HomeMy WebLinkAbout10 - Encroachment Agreement - 405 & 405-1-2 GoldenrodMarch 27, 2001
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
ITEM NO. 10
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Public Works Department
SUBJECT: ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION AND
MAINTENANCE OF PRIVATE IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THE ALLEY
RIGHT -OF -WAY ADJACENT TO 405 & 405 '/z GOLDENROD AVENUE,
CORONA DEL MAR (N2000 -254)
OWNER: Rexford E. Brandt, Successor to the Brandt Family Survivor's Trust
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Approve the application subject to:
1. Execution of an Encroachment Agreement for non - standard improvements.
a. Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Agreement.
b. Authorize and direct the City Clerk to have the agreement recorded with
the Orange County Recorder.
2. An Encroachment Permit issued by the Public Works Department.
3. A Building Permit issued by the Building Department.
4. The Building Department, Fire Department, General Services Department, and
Public Works Department shall approve all improvements.
DISCUSSION:
The current owner of the property located at 405 & 405 '% Goldenrod Avenue in Corona
del Mar is Rexford E. Brandt, successor to the Brandt Family Survivor's Trust. The
representative of the owner, Mr. Eric Welton, is proposing to construct a duplex on the
property and is requesting that the City permit the construction of a cantilevered deck at
the end of the alley in order to provide vehicular access to the property from the alley.
The proposed improvements are shown on Exhibit A.
The proposed alley deck will be constructed of reinforced concrete and will require the
issuance of Building and Encroachment Permits. These improvements will require
regular maintenance in order to keep the structure in a safe condition. Any open area
SUBJECT: ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE OF PRIVATE IMPROVEMENTS
WITHIN THE ALLEY RIGHT -OF -WAY ADJACENT TO 405 & 405 %a GOLDENROD AVENUE, CORONA DEL MAR
(N 2000 -254)
March 27, 2001
Page 2
below the extension shall be fenced off and landscaped. The Permit also includes a
condition that would allow access from the alley extension to other properties in the
future.
Council Policy L -6, 'Private Encroachments in the Public Right -of- Way ", requires the
prior approval of City Council for private structural improvements such as planters,
stairs, etc., in public easements or rights -of -way. An encroachment agreement will
allow construction of the cantilevered alley extension in the alley right -of -way as
approved by the Public Works Department and require the property owner to maintain
the deck. The encroachment agreement will also include a hold harmless clause
indemnifying the City of Newport Beach against any liability of any manner connected
with the proposed encroachments in the alley right -of -away.
Some of the nearby property owners have expressed concern over the impacts of the
proposed alley extension from safety, aesthetic and geotechnical perspectives. If the
City Council determines that extending the alley is not the best way to provide access to
this parcel it is recommended that the Council make the following findings and condition
related to a driveway off Goldenrod Avenue.
FINDINGS
1. City Council Policy L -2 does not apply to this property.
2. Access may be provided from Goldenrod Avenue and may exceed 50% of the
lot frontage.
CONDITION
That the existing palm tree be relocated to the common property line.
Res Ily sal fitted,
' i
L
Don ebb
Public Works Director f
By:i
Richard M. E monston
Transportation & Development Services Manager
Attachments: Photographs
Exhibit A
Encroachment Agreement
1
w 4'�
j
• al• .. � f� � + 7J _r
\ 1• U
t J
l.Y r'�:l � it �'�✓ j�.�'y G� Id
RECORDING REQUESTED AND
WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO:
Public Works Department
City of Newport Beach
Post Office Box 1768
3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, CA 92659 -1768
Space above this line for Recorder's use only.
ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT
(EPN2000 -254)
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this day of
2001, by and between Rexford E. Brandt, successor to the Brandt Family Survivor's Trust;
hereinafter "OWNER ", and the City of Newport Beach, California, a municipal corporation
organized and existing under and by virtue of its Charter and the Constitution and the laws of
the State of California, (hereinafter "CITY "), "OWNER" is the owner of property located at
2720 & 2730 Bayside Drive, Newport Beach, California and legally described as Lots 1 & 3,
Block 333 of Corona del Mar Tract as shown on a map recorded in Book 3, Pages 41 through
42 inclusively of Miscellaneous Maps and as modified by N.B.L.L.A. No. 81 -1 recorded June
12, 1981 in Book 14099, Page 148 of the Official Records in the office of the County Recorder
of Orange County, California;
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, OWNER desires to construct and maintain certain non - standard
improvements (hereinafter "PERMITTED IMPROVEMENTS ") within Bayside Drive right -of-
way (hereinafter "RIGHT -OF- WAY ") that is located adjacent to 2720 & 2730 Bayside Drive,
Newport Beach, California and legally described as Lots 1 & 3, Block 333 of Corona del Mar
Tract as shown on a map recorded in Book 3, Pages 41 through 42 inclusively of
Miscellaneous Maps and as modified by N.B.L.L.A. No. 81 -1 recorded June 12, 1981 in Book
14099, Page 148 of the Official Records in the office of the County Recorder of Orange
County, California;
WHEREAS, said PERMITTED IMPROVEMENTS may interfere in the future with
CITY'S ability to construct, operate, maintain, and replace CITY and other public facilities and
improvements within RIGHT -OF -WAY; and
WHEREAS; the parties hereto desire to execute an agreement providing for fulfillment
of the conditions required by CITY to permit OWNER to reconstruct and maintain said
PERMITTED IMPROVEMENTS;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises, the parties hereto agree
as follows:
1. It is mutually agreed that PERMITTED IMPROVEMENTS shall be defined as a
concrete alley extension with grade beams and caissons, metal or concrete guard rail with
signage, and appurtenances in the alley right -of -way as shown on EXHIBIT A attached hereto
and as approved by the City Engineer. In addition, the proposed PERMITTED
IMPROVEMENTS may vary at the time of construction due to refinements to the plans. Any
such changes must be approved by the City Engineer and shown on the "As Built" plans.
