but let him labor diligently and build one for himself, thus by example assuring that his own shall be safe from violence when built." "Reply to New York Workingmen's Democratic Republican Association" (March 21, 1864) Please let the Megonigal neighbors know that their roles could be reversed and that they themselves could be caught in a frustrating, expensive and emotionally exhausting battle to perfect what is rightfully theirs. I regret I will not be able to attend the meeting as I will be in New York on business. A few new construction jobs and an improved tax basis on that property are other good reasons to remind the protestors of the public good that comes from a private right. Thank you for considering this appeal. Sincerely, Edward W. Cook III Co- President McCarthy Cook 8 Co. owc0mccarthvcook.com www.mccarthwcook.com Orange County Office Metro Center ar South Coast 575 Anton Boulevard. Suite 590 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 (714) 427.1849 Direct (714) 913.6900 Main (714) 913 -6901 Fax Los Angeles Office The Atrium 2301 Rosecrans Avenue, Suite 4170 El Segundo, CA 90245 (310) 341.4816 Direct (310) 297 -9300 Fax San Francisco Office China Basin 185 Berry Street, Suite 150 San Francisco, CA 94107 (415) 543.3838 Main (415) 543.1623 Fax From: Dewain Campbell [ mailto :DCampbell @camcopacific.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 6:34 AM To: rhawkins @earthlink.net Subject: FW: Begonia Park neighbors vs. adjoining Property Owners Honorable Mayor, City Council Members, Mr. Hawkins and Mr. Campbell, Having been. a resident of Newport Beach for the past 25 years, we have visited Begonia Park many, many times, with friends, family, our six children, and our dogs.... HOWEVER, it is really ridiculous to have the few neighbors, (with both the Planning Commission and City Council seemingly in tow) continually delay the lawful owners from usutg their property. This home, by Newport Beach standards is very modest, at only 3,500 SF. The Owners are not even asking for a variance. They have been asked to, and have, jumped through a ridiculous amount of hoops... for years. This is obviously a violation of the very rights that US citizens hold dear... rights of.Property Ownership. Our family has watched, with interest over the years, the battle which has been waged against the adjoining property owners to Begonia Park... as it pertains to them being able to build on THEIR property which is adjacent to, BUT NOT A PART of Begonia Park. My wife and I have even come down to watch some of the various City proceedings on this matter. We have never ever spoke up, but it supply seems to be time. We have been amazed at the delays and roadblocks thrown up by the City, even requiring this poor family to have an Environmental Impact Report? That seemed at the time to really be way beyond reasonable; yet they did it. It came back in their favor with minimal, if any, negative impact. I have been in the real estate business for 35 years. It just seems to be unfair, to let a very few (local and very vocal) residents (who may have their personal view compromised) continue to delay this family from building their dream home. If the City (or the complaining neighbors) wanted to have bought, (or even had the City conden -med the property through Eminent Domain), they should have, long ago. As a taxpayer, thank goodness, we did not! This property is not a City Park... and never has been. We, the taxpayers, have no right to this piece of property. To make this poor family suffer more is simply unfair. Personally, I /We have no dog in. this hunt, other than the desire to do as our parents taught "ALWAYS... DO WHAT IS RIGHT" (thanks Mom). We suggest to all, it is time to... LET THIS FAMILY BUILD! Sincerely, Dewain and Jenny Campbell Dewain and Jenny Campbell 26 Seabluff Newport Beach, CA 92660 dcampbell@ccimcopacific.com cell 949 939 0180 home 949 737 1722 4 G7Z 1 0] A PLANNING DEPARTMENT NOV 18 2009 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH. From: Doug Schneider [maiito:doug @roadrunner.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 10:32 PM To: rhawkins @earthlink.net Cc: jcampbell @newportbeachca.gov Subject: Kim and Carolyne Megonigafs home building effort Dear Mr. Hawkins. My wife and I support Kim and Carolyne Megonigal's cf.-Tort to build their home in Corona Del Mar. I have lived in Newport all my life; have seen the location, and really cannot understand why their property rights are at risk. I hope that the Planning Conunission and City Council approve their project and protect personal property rights in Newport Beach. Most sincerely; Doug Schneider Douglas F. Schneider 2682 Circle Drive i\'ewport Beach.. CA 92663 Voice: 949 - 631 -5395 Fax: 949 -631 -3297 Email: doug�2aroadrunneccom RECEIVED BY PLANWMG DEPARTMENT NOV 18 2009 �wacv. beach iron tcabo.com CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH - - - -- Original Message---- - From: wade cable [mailto:wadeandsue @cox.net] Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 7:01 PM To: rhawkins @earthlink.net Subject: Megonigal's planning commission application Chairman Hawkins I am writing you to express my support for the Megonigal's application to build on their lot in Corona Del Mar. My wife and I reside at 1 Pinehurst Lane, Newport Beach and I hope our support will help in the approval of the Megonigal's plan. Sincerely Wade Cable RECENED BY PLANNING DEPARTMENT NOV 18 2009 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Front: Marl: Coleman [maiIto:mcoIeman rr tfpgroup.comJ Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 3:50 PM' To: rhawkins @eartltlink.net Cc: jampbell@newportbcachca.gov Subject: Megonigal Property Bearing Dear Messrs. Hawkins and Campbell — I ant a resident of Corona del. Mar, near the property owned by the Megonigals. I am also an acquaintance of Kim and Carolyne Megonigal. We live at 210 Orchid Avenue in CdM, and often use Bayside Drive as a means of traveling to west Newport and beyond. As a result, we are very familiar with the subject property. My wife ,loan and I hilly support the efforts, and the right, of the Megonigals to build the home that they have presented to the City Council et al over the past year or two. Our understanding is that such new home will be within existing codes, and that other relevant matters such as a passing EIR have been complied with. To us this seems to be a "no- brainer ", and complies with the right of every American to have their personal property rights be protected. We appreciate your care and concern over this and similar matters, and strongly support the Megonigals' efforts and their rights. Mark Coleman I CEO I Training Funding Partners I mcolcman ooperoup.com 714 -259 -7320 (direct) 11173 Warner Ave I Tustin I CA 192780 1 v"wivAl'pgroup.com "Celebrating our I5 'h year of bringing training funding to great comporr.ies across the U.S. " RECEIVED EY PLANNING DEPARTMENT Nov 18 2009 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH From: Pat Fuscoe (mailto:pfuscoe @fuscoe.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 6:00 PM To: jcampbell @newportbeachca.gov; rhawkins @earthlink.net Cc: kmegonigal @kimco.com Subject: Megonigal Property Application Mr. Campbell & Mr. Hawkins: I am sending you this email to add my support for the approval of Kim & Carolyne iMegonigal 's application for Planning Commission clearance of their home construction plans in Corona del Mar. I have been a resident & taxpaver in Newport Beach for over 30 years and believe they have done everything properly and have earned the right to build & enjoy their home, just as I have. I am dismayed at the constant din of whining from neighbors that are simply upset with change R forget that their new neighbors have the same rights as they to have a decent, code complying home in a great town.. Please approve their submittal & stand tall for those that abide by the established process & regulations ......................thank you for your consideration .................pat fuscoe 920 Cliflltouse.Bluff Newport Coast, California 92657 Patrick R. Fuscoe, P.E. President/CEO pfuscoe u(Y7fuscoe.com FUSCOE ENGINEERING, INC. full c -bole Ihlnking® 16795 Von Karman, Suite 100 Irvine, CA 92606 (949)474 -1960 8 (949) 2714424 9 vnvw.fuscoexom RECEIVED 13Y PLANNING DEPARTMENT NOV 18 2009 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH RECEIVED BY PLANNING DEPARTMENT NOV 18 2009 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH November 14, 2009 431 Acacia Avenue Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Mr. Jim Campbell Newport Beach Planning Department 3300 Newport Bouldvard Newport Beach, CA 92663 RE: Megonigal Property 2333 Pacific, Corona del Mar Dear Mr. Campbell, I live just a block away from the above property and enjoy riding my bicycle about three times a week. One of my favorite spots is Begonia Park. It is beautiful. The views on Begonia Ave are breathless, as I can see all the way to the Harbor. I HIGHLY PROTEST the build up on the Megonigal property, as it would destroy one of the wonderful vistas of Corona del Mar. I urge you and the members of the Planning Department to disallow the selfish property owners to enjoy a vista while destroying the views for the rest of the citizens of Corona del Mar. Feel free to contact me if you have further questions. Regards, Sheri Newcomer PATRICIA W.B. RICKS 436 Begonia Ave Corona del Mar. CA 92625 November 16. 2009 Mr. Jim Campbell 113 Planning Dept. 