The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSS2 - Lido Marina Village - PowerPoint (Public)& A :`A 1` Agenda Item No. SS2 June 10, 2014 Lido Marina Village Marina Reconstruction Newport Beach City Council Study Session June 10, 2014 VILLAGE X1% Project Aerial VILLAGE Lido Marina Village (LMV) Marina Reconstruction - Project Status • Application for Approval in Concept (AIC) submitted to Harbor Resources March 28, 2014 • Project includes: • Reconstruction of existing marina • Public access improvements to marina • Seeking City Council input prior to Harbor Commission consideration Nt LMV Marina Reconstruction - Existing VILLAGE • Existing 48 -slip marina • Originally constructed in 1955 • In need of utility and infrastructure upgrades for code compliance and life safety X1% �. LMV Marina Reconstruction — Existing Marina VILLAGE il X1% LMV Marina Reconstruction — Proposed Reconstruction Entitlement would allow for: 0 VILLAGE Replacement of existing marina with a 47 -slip marina Significant increase in number of small and human - powered craft through on -dock racks New in -slip pump outs Water taxi berth Enhanced public access boardwalk Conceptual plan and entitlement for new public dock X1% LMV Marina Reconstruction — Illustrative Plan VILLAGE Lido Marina Reconstruction - Existing and Proposed 91 roposed 18 1: VILLAGE Lido Marina Reconstruction — Proposed Vt LLAGE L F ,IN ` �.e\ DOCK A DOCK B DOCK C IYYIII -W" DOW [Single Berth Sllpel ISingle Berth Slips) �• was• n eeM 1. x /Ww PM[ uvVE cwTMr,� —n %* ` YGP YCIA. RYNI T ' -T -r ` I - 1� e�P eM�P �� M M MWQ P. .. e: lkf @ e°lorxl°4'sle YwL PrLm =806 "�° 4 a]w ms 4 aimr eueoe LL a o: 0 F r t avW� 1 Exhibit 1 [ �y LIDO MARINA VILLAGE Lido Group Retail, LLc # ...m...... Dock A • Two small boat basins and dock • Access to Dock A from 80' ADA compliant gangway • Basin 1 - 9 small boats (under 25') - Several gondolas - Water taxi berth - Racks and launch retrieval for 27 kayaks - Low Freeboard Dock for easy kayak launching • Basin 2 - 8 small boats (under 25') - 4 gondolas • Dock - 11 slips including side tie KAYAK RACKS 4 LALNCN /RETREVAL ` 80' GANGWAY W/ OPEN GRATNG ,',�� 6}: 9✓ P INTERNAL W10TN A6CLR. J . WATER TAXI PtAVMT BEArN / VJCT I S" i, BOAT jI jI I T '14 .11 BASIN I A O2 -Dr 7lJf 4E I 6 �fWC,�� - •f CAIMLEVERED (E) DECK BaVVMX (PROPOSED) 1l4G IYeo_G1HI•�o L BOATING POBUC i ACCT i' vI LLAGE y. P.D. BT DG s+sz io AMINIIiii Dock 6 • Main Yacht Center • East gangway 80' ADA accessible • West gangway standard 35' with open grating • Berths ten boats greater than 82' r vI LLAGE —uw.w, �unt,RY !z 1 (IOCR+6F u*cs� •/ tKh OMIK I%TfftN VOI. 4fOR, 1 -- - - ; ' ti.x. r d ac.; In / �w Ow of Lim i SL! ya lm 3m 11 Dock C • Access via 80' ADA gangway with open grating • Accommodation for 8 boats • Five slips — three 82' and two 90' • Three end ties —two 38' and one 90' VILLAGE 12 Ohl Public Dock • New point of vertical access to water • Access via 80' ADA compliant gangway • 10' long by 90' wide dock • Intended for transient use • On -site sewage pump out proposed • DJM Capital intends to provide conceptual design and entitlement of new public dock LIOJ MINA vI LLAGE / SEWAGE PUMPOUT vr/ PUBLIC k/' ELKS mom/ e" DOCK (10'x96') / o � Q 80' GANGWAY a / INTERNAL WIDTH: 4TCLR. — GANGWAY PLATFORM , ?o 13 Public Access Boardwalk • Existing boardwalk not continuous, meanders through restaurant and shop patios • Proposed boardwalk would be continuous, delineated walkway along seawall • Includes cantilevered feature, extending six feet beyond seawall / PUBLC `7 ACCESS 6' -0' 1 - 1 F.O. I BIRO 1 NTI CALEVERED 1 17Y F.O. I 61-T 1 i BOARDWALK (PR0°05m) BOAR 1 .1144 1 UL (PROPOSED) MA 1 22 IL - 1 1 1 MARINA MARINA MARINA ACCESS ACCESS ACCESS ., vI LLAGE �_j U mm I rmb i I 74 � I I I 14 Ar Public Access Boardwalk VILLAGE 15 1 Public Access Boardwalk Cantilevered design provides extension of existing seawall to protect against future sea level rise New "curb" would be approximately 1.5' higher than existing seawall ELEV. VA 9.5-10.3 tnm wx �J M�PIA vI LLAGE t9.5t T.O. (N) CURB I SLR PROTECTION -9.0E T.O. (N) BOARDWALK +SAE T.O. (E) SEAWALL