HomeMy WebLinkAboutM2005-0036Action
DREDGING PERMIT
Harbor Resources Division
Address: V"'Z
Pier Permit #: / 7
Status
Application Received
Date: -7
9� /7 /0 15
Eelgrass Inspection
Eelgrass
Present
No X
Date:
Yes
H. R. Approval to
Comments:
Completed
Date:
Submit to Agencies
0 �c eyd
7
Sent to Corps/Costal
Date: -71111oS-
OK from Corps
Yes -7
N o
OK from Coastal
Yes
I b- 4 0 5
No
Dredging Approval
H. R.
Initial
Date:
Completion Report
Date:
Received
Comments:
POSTDREDGING
COMPLETION REPORT
The perntittee shall send one (1) copy of the post -dredging report for each completed nulividual,
dredging project to the Corps and the CCC documenting compliance with all general and
special conditions defined in this permit. The post-dredgmg report shall be sent within 45 days
after completion of the complete individual dredging project authorized in this permit Me
post -dredging report shall include the followmg information for the completed inclividual
dredging project.
Permit Number 11,5- f Ito
Start Date: 10- 19- 06 Completion Date: 1,0-ato-vs-
Total dredged material to Beach- 11P-aahoe- latr,46
to Sea (LA3):
Total acreage impacted. .,o 3
Mode of dredging and transportation, and method and frequency of disposah
Hydraulic Suction transported through a pipeline onto
adjacent beach.
Tug or other vessel logs documenting contact with USCG MSO Long Beach before each trip to
the LA -3 ocean disposal site.
USCG Contact Yes No
Form of dredged materiak Slurry X Cohesive
Procedure and location where the disposal barge or scow was washed:
No washing.necessary.
A certified report from the dredging site inspector and the captain of any tug or other vessel
used to transport and dispose of dredged material at LA -3 indicating all general and special
permit conditions were met Any violations of the pernut shall be explained in detail.
All conditioning permits were met Yes No
Post -project surveys of Eelgrass beds potentially affected by the dredgin,--
Not necessary as no eelgrass was identified in dredging area.
The post -dredging report shall be signed by a duly authorized representative of the permittee.
The pernuttees representative shall make the follovving certification,
I certifij under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my
direction or supervision in awordance with a system designed to ensure that qualified personnel
properly gather and evaluate the information submitted Based on My inquuy of the person or
persons who manage the system, or those direcilij responsible for gathering the information, the
information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, tru�, accurate, and complete. I
A Wi
am aware that there are significant penalties for bmi fidse inforn"idn, ind di the
possibility offine and imprisonmentfor knowing viola * s
qio-nafiirp ?J?E:S
STATE & FEDEPAL AGENCY
DREDGING APPLICATION
Permit No' L
Payment:
Check No: Date:
Project Location: '31(4> V(A I-IncD kJc,?,6
dELA-9 OIL> C A
Latitude/Longitude: �J
W C1 1 (9
Cubic Yards to be Dredged:
Method of Dredging: 4!J Q IZA L) Ltc- -5uc-,,=-tJ
Nature of Dredged Material (Grain size data):
R(EAS,P- -SEE A=6cjAL-r1 A,6��
Disposition of Dredged Material:
BEAC.d RZaE*.11 kqur- Tr-) A�n)pc�r-
&---A4c�4 ( <
Method of Material Disposition:
HVD9kL-&ir-
Effect of Dredging on Contiguous Bulkheading and Beaches:
REPLE&JISkES SAisin Th,
(<19PPO Awo �fpays FIZOT-OC-T- 5JEA,6JA,-C--
Project Begins: Project Ends:
Page 2
Dredging Application
1, SEA&J LJALI�W— (Applicant/Applicant's agent), hereby certify that I have
read the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permit, RGP#54 and the California Coastal
Commission permit #5-99-282 for maintenance dredging in Newport Harbor and that I
will comply with all of the conditions of those permits. I will further hold the City harmless
from and indemnify them against any claim for damages arising out of the exercise of
these permits. In addition, 1, as the applicant shall reimburse the City of Newport Beach
for all attorney's fees and other costs expended by them in defending any claim, lawsuit,
or judgment arising out of the activities of the applicant carried on under the authority of
such permit.
SGAvJ WALqk�
Applicant – Please Print
SuF–i—L-HA - ve—m ii, c
Contractor – Please Print"
6 — 2-9 — C)9-'
Date
Signed- ��AwLA,(L
ApplicantFA-gent
STATE OF CALIFORNIA - THE RESOURCES AGENCY ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, Govemor
CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION
South Coast Area Office
200 Oceangate, Suite 1000
Long Beach, CA 90802-4302 July 20, 2005
(562) 590-5071
Mr. Tom Rossmiller
City of Newport Beach/Division of Harbor Resources
829 Harbor Island Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Subject: Condition Compliance — Coastal Development Permit 5-99-282, as amended
& Conformance with Consistency Certification CC -078-99 & CC -077-01
Dear Mr. Rossmiller:
Commission staff have received information submitted as evidence of compliance with Coastal Development
Permit 5-99-282, as amended, and/or as evidence of conformance with Consistency Certifications CC -078-99 or
CC -077-01 for the following sites in the City of Newport Beach:
City Harbor
Permit #
Site Address
Beach
Disposal
Qtj (cu.yds)
Ocean
Disposal
Qtyt (cu.yds)
Cumulative
Total� for
2005
175-816
816 Via Lido Nord
112
0
None Identified
235 East Bay Front
1 60
0
Sub -total
5461
1200
Year-to-date total
1
9529
Commission staff have reviewed the information submitted and determined that the above referenced dredging
events conform with Consistency Certifications CC -078-99 and/or CC -077-01 and that no further federal
consistency review is necessary from the Commission for the dredging components of the projects. In addition,
the proposed beach disposal events have been reviewed and found by the Executive Director to be consistent with
Special Conditions 1-3 and 9-12 of Coastal Development Permit 5-99-282, as amended. No further review is
necessary from. the Commission for the beach disposal components of the projects.
Please be advised that only the projects described in the materials submitted for the sites listed above have been
found to conform with Consistency Certification CC -078-99 and CC -077-01 and/or conform with the terms and
conditions of Coastal Development Permit 5-99-282, as amended. Any change in the projects may cause them to
lose their status as consistent with CC -078-99 and CC -077-01 and/or CDP 5-99-282, as amended. This
certification is based on information provided by the recipient of this letter. , If, at a later date, this information is
found to be incorrect or incomplete, this letter will become invalid, and any development occurring at that time
must cease until a new determination regarding conformance with CC -078-99 and CC -077-01 and/or CDP 5-99-
282, as amended, is obtained.
If you have any questions, please contact me at (562) 590-5071 or Mr. Mark Delaplaine at (415) 904-5200.
Sincerely,
Karl Schwing
Supervisor, Regulation & Planning, Orange County Area
Cc: Mr. Mark Delaplaine, California Coastal Commission
Ms. Cori Farrar, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Not to Exceed 500 cubic yards per dredging and beach disposal event
Not to Exceed 1,000 cubic yards per dredging and off -shore disposal event
Not to Exceed 20,000 cubic yards per year
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
LOS ANGELES DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 532111
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90053-2325
REPLY TO
�TTENTION OP July 22, 2005
Office of the Chief
Regulatory Branch
City of Newport Beach Harbor Resources Division
Attention: Chris Miller
PO Box 1768
Newport Beach, California 92658-8915
Dear Mr. Nfiller:
This is in reply to your applications dated June 21, 2005, for Department of the Army
Permits to conduct maintenance dredging, per Regional General Permit No. 54 in Newport Bay,
Newport Beach, Orange County, California. This letter authorizes maintenance dredging at
five project sites within Newport Bay (see below).
USACE Base
#
City
Harbor
Permit
Site Address
Volume
(Cubic
Yards)
Beach
Disposal
Ocean
Disposal
200501708
175-816
816 Via Lido Nord
112
112
0
200501709
None
235 E Bay Front
60
60
0
200501679
133-16
16 Linda Isle
240
0
.240
200501680
133-9 8,
99
98 & 99 Linda Isle
800
0
800
200501681,
114-328
328 Buena Vista Blvd
160
0
160
Totals
1372
172
1200
-- v -2-
Based on the information you have provided, the Corps of Engineers has determined that
your proposed activity complies with the terms and conditions of Regional General Permit
(RGP) No. 54. As long as you comply with the general permit conditions of RGP No. 54, an
individual permit is not required.
Furthermore., you must comply with the following non -discretionary Special Condition:
1. The permittee shall complete all dredging and beach disposal activities prior to
January24,2006. Should additional time be required, the permittee shall conduct anew
eelgrass presence/ absence survey per the requirements of. the Southern California Eelgrass
Mitigation Policy (see: http://swr.nmfs.noaa.gov/hcd/eelpol.hbn) and submit results to the
Corps with a request for additional time.
2. The pern-dttee shall confirm coordinates for location of offshore disposal site with City
Harbor Resources Division of all material approved for ocean disposal prior to the disposal of
material. The location of the designated site for LA -3 is expected to change in September 2005.
A general permit does not grant any property rights exclusive privileges. Also., it does not
authorize any injury to the property or rights of others or authorize interference with any
existing or proposed Federal project. Furthermore, it does not obviate the need to obtain other
Federal, State, or local authorizations required by law.
Thank you for participating in our regulatory program. If you have any questions, please
contact Corice J. Farrar of my staff at (213) 452-3296.
1 am forwarding copies of this letter to: Mr. Karl Schwing, California Coastal Commission,
PO Box 1450, Long Beach, California 90802-4416; Mr. Bob Hoffman, NOAA Fisheries, 501 West
Ocean Blvd, Suite 4200, Long Beach, CA 90802-4213; Mr. Brian Ross., USEPA, Region 9, 75
Hawthorne Street San Francisco, CA 94105.
Sincerely,
Mark Durham
Chief, South Coast Section
Regulatory Branch
VK;lMlY MFU-
NaNport Bay, CA.
or. .. a . I bbdwddmft
Isom* of
DAY.
EEL GRASS INSPECTION
NO EEL GRASS WITHIN 15'OF PROJECT
EEL GRASS IN THE PROOJECT REA
M
Ito) U
17:5- -3/jo 0)"
HARBOR RESOURCES 31V.
(;ITY OF NEWPORT BE, kCH
4'57hr'j"r HAV 7 1-2 /01
NMPMS–N
jNwFft8vPPaftd INk-WQMgAW
4�1�
Zn
44z r
'noposamwoo*
PROFILE Eddk*
VIM -
NM —
'Mwpa6s 0
US6MERHODUM
I I
W.4r 4W-tr
41r
- — - — - — -- — - — - L - — - — - — - — - — - / — -- - — - — - —
*4lVdA' EIM.GANGVW
or W4rX=42
exlswmpm
iieNrim
tWWrx2M
4W T 4W -Cr ow 4w -w
1RAcrNo. TRACMD. mar"o. IPACMD.
347 346 30' 344 343
. . . . . . . . . .. L - — - — - — - — - — - - — - — - — - — -- j - — - — - — - — - — - -- — - — - — - — - —
Curd Dock lun nam
J"CuFd
1A3Vv.M%%UftN0d
Kw*od8emchM
n Ks
Exh&V Lawd 7.; ws 'a"m r4m can
CbedodDr. Mmm CA W429
scdoc
Dow
Sheet CLI Job NM ma-rm
0101MINEEMINEEN
NEMESESUMN: 0 A R : N R 4 41-T-J�-910 I
RNMENE
KNINININ1110111
M1 TIM-,
. Scan Walsh
BELLPORT
101 Shipyard Way, Suite M
Newport Beach, CA 92663
July 6, 2005
Our Pro)ect K05.045.00
SUBJECT: Phi Grain Size Test Results for the Soil Samples Obtained from
-'ak 06r0a.:,
the Curci Residence located at 816 Via Lido Nord, Lido Isle,
Newport Beach, California.
Dear Mr. Walsh:
Presented herewith are the results of our phi grain size analyses performed on
the two soil samples provided to us by your firm. The test procedures were in
-63 (1998) and US. Army Corps of Engineers
accordance with ASTM D 422
Report Number CETA 79-7 criteria.
Please do not hesitate to call if you have any questions after you have reviewed
the attached data.
Respectfully submitted,
Karen E. Geraci,
Project Engineer
� "M WIT,
OF;ESS1
�A E - G
0 No, 6 �97 Mn
a
U3
Cr EXP.
clvl\�
OF C
Attachments:
Plates 1.1 and 1.2 Grain Size Summaries
Plates 2.1 and 2.2 Cumulative Grain Size Distributions PHI Units
Distribution: Addressee (2)
------ P.-\PRCTECrS\KO5.045.00\KO504500-P -GS
Er L111 dO
I
9
9
K
Sieve Opening
Particle Diameter in
U.S. Standard
% Matedal
Cumulative Percent
(mm)
Phi Units
Sieve Size
Retained by Weight
Retained
-----------------------------------------------------------
9.5
-3.25
3/8"
0
0.0
4.75
-2.25
4
0.2
0.2
Gravel 2.83
-1.50
7
0.1
0.4
2
-1.00
10
0
0.4
1.41
-0.50
14
0
0.5
1
------------- --------
0.00
------------------------------------
18
0
0.5
0.71
0.50
25
0.2
0.7
0.5
1.00
35
1.5
2.2
0.35
1.50
45
5.9
8.1
0.25
2.00
60
23.7
31.7
0.177
2.50
80
32.4
64.2
Sand
0.125
3.00
120
27.1
91.2
0.088
3.50
170
7.6
98.8
0.075
3.75
200
0.5
99.3
0.063
4.00
230
0.1
99.4
-----------------------------------------------------------
Silt-Clay <0.063
<4.00
<230
0.6
100
A sample was provided to David H.
Lee & Associates, Incorporated in a sample bag by
BELLPORT. The sample consists
of a POORLY GRADED
SAND (SP): olive -olive -gray
(5Y 4/2-3); humid; fine to medium sand. The sample was
obtained from the Curci
Residence, 816 Via Lido Nord, Lido Isle, Newport Beach
at a depth of 2.5
feet to 0.0 feet
MLLW.
IMEMENERNME
is ;.:"Mmmmmml
MF
I
I
David H. Lee & Associates, Inc.
I
PHI GRAIN SIZE SUMMARY
23011 Moulton Parkway, Suite D-1 1
L a Hills, CA 92653
agun
BE
Telephone: 949-461-5690
CLIENT: BELLPORT
Fax: 949-461-7901
A!
3
1
Sieve Opening
Particle Diameter in
U.S. Standard
% Material
Cumulative Percent
(mm)
Phi Units
Sieve Size
Retained by Weight
Retained
-----------------------------------------------------------
38.1
-5.25
11/2"
0
0.0
19
-4.25
3/4"
1.2
1.2
Gravel 9.5
-3.25
3/8"
0.6
1.8
4.75
-2.25
4
1.8
3.6
2.83
-1.50
7
1.1
4.8
2
-----------------------------------------------------------
-1.00
10
0.5
5.2
1.41
-0.50
14
1.1
6.3
1
0.00
18
2.5
8.8
0.71
0.50
25
4.6
13.4
0.5
1.00
35
10.8
24.3
0.35
1.50
45
16.5
40.8
Sand
0.25
2.00
60
29.1
69.9
0.177
2.50
80
17.1
87.0
0.125
3.00
120
8.8
95.9
0.088
3.50
170
3
98.9
0.075
3.75
200
0.3
99.2
0.063
-----------------------------------------------------------
4.00
230
0.1
99.3
Silt-Clay <0.063
<4.00
<230
0.7
100
A sample was provided to David H. Lee & Associates, Incorporated in a
sample bag by
BELLPORT. The sample consists
of a POORLY GRADED
SAND (SP):
olive gray (5Y 4/2);
saturated; abundant shells & shell
fragments. The sample was obtained
from the Curci
Residence, 816 Via Lido Nord, Lido Isle, Newport Beach
at a depth of -1.5
feet to -4.0 feet
MLLW.
David H. Lee & Associates, Inc.
PHI GRAIN SIZE SUMMARY
3011 Moulton Parkway, Suite D-1 I
IMM :sMiNNE11111
Laguna Hills, CA 92653
mmmmmlllmmmmmml
Telephone: 949461-5690
CLIENT: BELLPORT
100MERNMENEEMEM11
Fax: 949-461-7901
up ON I RAN
!��
Eelgrass Survey Reporting Form
(Version 1.0, June 20, 2003)
This form is required to be submitted for any surveys conducted for the eelgrass, Zostera
marina, that are required to be conducted under federal or state permits and authorizations
issued by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Coastal Commission. The form has been
designed to assist in identifying eelgrass while ensuring that the required information is
consistently documented. Surveys required to be conducted for this species are subject to
modification through publication of revisions to the eelgrass survey policy. It is incumbent upon
the authorized permittee to ensure that survey work is following the latest protocols. For fin-ther
information on these protocols, please contact: Robert Hoffman, National Marine Fisheries
Service, (562) 980-4043, or William Paznokas, California Department of Fish & Game, (858)
467-4/2-18).
Site Name:
816 Via Lido Nord, Newport Beach
(common referen��e)
Survey Contact:
(name, phone, e-mail)
Mark Sites J949) 675-1071
Permit Reference:
. . .
(ACOE Permit No., RWQCB
Order or Cert. No,)
RGP #54
Hydrographic System:
(bay, estuary, lagoon, or
harbor)
Lower Newport Harbor
pecific Location:
(UTK Lat-/Long-, datum,
N 33 36.6761
accuracy level, attach
W 117 54.681'
electronic survey area map if
ossible)
Was Eelgrass Detected:
Yes, Eelgrass was found at this site.
XXXX____No, Eelgrass was not found at this site.
Description of
Permitted Work:
Maintenance dredging for boat slip. Sand pumped to
(describe briefly the work to
adjacent beach.
be conducted at the site under
e permits identified above)
Description of Site:
Depth range:
(describe the physical and
+2'to -9'MLLW
biological conditions within
the survey area at the time of
e survey and provide insight
into variability, if known.
Please provide units for all
numerical information).
Substrate
� pe,
Sand to silt over sand
Temperature:
64 F
Salinity:
NA
Dominant
flora:
I
None
Dominant
fauna:
Mussels on dock floats.
Exotic
species
encountered:
None
Other site
description
notes: None
Description of Survey
Survey date
Effort:
and time
June 30, 2005 1445-1515
(please describe the surveys
period.
conducted including type of
urvey (SCUBAL, remote
video, etc.) and survey
methods employed, date of
work, and survey density
(estimated percentage of the
bottom actually viewed).
Describe any limitations
encountered during the
survey efforts.
Horizontal
visibility in
2'
water
Survey type
and methods:
SCUBA survey follo-wing submerged lines parallel to
ro erty lines
Survey
personnel:
Mark Sites
F urvey
ensi
Over 50%
rvey
Mitations:
r
Poor visibility
Other Information:
[+
(use this space to provide any
additional information or
+4.2' MLLW flood tide
references to attached
materials such as maps,
Drawing and aerial attached
reports, etc.)
Eelgrass Survey Reporting Form (version 1.0, 6/17/03)
Map Output Page I of I
http://www6.city.newport-beach.ca.uslservleticom.esri.esrimap.Esrimap?ServiceName=nb... 6/30/2005
Caulerpa Survey Reporting Form
This form is required to be submitted for any surveys conducted for the invasive exotic alga
Cauterpa tadfulta that are required to be conducted under federal or state permits and
authorizations issued by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers or Regional Water Quality Control
Boardg (Regions 8 & 91) The fbrm hag been designed to ass-ist in con"lling- the costg of
reporting while ensuring that the required information necessary to identify and control any
potential impacts of the authorized actions on the spread of Cmderpa. Surveys required to be
conducted for this species are subject to modification through publication of revisions to the
Caiderpa survey policy. It is incumbent upon the authorized permittee to ensure that survey
work is following the latest protocols. For fiirther information on these protocols, please contact:
Robert Hoff -man, National Marine Fisheries Service (NGAA Fisheries), (562) 9804G43, or
William Paznokas, California Department of Fish & Game, (858) 467-4218).
Report Date:
July 2, 2005
Name of bay, estuary,
lagoon, or harbor:
Newport Harbor
Specific Location Name. -
(address or common
reference)
816 Via Lido Nord
Site Coordinates:
(UTM, Lat./Long., datum,
N 33 36.676'
accuracy level, and an
W117 54.681'
electronic survey area map
or hard copy of the map
must be included)
Survey Contact:
(name, phone, e-mail)
Mark Sites (949) 675-1071
Personnel Conducting
Survey (if other than
above): (narne,phone,
e-mail)
same
Permit Reference:
(ACOE Permit No.,
RWQCR Order or Cert. No)
ACOE RGP 954
Is this the first or second
survey for this project?
second
Was Caulerpa
—Yes, Caulerpa was found at this site and
Detected?: (if Caulerpa is
found, please immediately
has been contacted on date.
contact NOAA Fisheries or
CDFG personnel identified
XXXXXXXXX
above)
No, Caulerpa was not found at this site.
Description of Permitted
Work: (describe briefly the
Maintenance dredging
work to be conducted at the
site under the permits
identified above)
Description of Site:
Depth range:
+2' to -9' MLLW
(describe the physical and
Substrate type:
Sand to silt over sand
biological conditions within die
survey area at the time of the
survey and provide insight into
variability, if known. Please
Temperature:
64 F
Salinity:
NA
Dominantflora:
provide units for all numerical
None
information).
Dominantfauna:
Mussels on dock floats
Exotic species
encountered
(including any
other Caulerpa
None
species):
Other site
description notes:
None
Description of Survey
Survey date and
Effort:
timeperiod:
June 30, 2005 1445-1515
(please describe the surveys
Horizontal
conducted including type of
visibility in water.-
2'
survey (SCUBA, remote
video, etc.) and survey
methods employed, date of
work, and survey density
(estimated percentage of the
Survey type and
methods:
Surveillance level SCUBA survey
following submerged lines parallel to
property lines
bottom actually viewed).
Describe any limitations
Surveypersonnel:
encountered during the
Mark Sites
survey efforts.
Survey density:
Over 50%
Survey limitations:
Poor visibility
Other Information: (use
this space to provide
+4.2' MLLW flood tide
additional information or
references to attached maps,
reports, etc.) I
Drawing and aerial attached
Caulerpa Survey Reporting Form (version 1.2, 10/31/04)
Map Output Page I of I
http://www6.city.newport-beach.ca.us/servlet/com.esri.esrimap.Esrii-nap?Serv1ceNanie=nb... 6/30/2005
W
L.0
LL
CU
07/0e/2005 11:11 NO.649 1?03
W
B E L L P 0 R T
July 8, 2005
Richard Carroll
820 Ma Udo'Nord
Newport Beach, CA 92663
Re; Curci Residence
Dear Richard:
As you may be aware. we're getting ready to install the new dock for my
grandfather and Lois in the next few months and prior we will be doing a little
necessary dredging work to accommodate the new slip size. The City requires
that we notify the neighbors on either side in writing as a courtesy before work
commences so in accordance with the City of Newport Beaches dredging permit
application procedure this letter is intended to serve as that written notification.
We will be doing what is commonly known as beach replenishment which is
where sand which has eroded from the beach is dredged and replaced back onto
the beach where it came from. We 'anticipate moving approximately 112 cubir-
yards (y) of sand in the proosss. Please feel free to contact me at the number
below if you have any questions.
Best regards,
Sean Walsh
BellPort Group 101 Shipyard Way, Suite M, Newport Beach, CA 92663
Tel: 949-723-7780 fax- 949-723-7786
www-beliportgroup.com
07/08/2005 11:11 NO.649 IP02
IK
B E L L P 0 R T
July 8, 2005
Congdon Family
812 Via Lido Nord
Newport Beach, CA 92663
Re: Curci Residence
Dear Bill:
As you may be aware, we're getting ready to install the new dock for my
grandfather and Lois in the next few months and pdor we MI be doing a little
necessary dredging work to accommodate the new slip size. The City requires
that we notify the neighbors on either side in writing as a courtesy before work
commences so in accordance vAth the City of -Newport Beaches dredging permit
application procedure this letter is intended to serve as that written notiffication.
We will be doing what is commonly known as beach replenishment which is
where sand which has eroded from the beach is dredged and replaced back onto
the beach where it came from. We anticipate moving approximately 112 cubic
yards (Y) of sand in the process. Please feel free to contact me at the number
below if you have any questions.
Best regards,
Sean Walsh
BeFort Group 101 Shipyard Way, Suite M, Newport Eleach, CA 92663
Tel, 949-723-7780 bx- 949-723-7786
www.beliportgroup.com
X -:N0 -I
0 EEL
r)5-?)
VICINITY MAP
Newpon Bay, CA. S.—Mg - — - xp,..ftd i. fied M deo0fl-
depft below Mean L�Low VAMWWM�
Maxin-n ramp offdo i—pp-d-*B� 10 feeL
kftgborh� wowteb%had In Oft swdon of
fiftwpodBay-
HARBOR RESOURCES DIV.
CITY OF NEWPqRT BE kCH
C11";,; M)-Ilc-;/ 1111q101
F;hal Dfct.;ns5 shall 1-ndu4e'
Cc,, 11 ouk jCcy -<-e+ba6(c- , PM f- be cA
Z- ea 5- � !�; "
&anbv-,ay mu T-� be- 2,/' pele, STD- 6cV-6
New Poe
New Piles
New PVe Suppoded NM sangwray
-E
pier- (3!.6'x 231
vi
EL GRASS INSPECTION
Pmposed New DO&
GRASS WITHIN 15'()F PR
4V
ASS1N THE PROJECYA
PROFILE
SIGNATURE EZslinq BoM
I/j/2,J01 ly,
FLEGEM
NEWPILES M Snow -Tr-r— 6-
14�rdd US FIERHEADME
IIEW 4LU-01a V-Crdd
+ — - — - — - —
/4-NEWSW
30'(r 41r -Cr
EX15r- SLI' LM BULKHEAD UWE
IV-ul
NEINGANGMY
V-"
5&-W
EMST94GPIM
NEWPIER
CM4rX25'177
- — - — - — - — - — - — -
4V -V' 'W4r -W4r 4V -W
TRACrNO. TRACT NO. TRACT NO. TRAcr No. TRACTNG.
347 346 345-' 344 343
- — - — - — - — - — - . . . . . . - — - — - — - — - — - -- — - — -
Revisio= Curd Dock Bellingham
John curd
Lzt 345,816 Via Lido NDFd
Newpoft Beach ca. W..d. hrb'.-
and wahwfm& sakdAms
sbus., . j., nhohd=
by. XG Eyisting Layout
W- .22D5 Badnem Park Drim
Scalm nft Mon. CA 9500
7EI- gq 678-2
0 385
Sheet CLI JOb ND. ...W- FAk M-1760
HARBOR RESOURCES DIVISION
829 Harbor Island Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
949-644-3034 / Fax 949-723-0589
Pier Permit Conditions
November 19, 2004
Property Address: 816 Via Lido Nord
With reference to the plans currently under consideration to reconfigure or modify the dock
system, the following conditions will now be in effect on the above referenced pier.
1. The pier permittee is aware of the Harbor Permit Policies and Chapter 17 of the City of
Newport Beach Municipal Code. The pier permittee understands that the above referenced
pier is under the purview of these Policies and Codes.
2. Any future work on the above mentioned pier requires permits with the City of Newport
Beach and any other applicable agencies. Painting, replacement of rub rails and work
considered to be cosmetic in nature does not reauire a permit.
3. The conditions set forth in this document pertain to the current, proposed dock system
under consideration. Any future modifications or alterations to the dock system may require
new conditions which may override or change these conditions. The size of the pier platform
was allowed per a Harbor Commission decision on October 14, 2004. See attached Staff
Rpnort.
4. Only marine oriented uses are allowed on the pier, pier platform, gangway and float. Patio
furniture, plants etc ... are not permitted.
5. Vessels will be allowed to project beyond the end of the finger / slip by the width of their
beam.
6. The maximum beam of a vessel that is permitted to side tie to the eastern finger is 5'.
7. The maximum beam of a vessel thatis permitted to side tie to the western finger is 7.5'.
Signature:
Chris Miller, R
I/- IS_
rces Supervisor
':;7/16/,r--/
Applicant Signature Print Name
Joint Pier Applicant Signature (if applicable) Print Name
36p S h e 1 1 m a k e r I nc 9495485315 p.3
U0
JL'4 ZF NLJ. 'J33 IM4
r x no 949S
5 h a I
Wroo
10-
!9!4
HARIWR RESOURCES DIVISION
M Harbor Island Drive
NewPMt Beach. CA 92660
949-644-3034 / Fax 949-723-0589
pier permit CondMons
NmooMber 119.2004
Properly Address: 816 Via Udo Nord
WA h reffferm to ft plans myrenitly under consideratim to recorfture or modify the dock
SyMM, the following condnkm vWj row be in effect on " above referenced Pier -
1. The pier pwmittos is aware of the Harbor Permit Policies and Chapter 17 Of the C'ty of
Newport Beach Municipal Code. The pier permittee understands that the above referenced
OW is under #0 pmiew of these Pefficies and Codes.
2. Any future work an the above Mentiomci pier requires permits with the City Of Newport
Beach and any other applicable agencies. Niftrig, replacement of rub rails and work
considemdw be cosmetic "I natm dow not mQUim a MuM.
3. The cwdftm set forth in fts domment peftin to the current PqwsQd dock system
under c0nsW6rdt!Dn- Any future modrwetions. or altera*yns to the dock sYSVM MY require
MW CwWMW% which my override or change these conditions. The size of the Pier Platf0cm
VM allowed per a Haftr CkimmiSsID11 decision on October 14, 2004. SM allschsd -ftO
RmKO. Pato
4. 0* nvdne oriented uses are allovied Orl the pier, pier plaffon7k. gangway and 1110at-
fum"ure. plarft etr—are not oerwated -
5. Vqsseft will be allowed to project beyond " end ol ft *Ver I slip by the width of theit
basm
6. The "Wdmum bearn of a vem, that is permitted to side tig to thig eastern finger is 5'.
7- The maximum beam of a vessel that is permfted to side tle to ft westem finger Is 7.5'.
sWature:
Chris MNW, HMW 148SOURM SuPeIVIS"
Pier Applicant Sigr-sluffl fWappikable) Print Name
'��Wpo
�' 7tr
� 4--ro
HARBOR RESOURCES DIVISION
829 Harbor Island Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
949-644-3034 / Fax 949-723-0589
APPROVAL IN CONCEPT
APPROVAL IN CONCEPT BY THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH as required for permit
application to the South Coast Regional Commission pursuant to California
Administrative Code, Sections 13210 and 13211.
General Description of Proposed Development: Replace wooden dock with
new concrete dock in a modified configuration. Replace existing non -conforming pier
in same basic configuration. The only change being to allow space for the new ramp
at the correct length. See 2 requested additions for final drawings.
jAddress number must be stenciled on 1 bayward facing pile.-
jPier conditions must be signed by applicant prior to final approval.
Wroperty Address: 816 Via Lido Nord I
Legal Description:
lHarbor Permit Number: 175-816
1PIan Check Number: TBD
jApplicant: John Gurci
Applicant's Mailing Address: 816 Via Lido Nord, Newport Beach, CA 92663
Phone Number: 949-631-3121
I have reviewed the plans for the foregoing development including:
1. The general site plan, including any roads and public access to the shoreline.
2. The grading plan, if any-.
3. The general uses and intensity of use proposed for each part of the area covered
in the application.
And find
Page 1 of 2
They comply with the current adopted Newport Beach General Plan, Zoning
Ordinance, Subdivision Ordinance and anv applicable specific or precise plans or,
ii That a variance of exception has been approved and final.
A copy of any variance, exception, conditional use permit or other issued permit is
attached together with all conditions of approval and all approved plans including
approved tentative tract maps. On the basis of this finding, these plans are approved in
concer)t and said annroval has been written uDon said n1ans. sianed and dated.
Should Newport Beach adopt an ordinance deleting, amending or adding to the Zoning
Ordinance or other regulations in any manner that would affect the use of the property or
the design of a project located thereon, this approval in concept shall become null and
void as of the effective date of this said ordinance.
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act or 1970, and state and local
quidelines adopted thereunder, this development:
�(Has been determined to be ministerial or categorically exempt.
o Has received a final Exemption Declaration or final Negative Declaration (copy
attached).
o Has received a Final Environmental Impact Report (copy attached).
All discretionary approvals legally required of Newport Beach prior to issuance of a
building permit have been given and are final. The development is not subject to
reiection in principal bv Newport Beach unless a substantial chanae is proposed.
This concept approval in no way excuses the applicant from complying with all
applicable policies, ordinances, codes and regulations of Newport Beach. See attached
conditions to the pier permit.
Tom Rossmiller, Manager, Harbor Resources
Sicinature: i f M
.Chris Miller, Harbor Resources Supervisor
November 19, 2004
Attachments:
Worksheet for Building Permit Application
Drawing
Pier Conditions
Page 2 of 2
WORKSHEET FOR BUILDING I FIRE PERMIT APPI-49RUOR RESOURCES DIV.
'iffl �CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
BUILDING DEPARTMENT ts I jq 16m
PI FARF PRINT C)R TVPF=
1. PROJECT ADDRESS (NOT MAILING ADDRESS)
LOOR
SUITE NO.
vi �-o mov-d
i CAFN
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
No. UNITS
LOT BLOCK TRACT I
I
2. DESCRIPTION OF WORK
. NEW n ADD n ALTER E]
Check Armrooriate Box
cl-ot, IL USE
m �Qjeal
ist-L
e -b-- % � A # OF STORIES
VALUATION
DEMO FT
EW/AD D E D/EXTG)
D,T OWNER'S NAME LAST
FIRST
curc-i
i CAFN
OWNER'S ADDRESS
OWNER'S E-MAIL ADDRESS
2 11., V L tdz Kt 0 r ej .
I
CITY STATE
ZIP
PHONE NO.
Be-a� CAIN,
4. ARCH ITIt-CT/D ES IGNER'S NAME LAST
FIRST
LIC. NO.
ARCH ITECT/DESIGN ER'S ADDRESS
ARCH ITECT/DESIGNER'S E-MAIL ADDRESS
CITY STATE
ZIP
PHONE NO.
F] 5. ENGINEER'S NAME LAST
FIRST
STATE LIC. NO.