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach. CA 92663 Re: Megonigal Application I'or 2333 Pacific. CDM Dear Mr. Campbell: RECEIVED BY PLANNING DEPARTMENT NOV 18 2009 CPCY OF NEWPORT BEACH I have seen the revised Begonia Part: view provided by your office and must protest the construction of this residence as proposed. The garage will block approximately 45% of the public view from Begonia Park. which was designated a public viewpoint in the voter - approved General Plan. The construction of this house will make a mockery of the General Plan and the %voters will. i ,Iy husband and I have no ocean view from our house. so this is not a private issue. When we moved to our house in 2001. we. along with most of our neighbors assumed that the Megonigal lot was part of the park. and that. the public view .would always be there for us to enjoy. On average. I walk to the park twice per dal' to enjoy that view. In addition to the points that have been raised by Friends of Begonia Park. I would like to add these: I. The population of my neighborhood consists mostly of middle -aged and retired people. We do not play ball or use the swing set or the playscape. For us the main purpose of the park is the view. If the view is taken from us. that will render the park useless for most CDkX4 residents. We live on 30 -11 lots. some with two dwellings per lot. in above - average concentration. The park is our open space where we can look out to the horizon, see the sunset. watch sailboats enter the harbor. see how big- the waves are at the teedee. and in special early momim_ lights catch the sun sparkling on the houses on the peninsula. It is the heart and soul of our area. if the IvIegonigals' earaae is built_ we will lose the feature that defines our neighborhood. 2. It is not sufficient to say that we will still be able to see blue water. The view from this viewpoint, which was designated by the City on the General Plan. and confirmed by the placement of a park bench. is one of the most spectacular views in Newport Beach. The combination of the Carnation bluff. the harbor, the peninsula, and the water showing- through die keyhole tree is a photographer's dream. if you approve the iMegonigal plan. you might as well I cut an Ansel Adams photograph in half and say ii s just as good because you've still got a view of half of Hal ('-Dome at Yosemite. People drive to Begonia Park to enjoy the exceptional view while they eat their lunch. Several times I've seen our firefighters parked on Begonia Ave to eat their lunch. facing the keyhole tree. The view the voters voted to protect is its entirety. 3. When the City of Newport Beach sold that lot to its first owner. the average -size house in CDM must have been no more than 1500 sq. ft. I doubt the City ever expected a 3.000 -4.000 Sq. 11. house to be built on that lot. The view of' the Megonigals' plan from Bayside indicates they can build it smaller house. which could access from Bayside. which would be more suitable to the lot and not block the public view. 4. Mrs. Megonigal and her previous husband purchased the lot, knowing the Griswolds never managed to get a building plan approved on it. The Megonigals were advised by a friend. very experienced in building on Orange County bluffs. that if they managed to build on that '•unbuildable" lot. they would not get the house they wanted. They have i <onored the history of their lot. its limitations. expert advice.. and the voter- approved General Plan. The principle of "Buyer beware" should enter into your considerations. The only two fair solutions to this problem are either that the Megonigals agree to build it smaller house with a garage off Bayside. or that the City buy the lot and add it permanently to Begonia Park. Perhaps this could be done through a bond issue to give the City time to pay. Begonia Park for most residents IS the spectacular view. perhaps the best public view remaining in Newport Beach. Please do not betray the voters and the General Plan by approving this construction. 0/14i;x �4 Patricia W. 13. Ricks From: Patrick Wood [ mailto :patrickgwood @hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 10:20 AM To: rhawkins @earthlink.net Cc: jcampbell @newportbeachca.gov Subject: Megonigal Home, CdM Robert - I understand Kim Megonigal is meeting before the Planning Commission Thursday night in order to receive approval to build on their lot. in Corona del Mar. I bave followed the events of this process over the past years through the OC Register and socializing with other members of the community. It has frankly become frightening the process and obstruction the City and a few selfish local residents have created in delaying the Megonigal's to build their home. Putting myself in the Megonigal's shoes, which 1 hope you too have done, I understand their frustrations and support their wish to build their home. Regards, Patrick Wood UM resident for zg years RECEIVED BY PLANNING DEPARTMENT NOV 18 2009 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH From: Mark and Joy Cernich [mailto:cernich @sbcglobal.net] Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 10:58 AM To: rhawkins @earthlink.net Cc: icampbell @newportbeachca.gov Subject: Kim and Carolyn Megonigal Dear Mr. Hawkins, RECEN . PLANNING DEP .. NOV 17 2009 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACr. On behalf of my wife and I, we are writing to let you know we support Kim and Carolyne Megonigal in their effort to obtain a building permit for their home they want to build in Corona Del Mar. As home owners in this city we feel the need to support fellow property owners wishing to build when they are complying with the building code and not asking for any variances. It appears that the Megonigal's have diligently completed all the additional requirements placed on them in an effort to satisfy the adjoining neighborhood and they should be granted their permit at this time. We believe the City has fair building codes in place that protect property owners rights and those laws should be followed in this case allowing the Megonigal to move forward with their home in the very near future. Sincerely, Mark and Joy Cernich 30 Beacon Bay Newport Beach, CA 92660 From: Steve Prough [ mailto ;steveprough @madrunner.00m] Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 2:17 PM To: 'Robert C. Hawkins' Cc: Campbell, James; Olson, Gaylen; Garciamay, Ruby Subject: Megonigal Home Dear Mr. Hawkins, I strongly support the building of the Megonigal home. RECEIVED By PLANNING DEPARTMENT NOV 19 2009 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH I happened to be at the City Council meeting when Buck Gully was being discussed and another agenda item was pulled being the Megonigal home. Being that I know Mr. Megonigal, I asked him the issues. I have reviewed his plans at the planning department and I have attended one meeting at Begonia Park. My grandfather built our first family home on Carnation Cove at 2209 Bayside Drive in 1933. 1 am a third Generation resident of Corona del Mar and have lived here 55 years. My grandchildren, born at Hoag, represent five generations. I have watched the homes being built all around me and around Begonia Park. I have watched good neighbors who have worked to blend their homes into the neighborhood and bad neighbors who didn't really care. Many a home has impacted our family home but that is unavoidable if you are first. We now have the guy who is last and we are going to limit his ability to enjoy all those things that we enjoy because he is last. I have reviewed his plans and have talked to him. He has done more than any who preceded him in trying to be a good neighbor. Representing one of those who were first, I respectfully request that he who is last should be given the same rights as all the neighbors who have built on and above Carnation Cove. Having attended meetings at Begonia Park and talking to neighbors, it is obvious to me this is all about some people wanted to protect their view by stealing the rights of someone else. On this point, please review the history of Inspiration Point above Big Corona Beach. On the point there is a rock listing the families that helped purchase that site. One of those names is Willits, representing my Mother and Uncle. We did not complained. We did not file lawsuits. We did not try to restrict someone else's property. We did the right thing and financially made a commitment. Tell these folks to do the right thing. Buy the Megonigal lot instead of trying to limit the use for their own view enjoyment and financial gain. Let this good neighbor, Mr. and Mrs. Megonigal; build their home. Stephen W. Prough -- Original Message---- - From: Terry Hartshorn [ mailto :tohartshorn @earthlink.net] Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 12:18 PM To: rhawkins @earthlink.net Subject: Megonigal home I have know Kim Megonigal since 1985 and he and his wife Carolyne are people of integrity and honesty. I am writing to ask that you be supportive of their desire to build a home in CDM. I am asking that the Planning Commission and City Council look favorably on this and approve their project. An approval will protect their personal property rights . Thanks Just a note I have lived in CDM and /or Newport Coast since 1992. RECEIVED BY PLANNING DEPARTMENT NOV 18 2009 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH From: Courtney Lawrence- Ziething [mailto:ccandco @sbcglobal.net] Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 2:57 PM To: rhawkins @earthlink.net Cc: icampbell @newportbeachca.gov Subject* Megonigal's Robert— I support the Megonigal's in their effort to build their home in Corona Del Mar and hope that the Planning Commission and City Council approve their project and protect personal property rights in Newport Beach! If these individuals wanted to make the lot part of the park they should have bought it and donated it! Sincerely, Courtney Lawrence Ziething owner /designer - c.c. and company (design firm) C.C.:;1 C omi.2anq � 2[ {Tustin i- \mac. -F N 92665 ?4�.r 50.9-2.22. .I 50A www.ccandcoml2anydcsi ns.com RECEIVED BY PLANNING DEPARTMENT NOV 18 2009 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH - - - -- Original Message---- - From: vitessel @sprint.blackberry.net [mailto:vitessel @sprint.blackberry.net] Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 2:34 PM To: rhawkins @earthlink.net Cc: jcampbell @newportbeachca.gov Subject: Kim Megonigal home proposal Dear Mr. Robert Hawkins, My wife (Christine) and I have lived in. Newport for almost 40 years on Lido Island. We became aware of Kim and Caroline Megonigal's problem with building a home on a lot they have owned for 15 years. We took the time to drive up and look at the lot after they put up sticks to show the impact of the proposed house. The only view that seem to be impacted was driving down the street towards their lot. We walked in the park and could not see the sticks they put up. We went back later after some park brushes were trimmed and could see the sticks but no view was impacted. I think that their neighbors are being very