2. CITY will permit OWNER to repair, maintain, use, operate, repair and replace
said PERMITTED IMPROVEMENTS and appurtenances incidental thereto, within a portion of
RIGHT -OF -WAY, all in substantial conformance with plans and specifications on file in the
CITY. CITY will further allow OWNER to take all reasonable measures necessary or
convenient in accomplishing the aforesaid activities.
3. OWNER shall fence and screen with landscaping approved by the General Services
Department the area below the PERMITTED IMPROVEMENTS.
4. Owner acknowledges that the PERMITTED IMPROVEMENTS are an extension of a
public alley and that the public, including adjacent property owners, shall have access rights to
the alley.
5. OWNER and CITY further agree as follows:
a. OWNER shall construct PERMITTED IMPROVEMENTS and appurtenances
incidental thereto, in substantial conformance with plans and specifications therefor on file in
the CITY's Public Works Department, and as described on Exhibit "A" hereto attached.
b. OWNER shall maintain the PERMITTED IMPROVEMENTS in accordance
with general prevailing standards of maintenance, and pay all costs and expenses incurred in
doing so. However, nothing herein shall be construed to require OWNER to maintain, replace
or repair any private -owned or CITY -owned pipeline, conduit or cable located in or under said
PERMITTED IMPROVEMENTS, except as otherwise provided herein.
c. If private- owned, City, or other public facilities or improvements are damaged
by the installation or presence of PERMITTED IMPROVEMENTS, OWNER shall be
responsible for the cost of repairs.
d. Owner shall be responsible for his pro -rata share of the cost of maintaining
the existing driveway between the curb on Bayside Drive and the property line.
e. That should the CITY be required to enter onto said RIGHT -OF -WAY to
exercise its primary rights associated with said RIGHT -OF -WAY, including but not limited to,
the maintenance, removal, repair, renewal, replacement or enlargement of existing or future
public facilities or improvements, CITY may remove portions of the PERMITTED
IMPROVEMENTS, as required, and in such event:
(i) CITY shall notify OWNER of its intention to accomplish such work,
if any emergency situation does not exist.
(ii) OWNER shall be responsible for arranging for any renewal or
restoration of the PERMITTED IMPROVEMENTS affected by such work by CITY;
(iii) CITY agrees to bear only the cost of any removal of the
PERMITTED IMPROVEMENTS affected by such work by CITY;
(iv) OWNER agrees to pay all costs for renewal or restoration of the
PERMITTED IMPROVEMENTS.
6. In the event either party breaches any material provision of this Agreement, the
other party at its option may, in addition to the other legal remedies available to it, terminate
this Agreement, and, in the event the breaching party is OWNER, CITY may enter upon the
RIGHT -OF -WAY and remove all or part of the improvements installed by OWNER with one
exception. That one exception shall be the CITY cannot deny vehicular access to the subject
property. Termination because of breach shall be upon a minimum of ten (10) days notice,
with the notice specifying the date of termination. In the event of litigation commenced with
respect to any term of condition of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to
reasonable attorneys fees and costs incurred.
7. OWNER shall defend, indemnify, waive, and hold harmless CITY, its City Council,
boards and commissions, officers and employees from and against any and all loss, damage,
liability, claims, suits, costs and expenses whatsoever, including reasonable attorneys' fees
(when outside attorneys are so utilized), regardless of the merit or outcome of any such claim
z
or suit arising from or in any manner connected with the design, construction, maintenance, or
continued existence of the PERMITTED IMPROVEMENTS.