CAP (N) REINFORCED CONCRETE CANTILEVERED DECK P ILLW SECTION - & OVERHANG awe V411W 16 'MR ILI Public Access Boardwalk • Continuous 6' boardwalk fronting Docks A and B • Extension east to Dock C infeasible because existing headwalk provides access across front of 3388 Via Lido, under separate ownership across 3450 Via Oporto because there is no where for it to go, and existing patio area considerably constrained vI LLAGE 17 Future Boardwalk Connection • Future water -side connection from the new Public Dock to Dock A • Future connection would pass through existing Elks dock (requiring modification to Elks dock) • Water -side float could connect new Public Dock to Dock A ,0.WATER TAXI BERTH �+ P,UDMPOUT -J SEWAGE PUMPOUT- PUBLIC DOCK (10'X90')- J SMALL BOAT BASIN 1 LF.O. 9. 't (E) DECI SECURITY GATES FLOATI PUBLIC ACCESS 60' GANGWAY INTERNAL WIDTH: 41rCLR. \` GANGWAY PLATFORM r vI LLAGE OG CANTILEVERED - BOARDWALK (PROPOSED) i MARINA \ /ACCESS 18 i LMV Marina Reconstruction • Approvals sought from City VILLAGE • Harbor Resources Department Approval in Concept (AIC) • Harbor Commission approval to allow slight adjustment of limit length to match existing configuration for Dock A and for new public dock • Harbor Commission approval to allow cantilever for public boardwalk • Long -term lease for Marina Harbor Commission Approval Required — Extension Beyond Pierhead line .�\ KAYAK RACKS 4 LA:NCH /RETRIEVAL 80' GANGWAY `�B'P✓ W/ OPEN GRATNG .> „+ INTERNAL WIDTH: 48*CLR r �$$ ..-.:._ ................._.. WATER TAM BERTH - _ �I_.. _..________� PLA POUT J\ � BYI1:. BOAT BOAT BASN I BASH 2 to [ + TO BLDG CANTILEYERED am 90NMWU f,O. I() Vlo Own K A ENLARGED PLAN ExNibT 2 r 1 LIDO MARINA VRIAGE Lido GmuPRelae. Tic 20 t — Harbor Commission Approval Required — Cantilevered Deck R/{E OR ELE�: a+�FS wx ra.pgawrupon9.tcx as[D. MIlDMUWK • \ C MIREIKgiCED LCNLREiE � .� GVIIILEVFRF➢IKfJ( RI YAWIAL6GP •ll•CIUML GpMIBIWE•1? 60M W SECTION - V OVERHANG LIDO GROUP RETAIL, LLC 21 1 LMV Marina Reconstruction — Alternate Marina Design • Conceptual Marina Plan included in Lido Village Design Guidelines • Conceptual plan developed by City sub- committee for land -side design guidelines • Innovative design with significant protrusion of docks beyond Federal project line • Could not be constructed within a reasonable time frame e<: I% LIDO VILLAG 22 1 f,\ b I\ Possible Options Going Forward 1. Allow plan to proceed for Harbor Commission review DOCK A N /nitl -UN Doom DOCK B ISinglo Barth SNpol DOCK C ISInNN Berth SNpol 23 C1. Possible Options Going Forward 2. Allow plan to proceed for Harbor Commission review and request staff [Multi -Use Dockl research to pursue additional Berth Slips) innovative dock DOCK A DOCK B DOCK C [Multi -Use Dockl ISingle Berth Slips) [Single Berth Slips) .� nAmu P IMUSM sm, MINIMUM (WWOUNI JNW U �. MIXIIII, K r 24 Possible Options Going Forward 3. Proceed with only Docks A and C to accommodate innovative dock DOCK A rrrw.r DOW t /• fti• .rr ..i M law r• `Yrl I MI-M It v U. llr w ur u .W !• alr at d aa� . DOCK C w.r. Mrr► area n. 7 � 25 Possible Options Going Forward 4. Halt Lido Marina Reconstruction plan and pursue innovative dock plan DOCK A DOCK 8 DOCK C INulll -Use Docki ISlnple Berth Sllpsl Mb& north •m"1 ue .v.e • iiauu ti p i/ orw wr, �•�ae /r V oeo ww. :111Z w.c W. 11 Y --- jF �i YeY /��/ .. ro uc 1 1 :.fA YOi M1 I a ,-° / n r M rM ou'I tr•OA a an a r =1 � ® r r wows+ fat .Odle I�lti nsO1 M firerlrer �M � I. ] i .- aaaoa• .avow r may. i' pis i Im Nt LMV Marina Reconstruction — Options Options 1. Allow plan to proceed for Harbor Commission review 2. Allow plan to proceed for Harbor Commission review and request Harbor Resources research to pursue additional innovative dock 3. Proceed with only Docks A and C to accommodate innovative dock 4. Halt Lido Marina Reconstruction plan and pursue innovative dock plan k`�� Other Issues Public Walkway at Elks k`�� Other Issues Public Walkway at Elks �01,WATER TAXI BER PUMPOUT SEWAGE PUUPOUT PUBL� DOCK 11+1� GATES Em \ ` 80' GANGWAY INTERNAL WIDTH: 48'CLR. GANGWAY PLATFORM SMALL BOAT BASIN 1 [P(E) •; F.O. BLDG CANTILEVERED - DECK