unreasonable in trying to stop their building when it is very apparent that no ones view is impacted. I do not want to see my city get the reputation of Laguna for anyone trying to build on property they have owned particularly when it has been owned for 15 years. Sincerely, Michael & Christine Gayner RECEIVED BY PLANNING DEPARTMENT NOV 18 2009 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Fahimeh Fathpour Mandavi 2330 2nd Avenue Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Jim Campbell Newport Beach Planning Department 3300 Newport Blvd., Newport Beach, CA 92663 Re.: Megonigal Application for 2333 Pacific, Corona del Mar November 16, 2009 Dear Mr. Campbell: RECEIVED BY PLANNING DEPARTMENT NOV 19 2009 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH This is to voice my objection to the above referenced planning department's revision of Begonia Park's View. Me and my family disagree with the Planning Department, 45 % park view loss IS SIGNIFICANT, the City General Plan should NOT be ignored, and thus the owner rights should NOT trump those of hundreds who wish for the view to remain as is. Thank you so much for your consideration. Respectively, Fahimeh Fathpour Mandavi JOHN M CLARK 608 Acacia Ave Corona Del Mar, CA 92625 11/17/2009 Newport Beach Planning Dept. Attention: Jim Campbell 3300 Newport Bl. Newport Beach, CA 92663 RECEIVED BY PLANNING DEPARTMENT NOV 19 2009 Crry OF NEWPORT BEACH I wish to comment on the Begonia Park issue by stating that my wife and I are against the ruining of the water view by another building project. We have been part time vacation residents beginning in 1959 and full time residents of Corona Del Mar since 1974. Begonia Park has been very special to us in that we walk down to the park with our dog almost every day. Our youngest Daughter's wedding was held in the park in 1989. Begonia Park is used for many weddings, family picnics and other events all year long and all because of the beautiful view back ground. Lets be realistic, the beauty of the park is the view, one of the last open views in our neighborhood. To lose even apart of the view it would be a travesty. Compare it with the. view point over looking Big Corona, always crowded on weekends and mornings with out of town visitors etc. We locals are crowded out, but we still have our neighborhood Begonia Park that the visitors haven't really discovered. Begonia is a well used park by the residents of CDM on the north side of bayside dr. The proposed home will be an accident waiting to happen in as much as it will be sitting on a steep hill with almost no footing for the foundation. In a 6.0 to 7.0 earth quake, such as on the Newport Fault, a quake of this magnitude would bring down a number of homes on the street, but most particularly on this sight which has a home directly below it. This means that the home will be a legitimate threat to the home below and the City would be blamed for awarding a building permit to this postage stamp sized, precariously positioned lot which was never meant to be a building lot in the first place. No other lot on that side of the street have homes directly below and I can assure you that the city never considered that down slopping back yard to the home below, a build able lot. Particularly when it was at the end of a park with a view over it I realize that the building dept. tries to be fair to all property owners, but this is one time that common sense needs to prevail. The residents of CDM do not need to lose a very much appreciated and enjoyed view of our beautiful bay. I would hope that you would rule against the ruining of our Begonia Park view. Remember, surrounding home owners have rights too. And we have the right to keep our park with it's fabulous view that we look forward to enjoying everyday. aTZ__444& Bahman Fathpour Mandavi 2330 2nd Avenue Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Jim Campbell Newport Beach Planning Department 3300 Newport Blvd., Newport Beach, CA 92663 Re.: Megonigal Application for 2333 Pacific, Corona del Mar November 16, 2009 Dear Mr. Campbell: RECEIVED BY PLANNING DEPARTMENT Nov 19 2009 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH This is to voice my objection to the above referenced planning department's revision of Begonia Park's View. Me and my family disagree with the Planning Department, 45% park view loss IS SIGNIFICANT, the City General Plan should NOT be ignored, and thus the owner rights should NOT trump those of hundreds who wish for the view to remain as is. Thank you so much for your consideration. Respectively, Bahman Fathpou davi By Newport Beach Planning Department RAHMMIW 3300 Newport. Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915 NOV 142009 Attn: James Campbell, Principal Planner CITY OP NEW0RT8MCg RE: Additional response to Megonigal Residence — DEIR. After reviewing the DEIR, I am in favor of the following: 1. Alternative Access scenario. This would preserve the view from Begonia Park, Begonia Avenue, and Pacific Drive. There are already driveways both to the north and south from Bayside Drive in the same area that an additional driveway would be needed, and to my knowledge there have been no accidents there since I moved here in 1998. This view would be an invaluable city asset for the many people who can see the view from their houses or from the park. 2. Alternate Design scenario, with a city variance for no covered parking spaces. This would preserve most of the view, and all of the view if city would allow street parking for this house, instead of parking on the roof. This would also preserve a great asset for the city, the view. In addition, I would like to comment on the Response to comment No. 2 on my previous letter. Before that response, I believed there was a 20 foot setback on the Pacific Drive properties, since I had never been notified of the abandonment in 2000. I thought either the city or the county would have notified me. Thank you for your consideration, -/L,L,e3-AL 11.,C ¢� Barbara Dawkins - - - -- Original Message---- - From: rhleason @aol.com [mallto:rhleason @aol.com] Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2009 7:23 AM To: Kim Megonigal; rhawkins @earthlink.net; jcampbell @newportbeachca.gov Cc: ]k Leason Subject: Megonigal residence Please approve the Megonigal's plans for the their property in Corona del Mar and uphold the rights of these property owners. J.K. And Robin Leason RECEIVED By PLANNING DEPARTMENT NOV 19 2009 CTTy OF NEWPORT BEACH November 18, 2009 James Campbell Newport Beach Planning Dept City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach CA 92663 RE: Megonigal Residence (PA2007 -133) 2333 Pacific Drive, CDM Dear Mr. Campbell, My name is Dan Spletter, I live at 430 1/2 Begonia in CDM, and am co- chairman of "Friends of Begonia Park" Watching this project reminds me of the old story about the husband caught by his wife while he's in bed with another woman, he yells out "Who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes ?" First, we were told the house and garage were much smaller than everyone could see they would be by looking at the story poles. This allowed the park view loss to appear much smaller, and therefore less objectionable. Theo we were told that there was a view loss but the actual loss is "less than significant." But anyone looking out from the viewing bench can clearly see that at least 50% of the water view would be taken over by a vision of this WWII bunker looking garage. Since when is 501/9 of anything referred to as `less than significant ?" Next we hear that the park view is not really the bay and ocean, this is only the "Focal Point." The view is the much larger area that includes the sky, hills, houses, and the water. Our question is: Why would someone leave their home to visit an ocean view park to look at the hills and sky, when they could probably see that from their home? Call it what you wish, but the big value of this park is its water view, not that of the hills or sky. So, the latest story is that of this total 1006/o larger view, only 35% is destroyed, and we're left with 65% of this total to enjoy, which should be fair and reasonable. Let me ask these questions in trying to understand this point: is the destruction of a valuable painting hanging on a wall "less than significant" because the painting is only the "Focal Point" of the larger view? After all, it takes up only a small part of the total wall, floor and the painting, so it's okay, correct? And would you find a 50%, 45% or 35% cut in your salary "less than significant ?" Would you find the remaining 65% acceptable? Next, in the "Planning Commission Staff Report for the Nov. 19, 2009 Meeting," page 2, paragraph #5, refers to General Plan Policies. In NR20.1, the city is required to `Protect and, where feasible, enhance significant scenic and visual resources..." In NR20.4, the city is required to "Design and site new development... including those down public streets, to frame, accent, and minimize impacts to public views." How could the General Plan be more clear on these issues? But the staff report states, on page 3, paragraph 1, that "protection cannot mean that there can be no impact whatsoever." and the view is really the hills, homes and sky, not just the water. This hardly passes what one neighbor calls "the giggle test!" Actually "protection" of something really does mean that it is kept from being negatively impacted, damaged, harmed or destroyed. I doubt anyone on the commission or in the meeting room, excepting the applicant and Mr. Campbell, would disagree with this. Surely, "no impact" cannot mean that it is okay to take away or destroy 501/6, or even 35 %, of something, especially something one is required to "protect," and is asked to "enhance." And one that is as valuable as the irreplaceable view that helps define Begonia Park. Does this make any sense, at all? On page 3, page 5 of the "Planning Commission Staff Report, October 22, 2009" Mr.Campbell states that "Protecting the view from Begonia Park does not mean that the view must remain unaltered, however several residents in the area feel that it should." [n fact, there are not "several residents" who have this opinion, there are at least several hundred that have it_ and many are here tonight. We do not