ENGINEER'S ADDRESS
ENGINEER'S E-MAIL ADDRESS
CITY STATE
ZIP
PHONE NO.
6. CONTRACTOR'S NAME
BUSINESS LIC.
STATE LIC.
S ba I V*�� T -4-,--C- .
15-F Ma '�O� INo.
541 LA-:�q CIassA8
CONTRACTOR'S ADDRESS
CONTRACTOR'S E-MAIL ADDRESS
0 Pk&lc��
sv\eAt��'Sb��IoW.Ne-f
9TY STATE
ZIP
PHON" .
K-p–s 0-- — CA
1(p;
OFFICE USE ONLY
PERMIT NO.
TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION
PLAN CHECK NO.
PLAN CHECK FEE $
OCCUPANCY- GROUP
PLAN CHECK ENG.
INSPECTION FORM /2
Wed or F/,;dc�
Harbor Resources Department
Date: /S /0�
Inspection Requested By: CM
Inspector: Don Duffy
Pier Address: U;cf ('11du Nova
Pier Transfer
Reinspection
GFI Present Yes Need None Needed Yes Need
Anti -Siphon / Backflow Present
Eelgrass
Yes No
Presenti I
Pump Out 46i,
Pier.Location
Yes No
Operational I
Recommended Action
Encroachmenet
Address of Complaining Party
Boat Description
_GF Number
Location on Dock
Comments / Observations
Other Request
r -e q
Ice—
do (,k- -<—ys
,�, 6; k -e-
Permits Output
Page I of I
e-mail all technical problems and errors.
Please
Building Department Online Services
Building Department Information: (949) 6"-3275 - Inspection Line: (949) 6"-3255
Plan Check Submittal Information
Plan Check Number
Status
Description
Street No.
Street Name
Applied
Approved
Expired
Plan Check Target Date
Plan Checked By
0880-2005
APPLIED
NEW CONC DOCK/PIER/RAMP
816
VIA LIDO NORD
417/2005
10/4/2005
5/5/2005
Street Dir
Notice - Building Contractor and Owner / Builder
After your project is approved, please call 949/644-3288 before you come in to obtain the permit to verify that the responsible
plan check engineer is available to sign the dravAngs.
Plan Check History
Date
Department
Action
Entered by
09/06/2005
BUILDING
1st Notice Sent
RPT
05104/2005
BUILDING
Approved
SK
04/15/2005
HARBOR
Corrections -Required
C Miller
RESOURCES
04/07/2005 BUILDING Plan Check Pending SK
04/07/2005 HARBOR Plan Check Pending
RESOURCES
The above plan review status reflect the last 10 activities of the relevant
department when entered in the system.
For further information or status inquiries please contact the individual departments.
Building
(949) 644-3288
Plannning
(949) 644-3204
Public Works
(949) 644-3311
Fire
(949) 644-3106
http://www2.city.newport-beach.ca.us/permitsN200plan—ck.asp 9/26/05
'klpo?7�
09/06/2005
SHELLMAKER INC
2035 F PLACENTIA AVE
COSTA MESA CA 92627
CITY OF NEWORT BEACH
SUBJECT: PLAN CHECK EXPiRATION DATE
ADDRESS: 816 VIA LIDO NORD
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
Jay Elbettar, Director
Our records indicate your Plan Check Number(s) 0880-2005 will expire on 10/04/2005
based on limitations set forth in Section 304.4 of the Uniform Administrative Code. You must obtain
a building permit or request an extension by writing to the Building Director prior to the expiration date
and show that circumstances beyond your control have prevented you from obtaining the permit.
If you allow your application to expire, you must pick up any drawings that we have in our office within
ten (10) days after the date of expiration. After that time, we will assume you have no further interest
in the plans and dispose of them.
To continue this project after the expiration date, a new application and plans must be submitted and
new fees must be paid. For further information, please contact a permit technician at (949) 644-3288.
Very truly yours,
BUILDING DEPARTIROE�41
For Jay Elbettar, P.E., C.B.O., Director
By: Au_)�
Permit Technician
3300 Newport Boulevard - Post Office Box 1768 - Newport Beach, California 92658-8915
Telephone: (949) 644-3275 - Fa)c (949) 644-3250 -Website: www.newport-beach.ca.us/building
e-mail: enb�-blg@city.newport-beach.ca.us
STATE OF CALIFORNIA --THE RESOURCES AGENCY ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER. Govem
CALIFORNIA COASTAL CqMMIGSSION
SOUTH COAST DISTRICT
PO Box 1450
200 Oceangate, 10th Floor
LONG BEACH, CA 90802-4416
www.coastal.ca.gov
Date: . September 26, 2005
Permit No. 5-05-127
NOTICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE PERMIT EFFECTIVENESS
Please be advised that the Administrative Permit with the above permit number
which was sent to you on August 24, 2005 and was reported to the
Commission on Friday, September is now fully effective.
Development of your project is subject to compliance with all terms and conditions
specified in the Administrative Permit.
Should you have any questions please contact our office.
Sincerely,
PETER M. Q.OUGLAS
Executive Di�ctor
By: KARL SCHWING
Orange County Area Supervisor
dt CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA- THE RESOURCES AGENCY ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER. Govemor
CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION
South Coast Area Office Permit Application No. 5-05-127
200 Oceangate, Suite 1000 Date: August 25, 2005
Long Beach, CA 90802-4302 a
(562) 590-5071 F3a Page 1 of 6
ADMINISTRATIVE PERMIT
APPLICANTS: John Curci, Trustee
PROJECT
DESCRIPTION: Remove and replace existing "U" shaped boat dock system consisting of a
wood pier, gangway, and floating dock and three concrete pilings with a new
system including: two (2) 5' x 48' fingers, 6' x 27' headwalk, 3 1/2 , x 25'
gangway, including removal and replacement of three 12" square concrete
pilings with three new 14" square concrete pilings, and demolish existing 15
./2' x 25' pier with four 12" square pilings and re -construct 15 Y2' x 25' pier
with two 14" square "T" pilings, and use of a TREX-like composite decking
material in lieu of wood for the new pier and ramp.
PROJECT
LOCATION: 816 Via Lido Nord, Newport Beach (Orange County)
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S DETERMINATION, The findings for this determination, and for any special
conditions, appear on subsequent pages.
NOTE: P.R.C. Section 30624 provides that this permit shall not become effective until it is
reported to the Commission at its next meeting. If one-third or more of the appointed
membership of the Commission so request, the application will be removed from the
administrative calendar and set for public hearing at a subsequent Commission meeting. Our
office will notify you if such removal occurs.
This permit will be reported to the Commission at the following time and place:
September 16, 2005, 9:00 a.m.
Wharfinger Building
I Marina Way
Eureka, CA 95501
IMPORTANT - Before you may proceed with development, the following must occur:
Pursuant to 14 Cal. Admin. Code Sections 13150(b) and 13158, you must sign the enclosed duplicate
copy acknowledging the permit's receipt and accepting its contents, including all conditions, and return
it to our office. Following the Commission's meeting, and once we have received the signed
acknowledgement and evidence of compliance with all special conditions, we will send you a Notice of
Administrative Permit Effectiveness.
BEFORE YOU CAN OBTAIN ANY LOCAL PERMITS AND PROCEED WITH DEVELOPMENT,
YOU MUST HAVE RECEIVED BOTH YOUR ADMINISTRATIVE PERMIT AND THE NOTICE OF
PERMIT EFFECTIVENESS FROM THIS OFFICE.
PETER LAS
Execu* or
By: — Karl Schwing
Title: Coastal Program Analyst
5-05-127 (Curci)
Administrative Permit
Page 2 of 6
STANDARD CONDITIONS:
Notice of Receil?t and Acknowledgment. The permit is not valid and development shall not
commence until a copy of the permit, signed by the permittee or authorized agent,
acknowledging receipt of the permit and acceptance of the terms and conditions, is returned to
the Commission office.
2. Expiration. If development has not commenced, the permit will expire two years from the date
this permit is reported to the Commission. Development shall be pursued in a diligent manner
and completed in a reasonable period of time. Application for extensior 3f the permit must be
made prior to the expiration date.
3. Interpretation. Any questions of intent or interpretation of any term or condition will be resolved
by the Executive Director or the Commission.
4. Assignment. The permit may be assigned to any qualified person, provided assignee files with
the Commission an affidavit accepting all terms and conditions of the permit.
5. Terms and Conditions Run with the Land. These terms and conditions shall be perpetual, and
it is the intention of the Commission and the permittee to bind all future owners and possessors
of the subject property to the terms and conditions.
SPECIAL CONDITIONS: See pages four to six.
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S DETERMINATION (continued):
The Executive Director hereby determines that the proposed development is a category of
development, which, pursuant to PRC Section 30624, qualifies for approval by the Executive Director
through the issuance of an Administrative Permit. Subject to Standard and Special Conditions as
attached, said development is in conformity with the provisions of Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act of 1976
and will not have any significant impacts on the environment within the meaning of the California
Environmental Quality Act. If located between the nearest public road and the sea, this development is
in conformity with the public access and public recreation policies of Chapter 3.
FINDINGS FOR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S DETERMINATION:
A. Prooect Description
The subject site is located at 816 Via Lido Nord in the City of Newport Beach (Exhibits #1-2). The
subject site is located at Lido Isle, a bulkheaded island developed primarily with single-family
residences. The proposed project (Exhibit #3) involves the removal and replacement of an existing "U"
shaped boat dock system consisting of a wood pier, gangway, and floating dock with a new system
including: two (2) 5' x 48' fingers, 6' x 27' headwalk, 3 1/2 ' x 25' gangway, including removal and
replacement of three 12" square concrete pilings with three new 14" square concrete pilings, and
demolish existing 15 1/2' x 25' pier with four 12" square pilings and re -construct 15 1/2' x 25' pier with two
14" square "T" pilings, and use of a TREX-like composite decking material in lieu of wood for the new
pier and ramp.
The dock project will be used for boating related purposes to serve a single-family residential
development. The site has been surveyed by the City of Newport Beach Harbor Resources Division for
eelgrass and no eelgrass was discovered within 15 feet of the project area. In addition, Special
- 0
5-05-127 (Curci)
Administrative Permit
Page 3 of 6
Condition 4 requires a Caulerpa taxilfolia survey not more than 90 days prior to commencement of
construction. The surveys are valid for a limited period of time (until the next growing season for
eelgrass and 90 days for Caulerpa taxilfolia). If construction does not occur within the respective time
periods, subsequent surveys will be required. Special Conditions 3 and 4 identify the procedures
necessary to be completed prior to beginning construction in the case the surveys expire prior to
commencement of construction. In addition, Special Conditions 3 and 4 identify post -construction
eelgrass and Caulerpa taxifolia procedures.
Public access to the bay is available approximately 150 feet west of the project site at the end of Via
Waziers and approximately 300 feet east ot '.he site, where in both locations, there are small pocket
parks adjacent to Newport Bay. The proposed project has received an approval in concept from the
City of Newport Beach Harbor Resources Division. The Regional Water Quality Control Board
(RWQCB) has determined that the proposed project will not adversely impact water quality if standard
construction methods and materials are used. The applicants have applied for a permit from the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers.
The proposed project includes the demolition and re -construction of a 15 1/2' by 25' pier. Typically, the
City has limited pier platforms to a maximum of 10' x 14' with two "T" piles supporting the platform.
However, in this case, the City allowed the re -construction of a 15 % by 25' pier at this site because
there is presently a pier platform of the same size at the site. The City typically does not allow pier
platforms to exceed the City's adopted standard size, unless there is already such a pier platform at the
site. As with a 10' by 14' platform, the proposed pier will only require two "T" piles; thus there is no
difference in the quantity of fill for the pilings associated with this larger pier platform. Furthermore,
there is no eelgrass in the vicinity of the proposed project, thus the proposed pier platform will have no
adverse effects upon existing eelgrass beds.
B. Marine Resources
The proposed recreational boat dock development and its associated structures are an allowable and
encouraged marine related use. The project design includes the minimum sized pilings and the
minimum number of pilings necessary for structural stability. There are no feasible less
environmentally damaging alternatives available. As conditioned, the project will not significantly
adversely impact eelgrass beds and will not contribute to the dispersal of the invasive aquatic algae,
Caulerpa taxifolia. Further, as proposed and conditioned, the project, which is to be used solely for
recreational boating purposes, conforms to Sections 30224 and 30233 of the Coastal Act.
C. Water Qualit
The proposed work will be occurring on, within and adjacent to coastal waters. The storage or
placement of construction material, debris, or waste in a location where it could be discharged into
coastal waters would result in an adverse effect on the marine environment. To reduce the potential for
construction related impacts on water quality, the Executive Director imposes special conditions
requiring, but not limited to, the appropriate storage and handling of construction equipment and
materials to minimize the potential of pollutants to enter coastal waters. To reduce the potential for
post -construction impacts to water quality the Executive Director requires the continued use and
maintenance of post construction BMPs. As conditioned, the Executive Director finds that the
development conforms to Sections 30230 and 30231 of the Coastal Act.
5-05-127 (Curci)
Administrative Permit
Page 4 of 6
D. Local Coastal Program
The LUP for the City of Newport Beach was effectively certified on May 19, 1982. The certified LUP
was updated on January 9, 1990. As conditioned, the proposed development is consistent with
Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act and with the certified Land Use Plan for the area. I Approval of the project,
as conditioned, will not prejudice the ability of the City of Newport Beach to prepare a Local Coastal
Program that is in conformity with the provisions of Chapter 3.
E. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
As conditioned, there are no feasible alternatives or additional feasible mitigation measures available
that would substantially lessen any significant adverse effect that the activity may have on the
environment. Therefore, the Executive Director finds that the proposed project, as conditioned to
mitigate the identified impacts, is the least environmentally damaging feasible alternative and is
consistent with the requirements of the Coastal Act to conform to CEQA.
SPECIAL CONDITIONS:
1. Water Quality
A. Construction Responsibilities and Debris Removal
(1) No construction materials, equipment, debris, or waste will be placed or stored
where it may be subject to wave, wind, or rain erosion and dispersion.
(2) Any and all construction material will be removed from the site within 10 days of
completion of construction.
(3) Machinery or construction materials not essential for project improvements will not
be allowed at any time in the intertidal zone.
(4) If turbid conditions are generated during construction a silt curtain will be utilized to
control turbidity.
(5) Floating booms will be used to contain debris discharged into coastal waters and
any debris discharged will be removed as soon as possible but no later than the
end of each day.
(6) Non -buoyant debris discharged into coastal waters will be recovered by divers as
soon as possible after loss.
B. Best Management Practices Program
By acceptance of this permit the applicant agrees that the long-term water -borne berthing of
boat(s) in the approved dock and/or boat slip will be managed in a manner that protects water
quality pursuant to the implementation of the following BMPs.
(1) Boat Cleaning and Maintenance Measures:
a. In -water top -side and bottom -side boat cleaning shall minimize the discharge of
soaps, paints, and debris.
5-05-127 (Curci)
Administrative Permit
Page 5 of 6
b. In -the -water hull scraping or any process that occurs underwater that re- suits in
the removal of paint from boat hulls shall be prohibited. Only detergents and
cleaning components that are designated by the manufacturer as phosphate -
free and biodegradable shall be used, and the amounts used minimized. .
c. The applicant shall minimize the use of detergents and boat cleaning and
maintenance products containing ammonia, sodium hypochlorite, chlorinated
solvents, petroleum distillates or lye.
(2) Solid and Liquid Waste Management Measures:
a. All trash, recyclables, and hazardous wastes or potential water contaminants,
including old gasoline or gasoline with water, absorbent materials, oily rags,
lead acid batteries, anti -freeze, waste diesel, kerosene and mineral spirits will
be disposed of in a proper manner and will not at any time be disposed of in the
water or gutter.
(3) Petroleum Control Management Measures:
a. Oil absorbent materials shall be examined at least once a year and replaced as
necessary. The applicant will recycle the materials, if possible, or dispose of
them in accordance with hazardous waste disposal regulations. The boaters
will regularly inspect and maintain engines, seals, gaskets, lines and hoses in
order to prevent oil and fuel spills. Boaters will use preventive engine
maintenance, oil absorbents, bilge pump -out services, or steam cleaning
services as much as possible to clean oily bilge areas. Bilges shall be cleaned
and maintained. Detergents will not be used for cleaning. The use of soaps
that can be discharged by bilge pumps is prohibited.
2. Eel -grass Surve
A. Pre Construction Eelgrass Survey. A valid pre -construction eelgrass (Zostera
marina) survey shall be completed during the period of active growth of eelgrass
(typically March through October). The pre -construction survey shall be completed
prior to the beginning of construction and shall be valid until the next period of active
growth. The survey shall be prepared in full compliance with the "Southern California
Eelgrass Mitigation Policy" Revision 8 (except as modified by this special condition)
adopted by the National Marine Fisheries Service and shall be prepared in consultation
with the California Department of Fish and Game. The applicant shall submit the
eelgrass survey for the review and approval of the Executive Director within five (5)
business days of completion of each eelgrass survey and in any event no later than
fifteen (15) business days prior to commencement of any development. If the eelgrass
survey identifies any eelgrass within the project area, which would be impacted by the
proposed project, the development shall require an amendment to this permit from the
Coastal Commission or a new coastal development permit.
B. Post Construction Eelgrass Survey. If any eelgrass is identified in the project area
by the survey required in subsection A of this condition above, within one month after
the conclusion of construction, the applicant shall survey the project site to determine if
any eelgrass was adversely impacted. The survey shall be prepared in full compliance
with the "Southern California Eelgrass Mitigation Policy" Revision 8 (except as modified
by this special condition) adopted by the National Marine Fisheries Service and shall be
prepared in consultation with the California Department of Fish and Game. The
applicant shall submit the post -construction eelgrass survey for the review and approval
of the Executive Director within thirty (30) days after completion of the survey. If any
5-05-127 (Curci)
Administrative Permit
Page 6 of 6
eelgrass has been impacted, the applicant shall replace the impacted eelgrass at a
minimum 1.21 ratio on-site, or at another location, in accordance with the Southern
California Eelgrass Mitigation Policy. All impacts to eelgrass habitat shall be mitigated
at a minimum ratio of 1.21 (mitigation: impact). The exceptions to the required 1.21
mitigation ratio found within SCEMP shall not apply. Implementation of mitigation shall
require an amendment to this permit or a hew coastal development permit unless the
Executive Director determines that no amendment or new permit is required.
3. Pre -construction Caulerpa Taxifolia Surve
A. Not earlier than 90 days nor later than 30 days prior to commencement or
re-commencerhent of any development authorized under this coastal development
permit (the "project"), the applicant shall undertake a survey of the project area and a
buffer area at least 10 meters beyond the project area to determine the presence of the
invasive alga Cauierpa taxi/blia. The survey shall include a visual examination of the
substrate.
B. The survey protocol shall be prepared in consultation with the Regional Water Quality
Control Board, the California Department of Fish and Game, and the National Marine
Fisheries Service.
C. Within five (5) business days of completion of the survey, the applicant shall submit the
survey:
(1) for the review and approval of the Executive Director; and
(2) to the Surveillance Subcommittee of the Southern California Caulerpa Action Team
(SCCAT). The SCCAT Surveillance Subcommittee may be contacted through
William Paznokas, California Department of Fish & Game (858/467-4218) or Robert
Hoffman, National Marine Fisheries Service (562/980-4043).
D. If Caulerpa taxifolia is found within the project or buffer areas, the applicant shall not
proceed with the project until 1) the applicant provides evidence to the Executive
Director that all C. taxifoiia discovered within the project and buffer area has been
eliminated in a manner that complies with all applicable governmental approval
requirements, including but not limited to those of the California Coastal Act, or 2) the
applicant has revised the project to avoid any contact with C. taxifolia. No revisions to
the project shall occur without a Coastal Commission approved amendment to this
coastal development permit unless the Executive Director determines that no
amendment is legally required.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF PERMIT RECEIPT/ACCEPTANCE OF CONTENTS:
I[We acknowledge that I/we have received a copy of this permit and have accepted its contents
including all conditions.
Applicants' Signature Date of Signing
WAdmin. Permits\2005\2005-09\5-05-127 (Curd) ADMINISTRATIVE PERMIT.doc
'qat�"L'
2� 4�'
IS38J 'o
LWLJ U-)
")A
ds
A
CD
4
2 0 65
- 0,5"Iq
Iv lie
� At
M GolfA
Qz'
21
21 g
7_:R
Alm
j
_4
ca
COASTAL COMMISSION
.9 z -
EXHIBIT #
<
PAGE OF
jz; L.
C�j
V*
'00 �39NWO 11W� �33S
t4�
I
C)
C).
aj
ou-
Eb
C:
IL
m
0
N
(D
ca w
'D
w
0
00)
UO)
m
C
c—
.
'a 0 -2 cm
.2
E
E � --� 0
c' -c D
'00
<
CE
W,
E
a E 0
T) a) �L
LU
w
LLJ
0
E
.0. 5o;
cu
CD
(U
0-
a)
(0
z:
E
.2
E
E
f -Izu 'o -s -00 -00
o 5 '.
cc
0
co - co
Zt--"a m >,= -D
0
05
(D
0
M
E
0
0
-6
1,
(D � (D
LL
6
0
Q)
j-,
m
—
2�
- �b
-�;
:5. � t� (a
IOD 10
m
m
LE
:2
-j 0-
,
a-
,
U)
_ : .0
� , (U C:
0 ol a)
3. -6 w m
WIM
'77 �i
I , ,
M, �
Q),Ln o C',
z -E zol -2-
0
Q) lu m u) u E
LLJ Iz mm .2 8
Goo
CA 4p,�
VICINITY MAP
Newport Bay, CA. 0100-t" S-WkV am -PVUW I" lad and derat
dspft balaw Mun Laww uw viaw wuw�
Makr— mr" of oft to apPirwim"y 10 fooL
N IoipomS�y.
SUP SITE
co. . . . . . . . . . .... ...
lz
121
...... . . . . . .
....... ... .... ... ... . . . . . . .
E X I I
PAGE OF -L-
P -WW PW
(IT -W x 25� a" SWPO(W
==."rUsft 0
Pmposed Gangway S2
(.T-6* x 241, we /—C—I\
+ Proposed DoCk By BeNnghm Mar**
ZPMPQS$d Too Ple SuPWPOned Mumls
PW TYP (WW of 2L sw v
S2 PROFILE
G
r;*Ung Sodom
+ - !LEGEND
EXIST. PXES a
NEWPILES III vnew IT4rnp�
=EIGST
NEW
:1 W -Wald Ilr4rold V -v dd U.S. PNMEAD LLNE
— - I r- ---� z '.' .
+
W"OscDcowpus
AT PROPOSED SUP.SEE
(TOTAL OF 31
Y.w 1 21 9 1
400 1
old PROPOSED SLIP
411' UJLDAXW"uw
EXIW.
- — - — - — --- - — - L .—.—.J—/ — -- - — - — - — - L
rr
EXIST. OWWAY
(74r x IF -C)
PROPOSED GAMMAT(
(7 -Ir x 2,r -n SEE S2
EXISTWO PER
(IW4rx2r4n
MLES AT PROPOSED DMV. v
M -r SM (TOTAL OF 2) S2
PROPOSED PIER R
(IT -V x 25*4r)6 &M 2
—s
4014r
TRACT NO. TRACT NO.
TRACT No. TRACT No. TRACT NO.
347 346 1 345 344 343
- — - — - — - — - — - -
PILING LAYOUT -L. - -. -.
APLICANTS NAME : JOHN CURCI - LOT:
JOB ADDRESS :816 VIA LIDO NORD CONTRACTOF :SHELLMAKER. INC.
NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 2035 F PLACENTIA AVENUE
COSTA MESA, CA 92627
TRACT:
DATE -
08/09�05
5-05-127 (Curci)
Administrative Permit
Page 6 of 6
eelgrass has been impacted, the applicant shall replace the impacted eelgrass at a
minimum 1.21 ratio on-site, or at another location, in accordance with the Southern
California Eelgrass Mitigation Policy. All impacts to eelgrass habitat shall be mitigated
at a minimum ratio of 1.21 (mitigafion:impact). The exceptions to the required 1.21
mitigation ratio found within SCEMP shall not apply. Implementation of mitigation shall
require an amendment to this permit or a new coastal development permit unless the
Executive Director determines that no amendment or new permit is required.
3. Pre -construction Caulema Taxffblia Survey
AL Not earlier than 90 days nor later than 30 days prior to commencei s it:;r,'L or
re -commencement Qf any development authorized under this coastal development
permit (the "project7), the applicant shall undertake a survey of the project area and a
buffer area at least 10 meters beyond the project area to determine the presence of the
invasive alga Caulerpa taxilblia. The survey shall include a visual exa rmnafion of the
substrate.
B. The survey protocol shall be ppepared in consultation with the Regional Water Quality
Control Board, the California Department of Fish and Game, and the National Marine
Fisheries Service.
C. Within five (5) business days of completion of the survey, the applicant shall submit the
survey:
(1) for the review and approval of the Executive Director; and
(2) to the Surveillance Subcommittee of the Southern California Caulerpa Action Team
(SCCAT). The SCCAT Surveillance Subcommittee may be contacted through
William Paznokas, California Department of Fish & Game (858/467-4218) or Robert
Hoffman, National Marine Fisheries Service (5621980-4043).
D. If Caulerpa taxifolla is found within the project or buffer areas, the applicant shall not
proceed with the project until 1) the applicant provides evidence to the Executive
Director that all C. taxftia discovered within the project and buffer area has been
eliminated in a manner that complies with all applicable governmental approval
requirements, including but not limited to those of the California Coastal Act, or 2) the
applicant has revised the project to avoid any contact with C. taxifolia. No revisions to
the project shall occur without a Coastal Commission approved amendment to this
coastal development permit unless the Executive Director determines that no
amendment is legally required.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF PERMIT RECEIPT/ACCEPTANCE OF CONTENTS:
I/We acknowledge that I/we have received a copy of this permit and have accepted its contents
including all conditions.
��bKAJ��� L-A -It - Os -
Q Applicants' Signature Date of Signing
G:XAdmin. Permit!A200M2005-09X5-05-127 (Curd) ADMINISTRATIVE PERMIT.doc
May3,2005
REPLYTO
ATTENTION OR
Office of the Chief
Regulatory Branch
John Curd
c/o Shellmaker, Inc.
Attention: Lisa Miller, President
2035-F Placentia Ave.
Costa Mesa, Califon -da 92627
Dear Mr. Curci:
Reference is made to your request of January 5,2005 (File No. 200500852-SJM. Under the
provisions of Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of March 3, 1899 (33 U.S.C. 403), you are
4ereby authorized to disclwge fill into - approximately 0 -003 -acre of open waters of the US
Disdmrge is associated with dock replacement and improvements at 816 Via Lido Nord, in
Newport Bay, in the community of Newport Beach, Orange County, California, as shown on the
enclosed drawings.
i
The owner must sign and date all copies of this Letter of Permission (LOP) indicating that
she agrees to the work as described and wiR comply with all conditions. One of the signed
ies of this Letter of Pernaission must be returned to the Corps of Engineers (a pre -addressed
elope is enclosed). Jn addition, please use the two attached postcards to notify this office as to
dates of commencement (wifl-tin jo days prior to the start of construchon) and completion of
activity (within 10 days following the end of construction).
Furthermore, you are hereby advised that the Corps of Rngmeers has established an
nistrative Appeal Process which is fully descritied in 33 CFR Part 331. The complete appeal
3s is diagrammed in the enclosed Appendix B.
Thank you for participating in our regulatory program.
Sincerely,
MarkDurham
Chief, South Coast Section
Regulatory Branch
!Aftjn
PUM��/John C%Ird DATE
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
LOS ANGELES DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX M2711
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90053-2325
May 3,2005
REPLY TO
ATTENTION OF:
Office of the Chief
Regulatory Branch
John Curci
c/o Shellmaker, Inc.
Attention: Lisa Miller, President
2035-F Placentia Ave.
Costa Mesa, California 92627
Dear Mr. Curch
Reference is made to your application dated December 30, 2004, for a Department of the
Army (DA) permit to replace an existing floating boat dock bayward of 816 Via Lido Nord, in
Newport Bay, in the community of Newport Beach, Orange County, California. Replacement of
the existing dock will result in a discharge of fill into approximately 0.003 -acre of waters of the
United States (U.S.).
Enclosed is a "Provisional Letter of Permission" (provisional LOP). This provisional LOP is
NOT VALID and does not constitute authorization for you to do work. The provisional LOP
describes the work that will be authorized, including general and special conditions which will be
placed on your final DA permit, should you receive Coastal Zone Management (CZM)
consistency concurrence from the California Coastal Commission (CCC). No work is to be
performed until you have received a validated copy of the DA permit.
By Federal law, no DA permit can be issued until the state has concurred with a permit
applicant's C2M consistency certification. This requirement can be satisfied by obtaining C2M
consistency concurrence, or providing evidence that 6 months have passed since you applied to
the CCC for concurrence. Be aware that any conditions on your C2M consistency concurrence
will become conditions on your DA permit, unless the Corps of Engineers deems these conditions
to be either unreasonable or unenforceable.
WHEN YOU RECEIVE CZM CONSISTENCY CONCURRENCE, THE FOLLOWING
STEPS NEED TO BE COMPLETED:
1.The owner must sign and date both copies of the provisional LOP indicating that
he/she agrees to comply with all conditions stated in the permit.
2.The signer's name and title (if any) must be typed or printed below the signature.
3.Both signed provisional LOPs must be returned to the Corps of Engineers at the above
address (Attention: CESPL-CO-R).
SPA
4.The CZM concurrence must be sent to the Corps of Engineers with the signed
provisional LOPs.
Should the C2M consistency concurrence contain conditions which might result in a
modification to the provisional LOP, by signing and dating both copies of the provisional permit
and returning it to the Corps of Engineers (along with the permit fee and C2M concurrence), the
Corps of Engineers will assume the. applicant agrees to comply with all C2M conditions which
are added to the final permit.
Should the CCC deny the required concurrence, then the DA permit is considered denied
without prejudice. If you subsequently obtain C2A4 concurrence, you, should contact this office to
determine how to proceed with your permit application.
If you have any questions, please contact Stephanie J. Hall of my staff at (213) 452-3410.
Sincerely, , -",\
A 61
Mark Durham
Chief, South Coast Section
Regulatory Branch
Enclosure(s)
Sep 26 05 03:36p S h e 1 1 m a k e r I no 9495485315 p.2
Calffornia Regional Water Quality Control Board
VW-; Santa Ana Region a
Alan C. Lloyd, PLD. 3737 Main Sbvet, Suite 500, Riverside, California 92501-3348 Arnold Schwarzenegge.
Agency Secretary Phone (951) 782-4130 - FAX (951) 781-6298 Governar
http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/santaana
December 31, 2004
Lisa E. I�filler, President
Shellmaker, Inc.
2035F Placentia Avenue
Costa Mesa, CA 92627
PROPOSED REBUILDING OF BOAT DOCK, JOHN CURC4 816 VIA LEDO NORD,
NEWPORT BEACH, ORANGE COUNTY
Dear Ms. hfiller.
If standard dock construction methods and materials are utilized, this project should not adversely
impact water quality. A statement has been submitted that there will be no waste discharged from
the proposed project. Based on these assurances, clearance is provided.
However, should the Army Corps of Engineers determine that this project requires a Section 404
permit it will be necessary for the project proponent to obtain from this Board a Water Quality
Certification under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act.
Should you have any questions, please contact I Shami at (951) 782-3288.
Sincerely,
eomeno (Jun) T. Martirez, Jr., EA
hoict Regulations Section
cc: California Coastal Commission, Long Beach
Army Corps of Engineers — Erik Larsen
County of Orange, County Property Permits Division — Patricia Bigger
JIS(blubtg2381et
California Environmenud Protection Agency
0 Recycw Pap-
NEWPORT BEACH HARBOR COMMISSION MINUTES
City Council Chambers
October 14, 2004
CALL TO ORDER 6:00 P.M.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL: Commissioners, Seymour Beek, Tim Collins, John Corrough,
Marshall Duffield, Don Lawrenz, Paulette Pappas, Ralph Rodheim
were present. Staff: Lorrie Arcese, Tom Rossmiller, Chris Miller.
MINUTES: The minutes for the last meeting were approved.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE& None
APPEAL ITEMS:
ITEM # I
A -
Subject:
Curci Residence, 816 Via Lido Nord
Summary:
Applicant wishes to retain the same dimensions of his pier
platform (25'x 15.5') when he replaces his entire dock
system in a similar configuration.
Discussion:
The applicant is requesting twice the square footage that is
allowed in the standard drawings. The platform is currently
in disrepair and must be replaced.
Public Comments: None
Action:
Commissioner Rodheim made the motion to allow the
applicant to rebuild his platform with the current dimensions
of 25'x 15.5'in the same orientation. Commissioner
Lawrenz seconded the motion and it carried with all ayes.
ACTION ITEM
ITEM # I
Subject: Dock Construction Standards.
Summary: The consultant has provided another iteration of the draft
dock standards which is close to the final draft. The new
standards reflect a change to performance criteria.
Discussion: We need to notify the public and have an outreach meeting
once these are ready.
Public Comments:
Action: Commissioners to have comments and suggestions to the
sub -committee by October 27. The sub -committee will meet
to discuss those comments before the next meeting.
ITEM # 2
Subject:
Bait Boat Docking Issue
Summary:
The bait boat has lost its berthing location and has
requested the assistance of City staff and the Commission in
Discussion:
finding a new home within Newport Harbor.
Discussion:
At a meeting today, the issue of commercial access in the
Public Comments: Richard Flugg feels that we don't need time limits at all since
harbor was discussed and the Staff said that this subject is
boats are never towed. Boat size should be limited or the
out of the Planning Commission's control. We need
docks should be limited.
incentives for developers and to help the Planning Dept with
Commission Lawrenz made the motion to approve the
the implementation of the general plan and to gather the
proposed time limits and forward the revision to the City
business community together on this through the Chamber
Council for adoption with the following stipulations:
of Commerce.
Public Comments: Chuck South said that a bait boat is a hard one to place.
They need to run in and out the Rhine Wharf continually, are
noisy and smelly. A mooring would not be a good place for
them.
Action:
Receive and file.
ITEM # 3
Subject:
Revise time limits on all public piers in Newport Harbor.
Summary:
Public piers with or without pumpout stations will have
varying times for each of the four sides of the float.