8. OWNER agrees that this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect from
execution thereof; shall run with the land; shall be binding upon the heirs, successors, and
assigns of OWNERS' interest in the land whether fee or otherwise, and shall be recorded in
the Office of the County Recorder of Orange County, California.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be
executed on the day and year first -above written.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
M
ATTEST:
City Attorney
City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
) ss:
51
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH,
a Municipal corporation
M
City Manager
OWNER:
By:
Rexford E. Brandt
Successor to the Brandt Family
Survivor's Trust
COUNTY OF ORANGE)
On 2001, before me,
personally appeared , personally
known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s)
whose name(s) is /are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that
he /she /they has executed the same in his /her /their authorized capacity(ies), and that by
his /her /their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s) or the entity upon behalf of which the
person acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Notary Public in and for said State
(This area for official notarial seal)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
) ss:
COUNTY OF ORANGE)
On 2001, before me,
personally appeared , personally
known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s)
whose name(s) is /are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that
he /she /they has executed the same in his /her /their authorized capacity(ies), and that by
his /her /their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s) or the entity upon behalf of which the
person acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Notary Public in and for said State
(This area for official notarial seal)
F:\Users\PBMShared\ENCROACH\FORMS\agmt-EP2000-254Brandt-CDM.doc
cr
I
--P.RqP65CD ALLEY 5X-TFANON
17150 L SCMENI NG . .
FIAceo� HMCN-r. APPLICAsTiCt4..
N1200U-P-54
LZ 2 — AZ I' L—
TFP& LP)
-4- 15 G LLON
DOj6AJWVjLL6 FRONT
A+W slor .
I
;8 [ W
PLAN-r-
T-YplrI.L
Exhibit A
(FPN2000-254)
March 27, 2001
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
SUPPLEMENTAL ITEM NO. IQ
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Public Works Department
SUBJECT: ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION AND
MAINTENANCE OF PRIVATE IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THE ALLEY
RIGHT -OF -WAY ADJACENT TO 405 & 405 Yz GOLDENROD AVENUE,
CORONA DEL MAR (N2000 -254)
OWNER: Rexford E. Brandt, Successor to the Brandt Family Survivor's Trust
The wrong agreement was inadvertently attached to the staff report. Please discard that
agreement and replace it with the attached.
R p cttull�.
on Webb
Public Works Director
By: r ►L d��
Richard M. Edmonston
Transportation & Development Services Manager
Attachments: Corrected Encroachment Agreement
RECORDING REQUESTED AND
WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO:
Public Works Department
City of Newport Beach
Post Office Box 1768
3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915
Space above this line for Recorder's use only.
ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT
(EPN2000 -254)
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this day of
2001, by and between the Rexford E. Brandt Trust; hereinafter "OWNER ", and the City of
Newport Beach, California, a municipal corporation organized and existing under and by virtue
of its Charter and the Constitution and the laws of the State of California, (hereinafter "CITY "),
"OWNER" is the owner of property located at 405 and 405 Y2 Goldenrod Avenue, Newport
Beach, California and legally described as Lot 5, Block 333 of Corona del Mar Tract as shown
on a map recorded in Book 3, Pages 41 through 42 inclusively of Miscellaneous Maps in the
office of the County Recorder of Orange County, California;
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, OWNER desires to construct and maintain certain non - standard
improvements (hereinafter "PERMITTED IMPROVEMENTS ") within alley right -of -way
(hereinafter "RIGHT -OF- WAY ") that is located adjacent to 405 and 405 Y2 Goldenrod Avenue,
Newport Beach, California and legally described as Lot 5, Block 333 of Corona del Mar Tract
as shown on a map recorded in Book 3, Pages 41 through 42 inclusively of Miscellaneous
Maps in the office of the County Recorder of Orange County, California;
WHEREAS, said PERMITTED IMPROVEMENTS may interfere in the future with
CITY'S ability to construct, operate, maintain, and replace CITY and other public facilities and
improvements within RIGHT -OF -WAY; and
WHEREAS; the parties hereto desire to execute an agreement providing for fulfillment
of the conditions required by CITY to permit OWNER to reconstruct and maintain said
PERMITTED IMPROVEMENTS;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises, the parties hereto agree
as follows:
1. It is mutually agreed that PERMITTED IMPROVEMENTS shall be defined as a
concrete alley extension with grade beams and caissons, metal guardrail with
signage, and appurtenances in alley right -of -way as shown on EXHIBIT "A"
attached hereto and as approved by the City Engineer. In addition, the
proposed PERMITTED IMPROVEMENTS may vary at the time of construction.
Hence, any changes must be approved by the City Engineer and shall be shown
on the "As Built" plans.
2. OWNER shall fence any open areas under the alley extension to prevent access
to this area and shall provide landscaping to cover the fencing.
3. OWNER agrees to allow the public to use the alley extension, including to
provide access to other properties.
4. CITY will permit OWNER to repair, maintain, use, operate, repair and replace said
PERMITTED IMPROVEMENTS and appurtenances incidental thereto, within a portion of
RIGHT -OF -WAY, all in substantial conformance with plans and specifications on file in the
CITY. CITY will further allow OWNER to take all reasonable measures necessary or
convenient in accomplishing the aforesaid activities.
5. OWNER and CITY further agree as follows:
a. OWNER shall construct PERMITTED IMPROVEMENTS and appurtenances
incidental thereto, in substantial conformance with plans and specifications therefor on file in
the CITY's Public Works Department, and as described on Exhibit "A" hereto attached.
b. OWNER shall maintain the PERMITTED IMPROVEMENTS in accordance
with general prevailing standards of maintenance, and pay all costs and expenses incurred in
doing so. However, nothing herein shall be construed to require OWNER to maintain, replace
or repair any CITY -owned pipeline, conduit or cable located in or under said PERMITTED
IMPROVEMENTS, except as otherwise provided herein.
c. If private- owned, City, or other public facilities or improvements are damaged
by the installation or presence of PERMITTED IMPROVEMENTS, OWNER shall be
responsible for the cost of repairs.