have an issue with the applicants' exercising their economic right to build a home at 2333 Pacific Drive. However, we must object to the outrageous idea that-they have the additional right to destroy a very significant and valuable part of a precious public community asset. There is only one kind of sense this project makes, and that is total and absolute NONSENSE! Begonia Park is an important community asset that the Planning Department and its staff should recognize as an obligation to protect from degradation, as the General Plan so clearly specifies. I strongly urge the Planning Commission to reject this application to build according to the latest construction application plan. Reg s, an Soler Date November 18, 2009 James Campbell Newport Beach Planning Department City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 icam.obelf t eity.newoort- bech.. RE: Megonigal Residence (PA2007 -133) 2333 Pacific Drive, CDM Dear Mr. Campbell, My name is Dan Spleder, 1 live at 430 1/2 Begonia in CDM, and am co- chairman of "Friends of Begonia Park." Title documents tell us that Caroline (Carolyn Pautsch) Megonigal, became the sole owner of 2333 Pacific Drive on Dec.20, 2005, taking title as an unmarried woman. Her current husband, Kim Megonigal, is not now and never has been an owner of this property, although he represents himself as such. Kim Megonigal is only a lender on the property, agreeing to loan $1,500,000 to Caroline on November 7, 2005- Documents (enclosed) recording both of these transactions were recorded on December 21, 2005. Caroline and her then husband, John Pautsch, purchased this 4,100SF lot on August 6, 1997 for approximately $300,000 according to the $330.00 tax stamp on the attached grant deed (taxes are approximately .11% of the transferred value). A smaller bluff lot of approximately 2,200 SF, a few lots east at 2223 Pacific Drive, sold for $1,070,000 on June 4, 1998 according to the $1,177 tax stamp on the grant deed. Clearly there was a severe discount applied to the value of 2333 Pacific Drive. This discount amounts to 72 %, on a lot twice as large as 2223 Pacific Drive, with a much better view. The discount obviously stemmed from the well understood previous issues of trying to obtain a construction permit on this lot. The citizens of Corona del Mar and Newport Beach are not required to reward the absolute gamble these applicants decided to take in trying to develop this lot. We should not be expected to destroy a significant pan of one of the natural assets that define our community so that Kim and Caroline Megonigal can enjoy ocean views from every room of their home. Our Planning Department should involve itself in protecting our assets, not in trying to find excuses on why they should be destroyed. We ask that the applicant's request for a permit develop the lot at 2333 Pacific Drive be denied. n Sple ate • RECORDING REQUESTED BY: When Recorded hall To: Roger A. Browning, sq. Glassman, Braig wn & Saltsman, Inc. 360 North Bedford Drive Suite 204 Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Escrow No. Me Order No. APN: 052 -011 -01c RKOrdad SWN RWM v6 Orw9s Count TOM Day, C1W% Raeonrar IIIIIIImililmill tlnmIII 27.00 2005001019758 02:38prrt 12/21/05 117 50 o11 AW a 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MOD 0.00 0.00 000 OR REOORDER'S USI SHORT FORM DEED OF TRUST AND ASSIGNMENT OF RENTS THIS DEED OF TRUST, made RAb` between Cawye S. PSatsCh' ar Onrtrarlaf 01ORMA herein called TRUSTOR, whose address is 2204 Waterfront Drive, Corona Del Mar, CA 92825 Fidelity National Tide Company , a corporation, herein called TRUSTEE, and " 1l PPOspoWt, Trustee of the Survival's Trust created under The Megonlgal Trust dated April 10, 19,92 , herein called BENEFICIARY, WITNESSETH: That Truator IRREVOCABLY GRANTS, TRANSFERS AND ASSIGNS to TRUSTEE IN TRUST, WITH POWER OF SALE, that property in Orange County, California, desc#bed as: See Exhibit 0A8 attached hereto and made apart hereof TOGETHER WITH the rents, Issues and profits thereof, SUBJECT, HOWEVER, to the Aght, power and authority given to and conferred upon Beneficiary by paragraph (10) of the provisions incorporated herein by reference to collect and apply such rent, issues and profits. For the Purpose of Securing: 1. Performance of each agreement of Tnrslor Incorporated by reference or contained herein. 2. Payment of the Indebtedness evids d. by one promissory note of even date herewith, and arty extension or renewal thereof. In the principal su� executed by Truslor in fav6r of Beneficiary or order. 3. Payment of such further sums as the then raced owner of said property hereafter may borrow from Beneficiary. when evidenced by another note (or notes) reciting it is so secured. Papa HO 1 of FW iB (Rev. Uer) SHORT FORM DEED OF TRYST Fo•ne EXHIBIT "C° 0 Ll APN:052 -011 -01c To Prolvid the Socially of this Dead of Timat, Trustor Agraes: By the execution send daty" of this Deed of Trust and the note secured hereby, that proftions (1) b (14). inclushie, of the fidi604s deed of trust recorded in Santa Barbara County and Sonoma County October 18, 1961. and In all Outer counties October 23. 1961, in the book and at the page of Opal Records M the office of the county recorder of the county where said property k located, noted below opposite the name of such county, viz: COUNTY BOOK PAGE COUNTY BOOK PAGE COUNTY HOOK PAGE COUNTY BOOK PAGE Alameda 435 664 Mnas 792 633 Plater E95 301 Slam 20 335 AWN 1 250 Lake 362 39 Pkanae let 5 slakirou 466 lei Arkador 104 346 Lamm 171 471 RNaekle 3005 623 Straeo 1105 162 sulk 1143 1 Los Angebe T2068 899 Sovamedo 4331 52 Banana 1851 889 c4lererss 145 152 Madere 810 170 (can Banco 271 363 Stanhum 1713 456 CoN4a 296 617 Martn 1606 330 San Bernard" 6567 81 SLOW 572 297 Contra Caste 3976 47 Mariposa T7 262 Sen Fronalato A332 905 Tdama 401 289 Del Norte 76 414 Mandotia 579 530 San J02" 2470 311 T" 93 388 Ei Dorado 566 456 Merow 1547 536 San Lute Obr4po 1151 12 TUMM 2294 275 Freeno 4628 372 Modoc 154 651 San Marto 4078 420 Tuokaene 135 47 Gann 4222 164 Mono 52 429 sake Barbara 1878 650 veebea 2062 966 Humboldt 657 677 Monte" 2194 538 same Clara 5396 341 Yob 653 245 Imperial 1091 501 Napa M as Soma Cna 1491 494 Yobs 334 496 Inyo 147 596 Now 306 320 Shaft ON 528 Ken 3427 60 Orenga Sees, 611 San DiW Serbs 2 Book 1991, Pape 183887 which provisions, Identical in all counties (printed on the attached unrecorded paga6) are hereby adopted and incorporated herein and made a part hereof as fully as though herein at length; that TnrMor will observe and perform said provisions; and that the references to property, obligations anti parties in said prwAS)ons shall be construed to refer to the property, oblgations. and prides sat forth in this Deed of Trust The undersigned Trustor requests that a copy of any Notice of Default and of any Notice of Sale hereunder be mailed to tan at his address hereinbafore set forth. STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF C) and ON tJe0vn6.4A.7,2oas before me, personally appeared CAAd,.,., S. St-k personally known to me (or proved to me an the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) Ware subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that halehaAfley executed the same in h4rlientheir authorized capacrly(ies), and Met by hkilherithelr signature(s) on this inalrwnent the person(s), or the eft upon behalf of which the person(s) acted. executed the instrument witness my hard and official seal. r C, f;BMl7 W Comet f 1369266 �Tlar rarlc•tauwoa4 $ toaa�kpeA.lrra'� FD-21B PRAT'. 4104) SNORT FORM DEED OF TRUST Page No. 2 at 4 e* AV &'A ALL THAT CERTAIN LAND SITUATED IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF ORANGE, CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: THAT PORTION OF PACIFIC DRIVE, AS SAID PACIFIC DRIVE IS LAID OUT AND SHOWN ON A MAP OF CORONA DEL MAR, RECORDED IN BOOK 3, PAGES 41 AND 42 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, AS SAID PACIFIC DRIVE WAS VACATED AND ABANDONED BY RESOLUTION NO. 380 OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE CRY OF NEWPORT BEACH A CERTIFIED COPY OF WHICH WAS RECORDED MARCH 1, 1927 IN BOOK 24, PAGE 1 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT WHICH POINT IS AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID PACIFIC DRIVE AND SOUTHWESTERLY PROLONGATION OF THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF BEGONIA AVENUE, FORMERLY 29TH AVENUE, AS SAID BEGONIA AVENUE IS LAID OUT AND SHOWN UPON THE SAID MAPOF CORONA DEL MAR; THENCE NORTH 39 040'30" EAST 20.00 FEET: THENCE SOUTH 63051'36' EAST 103.50 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 26008'30' WEST 35.37 FEET; THENCE NORTH 79 006'42" WEST 68.12 FEET; THENCE NORTH 25° 1 B'06' WEST 54.30 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. Assessors Parcel No: 052 -011 -01 RECORDING REQUESTED 9Y GERALD J. PHILLIPS, ESQ. AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: GERALD J. PHILLIPS, ESQ. PHILLIPS 6 WHISNANT, LLP 230 Newport Center Drive Third Floor Newport Beach, CA 92660 Title Order No. Recorded L ;lelal ReeoMe. orange Count' Tan Day, Cte t- Recorder r0�5�5nw11��an�uu 18.00 2004001019757 02:38p 12/21/05 117 30 GO 5 1X00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.00 0.00 0.00 Moo THIS IJNE FOR RECORDERS USE Grant Dead Mamiuded from Raopprafeal undw Propcomen 11, i.e., Cates, Covet Art 14Ag1 et seq.) no undersigned Gmr) fe) declare(s) under penalty of perjury that ere fone" is true and correct: Documentary transfer tax is i 0 computed on Me value of property conveyed, or ...._ Computed on fun value amt value of INra and en xeoraeraa remaining al time of selu, a , .x : is exempt from inPMINM of Ule Documentary Tiorgfer TOX pueuant to Revenue and Tax Code §119Ma), on transferring community, queskororanaty, or puad-eadtsf properly, asseLS between epeutas. punuant to a jCrdpmsrS, en order. ar a wmillen agreementbetwwar epwaes in tmtamplMluru d erry awdr [u0grnera a order. x Ossoexemptions: (statereawn, led We Code§ or Ordinance numeer) Tt'a coavev nee a tabu 11 s sole and 8.caratk _. UnYbaposabdaae:_x , Cayd NeWRort Beach nrenwr=y' ar . ,...,,,,.,. s . r tsq}, and This it an k,lereppusat Transfer ender §e3 Of the Revenue and Tampon Cede and Gmntorts) has (haws) ducked the applicable sxdudon from Reappraisal under