Discussion:
The public will be educated on the new rules. No boats are
to be left on the beach.
Public Comments: Richard Flugg feels that we don't need time limits at all since
boats are never towed. Boat size should be limited or the
docks should be limited.
Action:
Commission Lawrenz made the motion to approve the
proposed time limits and forward the revision to the City
Council for adoption with the following stipulations:
1 . Harbor Patrol must agree to strictly enforce the time
limits.
2. The length of the boats allowed at the docks will be
approached at a later date.
3. We will limit the number of boats tied behind the pier.
4. In one year, staff will give an update on how the limits
have worked and what enforcement has been done.
The motion was seconded and carried with all ayes.
SUB -COMMITTEE REPORTS: None
HARBOR RESOURCE UPDATES:
Tom Rossmiller gave a Powerpoint presentation on harbor updates. The Harbor
Resources Update is posted at. http://Www. city, newport-beach. ca. uslhbr (under
minutes, Harbor Resources Updates).
RECOMMENDED TOPICS FOR FUTURE AGENDAS:
• Revisions to 5.18 and 17/41
• Dock Construction Standards Final Approval.
• Review Task List.
• Delayed Appeals: Electra Cruises (December), Len Miller (November)
• Extensions at Public Docks
DATE OF NEXT MEETING: Wednesday, November 10, 2004, 6:00 prn
Council Chambers
ADJOURNMENT
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
HARBOR COMMISSION
October 13, 2004
TO: HARBOR COMMISSION
FROM: Harbor Resources Division (City Manager's Office)
Chris Miller, Supervisor, 949-644-3043
cm iller@ city. newport-beach. ca. us
SUBJECT: Appeal — Curci Residence, 816 Via Lido Nord
ISSUE:
Should Mr. Curci at 816 Via Lido Nord be permitted to retain the same dimensions of his pier
platform (25'x 155) when he replaces his entire dock system in a similar configuration?
RECOMMENDATIONS:
If desired, the Harbor Commission may chose any of the options as listed at the end of this
report.
BACKGROUND:
The Problem: According to the Design Criteria and Standard Drawings for Harbor
Construction, 1994, Drawing STD -608-L, a pier platform for a single residential use float with
a pier is permitted to be 10' x 14' maximum with the 10' side parallel to the bulkhead. For
reasons unknown, the existing pier platform at 816 Via Lido Nord is currently 25'x 15.5'
(387.5 square feet). The file for this dock does not reveal when this pier platform was
constructed with these dimensions.
The Related Considerations: Harbor Resources is currently reviewing and proofing an
updated version of the Design Criteria and Standard Drawings for Harbor Construction. This
revised document will also be submitted to the Harbor Commission for review at tonight's
meeting. The newly proposed maximum allowable dimensions for all pier platforms, whether
residential (single / shared) or commercial will be 170 square feet with no restriction on the
orientation. This new square footage number was derived from the following current
requirements.
Single residential pier 10'x 14' 140 square feet
Shared residential pier 12'x 14' 168 square feet
Commercial pier 12'x 14' 168 square feet
Environmental Review: Harbor Resources does not feel there is an environmental concern
with respect to the larger pier platform. The platform will be constructed with nearly the same
dimensions as the existing platform. The slight difference in dimensions will allow for a
longer gangway per current City standards. The float will keep its basic configuration except
the slip will be slightly longer and wider. Eelgrass is not present at this location.
Public Notice: This agenda item may be noticed according to the Ralph M. Brown Act (72
hours in advance of the public meeting at which the City Council considers this item).
Options: The Harbor Commission may elect one of the following options:
1 Allow the applicant to rebuild his pier platform with the current dimensions of 25' x
15.5' in the same orientation;
2. Offer amendments to the proposal and adopt it with those amendments;
3. Offer amendments to the proposal and return it to the applicant for additional
review;
4. Refuse the applicant's proposal. Allow the applicant to build a pier platform to the
current City standards of 10' x 14'.
Prepared by:
Chris Miller, Harbor Resources Supervisor
Attachments: Aerial View of 816 Via Lido Nord
Dock Proposal for 816 Via Lido Nord
U .1 TMMI W f W.,
816 Via Lido Nord
am amp mv am
I
I I vl:. I - - I I f I , I � I I
40 1
_2
ff mna
September 28, 2004
City of Newport Beach
Harbor Resources
829 Harbor Island Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Attn: Tom Rossmiller
Re: Curci Residence, 816 Via Lido Nord
Dear Tom,
I am writing to request that we be calendared on the next available Harbor
Commission docket to appeal the denial of the replacement of the existing, non-
conforming pier at the above referenced address.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Lisa E. Miller
President
2035F P�acent�a Ave., Costa Mesa, CA 92627 Plnone (949) 548-53-5-9 Fax (949) 548-5315
General Eng�neenncj No. 561434/M:Pwh-4e Construct�on and Dredging
p,ropo.secl pork
911(0 Vict Gado Nord
. /
-i_--i-_- -- -
/ .
_-- -'_/-- '-
| i
!
. .
-�_
�
�
_.77777-
J
�
�
(Sul k V)eo, &;n e-
s
om mo
r �w 0" BMW am om "M
3
PI e Y,
P!Git+C)rM
zs
G)
Z41
P,, p 0
Docic
zr7 -5
F I ocit
216 vio &',CJO Nord
'01
,
I
Li
173
4-
I
Cl -
C\
P. lev4wad
14 0
I T-1—FRulkhead L,;ne,
--L I I I it -1 1
L L.
I i Lr�LT r
-!IT r po5eq
ter
I -T- T
Nj
Ll I L
L. L I L i I i
if -Ll
i J
2 `7 s
LF I
Curct Dock
4� 1
-L 1- -1 L if li I 1 11 1 111 6 V i'a Lido
i
Noral
i I-1 L -j I.
I T
4. 1
1 1 T
JI
7 -
if
--T
4
i
1. if
L
-T1
fill
T-1
F1 T -T-F
T: if
14
Pley-heaO &;ne
'I
Lcl i'llco
1:7 M
.... .......
X,
�A
M
I General
6 Harbor Permits and Drawings
1 .1. The construction of harbor facilities -shall accommodate the need for safety
2.2.15 Dock (float) minimum clear width for commercial passenger use'
51 Harbor permits shall be obtained per Harbor Permit Policy H -i. Detailed
and durability as well as convenience and appearance. Structural elements of
shall be 6 feet to 80 feet long and 8 feet for docks over 80 feet
construction plaris (4 sets) and substantiating calculations (11 set) shall be
'submitted
'gangways, floats, piles, etc. shall be adequate to safeguard human life, boats
long.
to the Building Department with the permit application for the
and boating equipment. Boat berthing facilities shall be designed to
US MERHEADLM
4+
following items:
adequately handle an.ticipated,loadg with an ample factor of safety.
2.2.16 Walkways- or landing platforms shall not have less than 4 feet
- - - - - - - - -
r
unobstructed Width adjacent to gangways, nor 6 feet In front of
5.1.1 bulkheads and groins
1.2 Materials of construction shall resist the corrosion of saltwater In order to
gangways. at +75 foot M LLW water surface elevation.
assure low maintenance requirements and long life of the facility.
5.1.2 piers and landings
2.2.17 Fillets at the connection of marginal walkways, main walkways
1.3 Floats shall be desigq�d to assure stability and -buoyancy throughout the life of
and finger floats shall be Included in the berth designs and shall
5.1.3 gangways, !ncluding hinge connections and hand tailings
the float.
oulind at least 4 feet *,31ong both floats.
5.1.4 anchor piles and guide piles, including roller assemblies
1-.4 Adequate Utilities shall be provided for the convenience ind safety of boaters.
2.2.18 Gangway (brow) slope for commercial passenger, multiresidentlal
and maintenance workers.
and small craft marina use shall not exceed I foot vertically for
5.1.5 cantilevered patio decks
each 3 feet of length when the tide is at -2.0 feet MLLW- All other
gangway slopes shallnot exceed I foot vertically for each 2 Y2
5.1.6 other harbor structures
2 Layout and Design
feet of length, when the tide Is at -2.0 feet M LLW.
CId
5.2 Plans and calculations for the above Items shall be prepared by a Civil or
2.1 Designs for harbor facilities shall be based upon the use of the facility, defined
.2.2.19 Walking surfaces of gangways (brows), piers and floats shall have
Structural Engineer registered In the State of California.
as follows:
non-tkid finish, such as punched metal, unpointed timber, or grit
on- metal, timber or plywood.
5.3 In addition, detailed. construction plans shall Include, but not be limited to,
2.1.1 Single or joint residential.
indicating the following dimensions and detailed items:
2.2.20 Gangway (brow) minimum clear width for commercial passenger,
�.1.2' Multl-�resldentlal and small craft marina.
multi;,residengal or small.craft. marina use shall be 484nches. All
5.3.1 dock, pier gangway and anchor pile layout
- - - - - - ---
other gangway minimum dear width shall be 30 -Inches.
2.1.3 Commercial Passenger,
5.3.2 po�toon or float layout (with Rotation calculations provided separately)
2.2 Harbor stiuctures shall conform with uLayout Design Guidelines for Small
2.2.21 Gangways (brows) for commercial passenger, multi -residential or
small.craft marina uses shall be equipped with self-closing, self-
6.3.3 framing details Including angles, bent plates, bolt and -nail
Ctaft Berthing Facilities", latest edition published by the State. of California
latching gates at the bulkhead end. Gates shall not open Into
patterns, splices, bumpers, deals, etc.
'060adment of Boating and Waterways (Cal Boating), 1629 "S" Street, -
intersecting walkWays.
5.3.4 knee connections
Sacramento, California 95814; telephone (916) 263-0784, except as modified.
by the City'§ 'Standdrd Dtawings. for Herbor C onstrudion ", or as folloft
2.2,22 Toe slept at the bottom of gangways (brows) for single or joint
5.3.5 guide p!le roller assemblies
oldential' use shall not exceed 9 Inches. Skid resistant too
2.2.1 Berths shall not be occupied by vessels more than a bearn width
'plates shall be Installed. on all other gangways..
5.3.6 pier piles and anchor piles
longer than the berth nd larger than the vessel used In design
calculations,
2.2.23 Rallings.for single or joint. residential use shall be 36 -inches
minimum height. All other railings shall be 42 -Inches minimum
5.3.7 top of bulkhead and pier deck elevations
2.2.2 Maximum length ossel.is the largest vestal that shall be
height.
5.3.8 maximum dredge contours (labeled as such)
permitted to occupy a berth,
2.2.24 Railings for commercial harbor structures shall be built such that a
5.3.9 Maximum length vessels used In design calculations for each
2.2.3 Applied loads shall. be calculated for not lower.thbn -a +7.5 feet
sphere 4 -Inches In diameter cannot pass through.*
berth, (circled Within the berth).
above MLLW water surface.
2.2.4 Wind l6ads shall be calculated both parallel to -and perpendicular
2.2.25 Railings for commercial passenger, multi -residential or small craft
marina uses shall be capable of resisting ahtirizontal forcs Of at
5.4 Harbor . permits Will be conditioned to. limit the size of vessels berthed In the
OThe
td maximum length vessels and structures.
least 30 pounds per linear foot applied at the top rail. All other
facility; e.g., Harbor P ermit for this facility shall be conditioned.to allow
berthing of one -70 fd6t and three- 45 foot maximum length vessels'
harbor railings shall be capable of supporting a -horkontal forte of
2.2.5 Wind loads'on lateral area of vessels or structures 'Shall not *be
20 pounds per linear foot applied at the top rail.
5.5 Future dredging In the vicinity of a permitted harbor facilitywill be restricted,,
less than 15 pounds per square foot.
e.g. Dredging not permitted below the contours shown hereon'.
2.2.6 Lateral area of vessels for wind load calculations shall be equal to
(0-15) X (maximum length vessel) X (maximum length vessel)
3 Materials
PROCEDU wR4 ES
2.2.7 Ten percent (10%) of the full wind,load for an unshielded vessel
3.11 Materials for harbor facilities shall conforrh to the "Standard SPecificallons for
shall be applied to each vessel in the lee of the unshlelded vessel.
Public Works Construction", published by Building News, Inc,.except as
modified as folloivs:
PERMIT PROCESSING PROCEDURES
2.2.8 Guide pitles (those that priovide lateral support for floats) shall be
3.2 Fl6atation units shall consist of.
I., Fill out a Building permit application at the Building Department permit
positioned around berthing areas such that the centtofd of lateral
2T_T
counter.
support provided at the +7.5 foot M LLW watet surface elevation
coincides with the centrold of.applied taitet4l loads.
3.2.1 Cond(ete cast around a solid, dosedcell foam. core,
2.. Use city standaid harbor construction drawings (cost $2.00 per sheet). Draw
2.2.9 Pile penetration shall not be less than 10 feet, nor calcullated
3.2.2 Fiberglass, polyethylene oT plastic shell with'i- firm fiffing solid,
a site plan showing the scope of work and select the applicable details. Submit
engineering calculations as requited. Follow the Instructions on drawings.
penetrall
ton plus. 3 feet.
closed cell foam core, or
2.2.10 Pile cutoff elevation shall not be lower than +11 -feet M LLW.
3. 2.3 A solid, closed cell foam core covered Oth an approved coating
1 Three sets of drawings are required. Do step 2 dn three sets or make copies.
.0
.
to prevent physical damage.
4. Permit Technician will process the permit application and charge the plan
2.2.11 Floatation systems and piles shall be the products of
manufacturers and contractors regularly engaged in the
3.3 Timber for docks* shall have a minimum net thicknes's of I Yt inches.
check fees.
production of such items for marine construction.
3.4 Walking surfaces of gangways (brows), piers and floats shall have a non-skid
5. One set of drawings Is placed In the Building Department plan check stack.
2.2.12 Sufficient Rotation shall be provided to support dead load plus 20
finish, such as punched metal, unpainted timber, or grit on metal, timber or
The remaining two sets are given to the applicant to carry to Harbor
Resources.
pounds per square foot live load with a.freeboard of not less than:
plywood.
345
2.2.12.1 1 0 -inches for modular concrete flotation systems for
3.5 Timber shall be treatedwith ammonlacal copper arsenate (ACA) chromated
6. Harbor Resources will review the drawings and stamp the drawings "Approved
In Concepr.
oomrherdal'passenger use.
copper arsenate (CCA) or ammonlacal copper zinc arsenate (ACZA), per
PILING LAYOUT
AWPA Standard C2. Field cuts and bored holes shall receive a brush coat of
concentrated CCA, ACA or ACZA.
7. The �ppllcant will pick up these drawings from Harbor Resources and pursue
2.2.12.2 8 -Inches for modular concrete floatation systems for all'
state and federal approvals as required by H airbor Resources. Plan check may
other uses.
3.6 Timber piles shall be dual treated per AWPA Standard C3.
resume simultaneously while these approvals are pending.
2. 2.123 3 -inches pontoon freeboard for detached pontoon
3.7 Rollers shall be fabricated from polyethylene or polyolefin material.
8. After the Building Depaoment plan check has been completed, the applicant
. Rotation systems for commercial passenger use.
Will pick up and resolve Building Department corrections.
2.2.12.4 l'inch pontoon freeboard for detached pontoon Rotation
3.8 Iron and steel (including fasteners) in harbor structures, except for
reinforcement covered by at least 3 inches of concrete, shall be stainless steel
9. The applicant will resubmit to the Building Department tha Building check set
systems for all other uses.
alloy, hot-clip-galvanizedi or epoxy coated.
and two sets bearing required state and federal approvals.
2.2.13 Weight of treated Douglas Fit shall be assumed to'be 35 pounds
10. The Building Department Will veri� that the Building corrections have been
per cubic foot. Weight 6f sea water shall be assumed to be- 64
.
4 Allowable Stresses
resolved and all the required federal and state approvals are on the drawings
pounds per cubic foot.
and 9 s*ue the Harbor permit. The Building Department record set must bear all
2 . 2.14' Finger floats with wood decks shall be equipped with 2 YrInch
4.1 Allowable stresses for harbor structures shall not exceed those recommended
required approvals.
minimum diameter steel pipe torsion bars along float centerlines.
In the "Uniform Building Code".
wo
VICINITY MAP
Newport Bay, CA. Sourwinp av expmsw In foot SM d"s
C!"Ots b0aw M"" Loww Low Watv (MLLM
Maximm rwoe &Ode to eppmximetely 10 fmL
Harbw Ims are ft"istted In tKs seaba of
,4$wpon 13,Y.
SUPSITE
-*N
Proposed Pier /R
(15--V It 26), see ProPosed Piles Sumorted
Dock (total of 3). see 0
Proposed Ganry
x 21
,e
wr B(�
R, P"
Do
9 d ��_n S2
S 2 Is
pl�'�
(3'-6* x 241.
+1Z C6
Proposed Dock By Bellingham Marina
.led
Propossood Teee Pile Suppo
Vier Typ (total of 2). see /07111%
PROFILE
E.1sting �eo,-
APLICANTS NAME : JOHN CURCI - LOT- TRACT:345
JOB ADDRESS :816 VIA LIDO NORD CONTRACTOR :SHELLMAKER, INC.
NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 2035 F PLACENTIA AVENUE DATE
COSTA MESA, CA 92627 08/09/05
M =
t
.--nia Coasta' -----ission
i C,
-Coast Distric
''OVE
-_,it N
--------- -
%J %0 1= INL. T
APPROVALS
SITE PLAN INSTRUCTIONS
Provide a partial site plan in the space provided above drawn to an adequate scale to clearly show the following The following checked (V) approvals are required pricit to issuing a Buildinj Permit.
information: - Approval in Concept Newport Beach Council
i. Location and dimension of proposed structure Including piles and location of existing structures on adjacent
properties. - Army Corps of Engineers California Coastal Commission
2. Location of bulkhead, plethead and project fines. Public Works Department Building Department
3. Location of property lines. County of orange
4. Location of channel markers within 200 feet. Site Inspection. Site Re -inspection
5. Lot sizes and lot numbers, it available. Call (949) 644-3043 for appointment
6. Existing ground profile beneath proposed sttucture
CONDITIONS
7. Elevation of top and bottom of bulkheads and piles with respect to IM LLW.
S.V The Harbor Permit for this facility. shall be conditioned to allow the berthing of.
�Cv
8. Area and profile of any proposed dredging With elevations showing depths with respect of M L.I.W.
Number of boats Maximum boat length -feet
9. Any special conditions affecting the construction or affecting boating operations.
10. Existing structures shall be shown In light dashes. New work shall be shown In heavy solid lines.
E831
HARBOR CONSTRUCTION 'STANDARDS
=12 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH BUILDING DEPARTMENT
m
1 007 # 4�10S
JITLE SHEE"r & SPECIPICATIONS
RMBOR RESOURCES APPROVAL M. SCALE: DATE
AUG 0 9 5 BY: DATE: PRAWING NO. AS SHOWN AUGUST 25, 20 . 0011
SHEET - 01.
LFCITNO
EXIST. PUS a
WIN Pima v
MST------
"Im
US MERHEADLM
4+
- - - - --
- -
- - - - - - - - -
r
- - - - - - - -
PROPOSE. 0
ATPROP ... gS.Mr
(TOTAL OF Si
30W
CId
PROPDSEO SLIP
4W
U S. BULKHEAD LW_
--
- - - - - - ---
- - - L .
EXIST. SUP
- - - - - - - - - - - / - - - - -
- - -
EXIST.1104WAY
4"
(TV X it-rj
PROPOSED GAWSWATf C -A
W1.0.
(rrx2f.0,15a
EXISTWG PtER
7/
I -P PROPOSED CON
PUS ATAW
(D2
2T_T
SEE (TOTAL OF02S)gtMK'
PROPOS PlE R
S
......
......
.. ----- ---- -----
40!0
"'o.
TRACT NO.
TRACT NO.
TRACT NO.
TRACT NO. TRACT NO.
347
346
345
344 343
- - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - . . . . . . . . . . . .
PILING LAYOUT
APLICANTS NAME : JOHN CURCI - LOT- TRACT:345
JOB ADDRESS :816 VIA LIDO NORD CONTRACTOR :SHELLMAKER, INC.
NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 2035 F PLACENTIA AVENUE DATE
COSTA MESA, CA 92627 08/09/05
M =
t
.--nia Coasta' -----ission
i C,
-Coast Distric
''OVE
-_,it N
--------- -
%J %0 1= INL. T
APPROVALS
SITE PLAN INSTRUCTIONS
Provide a partial site plan in the space provided above drawn to an adequate scale to clearly show the following The following checked (V) approvals are required pricit to issuing a Buildinj Permit.
information: - Approval in Concept Newport Beach Council
i. Location and dimension of proposed structure Including piles and location of existing structures on adjacent
properties. - Army Corps of Engineers California Coastal Commission
2. Location of bulkhead, plethead and project fines. Public Works Department Building Department
3. Location of property lines. County of orange
4. Location of channel markers within 200 feet. Site Inspection. Site Re -inspection
5. Lot sizes and lot numbers, it available. Call (949) 644-3043 for appointment
6. Existing ground profile beneath proposed sttucture
CONDITIONS
7. Elevation of top and bottom of bulkheads and piles with respect to IM LLW.
S.V The Harbor Permit for this facility. shall be conditioned to allow the berthing of.
�Cv
8. Area and profile of any proposed dredging With elevations showing depths with respect of M L.I.W.
Number of boats Maximum boat length -feet
9. Any special conditions affecting the construction or affecting boating operations.
10. Existing structures shall be shown In light dashes. New work shall be shown In heavy solid lines.
E831
HARBOR CONSTRUCTION 'STANDARDS
=12 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH BUILDING DEPARTMENT
m
1 007 # 4�10S
JITLE SHEE"r & SPECIPICATIONS
RMBOR RESOURCES APPROVAL M. SCALE: DATE
AUG 0 9 5 BY: DATE: PRAWING NO. AS SHOWN AUGUST 25, 20 . 0011
SHEET - 01.
[44*441A.1 'I'm all t 1111gft4i
1. CONSTRUC11ON SHALL BE IN CONFORMITY NTH THE 2001 EDITION OF THE
CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE (CBC) AND ALL APPLICABLE LOCAL AND STATE
CODES AND ORDINANCES.
2. SITE INSPECTION: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL EXAMINE THE PROJECT SITE &
SHALL VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS, LOCATIONS & ELEVA71ONS OF THE EXISTING
CONSTRUCTION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ALSO DILLIGENTLY INVESTIGATE THE
SITE FOR THE POSSIBLE EXISTENCE & LOCATION OF UNDERGROUND UTILITIES,
PRIOR TO ORDERING ANY MATERIAL AND/OR COMMENCING WORK AND $HALL
REPORT ANY DISCREPANCIES TO "WILLIAM SIMPSON & ASSOCIATES, INC."
HEREINAFTER CALLED "THE ENGINEER".
3. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE BARRICADES AND PEDESTRIAN PROTEC71ON AS
REQUIRED BY STATE AND LOCAL CODES.
4. CONTRACTOR SHALL CONSULT WITH REPRESENTATIVES OF CITY AND UTILITY
COMPANIES CONCERNING AVAILABLE FACILITIES BEFORE COMMENCING WORK OR
CONNECTING TO SEWER, PIPING OR WIRING, ETC., AND REPORT ANY PROBLEMS
TO THE ENGINEER.
5. OMISSIONS OR CONFLICTS BETWEEN VARIOUS ELEMENTS OF THE DRAWINGS,
NOTES, AND DETAILS SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ENGINEER
AND RESOLVED BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH THE WORK.
6. CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL TEMPORARY TOILETS BEFORE START OF JOB.
7. NOTES AND DETAILS ON DRAWINGS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER THESE
GENERAL NOTES.
8. TYPICAL DETAILS SHOWN SHALL APPLY WHERE NO SPECIAL DETAIL IS SHOWN.
9. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS (NOT SCALED DIMENSIONS) SHALL BE USED.
10. TEMPORARY ERECTION BRACING AND SHORING SHALL BE PROVIDED AS REQUIRED
ON ALL STRUCTURES, ADEQUATE TO PROVIDE FULL STRUCTURAL STABILITY AND
SAFETY. BRACING SHALL NOT BE REMOVED UNTIL THE ELEMENTS ARE FULLY
CONNECTED AND ARE CAPABLE OF SUPPORTING THE DESIGN LOADING.
11. CONTRACTOR AGREES THAT HE SHALL ASSUME SOLE AND COMPLETE
RESPONSIBILITY FOR JOB SITE COND111ONS DURING THE COURSE OF
CONSTRUCTION OF THIS PROJECT, INCLUDING SAFETY OF ALL PERSONS AND
PROPERTY; THAT THIS REQUIREMENT SHALL APPLY CONTINUOUSLY AND NOT
BE LIMITED TO NORMAL WORKING HOURS; AND THAT THE CONTRACTOR SHALL
DEFEND, INDEMNIFY AND HOLD THE OWNER AND THE ENGINEER HARMLESS FROM
ANY AND ALL LIABILITY, REAL OR ALLEGED, IN CONNECTION WITH THE
PERFORMANCE OF WORK ON THIS PROJECT, EXCEPTING FOR LIABILITY ARISING
FROM THE SOLE NEGLIGENCE OF THE OWNER OR THE ENGINEER.
12. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL EXERCISE EXTREME CAU11ON NOT TO UNDERMINE ANY
ADJACENT STRUCTURE DURING THE COURSE OF CONSTRUCTION.
13. CLEAN UP: NO PAINT, PLASTER, CEMENT, SOIL, MORTAR OR OTHER RESIDUE
SHALL BE ALLOWED TO ENTER THE BAY, STREETS, CUTTERS OR STORM DRAINS.
ALL MATERIALS & WASTE SHALL BE REMOVED FROM THE SITE, NBMC 17.32.020.
14. DEMOLITION: ALL MATERIAL FROM THE EXISTING BULKHEAD THAT IS NOT USED
AS FILL SHALL BE REMOVED FROM THE SITE & DISPOSED OF IN AN OFFICIAL
DUMP SITE.
15. SEE THE LATEST "GENERAL GRADING SPECIFICATIONS" OF THE BUILDING
DEPARTMENT, CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, FOR THE CITY'S: GENERAL NOTES,
EROSION CONTROLS, REQUIRED INSPECTIONS, GRADING FILLS/CUTS & ALL
NECESSARY DOCUMENTATION.
16. PIER, GANGWAY & DOCK STRUCTURES SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE
WITH CURRENT CITY STANDARD DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR HARBOR
CONSTRUCTION.
17. PONTOONS SHALL BE AS MANUFACTURED BY BELLINGHAM MARINE U.N.O. ON
PLANS.
18. CLEATS SHALL BE CAST DUC11LE IRON - HOT DIP GALVANIZED, AS
MANUFACTURED BY HENDERSON MARINE SUPPLY, INC. OR EQUAL.
FOUNDATIONS
1. PILING DESIGN IS BASED ON THE RECOMMENDATIONS CONTAINED IN THE
TABLE 18-1-A OF THE CBC.
CL
Ln
0
co
0
�n
1. ALL CONCRETE MIX DESIGNS, CONFORMING TO CBC SECTIONS 1904 & 1905, SHALL BE
SUBMITTED TO THE ENGINEER FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL BEFORE ANY CONCRETE
IS PLACED. ALL CONCRETE MIXES SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM CEMENT CONTENT
OF 6.0 SACKS OF CEMENT PER CUBIC YARD OF MIX, FOR USE IN A SALT WATER
ENVIRONMENT. ALL CONCRETE MIXES SHALL BE CERTIFIED BY A CONCRETE TESTING
LABORATORY AND SIGNED BY A CALIFORNIA REGISTERED CIVIL ENGINEER.
2. CONCRETE SHALL HAVE MINIMUM 28 DAY COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF 6000 PSI.
THE MAXIMUM CONCRETE SLUMP SHALL NOT EXCEED 4". PLACING OF ANY CONCRETE
SHALL BE CON71NUOUSLY INSPECTED BY A REGISTERED DEPUTY INSPECTOR, PAID FOR
BY THE OWNER.
3. GROUT SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM 28 -DAY STRENGTH THE SAME AS THAT OF THE
PANELS. THE CONCRETE GROUT SHALL BE A SUITABLE MIX CONSISTING OF PEA
GRAVEL, SAND, CEMENT AND WATER. MAXIMUM SLUMP SHALL BE 5 INCHES. AN
APPROVED SUPERPLASTICIZING ADMIXTURE MAY BE ADDED TO INCREASE THE SLUMP
TO MAXIMUM 7.5 INCHES. GROUT UNDER PLATES SHALL BE "POR -ROK" OR "FIVE STAR
GROUT" OR AN APPROVED EQUAL.
4. PORTLAND CEMENT SHALL BE TYPE V LOW ALKALI CONFORMING TO A.S.T.M. C150 AND
SHALL BE TESTED. AGGREGATES SHALL BE NORMAL WEIGHT (145 PCF) U.N.O.
CONFORMING TO A.S.T.M. C33, WITH CONCRETE SHRINKAGE CHARACTERISTICS OF LESS
THAN 0.050% ; WATER -CEMENT RAT10 SHALL NOT EXCEED 0.40.
5. CONCRETE TEST SAMPLES SHALL BE TAKEN IN ACCORDANCE WITH A.S.T.M. AND CBC
STANDARDS. RESULTS OF THE 7 & 28 DAY TESTS SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE
ENGINEER FOR HIS RECORDS. SLUMP TESTS ARE REQUIRED FOR ALL TEST SAMPLES
AND MUST ALSO BE REPORTED.
6. SIDES OF DEADMAN FOOTINGS SHALL BE POURED AGAINST STABLE EARTH.
7. ALL STEEL REINFORCING, ANCHOR BOLTS, DOWELS AND OTHER INSERTS SHALL BE
SECURED IN POSITION AND INSPECTED BY THE LOCAL BUILDING DEPARTMENT
INSPECTOR, PRIOR TO THE PLACING OF ANY CONCRETE.
8. ALL NECESSARY BRACES, STRONGBACKS, PICK-UP INSERTS, BOLTS, ETC., FOR
PRECAST CONCRETE PANELS SHALL BE DESIGNED BY OTHERS FOR SAFE ERECTION OF
THE PANELS.
9. NO FLY ASH SHALL BE USED IN ANY CONCRETE. NO CALCIUM CHLORIDE SHALL BE
USED IN ANY CONCRETE.
10. ALL CONCRETE TO BE CURED FOR A MINIMUM OF 3 DAYS BY A METHOD ACCEPTABLE
TO THE ENGINEER.
11. FORMS MAY BE STRIPPED ONLY AFTER THE CONCRETE HAS REACHED A MINIMUM
COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF 3000 PSI.
1. ALL REINFORCING STEEL, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, SHALL CONFORM TO A.S.T.M.
SPECIFICATIONS A615 AND BE INTERMEDIATE GRADE 60 FOR BARS #4 AND
GREATER, AND GRADE 40 FOR BARS LESS THAN #4 AND ALL TIES AND DOWELS.
2. ALL REINFORCEMENT TO BE WELDED SHALL CONFORM TO A.S.T.M. A706,
UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.
3. REINFORCEMENT MARKED CONTINUOUS MAY BE SPLICED BY LAPPING 42 BAR
DIAMETERS IN CONCRETE AND 48 BAR DIAMETERS IN MASONRY NTH 24 INCH
MINIMUM LAP IN EACH CASE, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED ON PLANS. ALL
SPLICES WHEN DETAILED SHALL BE LOCATED WHERE SHOWN ON PLANS.
4. REINFORCING STEEL SHALL BE ACCURATELY PLACED AND SECURED IN POSITION
WITH METAL OR CONCRETE BLOCKS, CHAIRS, SPACERS, ETC., BEFORE PLACING
CONCRETE.
5. ADDIT10NAL REINFORCING REQUIRED FOR ERECTION OF PRECAST CONCRETE SHALL
BE ADDED PER THE CONTRACTORS DETAILS.
6. MINIMUM CONCRETE COVER FOR REINFORCING STEEL SHALL BE AS FOLLOWS,
UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.
A) CONCRETE BELOW GRADE OR IN CONTACT WITH SOIL: WHEN CAST AGAINST
EARTH 3", WHEN FORMED 2".
8) WALLS ABOVE GRADE: EXTERIOR FACE 11/2", INTERIOR FACE 1".
C) PRECAST CONCRETE ELEMENTS: AS DETAILED.
D) CONCRETE SLAB ON GRADE: REINFORCING STEEL AT CENTER OF SLAB,
UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.
7. REINFORCEMENT DETAILING SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH CBC SECTION 1907.
MAILING AND FASTENERS
ABBREVIATIO14S
ON
Z
C14 ti)
C14 Lf)
a) q)
1.
ALL NAILS, FASTENERS AND HARDWARE SHALL BE EITHER STAINLESS OR HOT DIP
z
Say
w coast Hwy
Z > c)
GALVANIZED OR EPDXY COATED.
A.8 . ............
ANCHOR BOLT
N.T.S . ..........
NOT TO SCALE
2.
ALL NAILS SHALL BE 16d (0.148" DIAMETER) HELICAL THREAD NAILS, WITH
A.C.P . .........
ASPHALT CONCRETE PAVING
O -C . .............
ON CENTER
T",
Otte
MINIMUM SENDING YIELD STRENGTH OF FyB= 90,000 PSI, U.N.O.
ADDL ..........
ADDITIONAL
OFF .............
OFFICE
3.
NAILING SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH TABLES 23-11-8-1 & 23-11-8-2
A.F.F . .........
ABOVE FININSH FLOOR
OPNG ...........
OPENING
OF THE CBC, U.N.O. ON DRAWINGS.
ALT ............
ALTERNATE
OPP HD .......
OPPOSITE HAND
4.
ALL HARDWARE SHALL BE MANUFACTORED BY "SIMPSON STRONG -TIE CO., INC."
ARCHT ........
ARCHITECTURAL
O.S.F . ..........
OUTSIDE FACE
AND SHALL HAVE A VALID ICBO NUMBER ON THE PRODUCT. ANY DEVIATION FROM
B.B . ............
BOTTOM OF BEAM
P -C . ............
PIPE COLUMN
T-_
THE APPROVED PRODUCTS MUST BE APPROVED IN THE PLAN CHECK OFFICE,
BET ..............
BETWEEN
PL .................
PLATE OR PROPERTY LINE
IA
AND NOT BY THE FIELD INSPECTOR.
BLDG ............