2
d. That should the CITY be required to enter onto said RIGHT -OF -WAY to
exercise its primary rights associated with said RIGHT -OF -WAY, including but not limited to,
the maintenance, removal, repair, renewal, replacement or enlargement of existing or future
public facilities or improvements, CITY may remove portions of the PERMITTED
IMPROVEMENTS, as required, and in such event:
(i) CITY shall notify OWNER of its intention to accomplish such work,
if any emergency situation does not exist.
(ii) OWNER shall be responsible for arranging for any renewal or
restoration of the PERMITTED IMPROVEMENTS affected by such work by CITY;
(iii) CITY agrees to bear only the cost of any removal of the
PERMITTED IMPROVEMENTS affected by such work by CITY;
(iv) OWNER agrees to pay all costs for renewal or restoration of the
PERMITTED IMPROVEMENTS.
6. In the event either party breaches any material provision of this Agreement, the
other party at its option may, in addition to the other legal remedies available to it, terminate
this Agreement, and, in the event the breaching party is OWNER, CITY may enter upon the
RIGHT -OF -WAY and remove all or part of the improvements installed by OWNER with one
exception. That one exception shall be the CITY cannot permanently deny vehicular access to
the subject property. Termination because of breach shall be upon a minimum of ten (10)
days' notice, with the notice specifying the date of termination. In the event of litigation
commenced with respect to any term of condition of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall
be entitled to reasonable attorneys fees and costs incurred.
7. OWNER shall defend, indemnify, waive, and hold harmless CITY, its City Council,
boards and commissions, officers and employees from and against any and all loss, damage,
liability, claims, suits, costs and expenses whatsoever, including reasonable attorneys' fees
(when outside attorneys are so utilized), regardless of the merit or outcome of any such claim
or suit arising from or in any manner connected with the design, construction, maintenance, or
continued existence of the PERMITTED IMPROVEMENTS.
8. OWNER agrees that this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect from
execution thereof; shall run with the land; shall be binding upon the heirs, successors, and
assigns of OWNERS' interest in the land whether fee or otherwise, and shall be recorded in
the Office of the County Recorder of Orange County, California.
C
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be
executed on the day and year first -above written.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
0
ATTEST:
City Attorney
City Clerk
4
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH,
a Municipal corporation
OWNER:
in
City Manager
Rexford E. Bran
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
) ss:
COUNTY OF ORANGE )
On , 2001, before me
personally appeared , personally
known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose
name(s) is /are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he /she /they
has executed the same in his /her /their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his /her /their
signature(s) on the instrument the person(s) or the entity upon behalf of which the person
acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Notary Public in and for said State
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
) ss:
COUNTY OF ORANGE )
On
(This area for official notarial seal)
2001, before
personally appeared , personally
known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose
name(s) is /are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he /she /they
has executed the same in his /her /their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his /her /their
signature(s) on the instrument the person(s) or the entity upon behalf of which the person
acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Notary Public in and for said State
(This area for official notarial seal)
F: \Users \PB W\Shared\ ENCROACH\ FORMS\ agmt- EP2000- 254Brandt- GodenrodCDM.doc
"p26POSCO ALLEY EXTEN510N
"IIIWP.L. SCREENING
6WK20" HMCNT {'pPLICATIC�:.
N 12U'0 -254
i
PLAKT_. LocAT10U
TYPICAL
��j
ALLEY _ g %YCNSIOW
CIUARDpAlL 4. PE2
SHEET PO-1
,NK:FEW -E
_Z" c WfTE "- INOEIL _
4- 15 G LdJ
54DIJGNWILLE aFRONT
P+10 5foE
I \
Exhibit A
rGpmgnnn -q ,di
CEQA PrQl,L,, HOM, Chart
The California Environmental Quality Act
=CEOA - Credits Disclaimer
CEQA Process Flow Chart
Public Agency delsmknea MrNs
Cr activky b • prapet Not a project
Ppjecf
_ Proptt 4 minbmra
d=Aq,l qr Ho Ooarbl1 S*dk wg affect
Project is ama,pa W pub" aiiMpbon
Categorical axwnpIo
Not EaamPH
Pnbbe agency avek""a project
so aefermma a Cue b a poealplytY
Cut do project may how a
NgnWcent effect on emlronoE
Possible 0"6-,W ~1
Oslo mhWlon of bad agency vdwe NOtloa a1 Eimnptbn No ftdthw aNlofl
more than one Public agency u may xflbd nRWrd ferrite CEO11
invoived
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY LEAD AGENCY
*ccnt*nt*o1,*aflEIR Lea agency propurea Irma ably
lied agency dacfebn to prapre
EIR or Negallw Declaration
EIR Npadvs Declaration
Land agency wits HoLbe of I
CenwAtetton Pnperatlan to reaporolEb agency
Lad agency prapanes dr4M EIR
' Docurwn on permit I
Decision on Project I
Stab Agencies Local Agenelee Sbh Agarrrea LoufAgencbe
iga Notice d fife tfotiea of FCs Notice cl ige Nonea cl
Deermkrtkn �� Det.rmawlun Oeurmknetbn
rtlA OMloa of uffli OMIce of
pu
rdy r1Ci
�cba C1rk RP �� Ck�rk�
Page I oft
http / /ceres ca gov /cega/flowchart/tnder html 03/27/2001
Led agency to es Nagce of
Lead Agency gnaa ptobc
Compbllon and ghee public rnotirs
notice of avadminky
cl ava�bldry cl draft EIR
Of Negetiw Declaration
Commerrb on adapucy
cl dreg EEi or CarnanrWipr
Negative Doctvebon
PuDlb RWbW Peek
lhblk Ravbw Fantod
eappmernccy�
EIR 1hewi g r�eapenra m
Daefearnmakirng body
conaldss ffrnal EIR or