lhopostlien 13: A Itarefer to a Mates for the bera/MW use of a apouse, or the VAN" agorae of a deceased hansferor, or by a trustee _ of arch a it" to the spouse of the trut4X. Atrarolerwhich hkeselfed upon the death da spouse. A tran&* to a spouse or forma spouse In oamniion with a property andlerrrrd agreement or deuas of di sokalon of a marriage of bow soon, or AereatioN transfer. orterrlliradon, aol* betwew spouses, dany cD.Owners irrtareti _ The dWixidion of a lugd eMWv Property to a spouse or tormar spouse in extlan le lot the Yhferesl at such apou" in be legal ensitym connection with a property settlement a9memerdors deaeoddfaaoluaart damamlapeorhgalseptratbrt 06W, GXWff W*- -JOj#N W. PAUTSCH, JR. AND CAROLYN S. PAUTSCH, AS INDIVIDUALS Nmby GRANT(S)► CAROLYN S. PAUTSCH, AN UNMRRTED VOMAN . fhs foftwhrg described teal prop" In the County of ORANGE , Stele or ceIROMle Commonly known as 2333 Pacific Avenue, Corona Del Mar California 92625, legally described on Exhibit "A" attached hf!reW apiAde a part 4ereof. p rarn6nt..1U- 2005 STATE OFCAUFORKA N Rr COumY of ORANGE on December 20, 2005 betwe me, do OLYN undedgned. a No" Public in and for Mid Bldg, penvnay appserse CAROLYN S. PAUTSCH _ ww mft beat b me (or Pttven b me on to 4th 01 wase eriedra) tD heda peten(W wlprwrw(al krahe wbeoeea b tlre,vees i affivo andadahadedpadbn,eand VW eyexammd lire Wrwn witI Y Pant ft pw=K)(wy. and So by Iindle fiat dvMM lbe an ea hnbvnant ae lrereo,tsl. a the erdWr .Don herrrm d vdrra ne perWO)sotb0,aaevasd ere imar M WRNESSrrrr aard cow nd swaka t LLo., C 1Lenn vwn.vt eau r vc Llw,V CNN. /1750208 'Il ` NVA" W C.Dai0atl, N rG It t joil" 01 V 01 ft area for official notarial seal) STATEMENTSTO:CAROTYN S PAUTSCH 2204 Waterfront Drivt< Corona Del Mar. CA 92625 N W t Ss Grv, stare W RC ry 11 0 CALIFORNIA ALL - PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California County of ()r aF': ,Rl ss on to -'21 Orj , before me, !Shell -Q_Z !0Aa, personally appeared -�S_E>hn R• 5i'• Nn.rq a str.(n ally known to me roved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence RddO�t Qolrwiiloe • 1N161s MrQWlltle- Callle�ro woetwtn� to be the person(s) whose name(s) Is /ere subscribed to the within instrument and acknm%"sd to me that helshe/they executed the same in his/her /their authorized capecitylies), and that by his/her /their signature(s) on the instrument the person($), or the entity upon behalf of which the person($) acted, executed the Instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seat. Ram HGi7 $Yi MOre _�i�'��L�IX�. Though the inhYmaficm below is not mq mad by tics$ H may prove Vallo to to persons relying on the doe OMM and could preyeM bovalulenf renmrat and reanadem it of Ihfa ram to another doeuwwW. Descrlptlen at Attached DocumemT�1_ Tills or Type of Document '^ s' C$RpSt S,2R jrb4.4� .'7 Document Data: i2�Z0 " /0�5 _'..jNumber ofofPages: o[ Signers) Other Than Named Above:.$ Capaetty(ies) Claimed by SI e: Signer's Nam _! _ >( Individual rice of ,n�nm nmc _i Corporate Officer — Tltle(s): ., I Parmer— u Limited . General AhomeyinFed a Trustee 1 ' Guardian or Conservator 1 Other ^.. —_.._ _ ... Signer Is Representing: _ O,lB9Nr�YxpOry4stl6w•43�a.4(n M. Po ice. H4•Q.Y-M. GYmIi�•�...a�ivbrdg Nt0 IN Stlr MNrUrrGi. A�aw. rdOWiNT! • • Government Code 27381.7 I certify under the penalty of perjury that the notary seal on this document read as follows: Name of Notary: Date Commission Expires: County where bond is Filed: Commission No.: Manufacturer/Vendor No.: SHELLY DROWN JUL 29, 2009 ORANGE 1598012 NNA1 Place of execution - Newport Beach FIDELITY NAT1104AL TITLE COMPANY Date - December 21, 2005 RECORDED AT THE RFOUEST OF CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY RF.CORNM RXQUESM RY AKD VOWN R®DOROF D KAM Ter Rj s ][ E. FhYa 2025 West Balboa Rlvd. Newport Reach. CA 92663 Recorded in the County of Orange, Califomia Gary L. Granville, Clerk/Recorder IA1®1111101111 49.00 19980350812 3:43p 06!04/98 004 25010868 25 67 G02 2 07 588.50 6.00 3.00 0.00 0.00 588.50 20.00 20.00 0.00 I Spas Above'nnm Lim Im R=otdu's U0 Oely A.P.N.: Order No.: 8800777 %>!; Escrow No.: IS$DD -DM GRANT DEED THE UNDERSIGNED GRANTT)RU) DECLARE(s) THAT DOCLULNTARY TRANSFER TAX IS: CIOUNrY SI . L77 z [ X I oompatod on full value of ProperrY conveyed, or [l computed on full value less vaa77uCt kieus or mcumbr� rmmg at rime Of sale, unincorporated area; I X 1 City of NrArpon Dgm% . and FOR A VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, Reveipr of whkh is hereby acimawiedg 1. Robin A. Can"M and Joan F. CAMFW, Trudeft of The Catnpldl ftzaW Tnrt 5-UN hereby GRANT(S) to Rinsed 6. Flow, a warried man an hie sole aid separate Property the Movimg dmaibed pro" is die City of Newpst Rtseh, County of Onne Sure of Calitaoii; A pardon of Lot 0 of Carom del Mar, as move particularly desorbw an Brhiblt "A" tttttwel" 6crAo aid by refermce made a pat Rceat The CamRbc)] Family Trust STATE OF ( pmooa ly!mown 10 rat and wAom kdOed n mmj dw wrr M a) or mvtriu�aoa ISS I bc%e as aa the brit N s dd&mN eridemr) b be OC pftzm(a) whose uae(a) idm Akwe r m me amhie oatrnmrnt Oy asmad de nine is bWbmMbcir a.Olar' cqacyy(iea) and ass by ra/We eir sig I m(s) ea me mmoom bf wtich art op.eeisJ sad. eraasd k mmu„or. IIa news OSE �r taaaaepraaaft,Ol Tbb am for d&W aasri.I sal. Mail Tu &Mtroeah to: SAME AS ABOVE or Address Noted Below Exhibit "A" Parcel l: nat portion of Block D of Corona Del Mar, in the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange. Statt of California, as per map recorded in book 3, page(s) 41 and 42 miscellaneous maps, in the office of the County Recorder of said County, described as follows: Beginning at the point of intersection of the Northwesterly line of Lot 4 in Block 328, of said Comna Del Mar, projected Southwesterly, with the Southwesterly, line of Electric Way, as shown on said map, thence Southwesterly along said projected line of said Lot 4 a distaace of 56.51 feet; thence Soutbeamotly to a point in the Soutbwcu=Sy projection of the Southeasterly lint of raid Lot 4, said point being 51.77 fact along said Snutbwestetly projection from the intersection thereof with the Southwesterly line of said Electric Way, thence NoAheas" along said projected line of said Lot 4 to the Southwesterly line of said Electric Way; thence Northwesterly along said Southwesterly line of said Electric Way to the point of beginning. Parcel 2: A right of way far ingress and egress over the Southeasterly 2 feet 6 inches of that portion of Block D of Corona Del Mar, as shown on a map recorded in took 7, page(s) 41 and 42 of miscellaneous maps, records of Orange County, described as follows: Beginning at a point in the Southwesterly projection of the Northwesmdy line of Lot 4 in Block 328 of said Corona Del Mar, said point being 56.51 feet from the iatersxvoo of said Southwesterly projec! with the Southwesterly line of Electric Way, as shown on said map; thence Southwesterly along said projected line of said Lot 4 to the point of intersection thereof with the Notthca terly lino of the County Road conveyed to the County of Orange by deed recorded in book 282, page 172 of Deeds. records of said Orange County, thence Southeasterly along said Northeasterly line of said county mad to a point of same where it intersec6 the Southea mrly line of said Lot 4, projected Southwesterly; thence Northeasterly along the Southeasterly line of said Lot 4, projected, Southwesterly to a point 51.77 feet from said Southwesterly line of Electric Way, thence Northwesterly to the polar of beginning. () . r. - lIOOiM1W9BY FMA11611M7R EMMAUMCdIPW w APIDIMMEMCCUMMUL70 jpbnp 2304 Baterfrout drive Corona del liar. CA 92623 Recorded in the Anty of Orange, California Gary L. Granville Clerk/Recorder l iii iii im ii lY 11i Illy 11111f1011 19.00 19970392123 1:52pm 08/15/97 004 21003681 21 30 G02 5 07 165.00 7.00 12.00 0.00 0.00 165.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 no fit ttednedwli. �J FM A VAwAKS A7M. Lmlpt d whir], it hU ft rJ<awtae $1 1 Dewba G. Mba DoW IL OdmmK and lale O Ltomey m t ■awea d rip >lW D0dtldIM T wt w to a wtlAdd I4 hdm 4 Dw04a G. 101o& DwM It Geiwdd ad Lfh G. iDlo=6 w Y% dti0 L L MInw' TruI vA tke d 3mtOt otDowbu G.:LLp at to o mdbldd I fib hhlay DaalAte G. ;kL Dald L Getewwld and Lob G.Md a% alhubmddoL8. GdomMTgo &PbAhwfrBew1@dDwYILQd=MwM m 0 11 I Vft htewtt Dowba G. )nt1L Dwrld E. GehwoM and Ld0 G. Lenny w 1hw0n0 of do" G511twelalfrwmtti0.d6rtie Damdt dLai G. Lfeaw. w is unaadtdd0a fKtrletwaM hmft GkAHMP)la,JdlaD.>wWdk. Jr. unit Cwaba WF&mbdk. Truss; d'H! Awtel 'lfW% altiibi Nfff .tlftt A M qte lolowI I dooeme p p M Lade MY dNmpn Data. Cnaq d Ow/03100 dCmUNsk pe0 Ladllt •t' Nt0r11d>Atnte as sd0 a poet iiwo[. . SwdpatQwppepaiedinatamadam WOW mobspatfond 1weumOr tww ,"pint: 61 M GRANT DMD COli1W= ON MXr PAGE bW iEa Summon b SAME AS ABOVE oe Addma Nona Eolotr E MM1T "A" • APP 052- 011 -01 AILTBATcmTAsmLm DlRVA71DDI7=srA-marc acamA.COMMOVOliANGILCnTOFMWPCNtT BRAtS UUMM A3 FaU4 VIp THAT PORTMN OF PACIFIC DRIVE. AS SAID PAC= DRIVE IS LAID OUT AND SHOWN ON A MAP OF CORONA DID. MAR. RECORDED IN BOOK 3. PAOBS 41 AND 42 OF MIKSLLANBOUS MAPS, RBOORDS OF ORANGE OOUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AS dAID PACIFIC DRIVE WAS VACATED AND ASANDOMW BY RBSOLUTION NO. 380 OF THE BOARD OF THUM= OF TIM CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, A CGRTIF= COPY OF WHICH WAS RECORDED MARCH 1. 192714 BOOK 24. PAGE l OF OFFICIAL. RBCORDS OF SAID ORANGE COMM . DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POENT WHICH POINT N AT THE INTERSSCIIGH OF THE SOUIEIWEMELY LINE OF SAID PACIFIC DRIVE AND TUB SOUT1 WBSTIIRLY FROLONOKIION OF THE NORTHWESTERLY IBM OF BEGONIA AVENUE. FORMERLY 29TH AVENU$ AS SAID BEGONIA. AVENUE IS LAID OUT AND M WWN UPON THE SAID NAP OF CORONA DEL MAR; THENCE NORTH 39' 40' 30' BAIT 20.00 FBE; THENCE SOUTH 63. 