BUILDING
PILAS ..........
PILASTER
5.
ALL HARDWARE SHALL BE INSTALLED PER MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS.
SIM .............
BEAM
PLYWD .........
PLYWOOD
z
3:
BLIND NAILING SHALL NOT BE ACCEPTABLE AND WILL BE REJECTED.
BOT .............
BOTTOM
PSF .............
POUNDS PER SQUARE FOOT
S.W . ............
BOTTOM OF WALL
PSI .............
POUNDS PER SQUARE INCH
C .................
CHANNEL
REeAR .........
REINFORCING BAR
STEEL
CANT ..........
CANTILEVER
R.B . .............
ROOF BEAM
CL .................
CENTER LINE
REOD ...........
REQUIRED
1.
PLATES SHALL CONFORM TO A.S.T.M. A36.
CLG ..............
CEILING
REINF ..........
REINFORCING
2.
STEEL PIPES SHALL CONFORM TO A.S.T.M. A53, GRADE B.
CLR .............
CLEAR
REF .............
REFERENCE
3.
ALL BOLTS SHALL CONFORM TO A.S.T.M. A307, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. WHERE HIGH
C.M.0 . .........
CONCRETE MASONRY UNIT
REV .............
REVISION
STRENGTH (H.S.) 13OLTS ARE SPECIFIED, THEY SHALL BE MINIMUM X" DIAMETER AND
COL ............
COLUMN
T.L . .............
TOP OF LEDGER
CONFORM TO A.S.T.M. A325 SC CLASS A UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE ON THE PLANS.
CONC ..........
CONCRETE
TS .............
TUBE STEEL
THE INSTALLA11ON OF H.S. BOLTS SHALL BE INSPECTED BY A REGISTERED DEPUTY
CONN ..........
CONNECTION
INSPECTOR APPROVED BY THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT.
CONT ..........
CONTINUOUS
4.
ALL BOLTS HOLES IN STEEL MEMBERS SHALL BE STANDARD HOLES, U.N.O.
CONST ........
CONSTRUCTION
SYMBOLS
5.
FABRICATION AND ERECTION SHALL CONFORM TO THE 9th E0111ON OF A.I.S.C. SPECIFICATIONS.
CTR ............
CENTER
6.
ALL HOLES FOR BOLTS IN STRUCTURAL STEEL SHALL BE DRILLED OR PUNCHED. BURNING
DSL .............
DOUBLE
@ ..............
AT
OF HOLES SHALL NOT BE PERMITTED.
DIET .............
DETAIL
CENTER LINE
7.
ALL STEEL SHALL BE EITHER STAINLESS OR HOT DIP GALVANIZED OR EPDXY COATED.
DIAG ...........
DIAGONAL
DIAMETER
DIAPH .........
DIAPHRAGM
........
PLATE OR PROPERTY LINE
DIA ...............
DIAMETER
........
STEP IN FOOTING
SOLID SAWN MEMBERS AND GLU-LAM BEAMS
DIM .............
DIMENSION
(E) .......
EXIS71NG
DN ..............
DOWN
(N) ..............
NEW
1.
ALL ROUGH LUMBER USED IN THE WORK SHALL BE SELECT STRUCTURAL DOUGLAS
H.P . ...............
HIGH POINT
FIR -LARCH TREATED WITH ACZA PER THE LATEST AWPA STANDARD C-2, MIMIMUM
LOR .............
LEDGER
RETENTION 0.60 #/CF. ALL LUMBER TO BE S4S & EXPOSED MEMBERS TO BE
LG ...............
LONG
PICKED FOR APPEARANCE.
LLH ..............
LONG LEG HORIZONTAL
2.
ALL BOLT HOLES IN WOOD MEMBERS SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 1/32" TO A MAXIMUM OF 1/16"
LLV ..............
LONGIT ........
LONG LEG VERTICAL
LONGITUDINAL
LARGER THAN THE BOLT DIAMETER. WOOD MEMBERS WITH HOLES NOT MEETING THE ABOVE
L.P
LOW POINT
CRITERIA SHALL BE REMOVED AND REPLACED BY THE CONTRACTOR AT HIS OWN EXPENSE.
. .............
LT
LIGHT
3.
FIELD CUTS AND BORED HOLES SHALL RECEIVE A BRUSH COAT OF CONCENTRATED ACZA.
...............
MAX ............
MAXIMUM
4.
WALKING SURFACES SHALL HAVE A SKID RESISTANT FINISH, SUCH AS UNPAID TIMBER OR
M -B . ............
MACHINE BOLT
GRIT ON TIMBER.
MECH ..........
MECHANICAL
5.
ALL GLUED LAMINATED MEMBERS SHALL COMPLY WITH STANDARD SPECIFICA11ON
MEZZ ..........
MEZZANINE
FOR STRUCTURAL GLUED LAMINATED DOUGLAS FIR LARCH (COAST REGION)
MFD .............
MANUFACTURED
LUMBER, AITC 117 - THE LATEST EDITION.
MFR .............
MANUFACTURER
A) GRADE COMBINATION 24F -V4.
MIN ..............
MINIMUM
B� INDUSTRIAL APPEARANCE GRADE (U.N.O.)
MISC ............
MISCELLANEOUS
C ADHESIVE SHALL BE 'PHENOL-RESORCiNAL' CONFORMING TO THE LATEST
M.F.0 . ..........
METAL FRAMED OPENING
EDITON OF A.S.T.M. D 2559.
MTL
METAL
D) TREATED NTH ACA OR ACZA PER THE LATEST AWPA STANDARD.
.............
(N) .............
NEW
E) ENDS SHALL BE SEALED NTH PENETRATING SEALER.
N.I.0 . ...........
NOT IN CONTRACT
6.
ALL GLU-LAM MEMBERS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED BY A LICENSED FABRICATION SHOP.
NO . .............
NUMBER
7.
THE FABRICATORS SHALL PROVIDE PROTECTION FOR THE GLU-LAM MEMBERS
N.S . .............
NELSON STUD OR NEAR SIDE
DURING TRANSIT. THE ERECTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROPER CARE
AND PROTECTION OF GLU-LAM MEMBERS DURING UNLOADING AND ERECTION.
8.
GLU-LAM FABRICATOR SHALL SUBMIT A CER11FICATE OF INSPECT10N TO THE
.
LOCAL BUILDING DEPARTMENT FOR EACH GLU-LAM MEMBER PRIOR TO ERECTION.
WELDING
1. ALL WELDING SHALL BE DONE USING THE SHIELDED ELECTRIC ARC PROCESS BY CER11RED
WELDERS, USING E70XX ELECTRODES.
2. WELDING OF STEEL REINFORCING BARS SHALL BE DONE WITH LOW HYDROGEN ELECTRODES,
A233. CLASS E70XX SERIES.
3. WELDS IDENTIFIED AS REQUIRING CONTINUOUS OR PERIODIC SPECIAL INSPECTION NEED NOT
HAVE SPECIAL INSPECTION WHEN WELDING IS DONE IN AN APPROVED FABRICATOR'S SHOP,
HOWEVER, THE APPROVED FABRICATOR MUST SUBMIT A CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE IN
ACCORDANCE WITH C8C SECTION 1701.7.
ALL ADHESIVE ANCHORS SHALL BE SIMPSON "SET" IN ACCORDANCE WITH
ICBO ER -5279 (SET).
California Coastal Commission
South Coast Dist ic ffi
APPROV 2
PermAN,... ........
By: ---- - - -----------
EFrECFIVE
Date: --------
..........
I- f
'p Upper
ON
Z
C14 ti)
C14 Lf)
a) q)
'tn 1 j
gs Rd
Newpott
z
Say
w coast Hwy
Z > c)
I=
4)
w
j CL
0
�j as��! 11
2;
04
w
LU wo
(1)
N
PROift
T",
Otte
LLJ
Z
x
_j
a. 6
U
0 -3
-q- <
P oft
T
:c
0)(010
W
z
�v
CO
Z
OEM
wmw
oc
zoft
cq V)
U) cn
7-
4z
T-_
x
r
<
Udo 0
IA
M w
2 _- Li
200 m M i I L
1.000 ft
< <
0 2=4 Yahoo 1 hc
LLJ
VICINITY MAP
0
REPLACING THE EXISTING DECK, GANGWAY & FLOATING DOCK WITH NEW
ONES AS SHOWN ON PLANS.
AFTER THOROUGHLY EXAMINING THE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS AND THE SITE:
1 . NOTIFY THE ARCHITECT AND/OR THE ENGINEER IN WRITING, REGARDING ALL
DISCREPANCIES REQUIRING CLARIFICATION, PRIOR TO THE "BID SUBMITTAL".
2. IF THE ARCHITECT AND/OR THE ENGINEER IS NOT NOTIFIED, AS REQUIRED PER
ITEM #1 ABOVE, IT SHALL MEAN THAT THE CONTRACTOR HAS CONSIDERED
ADEQUATE CONTINGENCY IN HIS BID TO COVER ALL COSTS TO COMPLY WITH
THE MOST STRINGENT CONDITIONS.
3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO ANY ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION
FOR ANY DISCREPANCY DISCOVERED AFTER THE "CLOSE OF THE BID".
0", L01
3
5
0
2
wo.
n: i z w
0 gm�ug
cz�,
4w �,
g0glo
z
IV*
00
.J
>
0
ON
Z
C14 ti)
C14 Lf)
a) q)
he 0
z
0)
:c
Z > c)
I=
mom
w
j CL
0
0
2;
04
w
LU wo
(1)
N
0
M 0
0 0
I!= j
z
LLJ
Z
x
_j
a. 6
U
0 -3
-q- <
U)
T
:c
0)(010
W
z
0)
CO
Z
OEM
wmw
oc
zoft
cq V)
U) cn
0
Two
x
0
<
M w
2 _- Li
< <
Uj
LLJ
0
0
z
3:
0
IV*
00
.J
>
0
ON
Z
C14 ti)
C14 Lf)
a) q)
he 0
w. a
04C -
0)
:c
Z > c)
rq F-
cj VM<'
cc CO
w
j CL
0
00
2;
LLI
y
6 -�
!
LU wo
(1)
< 0
0
M 0
0 0
I!= j
z
LLJ
Z
M
>
0
>
0
1q.
N
0
C14 ti)
C14 Lf)
a) q)
LO
0)
0
Z
rq F-
<
_j
w
j CL
0
00
2;
0: c�
n
y
6 -�
!
.
a.
, a.
< 0
Uj
LLJ
Z
_j
a. 6
U
0 -3
-q- <
T
Uj
w cq U)
(0 <
cq V)
U) cn
z
<
U) V)
M w
2 _- Li
< <
0
>
0
>
0
1q.
N
0
>
c� 0
LO
0
LLJ
a-
w
< CL
<
_j
w
j CL
0
00
w
a a:
0: c�
n
y
6 -�
!
.
a.
, a.
< 0
V_
S2C : 01/10/05 S20 01/10/05 2 x 4 CLEAR DOUG FIR 3-16d CEMENT COATED S2E : 01/10/05 3/1 z .
241 -Of' SHAPED AS SHOWN TYP SCREW NAILS COUNTERSINK TYP
PLUG TYP 3/1 8
7 POSTS @ S-8" SPACING -Ott
e.
1 x 4 CLEAR DOUG FIR TYP 3 x 4 S.S. DOUG FIR
2 x 4 CLEAR
DOUG FIR
----------------
--------------
-----------------
F_ -- -------------
-------------------
To
0 0
co z 7
a_ 0 0
Ln 70 0 Tr o 0 1. on
0
STRINGER STIRRUPS
L x 6 WEATHER BEST SOLID DECKING
co GANGWAY BRACKET 4-2 x 12 S.S. 'S4S G EACH STRINGER
W/3 -Y2"0 M.B. TYP DOUG FIR -UNDER SIDE AT X" SPACING (NER - 603)
C14 'z- I j
3 x 4 S4S POST TYP NN
b t3-3
0
1 Y441 e V4 TYP
TYP 5"
TYP
tz
Yg"O M.B. W/WASHERS
ON BOTH ENDS TYP 04
EA POST
-3/8" x 2" STRIP TYP 0
PIN.
1 x 4 S4S RAILING
DUE TO LL
DUE TO E/W
W/2 -8d NAILS
P- (COMPRESSION) (KIPS)
3.5
PER POST TYP
17.0
31-0#1
-
-
2y2"
-4
14" SO <
M- (SENDING) (FT -KIPS)
TYP
76.5
_x
!V- (SHEAR) (KIPS)
3.2
3.2
%tl �YA4 x 6 DECKING
TYP
0:
N-1
C14 'z- I j
3 x 4 S4S POST TYP NN
b t3-3
0
1 Y441 e V4 TYP
TYP 5"
TYP
tz
Yg"O M.B. W/WASHERS
ON BOTH ENDS TYP 04
EA POST
-3/8" x 2" STRIP TYP 0
PIN.
LOAD
DUE TO DL
DUE TO LL
DUE TO E/W
TOTAL
P- (COMPRESSION) (KIPS)
3.5
13.5
17.0
P- (TENSION) (KIPS)
-
-
-
-4
14" SO <
M- (SENDING) (FT -KIPS)
76.5
76.5
!V- (SHEAR) (KIPS)
3.2
3.2
0:
L
CENTER LIN;
OF PILE & a=W
2Y21 1
Typ
_j
z
w
_j
_1z
a.
x
_j
SECTION X—X
N.T.S.
LOAD
DUE TO DL
DUE TO LL
DUE TO E/W
TOTAL
P- (COMPRESSION) (KIPS)
3.5
13.5
17.0
P- (TENSION) (KIPS)
-
-
-
-
M- (SENDING) (FT -KIPS)
76.5
76.5
!V- (SHEAR) (KIPS)
3.2
3.2
CAP vAw J?;= = 7_ —1 U's — - — N�
c 11"x
Z
�t <
2 x BLOCKING ITYP L 3 x 3 x )41 x 5Y21G TYP @ EA PILE 4) DESIGN IS BASED ON THE FOLLOWING LOAD COMBINATIONS z
TYP @
U.J
PILES CAP (TOTAL OF 4) W12-Y2"O x 1Y2" LG 0- FRI BENDING AND COMPRESSION uJ
!Z Z
hit 9/4 x 6 DECKING 2 x STRINGER TYP LAC SCREWS AT EA LEG
too u- oz
Ic" a C) _5
16" O.C. MAX TYP C14 TYP ELEV=+9.0' 0
2 x 12 STRINGERS 4T L R BENDING AND TENSION
M.L.L.W. 1 PITCH F-1 OTHER, DESCRIBE Lf) p— <z
F\
% Ix
ArT X2"O M.B. W/WASHERS 5) FLEXURAL LENGTH IS EQUAL TO 2/3 OF TI-iE PILE LENGTH. '104 UOJ
9/4 x 6 WEATHER (D <
ON BOTH ENDS TYP N �
BEST SOLID _j AT + + EA POST 0)
DECKING SPACED GANGWA 0 <
)/4" APART WITH 14 Z
2- #1 2GA x 2)�" LG 6 x 12 F- V) <
it :2
N.T.S. _j
WOOD SCREWS SHAPE CONCRETE PILE AT FLOATING DOCK
PER BOARD PER W/5-%"
EQ E0 S2V oij/397ob <
CROSS MEMBER LAG 71-0'0 #4 REBAR PRESTRESSED CONCRETE PILE ALTERNATE DESIGN REQUIREMENTS z U)
11 i #4 CLOSED 0
'SCREWS It 11 Of EA FACE 0
3" MIN it ELEV= + 7. 0' TIES @ MAX _j 1) CONCRETE Qa
p
-4 M.L.L.W. 12" O.C. u -
EMBED MINIMUM COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH (F -c) @ 28 DAYS = 6000 PSI
C14 .4 v
3 x 4 POST AT 4'-0" AT PILE .4 16" TYP @ TRANSFER = 4000 PSI
CAP <
< 4
O.C. MAX TYP 4
2) REINFORCING
4 0 q
6 x 12 PILE CAP 4
CENTER LINE
PRESTRESSING STEEL SHALL CONFORM TO ASTM A-416 GRADE 270.
4 .1
U
to
=_b%1" PITCH vz
u % SPIRAL SHALL CONFORM TO ASTM A-185 GRADE 70.
CAP 4
OF PILE & PILE
< 0
4 z
lo 4'-211 4 4 4 w 3) FACTORED LOADS, EXCLUDING THE WEIGHT OF THE PILE, ARE AS FOLLOW �:FESS/
0 v 1) P1 Let'- TVD 11 16 cq U
c- r% _j
3--Y4"0x23" LG ALL THREADED <
:-H _H L 5 x 5 W/4-,V"O M.B. W/ x
5 x 5 x X CLIP ADHESIVE ANCHORS CENTERED !z to o �CLR
Z 0
WASHERS ON BOTH ENDS TYP WITH PILE & 6 x PILE CAP -4 SPIRAL X
ANGLE TYP 7 W
@FL w
ALL CONN, SEE ..4 it -Ott W/NUT & WASHER AT PILE TYP
CAP TYP
DETAIL 01 .3 r
4 TYP z
--j"J . i w
16 CONC SUPPORT PILE _j
LOAD
DUE TO DL
DUE TO LL
DUE TO E/W
TOTAL
P- (COMPRESSION) (KIPS)
3.5
13.5
17.0
P- (TENSION) (KIPS)
-
-
-
-
M- (BENDING) (FT -KIPS)
47.5
47.5
IV- (SHEAR) (KIPS)
4.5
4.5_
S 3812
E . 03/31/2 7
WPO
Qg "M 0
-00-1 - ffi- I �r� On
H 4A 0 0 1 A
b^ R"%sources DIVISI N %
a ur Un
I I I I
FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL
City of Newport Beach
829 Harbor Island Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
949-644-3034
Fax 949-723-0589
Date: 7b A&
To: `��Y) Wd I Sk
From:
FAX #:
# of Pages:
-Tem VOEkjQ1eV
723- TO(c
(including cover page)
Comments:
Ii, � �' K- Z'
r Y, gvc�
I/A; T F/j, C -S
17-v2' &F
W/
t � "011
COOSIVA
0 34 We& ^Ooc
VICIMITY SRETCH CAMP
NEWPOar DAYI CALI i. jerrr
P'OSXNIA I
&XPP*CSSeOI I., r,,.l ,,,( donoile,
5 below A-fee2r7 I-oWep low Wa�deo-. AjOX1"vC1jvv
0 /' /I - &C 1-110,rhos- /,;Ies
Ore C a ia ble'Shdr d /;7 -//7.1' s . Secytrc,? ojCMa w
po,-1
ro to., 5"eh
e07-reA-I
P, eol-: 7 74 � &�
?0
%&I
0
.3,47
."T'S7,
Ai
V. 5, 9VLk I- 1AIL=
041.1aW,4 Y
40,
rRAe 7' 907
2 46 3 4.6;- 341
3>43
V1,126) L IL�C)
-AA-1 r 5 IV,4" J014AY
A PPL / C 0 7,C-AC2- 907
VIA
Aaozess 1,12-w1vaer &c -ACA) CcAlrmA c roc OA re
F- J
�t�
-
Sr
1z,
.Cl NxwPovr dewc.A.1
�ZTW . �;X- P//-
c- Ylsr /5�11z-:: 7 V Z?I-;
IV
t 1- 5710
z5)(19T.- eO7-r69Al
so Wall "'Oe
VICINITY SRETCH
NEWPORr aAY, CAI. 1IF'ORNIA
510 eln 01i'm 47 5 are ex,---cssed f., A..., ,,,f
olept'As below AfcaF7 lowep I-aw 1,10sre^
range 0/' Y(2rho,- /,;?eS
ore esic6lt'shod /;7 7�A secl.,op o1cVew
V. 57,
6.4waW14 y
4a, 40'
r&PAe 7* —0 '907
34 . 7 3 46
VIL20 L /00
APP,Llc.4,urs AIA" -101-41v
e 70-AC7-907
,914, VIA L.100 "Of -?P
-Ioa AoDeess �vczwpaer CoAlrvAcrom DA -re
NO.
�0. NO
V
x /A
x
L WIA?y /0
4rr4cHz--:z:> ewes,,,
C
A TIN,
I
14
.5- Lg "'y
40
VN*
X
1/
L -TY 7
7AIG
24 i
/4="o w
-0
c-
c
A —1
" j -,
L�-YCTIAIC 1-4
44'-0' ly C,
^It 11
-0,
19
101 100 10, lot
5100 Cal::
eo z-
�4
A 4
1 7
A I
0of -01
10. too I-MA4&5-le 4Z-1 4Z,1M'&C-,e
a -Ile
CXW, &OL z y
ZLVW11367�
Fr—=
?OL 71,"
(5
/< CO - 74 .40 �/n�= ,ez-:-r4w-
7-10A1 OR
5-7 0-LIFIV7 fi� 40L775
s Y r1>L.:-c1<1
A/.
:2 zi �0
L eLz* 4,�5 Z-��
- Lx-
ef�,,O, "617-5- 7-0 &6:-
00 4 1K 1;1
11\16 4�;OWIV Z�2C- C-AIIIM�.
F ji
O.C. 7-1-M?V
FOA17-00,AIS /--�A,171COA19
/s X 9 7
ZZ20/v TOO"
&A 7225�� A:?ArS Axlr-- &-0,1A47
0
-Le--7 7-) 11A,
117-1-1
F--, 10
rA
19A--
4 X
lot lot
tot
#0#
Ix
IV
-4 L
Al
D
'01 tot ST glul.'su,
tot, 1,01 101 ids lot
-lot
Z, 4-a -,5CX P45 ��-7L '7
iiof EMU
o. 2.'
401
001 too tot 0# to,
It 4 0 4 �-2
bF CA 7.0
104
DATE
REVISION:
ow
DRAWN Sy SHZET NO.
774�- JV�R& fe -sv/
DATE MARINE CONSULTING & DESIGN f/ A r 2W
Fi. 0 A -rl"G 4,oiili`0C14e
SCALE 2400 W. COAST HIGHWAY NEWPORT BEACH, ' CA 92663
—00 SUITE F 714 642 — 2206
MaORA S AAeWol ORr 84eACAO�CALh�.� or SmrrTS
NoTg
SXMPRMS
I ''I'l I gN IN 11
Y4, -
Z-
515', -574
A
4-016
/--/o Z� C5')
�4- 7'
'N�l If
9
CLIP,XIAIGLE
4 X5 2 Y6
re X 5)A 4, e
CA12 &0Z -7'Y' 14:'L`W "t,
'/�'-""="T�r'777�-'7 . . . .. . -�r7
I LAP
4.
Z4
4 x <6, 57pl-lc6F
3c- c7 -loll
0 x 6
C,-912. 00Z- 7"Y
Y9
OXIS iSACIA
X,
..... . ....
1PAVITM, ENT
...................
/;?l 0 1 4f -
AIA z
4 7 1��Z-�<�V451VC-4�;'
rO OA 4 P,)
J
�5-L:-c T101".1
ORAWN NO.
7�
M A R I'lk\I'E C 0 PIN'S U L T I'lk\4'G D E S I
DATC
SCALt 2400 W. COAST HIGHWAY NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 2
Cc- W/<./ SUITE F 714 642 2206
Mc. WP OR T'494 5o 4 C14,* CA 4 154 OF 2. SHEVrol
ZA-
�-14,4
i2l
No. 226
12-
ly
X3
?It ( el
17
Z-,� c
744
All
1
42,
---------------
7
7ZI
Z- ir
Y
pew W
Hiz,
�-14,4
i2l
No. 226
s7
W1
Af C- C-� 7
75 f
4- 71,
7_
L -7c- 7, 7r,
/ �7, 75-��
77
�Z-/ 74/-/
157 Z_
z -x 5 y 16�1 lltll-w-70V/L-11'
� alld
V,76 p 7,7 71 -
It
-7,7 V,
ZT
-5T
6",
rif-ESSIOAN
S. Hop
00V
0. 226
u
CA
OF
Vilf-
THOMPSON FLOATATION, INCORPORATED
(714) 645-2842
1645 Monrovia Avenue I -Costa Mesa, CA 92627
I Telex 678308 THOMPSON CSMA
/7-0
7 -
Flange width 3'
on all 4 sides
FIGURE 2- FLOATATIOR UNIT DIMENSIGAS
1117
68�
3&�
16--
96
68-.95..
-68-
36 -3
20
103
68.95
1119
68-
361 -
1
90
68.95
10 1 4
8.4-06
1130
726--
4 8-
14
122
102.74
1131
96 �e
4a
14-
161.
140.04
1230
—72-
T02. 74
1231
- 9 6
48�
16
167
140.04
1430
72
481
23
145
102.74
1431
96
4 8j
25.
198
140.04
Potent No. 0 270 325
1.103-.2
.1,379-A
973.9
1.151.2
1,978.8,
1.657.7
2,259.0
2,376.9
3,519.8
C_
r . k
H r.4
C.
6_&&pkq_qf_.q,ppent par cubic yard
psi at 28 dgya
V ej- Ls Q0Q_p@j_ At _transf or
PfUTREWING -STEEL-
j _270KA iqQp_.ted stress
.rLU_evo_p.g7qp,_!1xv_.vt,mnd, 7-o7-,4L-
MA_Uya�� 270,P29
,gth -psi
x .6
=Jdxz_.atreojL___ 362.0 00 r)si
+
Ihitial_PUv3j__ 197.000 psi
2
.155 in
Initial for"- _p.er_sU-and __30.8_530 The
162 1000 ped
2
ftridmg f orce. P -e -Lr ptrand 25
Xtal working.force 1570,6661bo
2
Itfociive- prestreas-...
450 zhm�fojr HARBOR PRECAST COMPANY
LONG BEACV. CALIFORNIA
botto:
PRESTRESSED CONCRETE PILES
12" SQUARE
DRAWN CHfC1KfO APPROVED
—D f P T 0 N EJATf t DWG No. -
poofm pop -cc, a sem ta...
+1
3.2-3/8"
2j
Cir. to
spiral
P.
F4
W%
3AN
n-5/8#
chamfor
f our
-edges
6_&&pkq_qf_.q,ppent par cubic yard
psi at 28 dgya
V ej- Ls Q0Q_p@j_ At _transf or
PfUTREWING -STEEL-
j _270KA iqQp_.ted stress
.rLU_evo_p.g7qp,_!1xv_.vt,mnd, 7-o7-,4L-
MA_Uya�� 270,P29
,gth -psi
x .6
=Jdxz_.atreojL___ 362.0 00 r)si
+
Ihitial_PUv3j__ 197.000 psi
2
.155 in
Initial for"- _p.er_sU-and __30.8_530 The
162 1000 ped
2
ftridmg f orce. P -e -Lr ptrand 25
Xtal working.force 1570,6661bo
2
Itfociive- prestreas-...
450 zhm�fojr HARBOR PRECAST COMPANY
LONG BEACV. CALIFORNIA
botto:
PRESTRESSED CONCRETE PILES
12" SQUARE
DRAWN CHfC1KfO APPROVED
—D f P T 0 N EJATf t DWG No. -
poofm pop -cc, a sem ta...
r�
:12 -Speare pdes 6 Sle-opid, k)d axial Idad
P>e-o perlies a -r -5 L- e- I idn
A
Sedloo Moddtis -oLoul I,,-& c 14 11
.yA
d /Z V4 Iz 9 6 .3
i On 44eal 1,416,41 4-X iS
d YA r2- 172914 Ir -2 U -Se.)
C,,o 00
2 6� .00 6 Is 0 .0 0 PSI'
X 16", od 0 10 0 0 let,
PSI' 10 p e SS id
F
VA MIZ 2-
M-6 knen limded Zj 4 nompre-ij F'V� -T Ire5S d,4 513, -fC'
A4
M q -77 6 6
/,'.�7;/e4i 4� leAsi'loo s �ress dp
y 7, 8:5'o P 16s
Af-a oi em limded I �oms;le x1ress el' V f e. -
M z, Zdq ej 5'6 4- S96)11Z Z7, '716 PI. 4.3
4e
V�-e
1373
/7 �-3
1 q y
71 0-?
1?77
il 77
/07-9
17(
f
231
/0-7(
776
I- lot
(of7
7(,
971
Alycl-Ine P/4 4,7
9/(,p VIA 114pe
1Vz--:-Yv1ooRr
F,g1v&r,r,a7-1o,A1 Col-lnn<
X(I Z/J-)
70A
4-
C4 Z- 6 01,,4 7-101VS
!5r ev
,< /"�), lec-�q f
-,A - / / C, � /,r '! � v--/ =
7
-I
,ul 29 02,03:27p�, BellPort Group 349-723-7702 P.1
If -/
Facsimifle �-/ I /
711!xt
Fyom: Sean M. Walsh, BeflPort Grotnp
To: Tony Melum
Re: Curcil Residence, 816 Via Lido F�0�--,nJ
Pc
.js: 3 (including this cover)
if you have any pi�'able-mis rrecei,,�q �J--,,,g fa-, rj;lej�se call 949�.723.?781
K TIony:
- ' - . i- �
i ried' to get th is dolle oll I riday but It St. n -)- , - S11
��,Jhat we wolild like 'Ur.) dc� is, to rnove the e I ting dlo,-',� tl— Ieft ffiorth-ofest� by 4 feet
wNch would center thc: dc)ck between tl�e :�ron-l'-'rty 011 eitilc�"I- 3ide of
<est vv'. L get this
'Llie existing dock, Pleasle- let ir-ne know 1&1e, an -d. quic'
accomplished. Our thanks in ar-'-k,fance.
Regards,
Sean \Nalsl-i
This communication is interclecl on�%/ for the ise cf the pr�J'Ly b:) Nrh �L is aoj e SPI- Uld
n -,ay contain informalition ftit is pFjvil�gedl, cor dis,,-. -,sl-n-, Lind -r
m, yc.),.! are
F--deral and/or State law. If the reader of this thc ide.cli recipic',
hereby notified that any dis3ernmation, distribijtjon, o-,,
-V.-;-ion of Lhis is strici-ly
-c-, -ton error, �i!ease -ider mniediately
prohibited by law. If YOU have receved Uhis corrim m! -1b sei
by telephone and return th'-1 original transm;itt.al to zcid:-ess al0c'vc %,;.;n th--� 1-U,J)..S. Ct.ir tha'iks in
advance.
Jul 29 02 03:27p
Bel",Port Group 9 4 9 --'?12,3 -.77 �3 2
..........
Jul 29 02 03:28p Bel I Port Group 13 4 9 7 2:3 —7 7 9 2
j.
hi
-xr
4119 4 1141
4
3
eg,
4
-14
4vt
c
WNI'-�.-�, �tu-�
c"i
I
I
3
z
S.
o. 2 2 G
&f, c� -
C r-0
� 0 11
mi
Ll
N-4
e - I
I
t
-4
ce-: A /0 rl-: Z./ -Z/ CTAA /-194/ 4,xgx 14"", 9 /1
Ri 1.4
�4
--s- Lg 'y Z
L -:"Y/.57 7-XA/G 6 "'y 16
�-7YISTIAIG G,4AA,--jV1,)y-1 2-
44 0
0 Oft
101
1T
120 el -
%4 eOZ- TS
/0' �D
1 --4
2
_T44
4
f4
10, lot
ALL
_5 /6 4
4,,
/-?0/ 7�9 c'
4Z -Z Z Z1A4A6Z_:7 �A- III
�41171-1 W,4rLz�e -5,� L7-!;
x 74 t-`cnq
-:�4��- L)
r/OA/ A-o;�//V, 0/ 4
&OZ -7715,-1
S&IV7 At eOL7-5
A&177 -5-
h
-z R L?Z. 41L I\IV7-5' 7-0 Z?C-
4-d Ln"
-ZA 7-
X4 T
A 72�'
/Z:-"O/V 7'OOA.1
0 "JA" .7
tA I
0/, A
#
in
NO. I DATE RF-V[Slo?4:
VIS&:�� / 1=-IAI 77e,� )Allpe-
SIS140P GRAPHICSIAOCUPRESS
REORDER NO. A15406
41,0
0, X 2 CIA 7-.5*
x �5` 4 a 9 12. A. - 16 &: Z -w. yg
lot 10 101 - Olt
101 101 ;N REVIEWED BY pUCUIC
N no,
00,- rp T I C
By
'(3 VVOR HALL Ca
STANDARD GpECIF'""
tot H 'CATIOus �p' r,
lot 104
101 101 COMSTRUOTIONARD SUBJECT -
0 0.
—LI \M I
too
101 101 400 tL
101 101
lot
01 f
L'S
* DRAWN "y SHZCT M0.
R'o
OATII N,ARINE CONSULTING & DESIGN
Fl. OA 0 c 1-e
2400 W. COAST HIGHWAY NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663
JO/-/" C.41RCI jl*��
816, 1/24 41DO."0z'D A) e W)= OR 7 i9EA C".. CAL A -c. SUITE F 714 642 — 2206 or I? 514ttT$
." I - /'
>oe
4"'
/0 �
Ic
pz-,4 /\,/ -
4
14,V
cy)
it
.0,
0 0.
L:: 5 '0012
x J? x -4'1 Z
:'- \lN
(T)
�4 (oD
57
4 /--/0 L L:-�57,,/
—T- IYOL C -5-
o ]c3F 0-11,
Z -:-:,A J 7
ox? Z- Alf1k,
A?04 L L=-, p- OA-)
a,,41 L V &-OL r,
lol�
"14
NO. I DATE I REVISION:
BISHOP GRAPHtCSIACCUPRESS,
REORDER NO. MUM
-//ro Y-!
13,,
90 CLIP
SEC 77 OVV F
4 >5
l---2 X 9 le�_nf /ic"m/c
f ----j
I I ir
6 0 A41",
45 1-7
A, 1A IZ- -T 0 0: "'0, C.
Z_�WL-1 /'o"
lool
.........
4 x 6 x
PZ- A 7-Y
4* 0/1
.0
z��)/2 &OZ -7'_5
, L"IXI
kj
x
--------------------- -
Foieslolv IZ- -s-, C,
/C� >11
�cj
'K
tor
z--: r T
lorilthe
1,4o. 226
CO3
DRAWN SHEET NO.