�a� on draft EIR
Negedw Decimation
prepared by lead agency
Cmrldmatlon and appnwaJ of
Corrrdnaaar end approval
fort EIR by dacbbnnuld 4 body
of Negative Darderetbn
by decwonmekng body
FbxWW on faaabdily,
MINE
of rduclng w avoiding
Fidmge an leaabrgty of
—ding
egndtcant arwkwaaental
edU:nC or 9igndkaM
effete;
erweoranmrml effects
' Docurwn on permit I
Decision on Project I
Stab Agencies Local Agenelee Sbh Agarrrea LoufAgencbe
iga Notice d fife tfotiea of FCs Notice cl ige Nonea cl
Deermkrtkn �� Det.rmawlun Oeurmknetbn
rtlA OMloa of uffli OMIce of
pu
rdy r1Ci
�cba C1rk RP �� Ck�rk�
Page I oft
http / /ceres ca gov /cega/flowchart/tnder html 03/27/2001
Iffliffil.11M 1111111p] "W"' 11 11MM .11124 �W�
Activity has potential for a direct physical change or a reasonably foreseeable
indirect physical change in the environment, and
Activity involves a discretionary approval and
• Discretionary approval require the exercise of judgement or deliberation
• Ministerial approvals require little or nojudgment by a public official and
are not projects
Activity is one of the following types of activities
Activities directly undertaken by a public agency which include public
works construction activities clearing or grading of land improvements to
existing public structures enactment and amendment of zoning ordinances
and adoption and amendment of local general plans
Activities that are supported (n whole or in part) by public agency which
include contracts grants subsidies loans or other assistance from a public
agency
An activity involving the public agency issuance of a lease permit license
certificate or other entitlement for use by a public agency
21065 Project
Project means an activity which may cause either a direct physical change in the environment, or a
reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment and which is any of the following
(a) An activity directly undertaken by any public agency
(b) An activity undertaken by a person which is supported in whole or in pan through contracts grants
subsidies loans or other forms of asststance from one or more public agencies
(c) An activity that involves the issuance to a person of a lease permit license certificate or other
entitlement for use by one or more public agencies
A PROJECT IS MINISTERIAL IF IT
involv[esl little or no personal judgment by the public official as to the wisdom or
manner of carrying out the project
Definition of a ministerial project See CEOA Guidelines 41536
COMMON EXAMPLES OF MINISTERIAL PERMITS INCLUDE
automobile registrations
dog licenses
marriage licenses
15268(d) Where a project involves an approval that contains elements of both a
ministerial action and a discretionary action, the project will be deemed to be
discretionary and will be subject to the requirements of CEQA
15260 1285 Statutory Exemptions — No Justification
15300 15332 Categorical Exemptions — No Justification
15303 New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures
Class 3 eonsists of eonstruetion and location of limited numbers of new small facilities or structures installation of small new
equipment and (acid ties in small structures and the conversion of existing small struetures from one use to another whete only minor
modifieations are made in the exterior of the structure The numbers of structures desenbed in this seetion are the maximum allowable
on any legal pareel Examples of this exemption melude but are not limned to
(a) One single family residenee or a sceond dwelling unit in a residential zone In urbanized areas up to three single family
midenees may be eonttrueted or con erred under this exemption
(b) A duplex or similar multi family residential structure totaling no more than four dwelling units In
urbanized areas this exemption applies to apartments duplexes and similar structures designed for not
more than six dwelling units
(c) A store motel offiee restaurant or similar swcture not mvoly ng the use of significant amounts of hazardous substanees and not
exeeed ng 2500 square feet n (loot area In urban zed areas the ex mption also appl es to up t four w Is commereml build gs not
exceedin 10 000 square feet in floor area on situ zoned for such use if not mvol mg the use of sigmf cant amounts of hazardous
substances where all necessary publie services and facilmes are a actable and the surrounding area a not environmentally sensitive
(d) Water main sewage electrical gas and other utility extensions including street improvements of reasonable length to serve sueh
eonstiucihon
(e) Acemsory (appurtenant) struetures ncludmg garages carports patios sw mmmg pools and fences
(f) An accessory steam steal zathon unit for the treatment of medical waste at a fac hry occupied by a medreal waste generator
prov tied that the unit is nstalled and operated in accordance with the Medical Waste Mmagcmem tit (Section 117600 ei sect of the
Health and Safety Code) and accepts no otfsne waste
Note Authority c led Seel ons 21063 and 21087 Publ c Resou ces Code Reference Sections 21084 and 21084 2 Pubbe Raoutees
Code
Discussion This section describes the elan of small pmjects involving new construction or eon ersion of existing small swetures
The 1998 revisions to the secimn clarify the types of pm)ects to which it applies In order to simplify and su clardize application of
this section to commercial structures the reference to loceuptim bad of 30 persvms or Iessi contained in the prior guideline was
replaced by a limn w square footage subsection (c) further limits the use of ibis exemption to thou commercial projects whieh have
available all necessary public services and faalmes and which are not located in an environmentally sensitive area
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
MEMO
March 27, 2001
City Council Agenda Items 10 and 16
Subject: Response to Comments Made In The Taylor Consulting Letter of March 26,
2001.