31.30' EAST 10330 PUT. THENCE SOVrH 26' W 30' WEST 33.37 FEBT; THENCB NORTH79' 06' 42' WES! 68.11 FEET; THENCE NORTH 256 18' 06' WEST 54.30 FESTTO THB POINT OF smove RIO. S • - 0 • AN 052- 011 -01 BSHIBIT "B" Dmd" 0. Kfhq. David E. &%wold. and Lob 0. E, toion. as tnutsss of dw hi- I el Daduafbn Tnot as to on DorwAm 0. KBap, David E. Griswold and Lab 0. Ericson, as Tnwtm of #w L.B. Grhwoid Tnut ND.4 for tlw SwwM of Danatyn 0. Kling as to an 7 Donslye G. KkV, David it GrlswoM and _ Lob G. Mom, as Tnwma of tm LS. Griswold Tout No.4 for the emotem of David E. Gfhwoid as w an undWA*d IIM interest O. & Tnuba ZA DOW" G. K*% David E. 0riswoid and Lois 0. Erkaan, " Trtwtass of tits LB. Goff Tnwt No.4 for Ow BarwfR of Lolm 0. Ericsan, as to sn Dooms Dow AVOLUAL r 1 STAUap I� I M- Cuoxttap CAr/fl pmmw4 _ ��� bs�t�Yh/ba�wsU/rd �aay ■ b 1b �OIYIr `� IY paOnf� �P O�af�lYr �m��OnO, �i �WnRil/10Q1 Nth q LU are OEM OWL wmm= - a wo�.s.�mr MaKtZrOarrerdrOML WA= or CAIBQ! pr M C M cP r a ..., a Ak �o t�owbwdbl assbarir[rYrrq wY�rpbrb.µwpgw�s �{pLh.fridYir 40 MM b*MMW r1r b 'Is - bw dt Ywomm fis�aaar (�xYarllt�a�alrYlfd�lYi�/�r15 =ME" an WTDMWbWvdofWdaiL �1Y1.,nd e.n.R04 wa_ tm M&L braOMmo twi - w(wpoWwwwft%&mf ' - i v Ww*brrr Aewmmew hwww~10 ft a�Y Yrnorr =rtr hr+ 04 damnoOl = rr irdw ft From: Jim Connelly [ mailto: jim .connelly @creativeteaching.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 9:04 PM To: 'rhawkins @earthlink.neY Subject: Dear Commissioner Hawkins, I have been following the Megonigal saga for a number of months. I run and walk through the neighborhood frequently and can't believe what the city is putting that couple through. It a very short list of selfish neighbors that are trying to steal their basic property rights. If the accounts are correct, they are not seeking a variance and planning everything to existing rules and regulations, what conceivable reason would the city have for rejecting their plans. Respectfully Jim James M. Connelly 321 Pirate Road Newport Beach www.creativeteaching.com www.pacificlearning.com REczE pl ' '&Y VG '&Y D NOV 19 2049 CITY 0FAr%oR1TBE ACN From: Peter Denniston [mailto :Peter @dennistonrealty.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 7:21 PM To: rhawkins @earthlink.net Cc: jampbell@newportbeachca.gov Subject: Planning Commission - Megonigal Hearing on 11/19/09 Importance: High To: Robert Hawkins, Chairman of the Planning Commission Cc: Jim Campbell, Principal Planner Enough is enough! Until now, I have enjoyed being a resident of the City of Newport Beach and appreciated the strong leadership from the Planning Commission and City Council. We seem to be lacking this leadership with the proposed Megonigal home. I have watched this convoluted review and approval process wind through the City of Newport Beach and it causes me to question whether private property rights have been eliminated in our City. I can understand the City trying to fulfill its civic and moral responsibility to protect the public health, safety and welfare but this is absurd. The Megonigals are pursuing something that they have by right. Their proposed project is consistent with the General Plan and Zoning for the City of Newport Beach. They are not asking for any variances and their project complies with all height limits, setback and lot coverage requirements. They have been required to complete a full Environmental Impact Report which is absolutely unheard of by me and my real estate industry peers for a project this small. They have been required to repeatedly update view studies to satisfy the City's review requirements. They have responded to every request that the City has made. With the completion of all these studies, it's finally time for the City to approve this project. While some adjoining property owners want to see this property confiscated for open space purposes, no one has this right without paying fair compensation. At this point, the City has crossed the line in what looks to me to be approaching an illegal taking. The City should approve the project as recommended. If not, then the City should stop this charade and deny this project so that the Megonigals can sue the City for an illegal taking. Please feel free to call me with any questions. Best regards, ,Deter Peter Denniston 140 Sidney Bay Drive Newport Beach, CA 92657 Cell: 310.383.1810 Facsimile: 949.715.5047 E -mail: peter(@dennistonrealty.com PLAAfN12 O BY DOAR Nov 19 2009 Cj�, Opp �ORr'OzACN From: ]KLeason @aol.com [mailto:]KLeason @aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 6:47 PM To: rhawklns @earthlink.net Cc: jcampbell @newportbeachca.gov Subject: Megonigal Building Project Dear Mr Hawkins I will not be able to attend the public meeting tomorrow that will be discussing the Megonigal House project. I am in total support of their project. They are not requesting any variances and yet have been stopped from building their dream home for far too long. It is time to approve their project and stop the needless delay tactics! Thanks for your consideration. JK Leason 205 Evening Star Lane Newport Beach, Ca. 92660 Ocp P(4ftrr a IDY CDPP4RTM$k?' Nov, 9 P009 C 1rYoFAWWpDRTBRA CN From: ]Sarg22 @aol.com [mailto:]Sarg22 @aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 4:44 PM To: rhawkins @earthlink.net Cc: jcampbell @newportbeachca.gov Subject: Megonigals Hi Ko6ert- 'nave lived in Newport E)each for 5O years now and am familiar with home values and developments in our community. I am also friends with Kim and Carolyne Megonigal. Rind the amount of time and money (6y all parties) spent on this "view" issue to 6e a6surd! The Megonigals have owned this property for 15 years and have EVLEYrigbtto 6uild a conforming home on the lot!! All neig6om and fellow community mem6ers know that someone owns this property and has been paying taxes on it for years. how dare anyone say now that they are not entitled to build! Someone may lose their view ?? The park goers will lose their view ?? Anyone of these concerned parties bas the same right to purchase the property, pay taxes and donate the land for any use they choose! it is not their choice, they have not paid for it, paid taxes on it etcl I hope the city council will resolve this issue soon and let these people build their home they have dreamed of (and paid for) over the last 15 years! Thankyou For gourtime. J am. SavgRwii 2771 J3cupho e Dtftw .Newpayt J3ead, ea 92663 949 -631 -1543 Home 949 -280 -7675 ce& pLA 4PP &k *Oki o _ 'fir cprk -4109 From: William Bone [mailto:wbone @sundseco.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 4:29 PM To: rhawkins @earthlink.net; jcampbell @newportbeachca.gov Subject: My wife Cindi and I reside at 9 Harbor Island, Newport Beach, CA 92660. We understand that there is a public hearing before the planning commission this Thursday, November 19 at 6:30 p.m. at the Newport Beach City Hall to review the application by Kim Megonigal to build a new home in Corona del Mar. I understand also that you will be reviewing the Environmental Report for this project. We strongly support the approval of this project. We understand the home is a three bedroom home with approximately 3,500 square feet, which is very compatible with other homes in this area of Corona del Mar. The Megonigals have owned the lot for 15 years and are not asking for a variance. Cynthia and William Bone .I pr""' °u By GDJ?PAJZ7U6VT Nov 19 2009 ciryoF���RTB�CH Campbell, James From: Steve Erlinger [sterlinger@sbcglobal.net] Sent: Monday, November 16, 2009 10:49 AM To: Gardner, Nancy, Campbell, James Subject: Megonigal residence Application at 2333 Pacific, CDM I have contacted you before regarding this project. I am a resident of CDM living on Acacia Ave. I fully support the Megonigal's right to do with THEIR property as they wish as prescribed by the zoning laws of Newport Beach. The entitlement oriented neighbors who are whining about a view, they claim to be theirs, that will be partially obscured and their attempt to deny a person of their use of their property is contrary to our constitution and rights of property ownership. There would still be wonderful views from many areas of Begonia Park not to mention the many other spectacular views in other-parts of the city (many a mere several minute walk away from Begonia Park). Again, I am in total support of individual property rights and against this action group's horrific (and I believe nefarious and dishonest) attempts to deny these people their rights. I suggest that if these people want a view that is'theirs' that they go buy a property that would afford them that pleasure. Thank you, Steve Erlinger 510'A Acacia Ave. Campbell, James From: Linda Baker [Lbaker @rcdaw.net] Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 3:21 PM To: rhawkins @earthlink.net Cc: Campbell, James Subject: Megonigal Property Hello Gentlemen- I am a 40 year Newport resident and I just wanted to let you know I support the Megonigals in their desire to build a house on their property. If they had wanted it to remain a park, the neighbors should have banded together years ago and purchased the lot. I commend the Megonigal family for trying to be fair, but the fact they have to go through this frivolity at all is very unfortunate. Thank you. Linda Baker Campbell, James From: Brian Prinn lbprinn @skyeinc.net) Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 4:12 PM To: rhawkins @earthlink.net Cc: Campbell, James; 'Brad Hillgren'; 'Kim Megonigal' Subject: Megonigal Home Permit Dear Mr. Hawkins, My wife and I live in Corona del Mar at 3515 Seabreeze Lane. I am writing tayou in support of the home permit application of Kim and Carolyne Megonigal. It disturbs and disappoints me that this process has been drawn out for more than a year. Their application is in compliance with City codes and ordinances, and they are seeking no variances. Please end this unfair process with an affirmative vote this Thursday. Private property rights need to be protected and the laws of our city need to be followed without further delay. Brian and Linda Prinn Campbell, James From: Jim Gianulias Ucg @gcompanies.coml Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 4:24 PM To: Campbell, James Subject: Jim,please do the right and proper thing in allowing the Mcmonigals to build their dream homel From: susan lister [mailto:susanlister @mac.com] Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2009 9:17 AM To: rhawkins @earthlink.net Cc: jcampbell @newportbeachca.gov Subject: I support the Megonigal's home in Corona del Mar Dear Mr. Hawkins. It is my wish that the Planning Commission approve the Megonigal's right to build on their lot in Corona del Mar. I have lived herein Corona del Mar on Waterfront for 14 years. Last year this group spurred