121 DATZ :v/ MARINE CONSULTING & DESIGN
EL I -A M5 0 US L.A97AIL.S
SCALZ 2400 W. COAST HIGHWAY NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 2
wmwmmm� 816 VIA Z.00 A10RD "G WP OR r � Z34CA CA Z. /*,C*. J. N.6 92- SUITE F 714 642 2206 or S"ErTs
0
-7 5-�- YI-6
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
P.O. BOX 1768, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658-8915
11/17/86
John Curci
816 Via Lido Nord
Newport Beach, CA 92663
Dear Mr. Curci:
Re: Application for Harbor Permit 175-816 for pier maintenance
Sir:
Please sign and date�the enclosed card as indicated. After
we have received the completed card and after you have indicated
to us the name of your contractor and the requisite information
hbout the contractor's insurance, we will be able to issue the
permit.
If you have questions, please call me at 644-3044.
Sincerpoly
Tony MeAm
Tidelands Administrator
by db
3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach
II Lido Yacht Anchorage
Lido Peninsula - P.0, Box 1549. Newport Beach, California 92663 - Phone: (714) 673-9330
� 7 T- T-74/
June 18, 1985
City of Newport Beach
Marine Department
P. 0. Box 1768
Newport Beach, CA 92658-8915
Re: 816 Via Lido Nord
Gentlemen:
We plan to replace an old and deteriorated
dock at Mr. John,Curcils residence, 816 Via
Lido Nord, on Lido Isle in Newport Beach.
Enclosed are 40 copies of the proposed project,
for your staff and the City Council if necessary.
Please let us know if you need any further infor-
mation to grant a permit for this project.
nc
erely,
Ronald Snyder
Lido Peninsula Manager
Owned and Operated by Curci-Turner Company
Cl avm Nzmwavr de.4c.A.1
T A/ -'k
&
CONCRC /- "i �
P/1- C-57, . ':S, 411,e
IMOIPO-15115,9
Ivael'o"2
5'47
�?4C
1 345-
-T AIL -=,W
j/. 57.
,VLZ"W SZ/p
G,4NCfiVA Y
344
P- -Y/ 5 � r. , PIGR
40, 40 ' 40, 4.0, 4o'
I MAe 7' v e 907 1 . 1
347 946 3,4:�;' 34-d
VIL70 1100
Al
,4"e -IOJ44AJ CIIRCI ecr- X4,� Age..r, 7,e -,4c7-907
916 VIA I-IL20 1-ta&;4P
Aopesss &Izzwpaer CAZI,=� CoAlreAcroc OA r -e
C%
044
PIZ
0
C'e-..,
v -"r
VICWITY SkETCH
Jer.-r
evpohs below Arcro#7 lowep Low WaAdom.
I
PC" p d' 0.4, iliec - 0,0,0^0 it " nro Ar/.y 10 4.&V Map- A*,- /,;? es
ore C.Tio6l."Shed f;v 71/p;.s . o)P'VdWd~1 Asar.
5'47
�?4C
1 345-
-T AIL -=,W
j/. 57.
,VLZ"W SZ/p
G,4NCfiVA Y
344
P- -Y/ 5 � r. , PIGR
40, 40 ' 40, 4.0, 4o'
I MAe 7' v e 907 1 . 1
347 946 3,4:�;' 34-d
VIL70 1100
Al
,4"e -IOJ44AJ CIIRCI ecr- X4,� Age..r, 7,e -,4c7-907
916 VIA I-IL20 1-ta&;4P
Aopesss &Izzwpaer CAZI,=� CoAlreAcroc OA r -e
73 0-� — p-1
PERMIT NO. / tj �/ 6
Project Location:
DREDGING APPLICATION
816 Via Lido Nord
Cubic Yards to be Dredged: 148
Method
of
Dredging: Hydraulic
Suction
Nature
of
Dredged Material:
sand/silt
Disposition of Dredged Material: Place material on adjacent beach
Method of Material Disposition: PuM2 through discharge pipe to
disposal fill area.
Turbidity Control Method: Filter screen around discharge site.
Effect of dredging on contiguous bulkheading and beaches Will restore
depleted beach and reinforce bulkhead
kJ_ T.- Harrig hereby state that I have read the U. S. Army
(print name)
Corps of Engineers permit for maintenance dredging in Newport Harbor, the
City of Newport Beach and orange County Harbors,Beaches and Parks District
(if applicable) permit for maintenance dredging and that I accept all the
provisions therein. Additionally I guarantee that the proposed dredging
will not occur because of any altering of existing use of the affected
zone.
aohn Qijrgi
(Applicant -type name)
-i,/i n /78
'(Date)
Shellmaker, Inc.
(Contractor -type name)
Signed:
Conirractor!
Representative
Cl r Y- Niw,,,�aer" 9,6-,4c,,w
S
30
70 4-��6c-o.'h
%j
J'�5
'60
—35 2 '20
2
Al
� '11.0')
111,14.iq
�&-Aowr It- a,,,- 0 A 7- 0
P"f'L
Q'Qn M -L-1 LZI
40
polio,
0
cle
ca
1k
VIC) M I TY SKE T C H
pr4
Na—poar 5AY, CAL IFORNIA
Or& e-ARF'C,�SCci
bCIOW eWCOr7 40NVer ZOW
4, Fu
av,7o1,p
�%10A&r�,
t are 71,6z's
.5(rc/.'0'Y
'0"
T --T
ri
T.,
Drej
plln.IC7 el
P.
ire
-3 q7 3 15 3 'qq 3143
VIa- Zl::YIO AlOrel
CA
3 4-5-
7A, r 7
peess
comreA croA SAe
kcro.A-re 3 11,��117
CITY OF NEWPORT Br,-Athl
HARBOR PERMT
PERMISSION iS
--g�T Ajq-
MA,INTAIN 71331,7- 73�11
AT THE S471—
THE AZ�
A,NY
IS N10"",
C 1 §H' N
��cl Zff �a
C V h-AWZ c:, �-',-"17'0 R
PERMIT NO. VATE
'OPECUM cenjr-pormn"S:
Corps of
,�PNIce-rs Permit -3,-Ia - -2
Oroago CGurtY Pernait
other —
L4`�; ,-,
"T"oltr6ED By My COUNCIL
?
Sl
IN
Irp
l c",
oft,
VICINITY SKETCH
WIEWPORT MAY, CAi—F--j�R"tA
�A Y
- - - - - - eael/
3"
71'wr-
14-7
---:L' A /V
ItZr144
117 7e)
-- Dez5l�,7/1 0
f
DAT F-
r -
f
SUBJEC,T____-.. - -------------------- ---------------- S14E:E-r
.. ...........
71Vc Zs;,�c/,i
m
RAUB, BEIN, FROST & ASSOCIATES
ENGINEERS & SURVEYORS,
PHONE 54a-7723 P. 0. Box 117
136 ROCHESTER STREET
COSTA MESA. CALIFORNIA
August 21, 1969
Mr. David A. Kaylor
The Irvine Company.
550 Newport Cent-er Drive
Newport geach, California 92660
Dear Mr. Kaylor:
Re PromontorZ Point Larioon Stud%/ "B"
Pursuant to your request, I have analyzed Promontory Point Lagoon
Study "B" to determine whether a problem will exist j,!jtjj debris or
biological pollution. Also the question of erosion or accretion
in the entrance channel and lagoon was investigated
The proposed Promontory Point . Lagoon Study "B" encompasses approxi-
mately 10.5 acres of water, ranging in depth from, -5 ri-,ean sea, level
datum at the bulk -head to a bottom, depth. of -11 mean sea I evel datum
in 'fie laccon, 18 feet bayward from tht bulkheadi The prevailinq
winds in the area are from the southwest direction (See Exhibit "A").
The entrance channel to the lago-on joins the North Balboa Island
channel and is protected by Balboa Island from the main channel of
Newport Bay.
There is gooda circulation in the North Balboa Island channel. Any
debris which would enter the lagoon would derive from I -rash thri:�,-,,n
Into the lagoon writhin the lagoon itself or accasional trash drifting
into the entrance of the lagoon -being carried by the.prevalling v"inal
and flood 'slide.
This floating debris should be almost inconsequential, and with the
clean, unobttrutted bulkheading, which is prcposed for the perimeter
0� the lagoon, the. debris will collect a t 4he
�j first bend in the chan-,
nel closest to the Bayside Shopping Centerand be swept out due to
tidal flushing action. Since the cycle occurs twice daily in this
area, it is my opinion that most if not alI of Lthe floating -debris
would leave the lagoon by way of the entrance channel on an- ebb tide
at times when the wind is calm.
Mr. David A. Kaylor
Page 2
August.21, 1969
One area of possible trash accumul.atio.n is in front of Lot 59 behind
the groin -westerly of the beach. This can be alleviated by proper
attention to the design of the groin.
As far as biological pollution is concerned, there are no sources of
effluent discharge or large storm drain systems discharging into this
lagoon. Due to the geometry of the entrance and the size of the
lagoon, the water will be replaced by the normal tidal action with
approximately the same rapidity which occurs in t ' he lower Newport Bay.
It is therefore my opinion that there. will be no biological pollution
in excess of the acceptable limits as established by the Health De-
partment.
We have also analyzed the.bea th processes in the area and find no
evidence of erosion or accretion in the Balboa Island channel within
the vicinity of the entrance to this lagoon. Due to the low non -scour-
ing tidal velocity in this main channel, there appears to be no littoral
drift of sand in this area which could tend to block the entrance.
As far as accretion of sand within the lagoon due to sedernentary de-
positing of sand from the storm drain system is concerned, I feel
that this is a problem of temporary and minor consideral.-Ion due to
the small size of the drainage area contributing to the discharge
into the lagoon. Any accretion should stop as soon as the residen-tial
area surrounding the lagoon and Upper Promontory Point area is de-
veloped and landscaping established.
if you have any further questions regarding these matters, please call
on rae.
Sincerely,
RAUB, BEIN, FROST & ASSOCIATES
Jack G. Raub
Civil Engineer
JGR/cem
I
09
November 16, 1972
CITY' OF NEWPORT BEACH
CALIFORNIA 92660
MARINE SAFETY DEPARTMENT City Hall
70 Newport Pier 3300 Newport Blvd.
673-3360 (714) 87.0-2110
Councilman Paul Pyckoff
City of Newport Beach
City Hall
Dear Mr. Ryckoff:
Attached hereto are documents and correspondence which
I believe are the most germane items, available within
our files, involving the grants of easements for the
Promontory Bay waters landward of the Pierhead Line.
Please note that Captain Harshbarger identifies some
papers which we would appreciate having returned, since
they are either originals or are difficult to copy.
If you have any further questions on this matter, please
let me know,
Sincerely,
MARINE SAFETY DEPARTMENT
re—
N",'
R. E. Reed, Director
RER: lf
cc: City Manager
MARINE SAFETY DEPARTMENT
70 Newport Pier
TO: R. E. REED, MARINE SAFETY DIRECTOR
FROM: Captain Harshbarger
SUBJECT: BACKGROUND MATERIAL FOR COUNCILMAN RYCXOFF
REFERENCE PROMONTORY BAY "GRANT OF EASEMENT"
At the Joint Harbor Commitee meeting, November 14, 1972,
Council, -,tan Rycko]"-f requested that we gather the background
documents that ident-ifY the reasons for the "Grant of Ease-
ment' for the portion of dedicated waterways between the
bulkhead line and the pierhead line, of the above subject
project.
The following attached exhibits are the primary documents
that identify the rational for the "Grant of Easement" with
reference to the dedicated City waterways within Promontory
Bay.
Exhibit A - Tract Map #'3867 On sheet 1, first column is a
Note which r�i_a.ds.-"I.ntenTe_d use for Lettered Lots. Lot A -
For public water navigation purposes subject, however, to an
easement appurtenant to each of the lots within the tract,for
pier, mooring and maintenance purposes over portions of Lot "A"
lying between the bulkhead line and the pierhead line as shown
on the tract map contiguous to each lot."
Exhibit B - Proposed Grant of Ea'sernent This document was pre-
pared by the City Attorney to clarify the ambiguity noted on
the Tract Mao,
Exhibit C - Proposed Corporation Grant Deed This document was
prepared by the Title insurance and Trust Company for the City
to execute. The.Public Works Department and City Attorney have
prepared the Grant of Easement document rather than a Grant Deed
which indicates fee simple property.
Exhibit D "Proposed Council Resolution" This resolution autho-
rizes the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the subject easement
on behalf of the City�
Exhibit E - "Staff Report - Grant of Easement"'(11-13-72) The
staff report prepared for the ��_ouncilNovember 13, 1972, explains
thereasoning for Grant Easement with reference to the Tract Map
wording.
R. E. REED
Page 2
November 16, 1972
Exhibit F - "Staff Re�)ort - Summary of Promontory Bay Permits"
(5-19-72) This report prepared by George Dawes tor the City
Mapager su=,,arizes the permit process and background of the
Promontory Bay project.
Exhibit- G - "Staff Report - Harbor Permit #200-000" (PromontorV
Bay ) (8-10-70) The Harb6_r -Permit. was approved by'the City
Council, August 10, 1970. The report lists the recommended
conditions wiLh supportive discussion.
Exhibit H - "Sta-Ef Report - Ownership of Privately Created Waterways"
(4-27-70) It'is recommended in this report prepared by G. Dawes
for the City Manager that the waterways in Promontory Bay be
dedicated to the City. The report outlines the reasoning for this
recomm, endation .
The "Grant of Easement" does not void the Council's Harbor Permit
Policies for the easement area. It does, however, guarantee the
abutting upland owner the right to an approved harbor structure.
Should Councilman Ryckoff wish additional information or any
points clarified, please let me know. The Promontory Point file
is maintained in our office.
The Public Works D�epartriient has requested that the dupl icate
Tract 14ap (EXHIBIT A) be returned when the requested information
has been identified. If this exhibit is returned to me, I.will
see that it is replaced in the appropriate file.
Sincerely.,
D. Harshbarger, Captain
Marine Safety Department
DH:lf
Exhibits A-11-1
S I � T '1 9 f C A L I F 0 A R t Al
t @ U �l T Y .3 F D R A 9 G E i
0 � T 4 1 S D A Y 0 f "q ta
A IJ 0, 7 A PAI P J L I IN AM) PDX SAID COUHTY AND STAT 1, FERS-9 AIALLY
I - Ta hill 51 vicl PRIESMIT
A P E A i P 1P 0 lil il
h N S k A S MA R T 'l TO —M T 5 BE ASSISTANT SEEMARI OF T 11 E
P A N A '-4 E S T V I Wi'i I A CORNMT I 91A , THE CORPORATI33,
I A AT klio Ivisylu mAT AND X41UN T� ME To WE Tfil nasom
E D 'f li I VIT-2 I R 11 ST?llumi3T 012 H 14 -ALF Of SAID [Cape %0 109 AH)
T i I C K 0 W L � D G I D TO ME 1RAT S 0 C 2 CORPRATICH EXECITED 7 suil.
C ri il I S S 10 ;gl 49 IS 7�K
S 5 M Y ',R A 1 D A )l 0 1 C I A L S I
4 0 T A Z Y 9 6 L I I
IN MID iR, SAID COUNTY A0 �TAT i
F T E
kNTEMOSO U252,
1--f LOT A POR ,�7 sa mAw WOHEV ER,
TO AM SWbElWEN-11 APPURINENA0,4T To EACH 01: THE LOT'�, KITRIN
T�Ar-- T---7ACT 'r -OR PIER)M -VtC ;S OP -T -A-
c)os 6 c- ;L Lo
NRPqr.-�5 CW R PDA
L "( I W �1'tr ES C- T 'A E 4- 1\� T M S G U L 4!,4 E A 0 L I WE A N 0 T �4 E Pit S 1.7. A F- A 0 L i N i
-A 4D
O�4 TWE TMACT MAP C-ONTIGUOUS TO EAC9 L -GT.
I L01 2)— A
7 LOT C — P-01-2 1-40,ADIZ,�CA PONC, A90 -.1G-4,041C VISTA PU
PA2-V-lWC, ANWO 9,,3!wA-lE 01EACH FURPOSS-a-
6
�-0,7 FOR PURILIC PARK PUPtPO ES,
716, bk -SAC-) V-4A'UTSUA&,lr-S ?L;';zPos.
AND 'SCENIC VIFBT?� PURPC'alSS-
WL-( 7-ou bAYSIDS
(R;E:L0CA7S-6)j
4
, 04�, 30
YC bxrs S, cb ttz I v a
n
1 KI D [r- X MAP
C- I r- 17 M r A r7 I h I MO S CA LE
GRA,NT OF EASENCEET
mHE CITY* OF NEWPORT BEACH, a municipal corporation
L
organiz-ed under -the laas of -the State of California, hereby
grants to THE IRVINE COMPANY, a West Virginia corpora -Lion, an
eXclusive easement, together with the right to grant and transfer
same, for pier mooring, and maintenance purposes, over real
property situated in the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange,
State of California, described as follows:
. Thatportion of Lot A, in Tract No. 3867., in the City
of Ne-oTport Beach, County of Orange, State of California,
as per map recorded in Book 301, pages 40 to 46 inclusive
of kliscel-laneous Maps, located on the westerly, southwesterly
and southerly portion of said Lot Al lying between the
Pierhead 'Line and the boundary lines of Lots 1 to 45
inclusive, together with -that portion located on the north-
easterly and northerly portion of said Lo"t A, lying between
said pierhead line and the boundary lines of Lots 46 to 61
inclusive, as sho�,,-n on said rotap of Tract No. 3867.
IN WITNESS �ATETEEEREOF, said municipal corporation has caused
its corporate name and seal to be affixed hereto and this
instrumcDnt to be exlecuted by its Mayor and City Clerk thereunto
duly authorized.
DATED:
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
By:
Mayor
ATTEST-.�
STATI_!, O -F CALIFOlUlIA ) City Cler'j,-,.
County of Orange ss
On 1972, beforte me, -the undersigna(H,
a 1�fot-.ary P,,)blic i n za nn d id State, personally appeared
FA
DONA1,D A. McIN,1TIS, known to m_- -to De the 14ayor, and LAURA LAGIOS,
R�no-i.vn.to me to be city Clerk of the municipal corporation that
executed -the within instrument, known to me to be the persons
executed t'he within instrument on behalf of -the municipal
corpora -Lion therein named, and acknowledged to me that such
municipal corporation executed the within instrument pursuant to
a resolution of its CitY COUTICil.
WITNESS my hand and official seal
Notary Public in and for said State
T)
11,�_COROFNG REQUESTED BY
AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO
[_-.CHE IRVINE COMPANY
Name 610 Newport Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Addr.&)
city Attn.- Linda Alperstein
s!"to L
SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDER'S USE
MAIL TAX STATEMENTS TO
F
Name THE IRVINE COMPANY
Street 610 Newport Center Drive
Address Newport Beach, CA 92660
City &
""' [—Attn: David Kuhn -
TO 406 CA (7-63)
CorDorationGrant Deed
I
'HIS FORM FURNISHED BY TITLE INSURANCE AND TRUST COMPANY
D.T.T. S
FOR A VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged,
municipal THE CITY OFNEWPORT BEACH
a/corporation' organized under the Idws of the state of
hereby GRANTS to THE -IRVINE COMPANY, a West Virginia corporation
the following described real property in the City of Newport Beach
County of Orange , State of California:
AN EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT, TOGETHER WITH THE RIGHT TO GRANT AND
TRANSFER SAME, FOR PIER MOORING, AND MAINTENANCE PURPOSES
OVER THAT PORTION OF LOT A, IN TRACT NO. 3867, IN THE CITY OF
NEWPORT BEACH, COUNTY OF ORANGE., STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER
MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 301, PAGES 40 TO 46 INCLUSIVE OF
MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, LOCATED ON THE WESTERLY, SOUTHWESTERLY AND
SOUTHERLY PORTION OF SAID LOT A5 LYING BETWEEN THE PIERHEAD
LINE AND THE BOUNDARY LINES OF LOTS 1 TO 45 INCLUSIVE, TOGETHER
WITH THAT PORTION LOCATED ON THE NORTHEASTERLY AND NORTHERLY
PORTION OF SAID LOT A, LYING BETWEEN SAID PIERHEAD LINE AND THE
-,,.Q,OUNDARY LINES OF LOTS 46 TO 61 INCLUSIVE, AS SHOWN ON SAID
MAP OF TRACT NO. 3867.
In Witness Wbereof, said corporation has caused its corporate name and seal to be affixed hereto and this instru-
inent to be executed bv its __—J -resident and Secretary
thereunto duly authorized.
Dated:
STATE OF CALIFORNIA SS. By-- President
COUNTY OF
On before me, the under- By -
signed, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared Secretary
known
to me to be the— President, and
known to me to be
—Secretary of the Corporation that executed the
ividii n JuStVuraent, known to me to be the persons who executed the
Ivithi 'I Jnstrument oil hchalf (If the Corporation therein named, and
ac.knowfedl--d to me that sucli Corporation executed the within Tnstru
ment pur�ivant in its by-)aws or a resolution of its board of directors.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature
Title Order No
Name (Typed or Printed)
or Loan N
(Thk aiea for offirial not-jal ,,val)
MAIL TAX STATEMENTS AS DIRECTED ABOVE
RESO'[=ION NO -
A 1ZESOLUTION OF TIDE CITY COUNCIL OF THIE. CITY
0-'c.T' 1,-q'EW1-,`OP-,.'-P BEACH 2�'-0iTHORIZT�-TG THE EXECUTION,
0JF A GRANT b -P, EASE"L.-LEINT TO THE IRVIN�E, COMPANi-y
FOR PIER M'OOaLl-k-J�,- A -,%TD T�NIITENANTCE --L)U POSES -�N
jR
CO'N:NECTIO--L\T WIT11 TIRACT --N10, 3867
��!'JIHEPLCAS, or) June- 29, 1-972, ri�rlie Irvine Company recorded
-P-I-nal- 1,11--D-0 of Tract No. 3867 in the Office of the Orange County
I R, I
z -,corder; andt
NHEREAS, said rLap contained a note ti-Lat LoL A (the Bay)
was to be used for public wate-r navigation subjec-1-- I-
I- L-0 an easement
t
a-opurtenan'C- to each of the bayfront lots for Pier Purposes; and
TI�IHEREAS,l Title Insurance and Trust Co-mpany advises tilat
said note did not. technically acco-u�plish the intended reservation
by The -11-rvine Co-mpany of the easeiments for pier purposes adjacent
to each of the I.,ettered lots; and
VVETEREAS, the City Council wishes to clarify this
a-)oare-Int a!��biguity by granting to The Irvine Company an easement
- A - mooring anc! maintenance purposes,
-)ve,r Lo'� A for pier i L-
N0�1., TUE=FORE, BEE IT RESOLVEED by the Ci- Council- of
L -y
L. J-
-e City of Ne%�,-part Beach that the Ma.yor and C-ity Clerk. are
-tuthori2ed and directed to execute a grant of easement conveying
L
L- o TA�a Irvine Cosr.,ipany an easemenl-_ for pier mooring and maint-enance
TUIUTLMOIS('-�s 0V2r real prop-ex-ty described as foil
L 0 W S
U J- L- .1 -[1
That portion of Lot A, in Tract No. 3,367 ii t). e city
of '-N,e�,-rport Beach, Count- of O.cange, StaLe of California,
z
as per Majo recorded. in Book 301, p ages 40 to 46 inclusive
oF P-Ji-scellaneous J.'4aps, located on the westerly, soutlh,�Vest-erly
and southerly portion c -C said Lot A, lying between the
Pierhead lin-- a:ncl the boundary lines o.-11' Lots I to 45
m I,., S 4 V E� ,
c -L to-geLher -,,-74.th that pol-tion located on t -he north-
easterly an: -1 -1-lortherly Portion of said Lot A, lying 'between
said pierhead li-t,)e and the 1),ounC-71,ary lines of Lots 46 t -o 61
il-�ClU,34Ve, -LS t NTo� -31867.
, ..L C Shmm on said Map of Trac
7
ADO.""'RID t -his day ol. i-,"ovembe.-r-,
1972.
'JU 1-1, . L -
J.
y
3 01-7 2
/Y/ 7 4 -
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
Office of
CITY ATTORNEY
To- The Honorable Mavor and November 13, 1972
Members of the City Council
From: City Attorney
Subject Grant of Easement for Pier Moorings
(Promontory Bav)
On June 29, 1972, the Final Map of Tract No. 3867 (Promontory Bay)
oias recorded in the Office of -the Orange County Recorder. The map
contained a note that the Day was being dedicated for public water
navigation purposes, subject'to an easement appurtenant to each of
the bayfront lots for pier purposes..
Title Insurance and Trust Company, the title company, has informed
The Irvine Company that the language used for the dedication of�
the Bay on the recorded tract map was too vague and did not accom-
plish -the intended re,sorvation.
To clear up this apparent ambiguity, T.I. and The Irvine Company
have requested that the City execute a grant of easement for pier
mooring and maintenance purposes over a small area,of the Bay
cont-iguous to each of the adjacent lots. The attached resolution
authorizes the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the subject easement
on behalf of the.City.
Z;8NNIS O'NEIL
City Attorney
D QN: Irth
CC: Citv Clerk
Pub liC T
07orks Director
CITY OF f!"r "'IPORT BEACH
HARBOR AND TIDELANDS DIVISION
May 19, 1972
Q
TO: CITY 'I"LANAGER
FROM: Harbor and Tidelands Administrator
-IONTORY SAY PERMITS
S U "D J rEC T P R,),�
You requested that 1 provide you Information relative -to the
permi t. for dred9i.ng and bulkheading Promontory Bay.
LL)F
I n D a c esra b e r 1969, prior to Planning Commission action on the
e -n+lre project, The irvine Company provided basic data relative to dredgi ng.
and bulkheading the proposed bay. These data were transmitted to the
ty Control Board, the Los Angeles District Corps,
Regional 1-11ater QUal i L
olf Engineers, and the Director of the Harbor District for preliminary
inforimation with a reaue3t that thos-- agencies advise me if more infor-
m was d�--ired.. f1he Corps of Engine�-2rs and the Harbor District were
specifically advised of concern over water quality and the possible impacl.,
on beaches near the proposed bay and the 'Water Quality Board vias asked for
reco-mime�idations pertaining to conditions that might. be imposed, if any.
In January 1970, the Corps replied that the formal aoDlication,
when submitted, would require their review of tidal exchanges for posslabb
pollution problems, and for impact on beaci-.es and the liorth Balboa Channel.
In Febru--ry 1970, The lrvin6 Company for-nally applied, for a
Pa m,,it from, both tha City and the Corps of Engineers. In that sarse month.,
the Joint Harbor Committee aDDroved the Dro,4f ect in concept subject to other
'iy (rciaster plan a-mandments, use permits, etc.).
actions being taken by the C1
In April 1970, the Corps of Engineers adivised t�at they had
receiyed no adverse cc,--ments or objections from any interested State or
Federal agency and that a permflt would be issued only after the Corps
was advised of the City's position. Also in 'April, the Joint Harbor
tee approved the project after hearing a verbal report fron-the Harbor
C o.-, mi. i t L 1. . I
;, -.y Public Nlcr�.s Depart,91a -1
District Engineers and a -report that the Cit nt had
reviewed the engineering and -had no objections.' Jlt its abpro-Viils the Joint
Harbor Coniani ttee conditioned the pemi it that "the applicant. must 'Lake pre-
cautions against creating excess turbidity." In April, the Corps was advised
that the Cit -y had no object - ion at that time to issuance of a Corps permiit
proyiding the Corps was assured that 'there would be no water quality or
beach 2rosion proble:rs.
- 2 -
In May 1970, the Cos-ps issued a permit conditioned as follows:
"That-tha parmittee shall comply promptly with any
regulations, con-ditions, or i�structio'ns affecting the
worik- hC-reby authorized if any when issued by the Federal
ter Pollution Control Ad-,iAnistration and/or the State
water pollution control agency having jurisdiction to
abate or prevent water pollution."
A portion of tl-h2 Corps per -mit was a letter of March 1970 to the
Corps frcm the, State Resources Agency which reported that eight State
epa.tm;e,,�its had revie�Wed the :application and that the State bad no objections
but that "all de -watering operations shall be done in a manner to preven-116-
flulsar,co; or uf1s-1Q_htlinesS,, and that if it is proposed that discharges frcn.
� I
de,watering operations will be to the waters o.f the S -tate, in this case to
Nedport Bay, -hen the pro-popent is requested to file a report of waste
6 L
discharge with 'L�e Califo�nia Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa
Ana Region. The Department of Fish and Ga.me notes that this project will
Incr--ase the habitaL available to fish and wildlife, and recommends -that
ti'12 following pre-autiMlary rneasures be taken: All excavated material will
, - Mzed in a r1anner, that Will riot significantly increase
be disposed oi: and stabi
-the Siltation into, or tturbid-ity of, the waters of the State. For purposes of
Ithis pe—)�,Iit the rcaximui-,? a-mOUDt of settleable solids allc-.�,iable shall be one
rnilligrZm per liter pair �our (1mg/l/i r) F-;asur.--d where runoff -watfler enters
�' the State; no petroleum products shall be disposed of in the
aaters of- L P
excavated area; and alal constructio.-i 'e�lri - will be removed from thl-�- e^-cavaited
c �
area pi-lor to opEning the are to Nl&wport Bay."
in August 19709 the City Council approved the pem.it citing the
requirenents for the Corps pennit and the Resources Agency.
In Decamber 1971, The Irvine Commpany filed a request for waste
11scharce oDeration) wilth the Regional 'ilater Quality Control
a . LU
oard. After requiring an alternate contingency plan, the Executive Officer
of the Eluard in January 1972 authorized The Irvine Ccmpany to proceed
ad'hering to the following requircamerts:
no discharge if s u ch waters contain visible
Solids, debris, oil or scum.
"2. The waters of 'Newport Bay shall not be depressed In
.dissolved oxygen . . . below a level of 5.0 r.P,911.
U3. shall not contain sulfides greater than 0.1 rqg/l.
"49 . � . Po nuisances."
In folarch 1972, the full Water Quality Control Board confirmed the
ExeCUtI111- Officer's action adding a require,-.,,,ent for chlorine control (less
'L�an 0.11 mg/] and a rrl-�quire;rent-1 for -a mioni'toring and reprrtlag progra-.Q..
3
In April. 1972, The Irvine Company complied with the new regulations
requiring applications for -permits under the National Refuse A%ct of 1899.
The Regional Water Quality Board has been inspecting the . discharge
operations. at. frequent intervals. To the best of my knowledge, The Irvine
Ccmpany has been and is complying with discharge regulations except for one
s)n9le event. The single exception was a limited sediment discharge which
accured �-,,hen a Section of pipe vias changed and the new Section had dirt in
i A.
Th e Irvifle Ccmpany is planning controls so that there wi I I be nor
Massive inrush or outflow of -water when the.bay is opened up to the main
harbar.
The background file is located in the Marine Safety Department.
GEORGE M. CANIES
G i' -,'D h
cc. : X-ar-Ine Safety Director
C01--fluni ty Devel ournent Director
1-1ty Atterney
Robert S ry,--; r I ry i r, e Colmpany
17
01
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: Harbor & Tidelands Administrator
SUBJECT: HARBOR PERMIT NO, 200-000
APPLICATION TO:
August 10, 1970
ITEM NO. H-1
Dredge and bulkhead approximately an 11 acre lagoon, connected
to the harbor with a 100 foot channel just east of Balboa' Yacht Basin
for the purpose of developing an additional waterfront community. See
attached drawing.
APPT.TCANT-
V,
The Irvine Company
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve the application subject to the following conditi-ons:
1. Approval of the Corps of Engineers. (Corps of Engineers Permit
.was issued on 20 May, 1970)
2., Approval of the Joint Harbor Committee. (Approved on 14 April,
1970.)
3. That the applicant observe precautions against creating excess
turbidity as outlined in the State Resources Agency's letter
of.25 March, 1970.
4. That the waterway, up to but not including the bulkhead, be
dedicated to the City of Newport Beach. '
5. That the bulkhead design be approved by the Public Works
Director.
6. That there be no overhead wires or lines over the entrance
-channel and that any underground utilities'in the water area
.have a minimum of five feet'of soil cover.
7. That the Harbor and Tidelands Administrator and the Santa
Ana River Basin Regional Water Quality Control Board be
notified 48 hours in advance of opening the pro2osed chan.-nel
to the main harbor. (21 *9-
V
L A -
leo ) y"A
Mayor and City Council
8/10/70
Pg. 2
DISCUSSION:
A. The granting of a harbor permit is the final action required
to initiate the dredging and -construction phase of the Promontory Bay
project.
B. All other necessary permits or approvals have been obtained
from the Corps of Engineers and the Joint Harbor Committee. The Corps
of Engineers, in.gran-t-ing a permit, coordinated with the State Resources
Agency which in -turn coordinated with the following State departments
and agencies:
Department of Navigation & Ocean Development
Department of,Parks and Recreation
State Water Resources Control Board
Department of Fish and Game
Department of Public Health
Department of Conservation
Division oil Highways
State Lands Division
C. In ratifying the approval of the Joint Harbor Committee,
the Orange County Harbor Commission recommended:
1. That the water area be dedicated to a public agency.
Dedication of the wa'ter'area to the City is a recoinmended
condition to the application.
2. That The Irvine Company be responsible for any maintenance
dredging that might be required because of siltation from
the adjacent, undeveloped uplands. This recommendation
has not been included in the conditions because the
Porter -Cologne Water Quality Control Act places the burden
for sediment control on builders and developers.
3. That some level of responsibility should be placed on
the developer -in the event the proposed bay causes beach
erosion on Balboa Island. This recommendation has not
been included in the conditions because engineering
studies! reviewed by -the Corps of Engineers and -the
City Public Works Department, indicate that erosion is
improbable. The dedication of the waterway to the public
also alters the situation.
D. In approving the tentative tract 8 July, 1970, the
City Council directed that the water area be edicate to the City.
G. M. DAWES
GMD/db
Attachment
11 eel
DIL )AA?,
EAST
ST
JF�,ETTY
TIDE
SECTIOM
s s 0 c -
E E I
1.11 G
I G
APPLICATION M: I rt -6. 141a
SECTION 6-6 TU RIVINE 0H VANY
sso �IEVPUT UhTU DR,
IVIIIIIII
ss 0 c -
E Ej
kN I A
�JN G
6 NY,
THE ltV'NE
SECTION 6-6 SS NEW P W CENTER DR.
9- T.S.