The agreement, as drafted, includes a deceased party.
The agreements reference the Rexford E. Brandt Trust as the OWNER (for Item
10) and Rexford E. Brandt, successor to the Brandt Family Survivor's Trust (Item
16). The correct Owner will be listed in the agreements before the final execution
of the agreement. This will be determined by a current title report and the owners
shown on that report will be incorporated into the final Encroachment
Agreements.
2. The agreements as drafted associate all improvements with half of the four
properties.....
There are two Encroachment Agreements and each agreement relates to separate
parcels and issues. It is recommended that they be discussed and resolved
separately. The four Rexford Brandt Trust lots are separate parcels. The two
closest to Bayside Drive (Item 16) are taken together because the Lot Line
Adjustment (LLA) is reconfiguring the lots to face Bayside Drive instead of
Goldenrod Avenue. The other two lots are being developed separately and the
requested approvals are not connected.
3. It is unclear what justification or public benefit is used to rationalize the gift or
use of public property....
Item 10: The encroachment agreement allows the owner of 405/405 %: Goldenrod
Avenue to construct a 16 foot long alley extension to allow alley access to the
property. The agreement does not restrict the public or adjoining property owners
from using the extension.
Item 16: The encroachment agreement allows the owners of the newly created
2730 Bayside Drive to have the same type of driveway use of the public property
adjacent to their property as the owners of 2700, 2706, 2710 and 2720/2730
Bayside Drive now have. Owners of property in all parts of the City, that take
access from a street, are allowed to construct a drive on public property to gain
access to the street from their property and the City is obligated to allow this
access. Currently 2720 /2730 Bayside Drive (as a single duplex) shares the
common access drive with 2700, 2706, and 2710 Bayside Drive.
4. Pro -rata maintenance of the common drive....
The Section 5(d) clause is actually clause 10(d) for the Item 16 agreement. This
clause requires the owners of 2720 and 2730 Bayside Drive to be responsible for a
pro -rata share of the maintenance of the common drive between their property
line and Bayside Drive. Section 10(b) requires the owners of 2720 and 2730
Bayside Drive to maintain the permitted improvements, which are the
improvements adjacent to their property, therefore the owner of 2700 would not
be asked to share in the cost of maintaining anything adjacent to 2720 and 2730.
The management of the drive maintenance will be a cooperative effort of the
neighbors as it has been for at least 30 to 35 years.
5. If the "owner" breaches the agreement, the "city's " only recourse is to take over
the improvements.
The City cannot deny vehicular access to the various parcels. The Agreements
provide for the owners to maintain the permitted improvements. The primary
beneficiary of those improvements is the owner. If the improvements become
unsafe and they are not repaired, the City can do the repairs and place a lien on
the property to recover the City's costs.
TFi�L:]R 71'= '-^P45'�?
Taylor Consulting
TQ:949 X44 -229 r.i2)L i -0 Cl) 21
ATAVAVAkVAVAVAV
715 Woot Third StraM • Santa Ana, Ca. 92701 • TekphonaNax (714) 9tY- 4597/4599
March 26, 2001
Honorable Members
City of Newport Beach City Council
3300 Newport Blvd.
P.O. Box 1769
Newport Beach, CA 92658
Re: March 27' meeting: Items 10& 16 –
Encroachment Agreement EPN 2000 -254
Rex Brandt Trust
Honorable Mayor and Council Members:
We
RECEIVED BY
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CITY n;: n1Gv.rcrn-
i 2 7 21W J wL
AM PM
71819110i11i12i1i213141516
The exhibits to this coming Tuesdays staff report were made available on Friday. This
includes significant information not previously available for review and evaluation. This
letter provides concerns with the encroachment agreement, as follows:
The agreement, as drafted, includes a deceased party.
The agreement, as drafted, associates all improvements with half of the four the
properties and not necessarily the property benefiting from the improvernunts. It
is unclear how enforcement obligations could be pursued.