to a frenzy neighbors, who in my opinion, were lead to believe this was about a "park view" when in fact the real benefits are. for the people who incited this, a couple of home owners who feel melr view will be compromised. At that time I and others suffered almost unbearable irritation and intimidation at the neighborhood being papered on every public surface with a call to stop" the threat ". At the City Council meeting last year, Kim Megonigal was approached by two separate home owners begging him to "donate his property as a city park" with the promise that they would "name the park after him ". I just want to know if THEY would set an example and demonstrate first the same goodwill by leveling their homes for the City and donating their lots - and we'll name the fast and second parks after them. If that view is so important to the park then how much view is important? If the Megonigal's cannot build on this lot that they own then the home next to that lot should be demolished... it takes a part of that "view" as well.. Why are the other newly built homes there on the bluff not subject to view issues? The neighborhood has now once again been papered stating that a "tragic injustice" is occurring and that hundreds of people support stopping the Megonigal's from building (these flyers were also illegally stuffed in every mail box in Corona del Mar without postage). As a matter of fact that is not true. This vocal contingency is loud but I know many people here in the area who who support the Megonigals who have become very intimidated by this group. On behalf of me and my many neighbors who support the right of the Megonigals to build within the building code on personal property for which they have paid taxes and fulfilled all the requirements, please approve their right to build their home. Sincerely, Susan Lister cell 949.400.1887 susanl ister(a�mac.com RECE PLA NED BY INp UgPAR�W NOV 19 P009 C1ry OF NZWPOR7'aBACN From., Laura Catalino [ mallto :cataifno.laura @gmaii.com] Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2009 1:21 PM To: rhawkins @earthiink.net Subject: in favor of Megonigal house Dear Mr. Hawkins, I am a 10 year resident of Newport Beach, and I support Kim and Carolyne Mcgonigal building a home on their property in Corona del Mar. Laura Catalino 186 Villa Point Newport Beach, CA Thank you for your consideration. Laura Catallno 949 - 300 -3693 From: Jeff Stack [mailto:JSTACK @Sares- Regis.com] Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2009 12:28 PM To: rhawkins @earthlink.net Cc: jcampbell @newportbeachca.gov Subject: Importance: High Dear Mr Hawkins, Tonight I believe you are holding a Planning Commission hearing on an environmental report related to the construction of Kim & Carolyne Megonigal's house in Corona del Mar. I would attend the meeting this evening, but unfortunately am out of town on business & cannot be there. I have been a resident of CDM in Shorecliffs since 1976. I'am writing you because I am very much in favor of the Megonigal planned house construction because what they are requesting meets the Newport Beach Building Code requirements and they are not asking for a variance from the building code. As I believe you know, the Megonigals have owned their lot for approximately 15 years. It is inconceivable to me as to how they could be denied by the Planning Commission since they are within all the existing requirements of the current Building Code. I believe the City has a right to enforce its building code, but not to deny projects which meet all building code requirements. Please mark me down as strongly in favor of the Megonigal request. If you have questions or would like to contact me regarding this matter, please feel free to call me at any time (949- 887 -2815 or 949 - 756 - 5959). Thank you very much for taking the time to consider my views. Sincerely, Geoffrey L Stack 219 Evening Canyon Road Corona del Mar, CA 92625 - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Linda Geller [mailto:linda @avacap.com] Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2009 3:34 PM To: rhawkins @earthlink.net Cc: jcampbell @newportbeachca.gov Subject: The Megonigal property Please support the Megonigal's on this ridiculous property rights issue. It is too bad the neighbors like their own property to be respected but do not respect anyone else's. If the the nutty neighbors wanted to control this particular property they should have bought it themselves. Spoiled, spoiled people. Linda Kensey Laura Catallno 949- 300 -3693 Original Message---- - From: Charles A. Elfsten [mailto:celfsten @opcstaff.com] Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2009 4:24 PM To: rhawkins @earthlink.net Cc: Campbell, James Subject: Megonigal's House Plans Dear Mr. Hawkins, I don't know it you remember me, I met you several years ago. I'm the president of Newport Vista Ridge Home Owner's Association. When my wife and I were at Balboa Island about a year ago we were fascinated with the millions of plastered signs all over the trash cans, street signs and trees protesting the Megonigal's house plans on an extremely steep lot and acting as though it should be part of the park even though no one could safely climb it. My wife and I took one of the fliers off one of the city trash cans and was curious and drove by to see the lot. We were amazed when we drove up to the park and saw what appeared to be a low -end Santa Ana apartment complex approximately 30 ft high x 100 ft wide with an approximately 25 ft x 10 ft illegal billboard saying "save our park ". It didn't look like there was any park to save but looked like what might have happened is that these people in the apartment might lose 1 /30th of their view and they are unfortunately using the city and the city funds to protect their total view to the right of the park. The irony of this is that you have approved an extremely large house on the lot next to Megonigal's lot and the apartment looking complex Is blocking everyone's view behind them. It seems as though the city should be going after the people who posted the illegal signs and take a good look at the ulterior motive of protecting their view even though it is somewhat miniscule. If I was the city I would take a serious look at that ugly looking Santa Ana complex /house and see how it ever passed city zoning or if it is illegally built. You have a tough job. Sincerely, Charles A. Elfsten 40 Chandon Newport Beach, CA 92657 From: Brian Burke [mailto:bburke @burkegroup.net] Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2009 3:58 PM To: rhawkins @earthlink.net Cc: Campbell, James Subject: Megonigal's Corona del Mar House Mr. Hawkins, My wife and I have been following the progress of Kim and Carolyne Megonigal's proposed house in Corona del Mar. The Megonigals have gone to great lengths to design a home that exceeds every requirement that the city has for this property. They have owned this property for many years, it is zoned for the proposed residential use, and they have meet all of the governmental building requirements. I hope that the Planning Commission and City Council approve their project and protect our personal property rights. Best Regards, Brian and Suzi Burke 20 Cherry Hills Lane Newport Beach, CA Brian R. Bmke BURKE REAL ESTATE GROUP 260 E. Baker St., Suite 100 Cana Mesa, CA 92626 Tel. (714) 924 -6000 Fac (114) 924 -6001 Email, bburkenaburk youmnet Web: htto'Bwaw.burkeeroen.nn NOVEMBER 10, 2009 JIM CAMPBELL NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING DEPT. 3300 NEWPORT BLVD. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658 RE: MEGONIGAL BUILDING REQUEST DEAR MR. CAMPBELL: YOU HAVE HEARD THE TECHNICAL AND LEGAL ARGUMENTS WHY THIS PROJECT SHOULD NOT GO FORWARD. I WOULD LHCE YOU TO LOOK THROUGH ANOTHER WINDOW. MY HUSBAND AND I MOVED TO CORONA del MAR FIVE (5) YEARS AGO. WE HAD LIVED IN BAKERSFIELD FOR OVER FIFTY YEARS. WE RETIRED AND WANTED TO BE AS NEAR THE WATER AS WE COULD BECAUSE WE KNEW THAT AFFORDED COOL WEATHER AND A BEAUTIFUL LANDSCAPE. WE BOUGHT THE PROPERTY AT BEGONIA AND SECOND STREET BECAUSE WE COULD SEE A TRIANGLE OF WATER FROM THE FRONT PATIO AND THE SAME TRIANGLE OF WATER FROM THE TOP DECK, BUT WITH A LITTLE WIDER VIEW. WE WANTED TO SEE WATER AND THIS WAS ALL WE COULD AFFORD TO BUY. THE PROPOSED HOUSE AT THE END OF PACIFIC AND BEGONIA WILL TAKE ALL THE VIEW THAT WE HAVE FROM THE PATIO OR DECK BECAUSE THE VIEW WE GET IS OF THE HARBOR BEYOND THE PEPPER TREE. WE HAVE BEEN BATTLING CANCER IN MY HUSBAND FOR TWELVE YEARS NOW AND WE ARE STILL WINNING. IT 1S THE "LIGHT OF HIS DAY" TO WALK OUR PUPPY TO THE PARK, OFTENTIMES SITTING ON ONE OF THE BENCHES AND WATCHING THE BOATS GOING UP AND DOWN THE HARBOR. October 22, 2009. �• Subject: Comments on DEIR for Megonigal Single- Family Residential Project Located at 2333 Pacific Drive in City of Newport Beach Modification Permit (MD2007 -080) evaluation of the effect the subject home will have on the Begonia Park View. On page 4.3 -3 of the DEIR under the paragraph headed "Begonia Park Visual Simulations it is stated, "Exhibit 4.3 -2 ( #1) illustrates the view from the lower bench situated on Begonia Park of the site. As can be seen from this vantage point, the harbor and ocean to the west are clearly visible from this location. Although the proposed single - family residential structure will extend above Pacific Drive, view of the harbor and ocean from the lower bench would not be substantially altered even though a small portion of the ocean view above the roof will be reduced; no portion of the harbor visible from this location would be significantly affected by the proposed project." It is my contention such an erroneous conclusion was drawn by using exhibit 4.3- 2 in which the view is obstructed by overgrown foliage. After the foliage was removed on March 31, 2009, my picture #2, shows that the subject single - family home would have a decided effect on the Begonia Park View. Of course that is my personal evaluation, but I do know I would hate to drive my car with that amount of the windshield blocked off. These misleading presentations of the view were brought up by me at the last Planning Meeting discussing this project; I personally presented 3'X 4' photographs showing the outline of the single -house with the overgrown