C/I
r
rl
IALbOA
6ZACO
ISLAND re
OA
C
E4)V
DEL MAK
VE�T
VICINITY SKETCH
JE Y EAST
A ENV P IIAT bA-Y , CALIFOk9lX
o I J�Tly
14 OT E. , SOUNDINbS APLE E�PKESSED
Gpppl4i( SCALE - Was
IN FEET AND DENOTE �DEPTHS,
ki
16ELOW MEAN LOVER LOW WATEK.
MA%IMUM WGE OF 71DE
APPM. 10 FT. HAWK 1-114ES AVE.
BF VINPOK i�NY.
T
ESTA.61-1514FD IN -THIS SECTION
-101, le
LULUEND
+
ss 0 c -
E Ej
kN I A
�JN G
6 NY,
THE ltV'NE
SECTION 6-6 SS NEW P W CENTER DR.
9- T.S.
0 M A R, J. 1, it L_ 1, E: VA N G
FeNow, American society of Civii EinginSer5
CONSULTENG ENGINEER
;213' 626-6219
CABILL OJAYELL
July 15, 1969
T -vine Company
550 Newport Center Drive
I
Newport Beach, CaiilCornia 9 6 6 0
Attention. Mr. Charles Th
I-
Gentleznen:
621 SOUTH HOPE 5TREET,
LOS ANCELES, CALIFOkNiA 90017
I hzve discussed very-briefflly with Mr. Thompson Irv;ne
,el T
ornpany
s plans to dredge and develop a srnall laaoon, which has
"ean sclael-41aillcaLLy described in a by Raub, Bein, Frost &
.Mssocla�es entitled "Proposed 1-1:romo'ntory Point Lag
-,00n.11 This is
L -o reco:,d comrneras I had after these brief discussions -and cursory
exam.;natio-;ls of the RBF&A sketch.
'E'ssentially, the question. that has been d,
Iscussed by 3%1r.
-;-I ion-lp soil and Ime is whether or -not unacceptable water conditions
M; be expected in the westerly reaches of '"
g tbe proposed lacoon,
or can Lt be d-eveloped with reasonable expectatioas that esthetic
"'I not be inripaired and biolo.aical pollution will not be a
Without detailed and tedious cornputations or a sophisticated
model, no positive ans�,ver shoj:,ld be given, but relying on the Judge -
rzient- and consideration 01 prevalent wind directions, and perhaps
nnost iinportantly, 'the prevailing discipline that boat owners exercise
';- preventing waste discharrie fr.ozn boats into the bay at Newpo�, I
ILA.
See no reason to antic ipate undue proble-nis if you do develop the
pro,p,osed lagool'i.
-igate any possib il 4 +
0 1 n it I ��y that 'Hushing of the lagoon would
00 3.1'ripaired by a too -restricted exit, to Balboa Island Nort-a Channel
woi.,ld sugyest that the entra-ti-ce between the Channel and the -Dro-
-oosed Pro-nno-utory Icloint Lagoon be dred�-led and rn
aintained so that
11 W11, be a miniznurn of 1 000 square feet of cross-section at
',Aean Ilo,,yer Low Water tide stao-e.
Yours very tr"'
L 7,
OMA. J. L'UIEVAN e
SPLED-E
Mr. George M. Dawes
Harbor & Tidelands Administrator
City of Newport Beach.
3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, California 92660
Dear Mr. Dawes:
22 January 1970
A copy of the proposal to alter a portion of lower Newport Harbor.
as outlined in your submission to Mr. Herron of this office, has
been reviewed by the Coastal Engineering and Operations Branch.
Mr. Herron discussed our preliminary findings with you in a
telephone conversation on 15 January 1970.
A detailed review will be given this pr9posal when your formal
request for a navigation. permit is made. Our initial reaction is
as follows:
a. Tidal exchange of waters in the newly created bay should
be studied to determine possible pollution effects.
b. The effect of ebb tide currents from the proposed new
entrance should be studied.to avoid any adverse erosion and/or
shoaling effects on the banks of the.existing channel.
c. It does not appear desirable to extend harbor lines into
the proposed basin.
d. A navigation permit will be required to connect the pro -
posed basin and entrance channel to the existing navigation channel.
At least 30 days should be allowed to process this permit request.
If you desire further information on the proposal, please do not
hesitate to canon us.
Sincerely yours,,
S. J. B LACK
LTC, CE
Deputy District Engineer
February 4. 19TO
District Engineer
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Post Office Box 2711
Los Angeles, Ca lifornia 90053
Dear Sir:
On behalf of our client, The Irvine Company, we are hereby applying for a
Navigation Permit for the purpose of dredging and constructing bulkheads in
Promontory Bay, Newport Beach, California. The proposed bay extension is
shoreward of the U.S. Bull -head Line and lies between U.S. Bulkhead Stations
101 and 200, as shown on the enclosed permit application sketch.
We intend to excavate the area to the proposed project depth of -9 elevation
in the dry and remove the material at the entrance only after all the dredging
has been completed, thereby creating as little disturbance as possible to the
existing Balboa Island North Channel.
I have discussed this project with Mr. Wendell Reese of the Permit Section,
and he has indicated that a detailed review will be given to this application
vith regard to exchange of the newly created bay and the effect of ebb -
tide currents from the proposed new entrance on the existing North Balboa
Island Channel.
If during this review you require any further detailed information on this
proposed project, we will be more than happy to supply you with the information
required.
I have enclosed with this permit application one (1) reproducible copy of the
permit sketch and.three (3) prints outlining the area of the work in red. Also
enclosed is a copy of the Tentative Mapwhich gives more detail, for your use.
As The Irvine Company is very anxious to begIn work on this project and your
approval is req:uired before any construction can corm-ence, we would be most
appreciative of anything you can do to ex-pedite the approval of this permit.
Sincerely,
ES
)RA , BEM, FROST & ASSOCIATE
Jack G. Raub
Civil Engineer
JGR/cem
Enclosures
cc:. Mr. Dave Kaylor, The Irvine Company
February, 1970
City of Newport Beach
3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, California
Attention of: Mr. GeorM Daves,--Cj�X-Harbor Coordinator
Gentlemen:
On behalf of our client, The Irvine Company, and in accordraice with your standard
requirements for the application of a Harbor Permit for new construction in the
city of Newport Beach, we are hereby applying for a Harbor Permit to dredge and
bulkhead the Promontory Bay development in the vicinity of Beacon Bay.
At this time ve are unable to supply finished dredging and bulkheading plans,
although we would like to receive a pernit contingent upon final approval of these
construction drawings. We have applied to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for a
Navigation Permit, and they are now reviewing it and setting it for public hearing.
Enclosed with this application please find four (4) copies of the drawing indicating
the new work which we propose, a check for $100 to cover the basic Harbor Permit
fee and your harbor Permit application blank.
Since we are seeking approval on the Tentative Map and Use Variance at this tine,
we would appreciate it if this item could be included on the Harbor Agenda of
Februaxy 10 at 11 a.m.
If you have any questions or need any further information to consider this matter,
please contact me.
Sincerely,
BEIN FROST &-ASSOCIATES
L/Jack G. Raub
Civil Eng;ineer
JGR/cem
Enclosures
cc: �lr. Dave Kaylor, The Irvine Company
February.10,, 1970,
TO; Joint Harbor Committee
FROM: City Harbor and Tidelands Admini` trator
is
SUBJECT: 'Harbor Application 200-00.0
APPLICATION TO: Dredge and bulkhead an 11 -acre lagoon, connected
to the H E_
ar or with a*100 foot channel just east o� Balboa Yacht Basin,
for the purpose of developing an additional waterfront commiinity. See
attached drawing.
APPLICANT: The Irvine Company
SITUATION:
A. This application is part of a series of actions required
for the full development of the additional community. These actions,
currently being coordinated by the City Planning Department, includef
1. A Master Plan Amendmentt- for changing of the
Street and Highway Plan.
2'. A Use Permit..
3. A Tentative Tract Map.
40 A study to determine the effect this development
would have on the value of City property adjacent
to Bayside Drive.
A separate study by the City considering the pros -
and cons of dedicating privately created waterways.
6. The basic Harbor Permit plus incremental additional
requestsas the proposal develops'..
B. The.present request is for dredging and bulkheading only,
but further applications will have to be made for the detailed bulkheading
,plan and for proposed dock and slip facilities. Requests for private
residential slips and �loats would be the responsibility of individual
waterfront residents in accordance with an overall plan to be proposed
by -the -Irvine Company.
C. A Corps of Engineers permit is necessary and has been
applied'for. The Corps ha's already advised me that a detailed review
will be given the request to include:
1. Tidal exchange to determine possible pollution effects.
2. Ebb tide currents to determine if there are adverse
erosion or shoaling effects on the banks of the existing channel.
-00
Harbor Application 200 0.
2/10/70
2
The Corps has further stated that it does not appear
desirable to extend harbor lines into the proposed basin..
D. The Director� of the Harbor District have expressed
similar interests in water quality, water circulation and erosion
Of the banks of the existing channel. Hefurther feels that consi-
deration.should be given to:
1. Responsibility for maintenance of basin project
depths.
.2. Establishment of pier permit areas for individual.'
lots.
3 -for
...Dedication of water areas to a public agency
enforcement.
E. Any approval of the Harbor Application at this time
would have to be.j in essence, an approval in concept and would have
to be subject to:
1. Approval of the Corp.s of Engineers'.
2. Approval of the.City of Newport Bqach, which would
imply approval of other concurrent actions by the
City.
F. -Other conditions that could be considered -are*.
1. Dedication of the waterway..
2'. Maintenance Responsibilities�.
3. Public right of entry.
4. Engineering parameters.
5. - Pier -permit areas.'
..G. Me-DAWES
G14D/db
DATE20�4U9 11 9 SU BJ
CHKD. DATE - - ----------- - 7 74 �/ ------ i:: �zz Z _: 2 f/4
7 7'
:5.
-5Pe, ex:, g:::)
Cn/
7, 4`7
17-2
/'5p'::7e C::"7/ '::�>74 -
SHEET NO.----/ ----- OF -0 ----
JOBNO ----------- ------------------
C�- 5>c) ?/.,
-1-7,C> W--Ve- ZIII�1�2 741dC
42'75 a,06-11? 11::2 v e /
L-4, k/ K"Ce'? CL.1",77)
/ .5 1
:::,C--> 74
7.3 74 ly
L000l (34
By'le.��-,x-9 ..... \DATF-Z2.4".,76.qSU13JEC:T.-/
SHEET NO.. -.4;f
CHKD. BY ........... DATE --------------- --------- JOB NO -------- - . ..................
-------- — --------- - --- - --- - ----------------- - -----------------------
--------------- - --- - ------------ - -------
<0 4', Ld
I
Idl-CC56, CD X, /CC),) 4e.
,0,-nexe� C=5;
1=4/LF
71—
CALj. 0i.i.iiA
Depurlin -.t �r i �—i oi.. .nd Wolurcroft
Departm-nt cf F�,;' . i� Pecreation r
Doporlmunt of '%Vc.:— %.--uicc5
THE RESOURCES AGIENCY OF CALIFORNIA
SACRAMENTO, CALIFOW,411A
MNAR225qj70
Dist rict Engineer
S , Army Corps of Engineers
L,.��s ".ngeles District
L
0. Box 2711
Los 1--1%ngeles, California 90053
State Review and Comment
Public Notice No. 4 - Proposed dredging
and clonstruction of concrete bulkhead,
Newport Beach, Orange County
1416 -�L�Trk STxL�-.'
9�581-;
Air Resources BoDrc;
Colorado Ri,,er Board
State Lands Cornin;ssion
C)Mce of Auclear Energy
Slate Reclamation Board
Regional Water Quality Control
Boards
Slato Water Resource& Control
Board
Dear Sir:
'C
kilis Is 'o advise that your Public Notice No. 4 regarding a permit
application by The Irvine Company has been coordinated with the
z
'ollowing State agencies for the purpose of review and -comment:
Department of Navigation and
Ocean Development
.Department of Parks and Recreation
State Water Resources Control Board
Los Angeles Regional WQG Board
Department of Fish and Game
Wildlife Conservation Board
Department of Public Health
Department of Conservation
Division of Highways
State Lands Division
j�-,e State Water Resources Control Board recommends that all dewatering
o,)erations shall be done in a manner to prevent nuisance of unsightli-
'-;-'ss� a.-ld that 11' it is proposed that discharges from dewatering opera
,,ons will be to waters of the State, in this,case.to Newport Bay, then
zi-ie proponent is requested to file a report of waste discharge with the
California Regional Water Quality Control Board.4 Santa Ana Region.
.. ........ "7 ------
District Engineer P. 2 Public Notice 1�o. 4
T e Department of Fish and Game notes that this project will increase
the�l-,abitat available to fish and wildlife, and recori-imends that the
following precautionary measures be taken: AH excavated material will
be (,'IsPosed of and stabilized in a manner that will not significantly
incre'�Qse the siltation into, or turbidity of, the waters of the States
For purposes of this permit the maximum amount of settleable solids
allowable shall be one milligram per liter per hour (I mg1l1hr.) measured
ers waters of the State; no petroleum products shall
t re runof water ent
be disposed of in the excavated area; and all construction debris will be
removed from the excavated area prior to opening the area to Newport Bay,
The applicant being advised of the above coninents and requirements by
6 . istribution of this letter as indicated below, and trusting that they
will be complied with, the State of California interposes no objection -
to your issuance of the permit requested.
Sincerely yours,
FORD B. FORD
Ford B. Ford
Assistant Secretary for Resources
cc: Department of Navigation and
Ocean Development
State Water Resources Control Board
Los Angeles Regional WQC Board
Department of Fish and Game
..Department of Conservation
Division of Highways
State Lands Division
South Pacific Division
Applicant The Irvine Company
RESOUECE.')
CAUFOMNIA 1416 1141;�T,i STxZLT,
9531
Air Resourc- Bo.-ard
�:.-n C.n�i Gum, Colorado Ri�er Board
DCPL;r I ri—i t o.' r -d Wolurcraft State Lands Commission
-nr cf `�i: ,,creation CMce of Aucleur Energy
Oopaoi j�%: I'
0oporlmunt f —vices State Reclamation Board
Regional Water Quality Control
Boards
T H &E RESOURCES' AGLENCY OF CALIFORNIA State Water Resources Control
Board
SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA
MT1, RZ 25 �j
970
Istrict Engineer
Is Army Corps of Engineers
os -'.rgeles District
0. Box 2711
Los Angeles, California 90053
State Review and Comment:
Public Notice No. 4 - Proposed dredging
and construction of concrete bulkhead,,
Newport Beach, Orange County
Dea.r S i r:
b -;Js is to advise that your Public Notice No. 4 regarding a permit
application by The Irvine Company has been coordinated with the
following State agencies for the purpose of review and,comment:
Department of Navigation and
Ocean Development
.Department of Parks and Recreation
State Water Resources Control Board
Los Angeles Regional WQC Board
Department of Fish and Game
Wildlife Conservation Board�
Department of Public Health
Department of Conservation
Division of Highways
State Lands Division
:,c State I -later Resources Control Board recommends that all dewatering
operations shall be done in a manner to prevent nuisance of unsightli-
i-,ass, and that if it is proposed 'that discharges from dewatering opera-
-,�ions will be to waters of the State, in this.case to -Newport Bay, then
'Zille-proponent is requested to file a report of waste discharge with the
California Regional Water Quality Control Board.,"'Santa Ana,Region.
.... .... . ... ...... .. ..
District Engineer P. 2 Pub I i c Not ice No. 4.
The Dcpartj-,�,ent of Fish and Game notes that this project will increase
t 1-e�habltat available to fish and wildlife, and recommiends that the
following precautionary measures be taken: Ail excavated material will
be disposed of and stabilized in a manner that will not significantly
increase the siltation into, or turbidity of, the waters of the State
,-or purposes of this permit the maximum amount of settleable solids
allowable shall be one milligram per liter per hour (I m9111hr.) measured
�-.lnere runoff water enters waters of the State; no petroleum products shall
be disposed of in the excavated area; and all construction debris will be
reimoved from the excavated area prior,to opening the area to Newport Bay.
The- applicant being advised of -the above comments and requirements by
distribution of this letter as indicated below, and trusting that they
will be complied with,the State of California interposes no objection
to your issuance of the permit requested.
Sincerely yours,
r� ORD 13. FORD
Ford B. Ford
Assistant Secretary for Resources
cc: Departmient of Navigation and
Ocean Development
State Water Resources Control Board
Los Angeles Regional 14QC Board
,Department of Fish and Game
Department of Conservation
Division of Highways
State Lands Division
South Pacific Division,
Applicant The Irvine Company
NEWPORT BEACH
CALIFORNIA
city Hall
3300 Newport Blvd.
(714) 673-2110
March 21, 1973
Mr. Kenneth Sampson, Director
Harbors, Beaches and Parks District
County of Orange
1901 Bayside Drive
Newport Beach, California 92662
Attention: Mr. Larry M. Leaman, Chief of Operations
Dear Mr. Sampson:
This is in answer to your letter dated March 16, 1973 wherein
you requested, on behalf of the Joint Harbor Committee, an
opinion from this office on legal responsibility for any pos-
sible damage to public or private property resulting from the
tidal flow into and out of Promontory Bay.
Generally, in this instance and in the absence of a mistake
or defect in the design or construction of the project, the
City would be responsible for any resultant damages caused
by the tidal flow emanating from the Promontory Bay area.
Unfortunately, there is no exact means,. without the availability
of a model testing basin, for determining potential adverse ef-
fects which could result from the tidal action flowing into and
out of Promontory Bay. The developer's engineers and experts
addressed themselves to this concern, and based on their best
technical knowledge and research it was determined to the City's
satisfaction that the potential beach erosion or debris problems
caused by the project were remote. Had this been a concern,
the City perhaps could have required an indemnity agreement
from the developer at the time the various permits and maps re-
quired in connection with the project were approved.
In June of 1972 the waterways were dedicated to and accepted by
the City. Accordingly, the City assumed the responsibility for
the maintenance and control of any accumulation of debris, or
beach erosion, caused by the construction of the project. The
City has a beach erosion control program which monitors and
keeps these types of problems in check.
Mr. Kenneth Sampson -2- March 21, 1973
If significant erosion does occur which can be directly related
to the Promontory Bay project, the developer may be held liable
on a theory of implied warranty. However, it would have to be
shown that the construction did not conform to the approved de-
sign or that certain basic assumptions as I represented were, in
fact, incorrect.
I trust that the foregoing answers the question raised by the
Joint Harbor Committee. However, should you require additional
information, please let me know and I will attempt to respond
further.
Very truly
yours
DENNIS O'NEIL
City Attorney
DON dm
CC: City Council
/ity Manager
MZ
Marine Safety Director
Public Works Director
e
November 6. 1972
MRINE SAFETY DEPARTMENT
70 Newport Pier
TO: MARINE SAFETY DIRECTOR
FROM: D. Harshbarc$er, Captain
SUBJECT: PROMONTORY ZA'� - cHmNEL OPENING PLAN
Bob:
For your information,, attached are two memo's from (1)
David B. Kuhn, Project IManager for Promontory Bav, and
(2) Mr. A. D, Peiihall, Ilarine Contractor -for' the" Proo
montory project*
The memo's outline the steps t-liat are proposed in the
opening of Promontory Bay.
I will distribute these memols per your requests.
D. Harshbarger,, Captain
D11: lf
MARINt SAP.'ETY COPY
RESOLUTION NO. 7874
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
-AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION
OF NEWPORT BEACH
OF A GRANT OF EASEMENT TO THE IRVINE COMPANY
FOR PIER MOORING AND MAINTENANCE PURPOSES IN
CONNECTION WITH TRACT NO. 3867
WHEREAS, on June 29, 1972, The Irvine Company recorded
the Final Map of Tract No. 3867 in the Office of the Orange County
Recorder; and
WHEREAS, said map contained a note that Lot A (the Bay)
was.to'be used for public water navigation subject to an easement
appurtenant.to,each of the bayfront lots for pier purposes; and
WHEREAS,'�Title Insurance and Trust Company advises that
said note did not technically accomplish the intended reservation
by The Irvine Company of the easements for pier purposes adjacent
to -each of the lettered lots; and
WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to clarify this
apparent ambiguity by granting to The Irvine Company an easement
over Lot A for pier mooring and maintenance purposes;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of
the City of Newport Beach that the Mayor and City Clerk are
July 16, 1976
7-0. 7XY /JC*S7—,.Vd" aAPAC
MARINE DEPARTMENT a
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: Marine Director
ITEM NO.: G-6
SUBJECT: THREE MILE PER HOUR SPEED LIMIT - PROMONTORY BAY
Recommendati-on
If desired, direct the City Attorney to prepare the necessary
ordinance.
Discussion
The Board of Directors of the Promontory Bay Community Association
have,,requested by letter dated June 21, 1976 (attached),, that the
speed limit within Promontory Bay be reduced from five miles per
hour to three miles per hour.
The speed limit reduction is proposed for the following reasons:
1. Wake Damage: Certain types of vessels at five miles per hour
have caused minor float damage. Promontory Bay is completely
bulkheaded and wakes tend to rebound in this confined zone.
2. Safety: During the summer months, children use the bay for
swimming. The narrow entrance channel, leading into the bay
leaves little room for a vessel to avert a swimmer near or
just inside the entrance channel.
3. Enforcement: The Orange County Sheriff Department, Harbor
Patrol Bureau do not patrol these channels as frequentlyas
the more heavily used main channels, thus there is a I tendency
for sightseers to push the existing five mile,per Spur speed
limit.
Promontory Bay is a dedicated City waterway. In discus"ng the
sl
proposed speed limit change with the orange County Sheriff's
Department, Harbor Patrol Bureau,, the Assistant Harbor Master
PAGE 2
PROMONTORY BAY
has indicated that their division has no objections to the request
if it is approved by City Ordinance and subsequent County Ordinance,
if necessary.
'4� �.A' / 4��
1 IV t -l/
D. Harshbarger, Director
Marine Department
DH:ll
Attachment
G. W. MCCLELLAN JR.,, D.D.S., INC.
ARTHUR B. PARKINS, D.D.S.
1879 NEWPORT BOULEVARD
COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA 92627
(714) 645-6631
June 21, 1976 .
Mr. David Harshbarger
Assistant Director: Tidelands
City of Newport Beach
3300 Newport Boulevard
NT
ewport Beach, California 92663
Dear Dave:
I'm writing this letter at the direction of the Board of Directors of
the Promontory Bay Community Association pursuant to our phone conver-
sations of this day. I appreciate your swift and attentive reply to my
questions concerning reduction of boat speed ligits in Promontory Bay.
As I mentioned during our conversation this morning the Association app-
ointed me to inquire which path would be most appropriate for our Assoc-
iation to take in changing the waterway speed liniLt from five M.P.H. to
three M.P.H. As per your suggestion Itm writing this letter to state',
the Associations' position. The intention here is to give your office
adequate information to enable you, in conjunction with the City Attorney,
to write an ordinance for submission to the City Council'lowering the
speed limit from five M.P.H. The following three points are most prom-
inent in our request for a reduced waterway speed lifLit;
1. The wake from certain types of boats (heavily laden,outboards and
outdrives) is sufficient to cause cracking of concrete docks even when
the five M.P.H. speed limit appears to be observed.
2. During the summer months small children often use the bay for swimming,
surf mat riding, paddle boarding, and sailing.
3. Due to its rather "off the beaten path" location the Harbor Patrol
infrequently patrols the bay. For this reason weekend excursionists feel
secure to violate the posted 5 M.P.H. speed limit by a seemingly innocent
knot or two.
In order to put the above stated items in proper prespective it must
be noted that we in Promontory Bay have a unique problem in that portions
of the bay are particularly narrow and that wave action (cross -bouncing
off sea walls then back again) often continues for several minutes following
passage of the offending boat. Boats often come charging around the
corner which constitutes the entrance to the bay at an estimated six to
nine knots or faster. This is the narrowest portion of the bay and is a
blind sixty degree turn. Children often swim in this area. This speed
combined with the narrowness of the channel leaves little'running room
for a boater (probably not paying adequate attention)tto avert a swimmer.
G. W. MCCLELLAN JR., D.D.S., INC.
ARTHUR B. PARKINS, D.D.S.
1879 NEWPORT BOULEVARD
COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA 92627
(714) 645-6631
2.
Wakes caused by certain boats (the stern -heavy ones) which are observing
the speed limit causes severe damage to docks in the narrower portions
of the bay. Finally it is the position of the Board of the Association
that a permanently posted 3 M.P.H. speed limit in Promontory Bay plus
.a stenciled warning of "caution children swimming" or the like posted
on the bulk -head at.the entrance to the channel will do much to slow down
weekend boat traffic. We feel this change will improve the situation .
to the extent that we will not have to demand increased patrols from the
Harbor Patrol. We -stand ready to assist you in any way we can when you
our prompt� a6�tibi on t S
make your presentation,to the City Council. Yi
matter is appreciated.
Reaftl
3
G.W *cClellan, Jr,
Vic resident: Promontory Bay
Coiity, Association
14
I 7,p
WE
MiElf I
,&On, (MMI&M09 )UMD.
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS / PLANNING CONSULTANTS
218 EAST BROADWAY ANAHEIM, CA 92805 - (714) 772-3110
3995 E. BAYSHORE RD. PALO ALTO, CA 94303 - (415) 969-3376
TO:
Mr. Glen Weldon
NeWport Beach M6rine Dept. Sent by: Mail
#70 Balboa Blvd. TN Messenger
Picked up
Date: 4-21-75 Other
Project: Promontory Bay
We transmit: 10 copies each of Handrail Details
Remarks:
�.MCITITAIINIT-Wo,
TO:
EDMAYOR
El COUNCIL
MANAGER
ASST. MGR.
ADMIN. ASST.
ATTORNEY
CITY CLERK
comm. ormv.
FINANCE
FIRE
DATE
-,Z ---------- .............
[:1 GEN. SERVICES
9 "RARY
9�t'MARINE SAFETY
El PARKS & REC.
-0 PERSONNEL
El POLICE
El PUBLIC WORKS
PURCHASING
TRAFFIC
FOR: F] ACTION & DISPOSIT . ION
FIL E
INFORMATION
5LIV"EW & COMMENT
UdkW. TU RN
REMARKS:
.............................................................................................................
............................................... m ..........................................................
...................................................................................
.......................
........................................... 11 ........... .......................................................
............. I ..................................... I -
........ .........................................
FROM .....
j ..................
9 ........... .........
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS / PLANNING CONSULTANTS
�/—o W
218 EAST BROADWAY ANAHEIM, CA 92805 - (I
(� 4 19 2 --3 �1
PALO ALTO, CA 94303 - (415) 9
3995 E. BAYSHORE RD. 15M �7E
TO:
Marine Department
Date: 4-8-75
Project: Promontory Bay
WNHS I AA 110[l
Sent by
Mail
TC Messenger
Picked up
Other
We transmit: 1 set of xerox copies showing Handrail atop
Seawall.
Remarks: For your use
V I e7 e- 47 4r. �L) 0 !r n, , 0 �11 IJ , 'I I , '.4 -Y'
7,41V 4'—' 0 vo 'b Az AL- f 0 A-
-2
on /*/,, , -/. 1 6.1 /-, / I z
By: Tony (bacon
A V?e�' I Q( -'e OCYLII
4�7
QVQ)Hygo ILD mummooBu
M'MB' AS OF AMERICAN'SOCIETY OF LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT9
M 1A.1 BROADWAY. ANA HEIM. CALIFORNIA $2405 - TELEPHONE (7141 172-3110
DETAIL NO.
SERIES OF DATE
04 k4 1�
SHT. NO.
OF
CQ
'Q
61F -1
oy
#4
VA
WIN
V1
CIO
'f �
1114 '' ..
F
4z.
YL
41
L 11U
IL
06
"4
A I
tzl
-4r-
MEMBERS OF AMERICAN SOCIETY Of LANO 9 CAPE ARCHITECTS
It* EAST @ROADWAY. ANAHEIM. CAILIFOANIA 92865 - Trito.ofte 17.41 Im$too
.4
wq-
�vm 0
i
HAHt-';PAoNlL—. - SHL NO.
DETAIL NO- OF
SERIES OF DATE -4-6-71
C; -j
icz. qv
0'. A
0
pi
IL
Cl,
Ilk
Iv,
as
of
JL1 77
fly
t, �,4
0�j
misA
SHL NO.
T- NO.
*4--f
QUOMMO TIMITIMM201\3 DETAIL NO. OF
MEMOIRS Of AmtRICAN SOCIETY OF LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS SERIES OF DATE4.08,-7
216 a A31 @*OADWAY, AMAHIIM CAUFOMA 12891 - VILIPHOME 11M ITE -1110 I
COF
�JD
x,�r
A,
4
0
CD
co
VA
.04
/L N
,7T
CD
o—
fu
L
ru i
SHL NO.
DETAIL NO. OF
EMU.
ME" BEN$ OF AMERICAN SOCIETY OF LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS SERIES OF DAT E -751
m .1. IAST *A0A0WA"".. C...IA .1 lftl[P.OM 111.1 112.3tti
ol
r -J,
, A
co
WA
04
Of
tMIS
4r
-V�
10 It
SHT. NO.
�,k
DETAIL NO. OF
MCM11101 OF AMINICAN 80019TY OF tAMOSCAPI ARCHITECTS ERIES OF DATE
314 IA$V ORGADWAY. A�ANVM, CAUPORMIA 0189% - TILIPHOME (Tid) 172-3110
87
i At
1�jl
vr�j IVW
VA
. Cf. od
44
.41
CD
I It
EmmilwL
14
744,
4o
4w
SHT. NO.
DETAIL NO. OF
MEMBERS OF AMERICAN SOCIETY OF LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS SERIES OF J0 :AT o
210 EAST BROADWAY. ANAHEIM . CALIFORNIA 02095 - TELEPHONE OtIl) 771.2114
�Jl 11"t"i
JFI
Al
re
kll
04
VA
r.r
od
All
U
deNiine properties inc,
October 8, 1976
City of Newport Beach
Marine Department
3300 Newport Blvd.
Newport Beach, Calif. 92660
Re: Promontory Bay Community Association
Bay Cleaning
Dear Sir:
In July of this year, we sent you a letter requesting information
as to who is responsible for the cleaning of the rocks and rip -rap
in the bay near Bayside Drive.
Would you please contact this office as soon as possible so that
we may report to the Board of Directors of the Association if you
do, indeed, clean the bay,_or if we should contact another department
of the -City.
Thank you very much for your cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
DEVINE PROPERTIES, INC.
Sam John J�egp
Association Manager
KE: ke
'k,
cc: Board of Directors
Promontory Bay Community.Association
2865 east coast highway, p.o. box 687, corona del mar, california 92625 (714) 675-7611
61
0 C) — V'�7
MARINE DEPARTMENT
August 2, 1976
TO: P.B.& R. DIRECTOR
FROM: Marine Department
SUBJECT: DEBRIS ON PROMONTORY BAY
Cal,
As you may recall, I mentioned the problem of debris on the rocks in
Promontory Bay to you a week or so ago. I believe you indicated
you would have your people look at the situation.
I received the attached letter today. Unless I hear from you, I will
call Devine Properties and inform them that we will keep tabs on the
situation and try to keep the area a little cleaner.
6en E. Welden
Tidelands Administrator
Marine Department
GEW:ll
deNine properties inc.
City of Newport Beach
Marine Department
3300 Newport Blvd.
Newport Beach, California 92660
Re: Promontory Bay Community Association
Bay Cleaning
Dear Sir:
I have been informed that the Marine Department of the City
of Newport Beach is responsible for the cleaning of the rocks
and rip -rap in the bay on Bayside Drive. This is part of
the Promontory Bay Community Association. As the managing
company for this Association, we have been asked to inquire
as to whom is responsible for this cleaning. If your
Department is responsible, would you please contact this
office as to when the cleaning can be done. Thank you
very much for your consideration in this matter. We will
await your call.
Sincerely,
DEVINE PROPERTIES, INC.
' *,V- ' &,zez')
Kathy Ler
Association Secretary
KE:ke
2865 east coast highway, p.o. box 687, corona del mar, california 92625 (714) 675-7611
MARINE DEPARTMENT
July 16, 1976
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: Marine Director
ITEM NO.: G-6
SUBJECT: THREE MILE PER HOUR SPEED LIMIT - PROMONTORY BAY
Recommendation
If desired, direct the City Attorney to prepare the necessary
ordinance.
Discussion
The Board of Directors of the Promontory Bay Community Association
have,,requested by letter dated June 21, 1976 (attached), that the
speed limit within Promontory Bay be reduced from five miles per
hour to three miles per hour.
The speed limit reduction is proposed for the following reasons:
1. Wake Damage: Certain types of vessels at five miles per hour
have caused minor float damage. Promontory Bay is completely
bulkheaded and wakes tend to rebound in this confined zone.
2. Safety: During the summer months, children use the bay for
swimming. The narrow entrance channel, leading into the bay
leaves little room for a vessel to avert a swimmer near or
just inside the entrance channel.
3. Enforcement: The Orange County Sheriff Department, Harbor
Patrol Bureau do not patrol these channels as frequentlyas
the more heavily used main channels, thus there is a tendency
for sightseers to push the existing five mile per hour speed
limit.
Promontory Bay is a dedicated City waterway. In discussing the
proposed speed limit change with the orange County Sheriff's
Department, Harbor Patrol Bureau, the Assistant Harbor Master
ep
PAGE 2
PROMONTORY BAY
has indicated that their division has no objections to the request
if it is approved by City Ordinance and subsequent County Ordinance,
if necessary.
D. Harshbarger, Director
Marine Department
DH: 11
Attachment
G. W. MCCLELLAN JR., D.D.S., INC.
ARTHUR B. PARKINS, D.D.S.
1879 NEWPORT BOULEVARD
COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA 92627
(714) 645-6631 ,
June 21, 1976
Mr. David Harshbarger
Assistant Director: Tidelands
Uity of Newport Beach
3300 Newport Boulevard
T
Newport Beach, California 92663
Dear Dave:
I'm writing this letter at the direction of the Board of Directors of
the Promontory Bay Community Association pursuant to our phone conver-
sations of this day. I appreciate your swift and attentive reply to my
questions concerning reduction of boat speed 1ii4its in Promontory Bay.