BOARDWALK (PROPOSED) V10 ODOrt FLOATI PUBLIC AESS MA NA ACCESS 29 1 L NEWPORT BEACH, CA I EST. 1971 LIDO MAIRI NA VILLAGE 31 Rk IIL or 9 lam, March 25, 2014 City of Newport Beach Harbor Resources Department 829 Harbor Island Drive Newport Beach, CA 92880 Attn: Mr. Chris Miller, Harbor Resources Manager Subject: Lido Village Marina Response to City Council comments Alternative 5B Plan Opinion Letter In connection with Me Lido Group Retail, LLC Approval in Concept application submitted herewith for reconstruction of Lido Village Marine (Marina), URS Corporation has been requested to review the Alternative 5B Plan (Alternative 5B) for the watertront development at the Marina. URS Is currently Consulting M Lido Group Retail, LLC regarding the waterside elements of the Lido Village development and have worked directly for the City of Newport Beach on various current and past projects and have designed marinas in Newport Beach and Southern California for the past 45 years. It is our understanding that Mr. Lindsay Parton, President of Lido Group Retail, LLC had Me opportunity to meet with Mayor HIII and Councilman Selich several weeks ago to discuss the reconstruction of the Marina. During that meeting there was discussion regarding an innovative concept plan previously drafted for the marina. It was explained to Mr. Parton that a concept plan Mat had been advanced through a prior process related to Design Guidelines for the land -side of Lido Marina Village (Alta mauve 5B Plan, attached) a" that Me plan wars ruled consideration and review. We have Carefully considered how the Mauna plan Compares with Alternative 5B both in term of City and Federal permitting feasibility antl also in terms of the redevelopment goals of Lido Group Retail, LLC. Altemative 5B proposes a rre nine be setl on a dramatic curved dock extending well into the adjacent channel with extensions of fill into the harbor intended as focused entry points to the curved floating dock structure. Also included is a pedestrian bridge connecting the northwest end of Manners Mile to Lido Marina Village. The Alternative 5B marina is characterized by expansive water -space between slips and boats and presents a striking Image in 'plan" view, as one would fully appreciate looking down from an aircraft or perhaps for anyone passing over the harbor channel on Newport Blvd. There is no question that the Alternative 5B layout would be a striking addition to this area of Newport Harbor. That said, Mere are several issues regarding the Alternative 5B Plan that need discussion as they relate to City and Federal perming feasibility. Bulkhead and Pierhead Lines: We believe that Altemative 5B violates Current City and Federal policy regarding the limit lines that all projects within Newport Harbor must follow, i.e., no Fixed structures win extend beyond federally - established bulkhead lines. Alternative 5B also includes "Fill" in intertidal waters, which is generally not allowed. We acknowledge that Alternative 5B is not an engineering drawing. However, it appears that the proposed docks extend approximately 200 feet beyond current (Bulkhead and Remead) limits at the north end, and approximately 100 feet at the south end. Such an intrusion would not be allowed under Current City or Federal policy. We estimate an 8 to 12 year process, requiring changes that only the URS Corpulence 310 Golden Shan, Suite 100 Long Beam. CA 00802 office. (sea 3082300 32 +w.` City of Newport Beach, Harbor Resources Department Opinion Letter. Alternative 5B Mr. Chris Miller Lido Village Marina March 25, 2014 Page 2 Federal Government could implement With no guarantee of success. This does not take into account the California Coastal Commission review of such a project, which would present additional challenges. New Pedestrian Bridge A new pedestrian bridge is indicated on Alternative 5B that connects Mariners Mile to the Lido Village area. This connection appears to be positioned well as this relates to foot traffic between these two zones of the City and would certainly be welcomed by residents, visitors and local businesses. Still, we question the