foliage and one with the foliage removed by Photo -shop. They showed how the single -house drastically affected the view. I bring this up because, if this DEIR contends to have considered all the recent information available, the subject exhibits should have been updated to show the views as they have existed since March 31, 2009. Such an oversight of recent information casts doubt on the whole report but that remains for others to comment. on. My purpose is to bring the visuals from the Begonia Park lower bench view up to date. I dwell on that view only since the City to selected that spot to place a view bench -- - logical since the edge of the Park provides the maximum view. The same argument about the view being drastically reduced can be made for all the other vantage points in the Park, as well, if one wants to split hairs. Pictures 3, 4 & 5 show the building flags shortly after-they were erected which were pictures used to arrive at an outline shown in picture #2. Looking at the flags, one might question if the simulated house used in the DEIR report might be lower than the actual flags. Based on these problems I have brought up about exhibit 4.3 -2, and that it was the main evidence used to determine the loss of park view was insignificant, I think the public is entitled to a reexamination of this aspect of the project. And, as our Public Protectors, I would think you would want another review. It. would seem only right that such a re- evaluated by the Planning Department would include current views, as shown by my pictures. At the same time, they would provide the actual figures used to determine what amount ( %) is being blocked; i.e., what portion of the view is the base(100 %) and what % is the tipping point for "significant" and "Insignificant." Also, it should be disclosed publicly who determined the tipping point and the legality of the criteria used. From my pictures it appears that the loss of view from this single - family home was not given the evaluation it deserves; after all, it is the most important public asset of the Park. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely Clayton Gorrie 426 Begonia Ave., Corona Del Mar, CA 92625 949 - 675 -8007 gorrieckg@aol.com aol.com PlnDeptMtngOct2209 . -t c Y ■ aA.1 so L= J J yr� f /y� I a TKO �'.Nf+y.•il�� •• i ,('• f ' Ake AIML is r f ♦: Y 1 • ,OIL i a t . r r -r e ,Ail = % :� � > \ • ;x© � £ . � ■ � + _ :� a 4� 0 r� My name is Patricia Ricks. I live at 436 Begonia Ave, and I do not have an ocean view from my'-',, house. I walk to Begonia Park. on average, two times every day to enjoy the view. I wrote a letter to Mr. Campbell this week. which 1 hope you all have seen. I have a few questions for the commission, but first 1 would like to quote the pertinent sections of the City of Newport Voter - Approved General Plan, for which the City won the American Planning Association's National Planning Achievement Award. I could have selected many more references in the plan that pertain to this project, but I will confine myself to just a few. "Visual resources are an important component of the quality of fife of any geographic area. As users experience a place, their primary sensory interaction with that place is visual in nature, and a wide variet. of shapes, colors, and textures, composed by topography, structures, roadway's, and vegetation, forms the views of and from the City." "Open space areas provide visual relief from urbanized areas and scenic view opportunities. for motorists, pedestrians, and residents. The City has historically been sensitive to the need to protect and provide access to these scenic and visual resources and has developed a system of public parks, piers, trails, and viewing areas. (presumably so citizens can benefit from these resources) Figurc 4.1 -3 shows prominent coastal viewing locations throughout the City as identified through public view points and coastal view roads. (And as we all know here, the viewpoint bench from Begonia Park is one of the "prominent coastal viewing locations" marked on that map. According to the California Coastal Act Policy 305.1, the scenic and visual qualities of coastal areas shall be considered and protected as resources of public importance. Section 4.1.4 covers Thresholds of Significance based on Appendix G of the 2005 CEQA Guidelines. "... implementation of (aj proposed project would havd a significant adverse impact on aesthetic /visual quality if it would result in any of the foll.owing. And here is included "Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista." Specifically, if new developments blocked or obscured views from am of the significant public viewpoints, then impacts would be potentially significant. Under the General Plan this review process is to "ensure that scenic vistas and resources are not adversely affected." Under the General Plan Update "policies require that ... viewsheds be maintained" I quote from Policy LU 1.6 Public Views, which means this is a voter- approved City policy: "Protect and, where feasible, enhance significant scenic and visual resources that include open space, mountains, canyons, ridges, ocean, and harbor from public vantage points. fj: Given these several -time repeated points in the voter - approved General Plan, the questions I have for the commission to consider are these: 1. What is the definition of a scenic vista or viewshed, if it is not one of the most beautiful views in the City of Newport Beach, from a spot recorded in the voter - approved General Plan as "prominent coastal viewing location ?" 2. Since the General Plan makes it clear that it is a question df aesthetics for the enjoyment of the general populace — in other words, that none of us would be here if the view in question were a view of the Long Beach commercial harbor — isWr it reasonable to assume that a view of the sunset over Catalina is a significant parr of the scenic resource? Last night, from the Begonia Park viewpoint, l saw a beautiful red sunset over Catalina that I would not be able to see if the proposed garage was built. The view from Begonia Park is an unparalleled public asset and it includes the Carnation bluff, the Wedge, the harbor, the Peninsula, the blue ocean water through the keyhole tree, the sunsets, and Catalina. 3. If a 35 -40% loss ofa public view is not significant, what percentage is? 4. If the proposed garage is built and the remaining 60% of the view becomes "the new public view ", what is to stop the Planning Commission from approving a remodeling of this house or any house that would take away another 35 -40 9/9 of what remains and so on, until there is nothing left? 5. What was the point of all the work that went into the General Plan if the City has no intention of following its very clearly spelled out mandate? 1 ask you to perform your public duty and protect the public view from Begonia Park J' Kenneth Jaggers � %G' " J 516 Begonia Avenue Corona del Mar, CA 92625 (949) 673 -8992 November 16, 2009 Mr. James Campbell Principal Planner Newport Beach Planning Dept. 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915 Subject: Variance VA2007 -001, Modification MD2007 -080 & Megonigal DEIR Mr. Campbell, I strongly disagree with the with the assessment of the Newport Beach Planning Commission that the above project will have "no significant impact" upon the public view from Begonia Park or the Begonia Avenue street corridor. 1. The Planning Department has determined that the Megonigal will obscure 45% of the Ocean View from a selected viewpoint in Begonia Park. That is a very significant portion of the view from Begonia Park. Under the General Plan and Local Costal Program (CEQA) the city is required to protect ocean views from public land and from ocean facing streets, and must uphold this law passed in 2006. The Planning Department's conclusion about the loss of view is suspect and borders on the spurious. 2. 1 strongly object to granting this project a Variance from the 20 foot set back from the street for a structure. This setback has been required of all other properties on Pacific Avenue. A deviation from the City's clearly established and vigorously enforced requirement would destroy the look of the current houses on Pacific Avenue. Furthermore, granting this variance would open the Planning Commission to charge of selective enforcement of the planningibuilding code. 3. The position of the Garage for the Megonigal Residence presents a Public Safety Hazard. Residents would have to back out into a corner. Begonia Avenue is only 20 feet wide going into the corner with Pacific Avenue. With less than a 20 foot setback, the lack of visibility heightens the danger of Vehicle Accidents. 4. An evaluation of the impact on an Existing Public Asset has not been performed. It is highly probable that approval of this project would significantly diminish the value of Begonia Park. Granting approval of the Megonigal Residence would constitute a Taking of Public Property. To my knowledge, highly structured processes are required when projects diminish a public property and that in such cases, the beneficiary must compensate the public entity for the negative impacts. This point should be addressed by the City Attorney to determine whether the Planning Commission must consider these factors. Consider these points during your hearing, Kenneth Jaggers ( I IK?10p Debi Boler 1621 Tradewinds Lane Newport Beach, CA 92660 November 17, 2009 Jim Campbell Newport Beach Planning Department 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 RE: Megonigal Application for 2333 Pacific, CDM Dear Mr. Campbell: I would like to voice my strong objection to allowing this house to be built at 2333 Pacific in Corona Del Mar. Begonia Park is one of the most beautiful parks in our area and offers one of the most scenic views in Orange County. Once this house is built, these views are gone forever. The rights of one homeowner should not trump the rights of the hundreds of citizens and visitors who visit this park on a daily basis. I consider myself fortunate to live in this beautiful area and feel strongty that this park and its views should be protected for all to enjoy. Please do not ignore the intent of the City General Plan and the rights of CDM citizens. I strongly urge you to deny this application.