As I mentioned during our conversation this morning the Association app-
ointed me to inquire which path would be most appropriate for our Assoc-
iation to take in changing the waterway speed linlit from five M.P.H. to
three M.P.H. As per your suggestion I'm writing this letter to state'
the Associations' position. The intention here is to give your office
adequate information to enable you, in conjunction with the City Attorney,
to write an ordinance for submission to the City Council lowering the
speed limit from five M.P.H. The following three points are most prom-
inent in our request for a reduced waterway speed li-Ait;
1. The wake from certain types of boats (heavily laden outboards and
outdrives) is sufficient to cause cracking of concrete docks even when
the five M.P.H. speed limit appears to be observed.
2. During the summer months small children often use the bay for swimming,
surf mat riding, paddle boarding, and sailing.
3. Due to its rather "off the beaten path" location the Harbor Patrol
infrequently patrols the bay. For this reason weekend excursionists feel
secure to violate the posted 5 M.P.H. speed limit by a seemingly innocent
knot or two.
In order to put the above stated items in proper prespective it must
be noted that we in Promontory Bay have a unique problem in that portions
of the bay are particularly narrow and that wave action (cross -bouncing
off sea walls then back again) often continues for several minutes following
passage of the offending boat. Boats often come charging around the
corner which constitutes the entrance to the bay at an estimated six to
nine knots or faster. This is the narrowest portion of the bay and is a
blind sixty degree turn. Children often swim in this area. This speed
combined with the narrowness of the channel leaves little'running room
for a boater (probably not paying adequate attention)tto avert a swimmer.
G. W. MCCLELLAN JR., D.D.S., i.vC.
ARTHUR B. PARKINS, D.D.S.
1879 NEWPORT BOULEVARD
COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA 92627
(714) 645-6631
2.
Wakes caused by certain boats (the stern -heavy ones) which are observing
the speed limit causes severe damage to docks in the narrower portions
of the bay. Finally it is the position of the Board of the Association
that a permanently posted 3 M.P.H. speed limit in Promontory Bay plus
.a stenciled warning of "caution children swimming" or the like posted
on the bulk -head at,the entrance to the channel will do much to slow down
weekend boat traffic. We feel this change will improve the situation ,
to the extent that we will not have to demand increased patrols from the
Harbor Patrol. We -stand ready to assist you in,any way we.can when you
make your presentation.to the City Council.. Your prom�t:ael`tibii on this
matter is appreciated.
Res;661
t
G.W JeClellan, Jr.
Vic resident: Promontory Bay
Coiity Association
Ij
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
MARINE SAFETY DEPARTMENT
RECORD OF ORAL INFORMATION
From: In
person
Address:
,Z
Telecon
TO:
Div. : 27—(f?
SUBJECT:
C-5-/1 -
Outline of Information received F-25
, --given
lel,:::3 '7ZIe-
.1kao 0 -; �)o 0
No I i -. , . . INITO. DATE
M.S. DIRECTOR
ASST.DIRECTOR
SECRETARY
e, 71 n 7Z?
---f tu e r e 7 4,� e� or 10vef
le'r 41e. e -.s el I/V e"I 0 Z,:/
7
File:
Date: - 5-- 7�('—
S -7-1a /c, -S
lhl",Iva
e
r r
4 hlov,,,,? /9 rA 7117 q /P 0 w
-4,/ e
Ala C, -S
7 104 61 /1/ ,/-7 eS e? C Xe ---o
Action Required Person Responsible Date Due:
COUNCILMEN
ROLL CALL "'t
CITY OF NEWPORT
3.
4.
197
BEACH
MINUTES
Resolution No. 8512 awarding a contract to Ted R.
Jenkins Co., Inc. in connection with the 1974-75 Seal
Coat Program, Contract No. 1699. (A report from the
Public Works Director was presented.)
The following communications were referred as in-
dicated:
Referred to Planning Commission for inclusion in on-
going study, letters from Isabel Andrews Pease and
James W. Ray regarding a proposed ordinance to create
setbacks along Buck Gully.
Referred to Planning Commission for inclusion in on-
going study, letter from property owners on Mariners
Mile submitting recommendations for Mariners Mile.
Referred to staff for report back on June 23, petition
bearing 50 signatures of citizens objecting to the
"Pussycat" Theater in Balboa.
Referred to staff for reply, letter
bocker regarding a possible problem
with the Promontory Bay seawalls.
from C. B. Knicker-
in connection
Referred to Pending Legislation Committee, Resolution
of Seal Beach supporting Assembly Bill 1604, which
would provide for an annual appropriation of $3
Million from monies received by the State Lands, and
applied to the General Fund to be distributed to
coastal entities for reimbursement of beach -related
costs.
Referred to staff for study, letter from Bertha S.
Staebler in regard to unsatisfactory directional
signing for the municipal buildings on Jamboree Road.
Referred to staff for reply, letter from Bonnie M.
Rawlings protesting animals on the ocean beach.
The following communications were referred to the
City Clerk for filing and inclusion in the records:
Letter from Fountain Valley stating that that City
nominates Councilman Al Hollinden for reelection as
one of the two cities' representatives to the Orange
County Transit District Board of Directors.
Letter from Orange County Health Planning Council
enclosing a position paper on health systems agency
designation.
Letter from the State Attorney General's office
enclosing a letter from the Secretary of Resources to
Senator Beilenson indicating the administration's
support of Senate Bill 368 which appropriates
$3,481,000 to the Department of Fish and Game for the
acquisition of coastal wetlands located in Upper
Newport Bay.
Volume 29 - Page 126
INDEX
1974-75
Seal Coat
Program
R-8512
Buck
Gully
Setbacks
Mariners
Mile
Obscenity
�Promontor
Bay
AB 1604
Jamboree
Police
Facility
Dogs on
Beaches
7 00 - Oo-O
it- k e r.61 )stee
P. 0. Box 98, Balboa Island, Ca. 92662 �01 No. Bayfront
Phone 714 673-4247/673-0166
May 22,1975
City Council- A
Cityof Newport Beach
3300 Newport
Newport BeachIcalif 92661
Gentlemen:
I wish to call your attention to what I believe
is a very dangerous situation on our water front.
I am referring to the wall on both sides of the
entrance to Promontory Bay.If some one should
happen to fallin even if he were a good swimmer
he would have a difficult time sving himself.
Soon after this bay was fvrmed there were ladders
going down to a ledge but at low tide no one
could,reach the ladders.
.There has been at least one death in this channel..
How many more must die beforesomething is done
about this hazardous situation?
With the recent change in.command relative to
policing the harbor I don't know where the
responsi.bil.iy lies so I am sending a copy of this
-letter to our'Board of Supervisors whogwith the
exception of Ri.ley;I have no confidence,
Yours., tru y#
C.B.Knickerbocker
7S_
M
TO:
cy o r
//>Y'
2
6
ce F,.7 0 -
P. 0. Box 98, Balboa Island, Co. 92662 501 No. Bayfron,
Phone 714 - 673-4247/673-0166
City
Cj
-ty of Newport In-aael-i
Newport
k's'ffPOrt ",!�ao.hv Calif IIP26-61
Gentlemens
Vj;V 22ol975
I Wish to call your attewticia to Vnh�jt I baliovs,
s a very dirZeroua "E'ituz.-tion on Our rxa,'%,-�nr
an) relarrix
vqzal on bothc ::'Ud.Q!� 01�
entrams 4, px,O*.,,,j�)-.- � I
to ev-:An if lie wNro a good
A4 < A
ho would haVe a tiLna 6v,,,
iog 1-41mveLf,*
-con aZter tilis bLV, wcs fm
40-4 jvjz�_
but a4; lnw t-,Uvtl�
could r,�ach -4,ha 1"dderz. to
There ha -,i lrm-n at- least one i-11 this chan.,ael,
I'low many ji�orn, Mjst ,3
A _ie is dca-a
about th*S hazard0j,$ Si.,Mation?
�-Uth the rec,:)nt jr, c, nd rc-Aatlma to
K,
the iharbor i don 6 t -rivri wiric---re the
rosponsibiliy lJoa r4g) I a�.-,t a Copy 0: this
le t.Iter to our lloard of SU'PerVISQ-rS W. . 60,,With
excePtion of Rlley,l have -10 con1fidwice,
Your- V
r, ly
C*:u Kni iterb
I(VI Pacific
development company
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
TO: CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH DATE: May 17, 1974
3300 Newport Blvd.
Newport Beach
ATTN: Glen Welden
RE: CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE - PROMONTORY BAY
WE ARE SENDING:
Plans
) Photographs
Grading Plans
Elevations
) Brochures
Sketches
Sections
) Plot Plans
'Copies
Presentation Panels
) Originals
(x Other
THIS MATERIAL IS SENT FOR:
Construction Use (XX) Information & Files Other
Review As Requested
Approval Preliminary
COMMENTS:
Enclosed is the copy of Certificate of Compliance from the California Coastal
Zone Conservation Commission.
BY: RICHARD PUTMAN
ENGINEERING MANAGER
mm /�
610 newport ceder drKe newport beach calffomia 92663 (714) 644-3165
RONALD REAGAN, Governor
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
CALIFORNIA COASTAL ZONE CONSERVATION COMMISSION i�
-)T REGION
SOUTH COA, AL COMMISSION
666 E. OCEAN BOULEVARD, SUITE 3107
P. 0. BOX 1450
LONG BEACH, CALIFORNIA 90801 14 AY I G 19
(213) 436-4201 (714) 846-0648
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE IRVINE PACIFIUC'
The California Coastal Zone Conservation Actq Section 5609 specifies
that no structure or area of land or water shall be used or occupied
in t he manner authorized by the permit or in any other manner until
the Executive Director has issued a Certificate of Compliance with
the terms and conditions of the permit.
You are hereby notified that an inspection of your project authorized
under Permit No. E-5-25-73-95 approved on
was made on 1, lla.v 10, 1974 The following determination has
been made:
The work is considered complete and a Certificate of
Compliance is issued for the entire approved project
as authorized by permit.
The authorized work is incomplete and the items listed
below must be accomplished before a Certificate of
Compliance can be issued for the entire project.
nnpnq `er�R'
tM. . J . ar e
Executive Director
By: John Q.. -King
Date: PI -ay 10, 19`74
MARINE SAFETY DEPARTMENT
70 Newport Pier
N
December 27, 1973
TO: CHAIRMAN & MEMBERS OF THE JOINT HARBOR COMMITTEE
FROM: Marine Safety Department
SUBJECT: CANTILEVERED PATIO DECKS - PROMONTORY BAY
On September 25, the Irvine Company asked the City Council to
consider amending Section 29 (Patio Decks) of the Harbor Permit
Policies to include Promontory Bay.
The Council, at the,October 9 meeting referred the request to the
staff and the Joint Harbor Committee for study and report back.
The matter was brought to the Joint Harbor Committee by the Marine
Safety Department on November 13. The Committee requested the sub-
ject be reviewed at a Council Study Session.
At the Council Study Session of December 10 The Irvine Company was
advised to bring back to the Council, in writing, a method of
placing responsibility on each property owner for 1) debris,control
and 2) maintenance dredging for the zone between the established
Bulkhead and Pierhead Lines.
Following deliberation between the staff and The Irvine Company,
it was determined that conditioning each harbor permit with the
above mentioned two conditions would accomplish Council's request.
On December 17, the staff reported back to the Council with the
subject proposal. At their regular meeting the evening of the
17th, the City Council approved amending Section 29 of the Harbor
Permit Policies to include Promontory Bay subject to each harbor
permit in Promontory Bay being conditioned to include debris control
and maintenancedredging. Section 31 will be added to the Harbor
Permit Policies and will read as follows:
Page Two
31. Promontory Bay
1. The permittee shall be responsible and maintain the
area delineated on the harbor permit free and clear
from floating rubbish, debris or litter at all times.
2. The permittee shall be responsible for all maintenance
dredging, in accordance with the design profile for
Promontory Bay, for the area between the Bulkhead
line and Pierhead line as delineated by the harbor
permit.
R. E. REED, DIRECTOR
D. Harshbarger, Captain
Marine Safety Department
DH: GEW: 1 f
MARINE SAFETY DEPARTMENT
70 Newport Pier
December l3f 1973.
TO CITY MANAGER
FROM: Marine Safety Department
SUBJECT: CANTILEVERED PATIO DECKS - PROMONTORY BAY
COUNCIL STUDY SESSION (December 17)
The subject of cantilevered decks for Promontory Bay was reviewed
at the Council Study Session of December 10, 1973. The Irvine
,Company was advised to bring back to the Council something in
writing, such as wording in the C.C.& R's which spells out that
-each property owner abutting Promontory Bay would have the res-
p6nailbility for:
1. Debris Control
2. Maintenance dredging for the zone between the established
Bulkhead and Pierhead Lines.
The C.C.& R's, as currently adopted are non-specific with reference
to the above maintenance concerns, They state that the owner has
an easement between the Bulkhead and Pierhead Lines for 11 ... pier
mooring and maintenance purposes".
The staff and the Irvine Company have discussed amending the C.C.& R's
to specifically include debris�and maintenance dredging; however,
because of the amount of time necessary to accomplish this (approxi-
mately 3-6 months) and the fact that each and every harbor permit
issued by the City for Promontory Bay can be conditional to include
both maintenance dredging and litter control it appears that this
alternative would be a more Viable solution.
If Council desires,the following worded conditions will be placed
on each harbor permit for Promontory Bay:
(2,1 T -ha -t the permittee shall be responsible and maintain the
area delineated on the harbor permit free and clear from
floating rubbish, debris or litter at all times.
(J2 -Th-&t the permittee shall be responsible for all maintenance
dredging, in.accordance with the design profile for Promon-
tory Bay, for the area between the Bulkhead line and Pier -
head -line as delineated by the harbor permit.
CITY MANAGER
Page 2
December 13,1973
.The above conditions, if not adhered to, would be grounds for
permit revocation. The Newport Beach Municipal Code, Section
17.24.090 Revocation of Permit, outlines grounds by which Council
can r'evoke a harboF_p�Tr_m1_t.The paragraph that would apply is
#7 which states, "The permittee has breached or failed to comply
with the terms or conditions contained in the permit or upon which
the permit was granted".
1_1
CONCLUSION
In summation and if Council desires, 1) direct the staff to condi-
tion each harbor permit for Promontory Bay as outlined above, and
2) approve and amend the Council's Harbor Permit Policies Section
29. Patio Decks as shown below:
29. PATIO DECKS
"In areas where the waterways are privately owned, and within
Promontory Bay, patio type decks may be cantileverea*L;�ao*
Bulkhead Lines subject to the following
conditions":
R. E.. REED, DIRECTOR
MARINE SAFETY DEPARTMENT
C
D. Harshbarger, Captain
DH:lf
I -z-s
N
v C) -,,-n e,-,
a 2 j 7L'- I r, T, P
LLI
3 5
dOy.4
cz-
xj
S"IB
ma a nia n, a a
Z e C 7 -A 't - harbor e e
G 0 e r a a � I
A/0
t -e
-1-t an :7� -.0
7
-,D
MARINE SAFETY DEPARTMENT
70 Newport Pier
November 29, 1973
TO: CITY MANAGER
FROM: Marine Safety Department
SUBJECT: COUNCIL STUDY SESSION (DECEMBER 10)
CANTILEVERED PATIO DECKS - PROMONTORY BAY
The Irvine Company, reference the attached letter dated September 23,
1973, has requested the City Council to consider amending the City
Council's Harbor Permit Policies, Section 29 Patio Decks, to allow
cantilevered pat -1 -3 -decks within Promontory Bay.
The request was referred by the Council (October 9) to the staff
and Joint Harbor Committee for study and report back. The attached
staff report was s ' ubmitted to the November 13 Joint Harbor Committee
meeting; they continued the subject and requested that the item be
reviewed at Study Session.
Mr. David Kuhn, Project Manager for The Irvine Company, has indicated
he will provide further information and visual aids at Council's
request.
You will notice near the end of page 2 of.our report, an amendment
recommendation which identifies the additional verbage to the exist-
ing Council Policy.
R. E. Reed, Director
marine Safety Department
RER: lf
Attachment
MARINE SAFETY DEPARTMENT
70 Newport Pier
November 1, 1973
TO: CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE JOINT HARBOR COMMITTEE
FROM: Marine Safety Department
SUBJECT: PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE CITY HARBOR PERMIT POLICIES
(SECTION 2.9 PATIO DECKS) - TO ALLOW CANTILEVERED DECKS
IN PROMONTORY BAY
Recommendation
If desired, recommend to the City Council an amendment to the
City Council's Harbor Permit Policies (Section 29 Patio Decks),
which would allow cantilevered decks within Promontory Bay.
Discussion
The attached letter from the Irvine Company addressed to the City
Council, entitled Harbor Permit Policies - Proposed -Amendment, was
referred by the Cit� Council (Octo_b_e_r__9T to the staff and Joint Harbor
Committee for study and report back.
The Irvine Company in their letter has asked that consideration be
given to amending Section 29 - Patio Deck of the Harbor Permit Poli-
cies to include Promontory Bay.
The Marine Safety Department staff has met with representatives of
the Irvine Company, Public Works Department and Community Development
Department to discuss the attached proposal. The City staff con-
curred with the Irvine Company's reasoning as outlined in their letter.
In particular, cantilevered decks, if allowed within Promontory Bay,
would not infringe upon or interfere with the public's right to use
the waterways within Promontory Bay, and they would possibly increase
the aesthetic appeal of the Bay itself.
Currently cantilevered patio decks are allowed in the Dover Shores
Waterways and around Linda Isle; these structures have not generated
any citizen complaints to staff or have they been a problem from a
structural standpoint.
2.
Section 29. Patio Decks taken from the current Harbor Permit
Policies readg —as fo-11—ows:
"In areas where the waterways are privately owned, patio type
decks may be cantilevered beyond the established bulkhead lines
subject to the following condition:
A. The maximum projection of patio decks encroachments beyond
the bulkhead line shall be limited to 5 feet.
B. The minimum setbacks from the prolongations of the side pro -
property lines shall be 5 feet.
C. No float shall be permitted within 2 feet of the decks.
D. No permanent structure shall be permitted on the projecting
portion of the patios except:
1. Planters and benches not. ove-r''16 inches in height.
2. Railings not over 3 feet in height with approximately
95% open area."
The first paragraph, based on recommendation from the Joint Harbor
Committee to the City Council, could be amended to read, "In areas
where waterways are privately owned, and within Promontory Bay,
patio type decks may be cantilevered
lines.....11
The remaining sub -paragraphs would remain the same as outlined
above.
R. E. REED, DIRECTOR
D. Harshbarger
Marine Safety Department
DH: lf
Attachment
September 25, 1973
City of Newport Beach
3300 West Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Dear Members of the City Council:
JHE IRVINE COMPANY
610 Newport Center Drive
Newport Beach, California 92663
(714) 644-3011
-7-_7 Y
RE: Harbor Permit Policies - Proposed Amendment
We would like to propose an amendment to the City's Harbor Permit
Policies. The particular area we would like you to consider re-
vising is Section 29 - Patio Decks, as shown in the adopted Harbor
Permit Policies amended August 14, 1972. This particular section
allows patio type decks to cantilever beyond the established bulk-
head line up to five feet where waterways are privately owned. We
would like to suggest this section be enlarged to include Promontory
Bay.
As you are aware, The Irvine Company's original concept was to have
Promontory Bay be a private waterway. During the tentative tract
map hearings, however, it was suggested and adopted that the water-
way be dedicated to the City of Newport Beach. This has been
accomplished with the exception of perpetual easements for pier,
mooring and maintenance purposes reserved to the individual lot
owners. What we are suggesting is thatthe lot owners be allowed
on an individual permit basis to build cantilever patio type decks
over their bulkheads in accordance with the prescribed permit
policies and not to exceed five feet. Attached are plans prepared
by Raub, Bein, Frost and Associates showing our proposed deck design.
These drawings are a part of the Promontory Bay Development Standards,
which each homeowner must conform with.
In our opinion, these patio decks will not infringe upon or interfere
with the public's right to enjoy the use of the waters of Promontory
Bay. The decks will be only within the easement areas reserved to
the lot owners for their own slips and boats and, therefore, will
not affect navigability of the waterway. Further, it is our opinion
that the existence of cantilevered patio decks will increase the
visual appeal of the bay itself. This is due to the fact that the
decks will tend to break up the linearity of the bulkhead as they
have done in and around Linda Isle. Promontory Bay was designed
with the verbal understanding that these decks would be allowed.
Without the decks, the front (waterside) yards will be minimal and
in some cases unacceptable.
Members ot the City Council
,,Harbor Permit Policies -
Proposed Amendment 2 SeF mber 25, 1973
In conclusion, we feel that allowing cantilever patio decks in
Promontory Bay will not in any way,infringe upon the public's
right to use the water and in addition will increase the-a.esthetic
.appeal of the bay itself. Therefore, we ask that you amend your
Harbor Permit Policies to allow cantilever patio decks in Promontory
Bay.
Sincerely,
00, . ) 1 13
David B. Kuhn, Jr
Project Manager
Residential Division
DBK: j e
Attachment
CC: Dave Harshbarger - Department of Marine Safety
Ben Nolan Assistant Director of Public Works
Dick Hogan Director of Community Development
r.
-PROMONTORY BAY DEVELOPME-NIT STANDARDS -
Appendix A
Cantilevered Patio Plan Views
(See drawings
on next page)
i
A
7)
'K
hs!^, It is �S k,,. I sia;lj
lisl(ih is KiquiWl.
I R i I
P �All—v
J XLY, b Pa' E, I ". 1:
PROM ONTO KY
5 A v
I - 4 3
L- vl 0 USE
7
I %I 'ff'- v I �. v --
N 0 T E :
IMACKS M S901.11'! 191. 1EFIR5M
DILY; fok MILIAL 11TWK Kuulkwaas,
su IX8161T "Ad.
(if NRk� 140TES
I ZME [CIA WK
A WhLP IG ?�4M.;T VJV 2,E C; -V.:3 FMI Ilt; Wy N
bE D:S!�%20 TO A, IVI'MLIM,
J,E 04.!l
SPACE
4 Q VnM v --,v
W-, A,,z
Sl !.'-"f KE BC.--
SIJK:�,. I c T F-7 -1WN !-;--,T Ka- tz.� 1,
WD -�k
L AIL M11-0 2i -1 E To 9,
A: -L (-NSIR-MiN B
(Ifv Ol, ii -am!
J XLY, b Pa' E, I ". 1:
PROM ONTO KY
5 A v
C kN T1 L EV E R E D
PM- 10
P L-A N.'- V I _W" -S
FIAU13 rjfz[N rnO'—
A 1� D
"r .T
JU N r
I T I M 7
-PROMONTORY BAY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS -
Appendix B
Cantilevered Patio Details
(See drawings
on next page)
A
F�
r,
fid F RIN 1JPIEI;. 10 YJ11,.
EMT
OC
L
T M,
-77 --7.—,.T
7JI -6
14.74, vim
wu ba.lol-1 hi, [DUE
R."?Kv. c:4
INSP WLE
r a -
EMSTIM, bl�".��. NOTE
1; DE"'. Is TO i -11E 0��P,-TE YX-E;
W D 101i,, T4WA:ZS 0� GUY,
Q V V.P; USE V D�ip
L3 Y
cutiiKhcllol jumi
Lj CZ05S
0 C MA A, SUb. Sit PLIN
THIS SIKET
SECT I ON IN- A'
MWOUED CO:.Vi-TE MIS71RUCT104
5'-q' MM WITILUR
EIIST 1-1W -10i NMB
EXE W,!!',-UTED
i6J K,,ILS IYU: ST�5--'-RED
REDWOOD PUTE
R VW
J. i;)A� P.RY of -4:
14, -IT .6. 6ALV M b 1-4
A N' D UIASU SHIELD
W, CON'T 'LV W. i
4' 114 G. 19 i". I
+ up DECIA -7— EXISTIN6 bu-,-g"w
SECTION 'A -A"
T11,16A
I s 0 11, 0 , -wl,
LM�RAL R,:,�
z�4 9 w
1UY,:cW
'—s' "Mi
M
IWUMM HOLE a p0di
PEk AILAAb�. A35 1�' I'
co -o CR. KC.07,1've 11�'Ptli`;11!
I'DZEF WiiUL
ANT & 11' DC.- 1,!ZL
TYPICNL P N! V�EW
PD. hT I t��G LICT M-L�
i L i -'A i, ;,E i -:,S
V- V TWA
P A 0 M-0- NTORV--b-A-Y- -
NOTE CANTILEVERED PATIO
DETAILS
RA*UF3 13UIN - FRos,r
7�
MARINE SAFETY DEPARTMENT
70 Newport Pier
November 1, 1973
TO: CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE JOINT HARBOR COMMITTEE
FROM: Marine Safety Department
SUBJECT: PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE CITY HARBOR PERMIT POLICIES
(SECTION 29 PATIO DECKS) - TO ALLOW CANTILEVERED DECKS
IN PROMONTORY BAY
Recommendation
If desired, recommend to the City Council an amendment to the
City Council's Harbor Permit Policies (Section 29 Patio Decks),
which would allow cantilevered decks within Promontory Bay.
Discussion
The attached letter from the Irvine Company addressed to the City
Council, entitled Harbor Permit Poli:aies, - Proposed Awendme:nt, was
referred by the City Council (Octo-b-e—r--97 to the staff and ToInt Harbor
Committee for study and report back.
The Irvine Company in their letter has asked that consideration be
given to amending Section 29 - Patio Deck of the Harbor Permit Poli-
cies to include Promontory Bay.
The Marine Safety Department staff has met with representatives of
the Irvine Company, Public Works Department and Community Development
Department to discuss the attached proposal. The City staff con-
curred with the Irvine Company's reasoning as outlined in their letter.
In particular, cantilevered decks, if allowed within Promontory Bay,
would not infringe upon or interfere with the public's right to use
the waterways within Promontory Bay, and they would possibly increase
the aesthetic appeal of the Bay itself.
Currently cantilevered patio decks are allowed in the Dover Shores
Waterways and around Linda Isle; these structures have not generated
any citizen complaints to staff or have they been a problem from a
structural standpoint.
2.
Section 29. Patio Decks taken from the current Harbor Permit
Policies read'9 —as f—o'lTows:
"In areas where the waterways are privately owned, patio type
decks may be cantilevered beyond the established bulkhead lines
subject to the following condition:
A. The maximum projection of patio decks encroachments beyond
the bulkhead line shall be limited to 5 feet.
B. The minimum setbacks from the prolongations of the side pro -
property lines shall be 5 feet.
C. No float shall be permitted within 2 feet of the decks.
D. No permanent structure shall be permitted on the projecting
portion of the patios except:
1. Planters and benches not over 16 inches in height.
2. Railings not over 3 feet in height with approximately
95% open area."
The first paragraph, based on recommendation from the Joint Harbor
Committee to the City Council, could be amended to read, "In areas
where waterways are privately owned� zp�iq.nithin Promontory BaX,
patio type decks may be cantilevere beyoni'���*���z;��'i���ed*�ulkhead
lines ..... go
The remaining sub -paragraphs would remain the same as outlined
above.
R. E. REED, DIRECTOR
D. Harshbarger
Marine Safety Department
DH: lf
Attachment
7
STATE OF CALIFORNIA—RESOURCES AGENCY RONALD REAGAN, Governor
CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD-
SANTA'ANA REGION
6833 INDIANA AVENUE, SUITE 1
RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92506
PHONE: (714) 684-9330
October 31, 1973
State Department of Water Resources
State Department of Fish & Game
State Department of Public Health - L.A.
Orange County Health Department
Orange County Flood. Control District
Orange County Harbor District
City of Newport Beach /
The enclosed Order No. 73-61 rescinds waste discharge
requirements for dewatering operations by the Irvine
C3
Company at Promontory Point.
The board will consider this matter at the December
7� 1973 meeting. Your comments are requested by
December 1. 1973
4_�&�ES W. ANDERSON
Executive Officer
Enos: Tentative Order 73-61
cc: 9 Board Members
yh
X,
PUBLIC IV,
'y Or
California Regional Water Quality r
,�o rol BoaTa-,
Santa Ana Regil
,Ord� r No.
Rescind WAte Di h"
-so qrge'l.Re-quirements
,.for
Irvine Company at'�'romoiiiory-Point, Newport Beach
The California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region
finds that:
1. Waste discharge requirements were prescribed on February
24, 1973 for a proposed waste discharge to result from
dewatering operations by the Irvine C'o-�mpany at Promontory
Point, Newport Beach.
2. These construction operations have been completed eliminating
the need.for waste discharge requirements.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, that Order No. 72-8 "Waste Discharge Requirements
for the Irvine Company at Promontory Point, Newport Beach be rescinded.
I, James W. Anderson, Executive Officer, do hereby certify the foregoing
is a full, true, and correct copy of an order adopted by the California
Reglonal Water Quality Control'Board, Santa Ana Region, -on DaceQr 7, 1973
JAMES W. ANDERSON
Executive Officer
f
DATE...
TO:
El MAYOR GEN. sr=RVICES
El COUNCIL LIBRARY
EIMANAGER.'
FZ'MARINE SAFETY
E] . AS I S'T . .�MG.R. PARKS & REC.
,.EjAD.MIN..:ASST.
ATTORNEY I EIPERSONNEL
0 POLICE
Elq�Ty CLERK 0 PUBLIC WORKS
El COMM. DEV. El PURCHASING
Cl FINANCE E] TRAFFIC
FIRE
F OR: E:l ACTION & DISPOSITION
FILE
INFORMATION
L?'REVIEW af.COMMENT
E]RET6RK
s '
IRMARK : .. . . ...... ; .....
- r - of -
..................................................................
. .. ........................................... I ........................................................
..........................................................................................................
................................ ....... ....
....... ............................................ I ......
............................ .... ... . ....... .............
----- . ...............
'A
....... .......
----------------- ---------------
September 25, 1973
City of Newport Beach
3300 West Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Dear Members of the City Council:
THE IRVINE COMPAW
610 Newport Center Drive
Newport Beach, C�Iifornia 92663
(714) 64.4-3011
RE: Harbor Permit Policies - Proposed Amendment
We would like to propose am amendment to the City's Harbor Permit
Policies. The particular area. we would like you to consider re-
vising is Section 29 - Patio Decks, as shown in the adopted Harbor
Permit Policies amended August 14, 1972. This particular section
allows patio type decks to cantilever beyond the established bulk-
head line up to five feet where waterways are privately owned. We
would like to suggest this section be enlarged to include Promontory
Ba.y.
As you are aware, The Irvine Company's original concept was to have
Promontory Bay be a, private waterway. During the tentative tract
ma.p.hearings, however, it was suggested and adopted that the wa.ter-
way be dedicated to the City of Newport Beach. This has been,
accomplished with the exception of perpetual easements for pier,
mooring and maintenance purposes reserved to the individual lot
owners. What we are suggesting is thatthe lot owners be allowed
on an individual permit basis to build cantilever patio type decks
over their bulkheads in accordance with the prescribed permit
policies and not to exceed five feet. Attached are plans prepared
by Raub, Bein., Frost and Associates showing our proposed deck design.
These drawings are a part of the Promontory Bay Development Standards,
which each homeowner must conform with.
In our opinion, these patio decks will not infringe upon or interfere
with the public's right to enjoy the use of the waters of Promontory
Bay. The decks will be only within the easement areas reserved to
the lot owners for their own slips and boats and, therefore, will
not affect navigability of the waterway. Further, it is our opinion
that the existence of cantilevered patio decks will increase the
visual appeal of the ba.y itself. This is due to the fact that the
decks will tend to break up the linearity of the bulkhea,d as they
have done in and around Linda, Isle. Promontory Bay was designed
with the verbal understanding that these decks would be allowed.
Without the decks, the front (waterside) yards will be minimal and.
in some cases unacceptable.
Members of the City --,uncil
�Harbor Permit Polici-6 -
Proposed Amendment
2 September 25, 1973
In conclusion., we feel that allowing cantilever patio decks in
Promontory Bay will not in any way infringe upon the public's
right to use the water and in addition will increase the aesthetic
appeal of the bay itself. Therefore, we ask that you amend your
Harbor Permit Policies to allow cantilever patio decks in Promontory
Bay.
Sincerely,
C4 . D.
David B. Kuhn., Jr
Project Manager
Residential Division
DBK: j e
Attachment
CC: Dave Ha.rshba,rger - Department of Marine Safety
Ben Nolan Assistant Director of Public Works
Dick Hogan Director of Community Development
r
-PROMONTORY BAY DEVELOPME-NIT STANDARDS -
Appendix A
Cantilevered Patio Plan Views
(See drawings
on next page)
r
i
r
r
A "Alm
--S-T RJ
A
Ij 5 T
S 16 f C L 1 i i I 11 1 1 WD
ML -o to U.. I
.-. -i L N-11 -
--%, I E - "I --
Lil Lf, t
I I P" I RED
- H . 0 u I
3 14-7 1 t 4:,t -Wil
A,:: PAT 0
4,M
t.. I T F
N 0 T E :
5 11 !, A ( KS A I ( SI;OVI! 107, iiil,�NCE
M A(-IUXL IMMIC
1,!JST E, Z��W.D Uf,11 NIL Cki'? 5�
IV 1 �,, T1.
or 9s,-, Pi T1,C J 11 F, 11 r f.! I
7 Q
V 1!-'� V k" S U S� k C�,'
I All 7,1 i D f,
C111, :;,3 KA -,I tk
OL'_
P go HIONTO F\Y 6 A V
ChN'F I LEV E RED P h -r 0-
- ----- PLAN -.V.I.[.-.kVS .--
-3 F- n o E;,r
RAU 0 1 N r
-PROMONTORY BAY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS -
Appendix B
Cantilevered Patio Details
(See drawings
on next page)
ii
r
]it[ OR bvl(v. Wilily, IQ %,all
—7=- r
7: T
14 74' M.0
48 0 C bu. 1911 1 lil �N) Ai INA
t I cti Am -I iH --SL'
-S 11 D
;i1`j(Lu To V MM M
I!.I� la t D; F.��w LAU (NI-AC1101i JON!