potential feasibility of this bridge based on the height and length of the span and the land necessary to accommodate viable pedestrian use of the bridge. It must be high enough to allow for vessel movement beneath, but low enough so as not to adversely impact the Lido Village site, potentially requiring substantial loss of the property to accommodate a long and sloped pathway approach. While the footprint impact to the property could potentially be reduced with an elevator and adjacent stairway, bridges are incredibly costly and the expense of a bridge combined wrath the permitting and the requisite space, make such a bridge undesirable. The Current Lido Group Retail, LLC Marina: In addition to discussion related to Alternative 5B, there was also a discussion related to the proposed dock layout plan for the Marine. A question was raised regarding why the majority of the boats are depicted "bow in" towards the bulkhead, rather than "stem in" towards the bulkhead. When Lido Group Retail, LLC look ownership of the Marina it was discovered that erosion had occurred at the base of the seawall with portions of the wall's embedment dangerously low to the point where our marine engineer advised that landside pressure could force the wall to rotate into the bay. In October 2013 CAA Planning, Inc. was able to secure an Emergency Permit from the Coastal Commission to allow for sand to be placed on the bay -side of the we wall to reinforce the wall where the erosion had occurred. The Emergency Repair work was formalized through approval of a Coastal Development Permit in March 2014. II is necessary to utilize a "bow -in" vessel orientation to prevent prop -wash induced scour of the supporting sediments. The impacts from the "stern in" birthing cost Lido Group Retail, LLC time and money, and we believe it is a best practice to minimize future dredging or fill projects due to "stern -in" berthing. This practice is a management issue, and if a particular vessel can prove that their "stern -in" berthing desire can be accomplished without erosion to the bay mud, then such an orientation would be considered by the Marina management team. The Marina redevelopment plan incorporates a new and Improved boardwalk and visitor access to the marina from Lido Village. Our project team has met wit h you and your staff in the Harbor Resources Department over the course of the last several months. As far as we can determine at this stage, the marina plan meets the requirements for adherence to existing City and Federal limit lines, combines private and public boating elements, maximizes the effective use of existing water space and meets Federal ADA compliance requirements. This Plan also provides one of the most advanced dock -based facilities for human - powered craft (kayaks and paddle boards) that exists in Southern California. Notably, the redevelopmenl plan depicts a new public pier and dock. DJM is willing to design this new public dock for the City and process through the entitlement effort. The Alternative 56 plan does not include design of a new public dock, which will be a significant benefit of Lido Group Retail, LLC's proposed plan. We believe the Marina plan meets the City of Newport Beach and Federal Project and Pierhead requirements and brings a modem, updated marina development to Newport Harbor. The proposed Marina responds to the boating community 's needs, is dynamic in its own fight, and can be permitted within a reasonable amount of lime. In summary, we believe Alternative 5B is quite creative and interesting, but the hurdles we have identified are very difficult, N not impossible to clear. We have 33 +w.` City of Newport Beach, Harbor Resources Department Opinion Letter: Alternative 5B Mr. Chris Miller Lido Village Marina March 25, 2014 Page 3 advised the Lido Group Retail, LLC that pursuing Alternative 5B will add years to their schedule. They have responded that they are anxious to mwe forward with their business plan, which we agree is more realistic, feasible and approvable. Sincerely, Randy H. Masan, PE C030661 Vice - President Ports & Maritime National Leader Attachment 34