It is unclear what justification or public benefit is used to rationalize the gi ft or
use of public property. What is the consideration for the City or Public for
entering into this agreement?
Section 5(d) provides for prorata" maintenance of cxistiug facilities without any
specifics. Further, prorata would not be an equitable cost sharing arrangement
(i.e. 2700 has no reason to use or go in front of the 2730 property but has to share
in his maintenance. 2730 impacts 2720 – 2710 – 2706 & 2700 but pays no more).
Who is going to manage this?
n-2ClCti R'�l9 PP.DfO:HAF,P.ZS T; :'. LOP,
'iaa-?d59g
Taylor Consulting
ATAVAVATATATAT
315 West TOd Street • Santa Ana, Ca. 92761. - TPlephon&Iax 1714) 972-4597/4599
TO:949 _.44 '229
wz
If "Owner" breaches the agrcemant, the "city's" only physical recourse is to take
over the improvements.
We believe there are potential impacts from these public property improvements that
need to be addressed prior to approval in the following areas:
'traffic / Access
Noise / Glara
Hydrology / Drainage
Public resources / property
Geologic / Soils
Aesthetics
Hazards
Short-term construction.
Thank you for your expected assistance,
I
t
I
P . i0O2 /GEti
PIAR -22 -2001 18:47 FP.OM:HAPP.i9 TAYLOR 7149724599
Taylor Consulting
T0:949 644 3229 P.001,004
3- 1r7-o�
ATATATAVAVATAV
315 West Third Street • Santa Ana. Ca. 92701 - Telephorelfax (714) 9724597,'4599
March 22, 2001
Honorable Members
City of Newport Beach Planning Commission
3300 Newport Blvd.
P.O. Box 1; 68
Newport Beach, CA 92658
Re: March 27th meeting: Items 10& 16 —
LLA, Encroachment Agreements, & 7.0 Amendment 909
Rex Brandt Trust
Honorable Mayor and Council Members:
0
nT.
:74T
a
<C-)
m
no
M-n
n
m2
�m
n
-o
OCR
N
W
4
a
mn
r
np
N
�;X
T am taking this opportunity to get my comments into the public record. Although
sometimes these decisinn.g appear routine, the laws and codes provide these to be sent for
review, input and decision ;making. As a precursor to specific comments, I object to the
refusal by staff to provide information or to provide written response to correspondence.
The public process has not been well executed.
The staff refused to provide full public access to the informnlion on the project in conflict
with Council Policy E -1 and despite a specific Public Records Act request.
The attachments or exhibits to the staff report are not available.
The project(s) seem to be in conflict with Council policies G -1. K -3. L -2. and L -6.
1 strongly nppose approval on these decisions based upon the facts that have been
presented. In addition to this letter, please refer to my letter to the Planning Commission
on their Staff Report m,d the deficiencies invvmdstcneius that still exist.
Now and specifically, I have reviewed the staff report and have comments, as follows;
MAP-22-2001 19:48 FP.OM: HGRP,I9 TAYLOR -149-124S99 T0:949 644 3229
We
Taylor Consulting
315 West Third Street • banta Ana, Ca. 92701 • Telephone/fax (71 4) 972- 45 97145 99
Encroachment Agreements
In this section, a proposal or letter is being reviewed by staff with a oral report to be
provided at the hearing, How can the public and the City Council as decision makers
be prepared on a material compnnent of a project without having it ina.de available.
Summa
It is identified incorrectly that the Planning Commission recommended approval of
this package of decisions. The Commission has made a split decision .for approval of
the .LLA and "Zoning Code Amendment only. They were specifically instructed and
made their decision based upon not having the ability to review or authority over the
encroachment agreement and improvements in the public ROW.
There continues to be no analysis, discussion, evaluation. or dise)nsnre on what the
effects to the maintenance of existing public and private maintenance.
Findings
Finding one requires a determination that the original and resulting, lots are legal lots.
Besides being substandard and requiring exceptions and modifications, thee un- built,
sloped lot does not have physical access. With nn physical access, no residence can
legally be built on this lot in the existing condition,
Finding two includes an incorrect statement that these lots are both currently built
upon and are therefore buildable. F-eter to comments on tinding one above.
Finding four utilizes exemptions from the subdivision code for Lot Line
Adjustments which can be nrnvided when 4 conditions are met, including "minor
and routine in nature, and a determination can be made without the need for extensive
review and public involvement ". Ceitairdv, this Lot Line application has already
required significant staff review and the public is strongly requesting involvement.
This exclusion does not apply. Finding four indicates "no change in the land use,
density, or intensity" yet we know from the previous discussion that some multiple
of the existing units are proposed and cannot be built without this approval,.
Finding five is in conflict with the code reference section 19.08.0; of finding four in
that improvements are necessary.
P.002/004
- 7149-124599 TO:949 644 3229
MAP. -�2 -2001 18:48 FP.OM: HF7P.RIS TraYLpP.
WS
Taylor Consulting
AVAVATAVA.AVAV
315 VYest?hird Street • Santa Ana, Ca. 92701 • Telephonelfax (714) 972 - 459714594
Finding six is appropriate only if all construction were to be within the private Int.s.
The public ROW improvements do not allow use of this exception to CEQA
requirements, Section 15304 would be a more appropriate exception however the
"project' does not meet its requirement either.
Conditions
Condition two requires compliance with Public Works Standards where the body of
the report idcmiffes the improvements as non - standard. Further, is this condition
holds then the entire access should he required to be brought up to Public Works
standards.
Condition three requires the LLA to be recorded prior to the improvements, At that
point, the applicant will have reconfigured non - complying lots without the
improvements that are required for compliance.
Condition five appears to be concurrence that these really are separate units, ready to
be condominiums in the future, and not a duplex.
Condition six is non specific and therefore unenforceable.
Condition seven, if actually applied, would prevent this project from being built.
Condition eight is in conflict with condition two.
Cuudidun ten is impossible to comply with and therefore unenforceable.
Condition eleven is in conflict with Title 20. And, if strictly applied would prevent
approval ofthiq request and construction. Therefore it is ambiguous and
unenforceable.
Irrespective of these comments, you are resting this conglomeration of approvals (LLA,
ZC, and encroachment agreements) all on a CEQA section for reconstruction of a house.
You have several CEQA "projects" here that would be demonstrated if the appropriate
Initial Study were performed.
8.003 %004
NN- 2d -2�U'1 18:48 FROM:HARPIS TAYLOP, 7149724599 T0:949 644 3229 P,004,004
We
Taylor Consulting
ATATAWAVATATAV
315 West Third Street • Santa Ana, Ca. 92701 • Telephone/fax (714) 972-459714599
Ask yourself, if the City were doing the improvements identified, would you have to do
and Initial Study and comply with CEQA? Maybc the answer can be obtained by
reviewing the CEQA compliance of the wall construction across the street at Femlcaf,
We ask that you direct Staff to perform an Initial Study wider the CEQA guidelines to
determine if there is potential for impacts. If the potential for impacts exists then an
appropriate cvaluutiun of impacts, alternatives, mitigation measures, and overriding
consideration should be made.
We believe there are potential impacts in the following areas:
Traffic / Access
Noise / Glare
Hydrology / Drainage
Public resources / property
Geologic l Soils
Aesthetics
Hazards
Short -term construction.
We ask only for what is required and what will prevent unknown problems from
occurring. Full puhlic disclosure. and adequate time for analysis should not be this
difficult.
Thank you for your expected assistance.
I
TO =94-� G"4 '229 F. 0011 G22
P1RP.- 2E -20Ci1 1T -�79 FRGP1= HaP.P.IB THiUJR
71d?T24599 -
f�
"RECEIVED MER AGE W
�R iTtm " 1.0 * t b 3 a o
Taylor Consulting
AVAYAVAVATAVAV
315 Waat Third SUOCt • Santa Ana, Ca. 92701 • TdL- phOne99x (714) 912- 4597/4599
March 26, 2001
Honorable Members
City of Newport Beach City Council
3300 Newport Blvd.
P.O. Box 1768
Newport Beach, CA 92658
Re: March 27h meeting: Items 10& 16 —
Encroachment Agreement EPN 2000 -254
Rex Brandt Trust
Honorable Mayor and Council Members:
wo
RECENED BY
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CITY ()F
2 7 Z001 J WL
AM PM
?i8i9i1011lil2ili2i3i4i516
0
cd>T
<.; C
d
or"
M
=nn
A -
0
M-1
�m
N
oc�
m�
yr
nM
a
�x
The exhibits to this corning Tuesday's staff report were made available on Friday. This
includes significant information not previously available for review and evaluation. This
letter provides concerns with the encroachment agreement, w follows:
The agreement, as drafted, includes a deceased party.
The agreement, as drafted, associates all improvements with half of the four the
properties and not necessarily the property benefiting from the improveiucnts. It
is unclear how enforcement obligations could be pursued.
It is unclear what justification or public benefit is used to rationalize the gi ft or
use of public property. What is the consideration for the City or Public for
entering into this agreement?
Section 5(d) provides Fnr prorata" maintenance of c;xh iug facilities without any
specifics. Further, prorata wottid not be an equitable cost sharing arrangement
(i.e. 2700 has no reason to use or go in front of the 2730 property but has to share
in his maintenance. 2730 impacts 2720 —2710 —2706 &2700 b11t pays no more).
Who is going to manage this?
NPR -26 -2001 17:09 FP.O"I!HAPPIS TAYLOR
✓� x1497245'99 T0!949 544 3229
W2
Taylor Consulting
ATAVATATAVAVAV
315 West Third Street • Santa Ana, Le. 92701 • Telephone/Fax MA) 972459714535
If "owner" breaches the agreement, the "city's" only physical recourse is to take
over the improvements.
We believe there Are potential impacts from these public property improvements !hat
need to be addressed prior to approval in the following areas:
Traffic / Access
Noise / Glare
Hydrology / Drainage
Public resources / property
Geologic / soils
Aesthetics
I3azards
Short-term construction.
Thank you for your expected assistance,
P.002 002