V I Ud fills SKIVT
�ECTIGN
smi. 1 0'
-.i� .0" MN MM cMillt EVEZ
umu I
Q11 , OU �.;Mtu
.,1111 I� I NLS 16' 0 C
pi lz- I
DWOOD PLNI 1. 11' C
ohiv M b 114
WELD
4 W, CU0.
4" '14 64V W 6' Ot it, n ),,--
K101011MILE SICT Ill �11 OF DECIA 111STING bul-YIIIEND
Ir -j
SECTION "h -A"
'MIFIEV, COMMUCIlotl
OP11011AL REM.I.MEWND
INMCUNI 110LIE i PUIE
PER YWVII,�k A35 11' , 11'
to','R. 0?. DiCOVJN� INSPECTION
- — - - — ------------ J1
11, 0"
U.M.YL P.6I;V
joilif IC Oc T%p11CNL
T
I N p T i 0 N I� D I t\ I t
6 T, I f .4 "-1 j- 1 '1
TYPI( N[ P L N N V � E W
Whi AW J04MUC, ULT XJL�—
lf-., X U C,L 6
P R 0 Mi 0 N T 0 R V 5 A Y
NOTE CANTILEVER I E .9 PAT 10
MI MUM t41I.TM DITA I LS
liul
.1 U Il I 13 1 � - ------ qi
lt;e
4�2w,r,�-
o
Aol A64 —ft"ft
OOU /ok -ae-.#Of'
C- 41 Ir- qr e?4 /11
100"
40,
-ool
V e --v
cau,111,11-w edl
C/C
-1417 r-
xft4.rcv,
Ak
.000
A*
Of
IL
Cog,
ll000e,�,
May 16, 1973
City of Newport Beach
Marine Safety Department
70 Newport Pier
Newport Beach, California 92660
Attention: Mr. Robert E. Reed
TW IRVINE CDMPAW
610 Newport Center Drive
Newport Beach, California 92663
(714) 644-3011
Subject: Promontory Bay Channel Opening Schedule
Dear Mr. Reed:
This is to advise you that our current schedule calls for
the channel opening at Promontory Bay to take place during
the period of June 1 to June 8, 1973.
The actual opening will by design be a slow process. There
will be no dam breaking, but rather a gradual introduction
of sea water into Promontory Bay through pipes installed in
an earthen dike. When the water level has been equalized
on both sides, we will begin to remove the dike by dredging
from the bay side. This will take approximately a week and
could take longer since the dredge will be operated at a low
capacity to ensure proper clarification of the discharge.
We would be happy to have you visit the site and inspect the
work during this operation if you so desire.
Sincerely,
David B. Kuhn, Jr.
Project Manager
Residential Project Administration
DBK: gr
cc: Captain David Harshbarger
Identical Letters to:
Mr. Walter S..Boyle, U. S. Corps of Engineers
Mr. Krieger, Environmental Protection Agency
May 16, 1973
City of Newport Beach
Marine Safety Department
70 Newport Pier
Newport Beach, California 92660
Attention: Mr. Robert E. Reed
mi rLie"E; I R V I N E C 0 M PA N Y
610 Newport Center Drive
Newport Beach, California 92663
(714) 644-3011
Subject: Promontory Bay Channel Opening Schedule
Dear Mr. Reed:
This is to advise you that our current schedule calls for
the channel opening at Promontory Bay to take place during
the period of June I to June 8, 1973.
The actual opening will by design be a slow process. There
will be no dam breaking, but rather a gradual introduction
of sea water into Promontory Bay through pipes installed in
an earthen dike. When the water level has been equalized
on both sides, we will begin to remove the dike by dredging
from the bay side. This will take approximately a week and
could take longer since the dredge will be operated at a low
capacity to ensure proper clarification of the discharge.
We would be happy to have you visit the site and inspect the
work during this operation if you so desire.
Sincerely,
David B. Kuhn, Jr.
Project Manager
Residential Project Administration
DBK: gr
vet-4� Captain David Harshbarger
Identical Letters to:
Mr. Walter S. Boyle, U. S. Corps of Engineers
Mr. Krieger, Environmental Protection Agency
A.16 /V�_' &01�1'
/I -
�11 -0co 0 —
MARINE SAFETY DEPARTMENT
70 Newport Pier
April 12, 1973
Mr. James Turner
409 Bayside Drive
Newport Beach, California 92660
Dear Mr. Turner:
Mayor McInnis,, throulgh the City Manager, has asked that
we reply to your written inquiry received April 2,, 19731,
with reference to Promontory Bay and Promontory Point.
The Promontory projects, both the bay And the upland con-
struction, are Irvine Company developments. At this point
in time, the City, after extensive reviews, has issued
all the necessary permits for both subject projects, .
There are basically two main projects within this develop-
inent* These are:
lo Promontory Bay - This includes an 11 acre lagoon,
connected to the harbor with a 1001 channel# bulkheading,
and single family dwellings fronting the lagoon,
2* Promontory Point - This project is located on the bluff
between Bayside Drive and Coast Highway and is a 520 unit
apartment complex,
Attached for your information are three memorandums copied -
from our files with reference to the Promontory Bay project,
which hopefully will answer your questions concerning the
lagoon and channel.
Mr, James Turner
Page Two
Should you wish further information, you are more than wel-
come to come to the Marine Safety Department and review the
Promontory Bay file6 The files concerning Promontory Point
are located at the Community Development Department and can
be reviewed at their location.
Sincerely,
D. Harshbarger, Captain
Marine Safety Department
DH: lf
Enclosure
L
RECOVED
APR 2 '19-73��
i i M a y o r
ty of Newport
Beach
Us
Al
)c
�l �KA
bA
r Ch
A L
60A
V1 C i N IT'� SKETC H
\q P t K 7 b A C A Ll F 0 k N I A,
ml �1�
S�.%qjNb� A EmVSS�D 1 VEEI AN D EN G E
E �_O W M E A ,, L 0 V F. K LOW WkT�K. MVIMUM RN�G�
N P P R 6 1. j', PAO,�'K LlWbS A Y, i. S IVA 6 U S V1 E D N
ILI
C�hl c l6d�K'HEND -
e�. N
is lop
Y .61
SUT 10 A -A
7 1/
/0
W
8,
'6
-Ile
4,4s
4
'V6
%\
S.
__lk r
419
i�AYSID[, R.
bULYqLAD LNE
PIEK�W LINE —7 V, A U 1� b I N
P K 0 P 0 S E D ul
AND 6 u L K _k
0 M 0 WT 0 KY N Y'
ro �SIDF D�. 14 EW P 0 �T b� jk C 9, CkLIFOW�
-t- UUCATC.
A P P L I C C W by
T�E RVISE UMiANY
SECTION 6-6
0
--er
i-larc!
,-1 1 �0 7 3
TO: CHAI.R�IAN, - JOINT HARBOR CO-'-'U!IITTEE
FROM: City Marine Safety Director
SUBJECT: PROIMONTORY BAY; TID.-'�L EBB CURRENTS A1114D WATERWAYS
DEBRIS
1,1,ear t -he closing of the February.13 meeting of the Joint Harbor
Committee, Councilman Rvckoff and Harbor Commissioner Robinson
posed ques-tions on the possible effects of the.Promontory Bay
project's tidal ebb current upon the already eroding beaches of
Balboa Island. Questions included accountability, should this
erosion be exacerbated with the additional ebb volumes generated
by the Project.
Also questLoned,was identification of responsibility for waterways
debris cleaning within the project itself after completion. Council-
man Kym-la, Committee Chairman, directed the staff to review -these
aspects of the project and make a report backto the commit . tee.
1. EROSION: BALBOA ISLAND BEACHES
According to the engineers I have consulted on this subject,
the problem is threefold. one problem, of course, is the littoral
transport of sand created by existing currents during tidal ebbing.
A portion of this has been retarded by the groin-ing project.now
being conducted in stages. Another aspect is the problem existing
,through the profile's slope toward the channel's middle. A third'
,influence, interestingly so, was pointed out as being the t . rans-
port of material away from the beaches onto the sidewalks and
streets by sunbathers and bathers. This material is then swept by
maintenance crews and hauled away. Erosion is a problem which is
occurring along the three sides of- Little Island having open bay
exposure.
2. EFFECTS BY PROMONTORY BAY
The effects upon this problem by the opening of Promontory Bay
may, or may not, have significance. I base this upon the only
mathematical values available to me at this point in time. (Exhibit 1)
The calculations therein were submitted by Raub, Bein, Frost, and
Associates. They are cor..ipleted with a shown tidal ebb current velocity
of 0.34 feet per second. Converted, this is 4.1 inches per second,
or .227 miles per hour. Their conclusion is that this is vrell below
the rate of erosion velocity.
Currently, the C-itv staff finds no dis,7-igree-ment with -
the calcula-
0 -.1 i 5 r 0 E T
al" T
�Ie Tf,
110.i�_ z;_ L I e i L a r_- r
t 5 S ;i 4 o _ri a ge rr,,,an e o a , o i i w, c, t- - -, Z
L Z:
_'Ld be cons 4-ILIte-red the Cib., st-H-f-f encourage f-Ily �Droposes -lis
4 1 - review
for Joint
-4-11fLor-mat-ion be sub___1_.eU L
S E 1�: 7
DEBRIS N-T.H-E P20iECT , 0-,, 11 J_ -,J'G
CL RESPONSIBILIT-Y
A material review reveals that the project's. waterways were de�di-
cated -L-o the C 4 -1 - -
�L_Y, �-,Tlt_h a,- easef.ient granted .t7ithin the pierhead line
to the owners within the developinnent.
Raub, Bein, Frost, and Associates address themselves to this
problem in a letter to the Irvine Company, dated August 29, 1969.
it is attached as Exhibit 2. Althoug-h th-e waterways are dedicated
to the City, and the debris cleaning in the waterways would be
the City.'s, it should not be a problem of much significance. The
bay is projected to completely flush during a 33 hour period. If
any problem develops, it will izltore likely be isolated within the
granted local owner's easement area, landward of the pierhead line.
I cannot find anything in the engineering firm's material which
is directly related to 'the occasions dealing with high winds. For
instance, the heavy sout-heasterlies leading oncoming rainstroms
heavy westerlies on the trailing sides of rainstorms, and Santa Ana
winds, However, these are not prevailing winds, they are sporadic.
4. ADDED ITEMz 'NAVIGAT TON
pER�,JIT
Attached, for further information as Exhibit 3, is a copy of the
Army's navigation permit for this Project, issued on I -lay 20, 1970.
included, is the original written request, and the conditional -permit.
CONCLUSIONS
At this stage of development, I do not know if a seperate E.I.R . .
on the waterways could be required. This is perhaps a matter for
legal counsel, in view of the project's overall timing. Permits
have been granted, and the developer has moved ahead within the
parameters of these permits.
Should the Joint Harbor Committee care to pursue this issue, I
recommend that a special meeting be held with the Irvine Company's
L
representatives. The bulkheading is p ; roceeding toward the Balboa
Island North Channel, and the completion might be somewhat close to
the scheduled Joint Harbor Committee meeting in April.
Submitted by,
_jEr
CITY OF - VIPORT BEACH
Marine Safety Department
R. E. Reed, Director
Attachments
R4,v,
fEA -�We�omp C4-. / '11)
POR AO S&C--,OVPS
Z/,o 0 �PE-R AAAAW7.-F-
�)/ Z60 ** 0�,,e 1-140VA,
(4��5 7-11,4,,V �14
14 MPH -=.))3zo PER HR,
P2 7 3,fF7- Pep, sirc.,
M P H
C44S.S.CS 0,lP
ebvV;P-V 6RAA-Ire-D rlPeLAMPS
Clry CweAoV72F.P 71-jP4e4o4A1,PS
AelvAr& amAFRwA71ER /-Or- ooWAleRsoO�IoP
PUBLIC VVPeeK1A7-EX /.Or- OWVER-S#'P
PR1V,47-,&- 1JL-,e".4AodR17-
SUBJECT: "GRANT OF EASEMENT." - CLARIFICATION
Reference telephone conversation (11/17/72) between Marine Safety
Director and Councilman Ryckoff.
Councilman Ryckoff has posed the following questions for clarification
with reference to the packaged material submitted for his review
11/16/72.
Ques-tion 1. What is the status of the waterway dedication to the
City at this point in time?
a. Has it already been done?
b. Does it now need dedication?
Answer - I=& The waterway was dedicated to the City when the City
Council approved Tract Map #3867 (Promontory Bay) 6/12/72. On June 29,
1972, the Tract Map was recorded in the Office of the Orange County
Recorder.
A condition of the Tract Map approval was that Lot A be
dedicated for public water navigational purposes subject to an easement
between the bulkhead line and pierhead line for pier and maintenance
purposes.
Question 2. If it is dedicated to the City, who will be responsible
for maintenance dredging, water quality control and law enforcement?
Answer - Maintenance Dredging - The City and/or County Harbor District
NONNOMME�
would be responsible for maintenance dredging of that portion of
iCh is dedicated to the City.
Promontory Bay A,
The "Grant of Easement" area (between the bulkhead line and
the pierhead line) would be the responsibility of the abutting upland
owner.
NOTE: (1) It is possible to assess the individual waterfront owners
as indicated in the memo dated 4/27/70 from G. Dawes to the City Manager.
NOTE: (2) The Orange County Harbor Commission recommended that the
Irvine Company be made responsible for any maintenance dredging that
might be required of siltation from the adjacent, undeveloped uplands,
was not included in the City's Harbor Permit because the Porter -Cologne
Water QualitZ Control Act places the burden for sediment control on
%
builders and developers. (See discussion Harbor Permit memo 8/10/70).
. AAC
Answer (b). Water Quality and Law Enforcement A basically the same as
above, (City and County Harbor District.responsibility)
Question 3. What problems do we foresee if permanent easements are
granted to property owners for waters landward of the pierhead line?
Answer -
None.
The individual upland owners must still
comply
with the
Council's
Harbor
Permit Policies, Harbor Regulations and
Army
Corps
of Engineers permit requirements.
azt, Z�,
C�t-
- J.A
V
tL
A,
1
'00.0.1
6-
oe
10'
10
10!
38htz-s,
fo
E -r
DATF
SHEE
.0 HK Y ------- EDA T F ------------ ---------- JOB NO
----------------- --------- - - ---------------------------- ----------------------------------- - ------
-Lok-H-1-B-F F---
-7,,0
Z-, Z-, tj,
fD -7c:) C- c
-ZZ
--3,:!? C7
0- CD
AA�AL' 7
-75
;t-/, Z, .4, -
711
OF
H K 0. E3'T ------------- DA�C
--------- - JOB --- - ---------------------
----- - ------- - - ---------7 ------ -------- -----------------------------------
------------------------ - --------------------------------------
R,N u E3,. E-1 N, F"R 0 S T A- S30MATES
Z)
ENGINE -ERS & SURVEYORS
PHONZ 542-7723 0. ROX 117
136 ROCHESTER STREET
COSTA MESA. CALIFORNIA
August 9-1 9; 0-9
Ir,. ARISIT
Mir. David, A. veiaylcr
The Irvine Ccm.pany
560 N--vort Cemter DD H. v e
-0 C Cal-ifornia
p or t Bea -h,
Dea r. Kay I or:
Pe: Promontol-v Point Laf::Con Stut/
PUMLfant to your requc_�t, I ave analyzed. Pr',1j--j0n+ La
" '1) .7- - J) 01�1,1 PoInL 0 C If
Study B a prDbler-9 will E!X4_
I_Z. WIG,, debris
01,
biological P011L lon. AlIsO 1'.he quesl�Aon of croslon or accrp
-Lion
IV Vie ent'rarce C11";.annel and lagoon was im;,estigateo.
-,Nj-
Y Point La-3oon Stuey e r L)asses :"L p
Ma Coly 1.0.5 acras of lwater, ran�ing in dept!
-1 frim -5 -mean sea level
LL L
dall-urii at the b u I ck lhea d 't, 0 a deP`h Of -11 Moean sea le'UP-11 daftm
i n t 1'. e la.f!oon, IS fe-et bay;,,ard from tj,,L%
ufk�eaid. The, pr -availing,
winds in ihe area are f mm the direction. (See Exhibit [Wf).
Thl- entrance channel to th,' lac -Con Joins the. Vort-h Brlabl.o;j
Island
channel and is p-)otec,ed by Balboa Island frnmm the main channel of
L
3--y.
There is
c1MUl---_r10n In -'�-,n e N!Orth Ballbo,, .1sland channel Any
L
debris vhich um.uid -Y"2- 'he In -con would derive
I _�; frrm Itrash 1-- h m,,,n
I Zhe lagoon i W, I , I
P -to 4 *t�'n the la:'Gan, itself or acca ionall
trash d-r1-;,Ft1?-,9
into t -he. entrance of tile lac,0011 !%p4ng
carried by the prevailing !,Irld
--Id
and f1cod le.
This floating debrls Should be alimost inconsequential, a j -,d v,
lith the
c I Z, N V? I rj_;D S M c I s pmposed for Vn e perin'eter
at 4
L 1.9 irst bend in the chan-
Of thc I a fZ37 0 0 f-) , the di�bris lie'
aY S1 d a 0 ni-,-, i Il I:; C a r. te 7, and te s1wept ou-,- IuZ2 to
t
ti�al ql sh I rig action. Sinc h " Cycle occurs -11--wice eaily in -LII4S
e '�. t,2,
area, it is my opinion th_,At .7,,.3,st ix, -lot 01,
1 ?1; S
o ` th a floating de b.
t' I a �J'0 019 bY I,' ?a.Y Of the entrance chamn�l on an ebb ti de
at t-jT-;!_C-S when t1he, V-117nd is calm..
111r. David A.� Kaylor
Page 2
-.69
August 21, 1.2 -
One area of posslible trash accu,-.uTation is in front of Lot 59 behind
-erly o -F V- beach. This -an be alleviated by p—nipet.
the groin v_st
a --en�ion to tlh_;n� C*CSI*gn Of
t L tl the croin.
I tic -is concerned, there arc- no sources of
As faras biological pol ju 1, an I
lue t disharge or large sto rain systems discharging Into -his
tor,:,, di L L
i agoon. Due to the geo.metry cif 1:11he ent-rance and the size of the
lagoon, the water will be replaced by the tidal action with
approximnately theasame rapidity which occurs in t * �e Newport Day.
in4on that t�ere will be no Lion
1--r op
It is th efore P., biological Pollut
tablished b the Health De -
In excess of the acceptable limits as e s t Y
partment.
aih processes in the area and find no
We have also analyzed t�e_beac
evidence oil eroSion or accretion in -the Balboa Island d"-,an.nel within
lt� of t ne
tile Vicint entrance to this lagoon. Due to the low non. -scour-
ing tida". veloci-ty in this main channel, there appears t-10 be no littoral
drift ol" sand in 11,his area wh1C1',. could 'Lend to block tim entrance.
As 1-ar as accretion oil sand within the lagoon due to sedementary elle-
torm rai - ter feel
L i in
positing of sand f rom the sl d sya P is concerned, T
this is a problern of temporary and minor consileration due to
thm,
the swial I size of -4[he di-ainage area contributing to the discharge
int oog soon as the residenHal
to the lagv i Any accretion should stop as
area surroundling th, lagoon iand 12pper Promontory Point. area"is de -
V0
loped and landscaping established.
-ions regarding these matters pleas- all
ther quest C
If you have a ny. fur
on Me.
Sincerely,
)0- ASSOCIATES
RAUB, BEIN Fr. ST 4a
Jack. G. Raub
Civil Engineer
SECTION �-6
MONA
ga MAK
EAST
J E� \_ :
MY
1 .5 0 K U, L L-Ck I.TZ
r-011TA i L 1.=
E ET
PROPOSED DREDGIMG
Ail D H LKR E AD
IM 6
I R- 0 M 0 N T 0 f� Y
b A Y'
TRE RVINE
CV -1 P'KY
RAU13, SEINY FPzoST & AsSOCIATES
C11/11- & STRUCTURAL- ENGINEERS (714) 548-7723
LAND SURVEYORS &PLANNERS 542-1022
P.O. SCIX 117 . 136 ROCHESTER STREET, COSTA MESA. CALIFORNIA 92627
February 4, 1970
District Engineer
E�ngineers
U.S. Arr.V Corps of E
Post Office Box 2711
Los Angeles, California 90053
Dear Sir:
On behalf of our client,,The. Irvine Company, we are hereby applying fo r a
Navigation Perrdt for the purpose of dredging and constructing bulkheads i
Pronontory Bay, Newport Beach, California. "The proposed bay extension is
shoreward of the U.S. Bulkhead Line and lies between U.S. Bull -head Stations
101 and 200, ez shown on the enclosed permit amlication sketch.
We -intend to excavate the area to the proposed project depth of -9 elevation
in the di -I and renmov-_ the material at the entrance only after all the dredging
has been completed, thereby.creating as little disturbance as -possible to the
existing Balboa Island North Channel.
I have discussed this project withl Mr. Wendell Reese of the Permit Section,
and he has indicated that a . detedled revi I 6w will be given to this application
with regard to ticial exchange of the nelily created bay and the effect of ebb -
tide currents from the proposed new entrance on the existing 'I"Torth Balboa
island Chaanel.
If during this review you require axry further detailed information on this
proposed project, ve -will be more than happy to supply you Vith the information
required.
I h eve enclosed -with this peznmit ap
�plication one (1) reproducible copy of the
D e rr—i t sketch end three (3) prints outlining the area of the wor'k. in red. Also
enclosed is a copy of the Tentative Map, which gives more detail, for your use.
As The Irvine Co=any is v-ery anxious to begin work on this project and your
approval is required before any construction can cormence, we would be most
appreciative of anything you can do to expedite the approval of this permit.
Sincerely,
RAUB, BEIN, FROST ASSOCIATES
.1a6k G. R aub E -B _1970�
LCivil Engineer
THE
.JGR/cem
Enclosures
cc: L, -Mr. Dav6 Kaylor, The Irvine Cor-Vany
T3
Zo
IV
P4C T LEA ISU0.3
y C,
OA
Clr4 4,
v Z: L A Al
VEST
JETTY
VICINITY S Y, E T c H EAST
KEN11 p 0 0 IS XY , CAUFO�)Mk. JMY
-7.77,
NOTE: SOUNDINuS AKE ExPKESSE) Im FEET AND Umautt UcrillS
6ELOW MEAN LOVER. LOW WTE.7— MWHUM RX11GE OF TIDE
APPRO1. 10 FT. 14,\K6OF, L114SS AWS ESTAbLISHED N -TqlS SECTIO1.4
OF 14EV?O?,T 6NY.
USL
too,
LULKHEAD
ev
4p, 3
e
SECTION A -A
7. y
17,
110
4P,
A
4�,
4
IF4
*6
cell
s
p
Ile
't WST. bAYSIDE H. 13 9 L A N
t? In --,a
LkgEAD LIKE
PIMEXI) A S
7A
P 0 S E D D K E D G I
AN D 27 U UK 9 E D I M G
I k 0 q, .0 �l T Y b
i J 7 14 T 1. k C.4. C A' —;F i I X
14Y
S E CT 10 N b-� E C "A
DEPARTMENT OF THE A y
LOS ANGELES DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P. 0., BOX 2711
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90053
IN REPLY REFER TO
SPLCO-0 2 0 May 1970
The Irvine Company
550 Newport Center Drive
Newport Beach, California 92664
Gentlemen:
In response to your request of 4 February .1970, there is inclosed
a permit authorizing excavation and the construction of a bulkhead
at Promontory Bay, Newport Beach, California.
If it becomes necessary for any reason to make any material changes
in the location or plans of the work, revised plans should be sub-
mitted promptly to this office in order that, if found to be unobjec-.
tionable from the standpoint of navigation, they may be approved as
required by law before construction is begun.
A form, in duplicate, is inclosed for your convenience in reporting
the status of work under this permit. One copy is to be retained in
your files and the other returned to this office.
Also inclosed for your information are copies of letters received
from Southern California Edison Company and the Ocean Fish Protective
Association.
Sinc y yoursli
.4 Incl OBERT J. p LLEY
1. Permit Colonel, CE
2. Work status form (dupe) District Engineer
3. Ltr fr So. Cal. Edison.
4. Ltr fr Ocean Fish Prot. Assn.
R EC LE I V EL D
2 1970
9 t I
PROJECr DZ"'ELCP:,!-,j-F
DEPARTMENT OF THE AT! 1Y
�h -real estate or mate-
.NoTE.—It is to be understood that this instrument does not give any property rig ts either in
rial, or any exclusive privile.ges; and that it does not authorize any injury to private property or invasion of private
rights, or any infringement of Federal, State, or local laws or regulations, -nor does it obviate the necessity of obtaining
ffl e T It Eft -4 -1-4
State assent to the work authorized. f , nin't1t:Y r1c ftEtll� 8 HE! - 3 3
efmira Iffff! ±1tBt!e ftfaftTs b, f. (See C-temiltings V. Ghicavo, 188 U. S., 4i -j-)
PERMIT
U. S. Army Engineer District, 0 Los Angeles
Corps f Engineers..
Los Angeles, California
- - ------ 2DL.U4Y-----t 1970
The Irvine Company
550 Newport Center Drive
Newport Beach, California 92664
Gentlemen:
Referring to written request dated4 February 1970 for permission to excavate
and construct a bulkhead
have to inform you that, upon the recommendation of the �Chief of E�ngineers,
and under the provisions of Section 10 of the Act of Congress approved March 3,
1899, entitled "An act making appropriations for the construction, repair, and
preservation of certain.public works on rivers and harbors, and for other pur-
poses," you are hereby authorized by the Secretary of the Army.
to excavate an irregular shaped area about 2,300 feet long by 100 to 400 feet
(Here describe the proposed structure or work.)
wide and deposit approximately 290,000 cubic yards of material on shore off the
site and construct about 5,100 linear feet of concrete bulkhead
in Newpor t Bay (Here to be named the river. harbor, or waterway concerned.)
cat a
,,.�.ocatgn shoreward of and about midway between U. S; Bulkhead Stations
(Her De namet e nearest well-known locality—preferably a town or cify—and the distance in miles ar'd tenths from some deffulte point In
the same, stating whether above or below or giving direction by points of corapaaa.)
101 and 200
in accordance with the plans shown on the drawing attached hereto marked "Proposed
(Or drawings: give file number or other definite identification marks.)
'Dredging and Bulkheading, Promontory Bay, Newport Beach, Calif. Application by:
The Irvine Company, 550 Newport Center"Dr., Newport Beach. 3 Feb.
subject to the following conditions:
4
ngineers,
(a) That the work sh oe subject to the supervision and approval of the jistrict Engineer, Corps of E I . .
in char . ge of the locality, N, may temporarily suspend the work at any t; if in his judgment the interests of navi-
gation so require.
(b) That any material dredged in the prosecution of the work herein authorized shall be removed evenl I y . and no
large refuse piles, ridges across the bed of the waterway, or deep holes that may have a tendency to cause.injur.y to
r cable hereby authorized is laid
navigable channels or to the banks of the waterway shall be left. If any pipe, wire, o
illing
in a trench, the forniation of permanent ridges across the bed of the waterway shall be avoided and the back f
shall be so done as not to increase the cost of future dredging for navigation. Any material to. be deposited or
y or on shore above high-water mark, shall be deposited or
dumped under this authorization, either in the waterwa so prescribed thereon, within or behind a good
dumped at the locality shown on the drawing hereto attacned, and, if
or bulkheads, such as will prevent escape of the material in the waterway. If the mate -
and substantial bulkhead tributary waters, or in Long Island Sound, a
rial is to be deposited in the harbor of New York, or in its adjacent or bor, New York City.
permit therefor must be previously obtained from the Supervisor of New York Har
(c) That there shall be no unreas I onable interference with navigation by the work herein authorized.
(d) That if inspections or any other operations by the United States are necessary in the interest of navigation,
all, expenses connected therewith shall be borne by the pe-rmittee. to forb id the full . and free use by the public of
(e) That no attempt shall be made by the permittee or the owner
all I navigable waters at or adjacent to the work or structure.
(f ) That if future operations by the United States require. an alteration in the position of the structure or work
herein authorized, or if, in the opinion of the Secretary of the Army, it shall cause unreasonable obstruction to the f ree
of said water, the owner will be required upon due notice from the Secretary of the Army, to remove or
navigation i
alter the str . uctural w ork or obstructions caused thereby without expense to the United States, so as to render naviga
tion reasonably f ree, easy, and unobstructed; and if, upon the expiration or revocation of this permit, the, structure,
ion, or other modification of the watercourse hereby authorized shall not be completed, the ovmers shall,
fill, excavat er as the Secretary of the Army
without expense to the United States, and to such extent and in such time and mann to its for I mer condition t I he navi-
may require, remove all or any portion of the uncompleted structure or fill and, restore
laim shall be made against the United States on account of any such removal
gable capacity of the watercourse. No c
or alteration. h rei
(g) That the United States shall in no case be liable for any damage or injury to the structure or work e n
authorized which may be caused by or result from future operations undertaken by the Government for the conserva
tion or improvement of navigation, or for other purposes, and no claim or right to compensation shall accrue from
any such damage.
(h) That if the display of lights and signals on any -work- hereby authorized is not otherwise provided for by law,
may be prescribed by the U. S. Coast Guard, shall be installed and maintained by and at the
such Hights and signals as
expense of the owner. work will be . commenced, and as
(i) 'That the permittee shall notify the said district engineer at what time the
far in advance of the time of commencement as the said district engineer may specify, and shall also notify him
promptly, in writing, of the commencement of work, suspension of work, if for a period of more than one week,
resumption of work, and its completion.
M That if the structure or work herein authorized is not completed on or before -------------------- --------- day,
of — ------------- Df�gz?.mbar ---------- 19-11, this permit, if not previously revoked or specifically ext I ended, shall cease and
be null and void.
M That the permittee shall comply promptly with any regulations, conditions,
or instructions afIfecting the work hereby authorized if and when issued by the
Federal Walter Pollution Control Administration and/or, the State water.pollutiOn
control agency having jurisdiction to abate or prevent water pollution. Such
regulations, conditions or instructions in effect or prescribed by the Federal
Water Pollution Control Administration or State agency are hereby made a condition
of this permit.
- By authority of the Secretary of the Army:
ROBERT J. ALLE
Colonel,
District Engineer
1131111 1721 (CiVil) Tbis foryu supersedes ED Form 98, dated I Apr 48, wbtch trifty be used unfli e.xbsustel
I SEP 48 V. 3. G0YKRhMLMT P-1-4-� 01r11:9 18-13158-3
EM 1145-11-303
OF THE ARN'Y
�_OS co.�!�,S O�' NG I,"! H—Ps
p. 0. E -,OX 2711.
LOS ANG�LES. CALIFORNIA
M REPLY P.EFER TO
SPLCO -0
-The Irvine- Company
550 Newport Center Drive
Newport Beach, Cali fEorni a 92664
20 Mal 1 1 1970
Gentlemen:
In response to your request of 4 February 1970, there is inclosed
a permit authorizing excavation and the constru--tion of a bulkhead
at Promontory Bay, Newport Beach, California.
If it becomes necessary for any reason to make any material changes
in the location or plans of the work, revised pl-3,ns should be sub -
mi -ted promptly to this office in order that, if found to be unobjec-
tionable from the standpoint of navigation, they may be approved as
required by law before construction is begun.
A form, in duplicate, is inclosed for your convenience in reDorting
the status of work under this permit. One copy is to be retained in
your files and the other returned to this office.
Also inclosed for your information are copies of letters received
from Southern California Edison Company and the Ocean Fish Protective
Association.
4 Incl
1. Permit
2. Work status for -m (dupe)
3. Ltr fr So. Cal. 'Edison
4. Ltr fr Ocean Fish Prot. Assn.
Since'Pt�_y yours.,
BERT J. LLEY
colonel, CE
District Engineer
I L L
TAAY '11970
THE
P R 0117 C f 3 E L
DIEPAIR-MiAlENIT OF TIHEE 'A'RN!Y
,I does riot gi-ve any v r; q I.-, a : th r e a, e st a -� e o - M:!- t
S 'a hc: that "'his inst, Li �er. ITIV-1
-ror)P-rW 0- s' o 7, P
or XCIU-ive and L�ot �'o�"; not au L-Z:e 21 j 1'-Y W j — , " ,, ;
any e I , ss:ty of
--S of re 1 -1 Is, -.no r does i" o-viaLle the nece
frjngi2n1U1-1t Of I'Cdel:al, St,Ltk�, or 1CCa' 12--" t:()
ights, or a! -,Y III
sl�ate assrnt to tl.-- TArorK au"horizod. ...... --
PER11,111T
u. S. Army 7n,.7;neen District, Los Angeles
co�-Ps 0 f Er, 21, –J'n E) E–'rs
C L
Los Angeles� alifOrnia
------------------ - ------
The Irvine COmPanY
550 Newport Center Drive -
%-.ewport Beach, California 92664
Gentlemen:
te
Referring to written request dated 4 February 1970 for permission to excavaL
and construct a bulkbead ------
ndation of the Chief of Engineers,
—T—ha—ve to inform You that, upon the recomme.
the provisions Of Section 10 Of the Act of Congress approved March 3,
and under
1899, entitl ed "An act meking appropriations for the construction, -repair, and
preservation of certain.public works on rivers and harbors, and for other pur-
poses," you are hereb - y authorized by the Secretary of the Army-
7egular shaped area about 2,300 feet long by 100 to 400 feet
to excavate an irl C,
(H�re describe the proposed atructUre or work.)
wide and deposit approximately 290,000 cubic yards of material an sho e off the
site and construct about 5,loo linear feet of concrete bulkhead
?jewport Bay (Here tc be named the, river. bsxl>or, or waterway concerned.)
reward of and about midway between U. S-. Bulkhead Stations
Elt a �.ocat gn, 6hq 1--kn.-.,-n 1.caEty—preferably a towm or C16 --and the distance in miles and tenths from vome dedult-a PoInt tq
(Rere to ns-mt� L neare3t 'we i
the 5.-ame, stazing whether above or below or giving direction by points off compass.)
101 and 200
in accordance with the plans shown on the drawing attached hereto marked Proposed
(Or drawings; give fle number or ether definitp identification xnaxk.i.)
Dredging and Bulkheading, Pro.montory Bay, Newport Beach, Calif. Application by.
C, port Center"Dr. Ne -,Tor- Beach.
The Irvine COMDany, 550 New
subject to the followl-ng conditions:
Er.
k" -s-;", co-ps 9.,
(a) Tr�;i� S." uL' �;ubji_�zt to
j�, :-, th�� ir-'�t�e3ts Of f a;;
LY SUS�r_
and no
at;��a s') 0 rno V
orl- _1__L
S,
T1 la, in t��:�
tend2ncv to CaLlSe -.0
large I-C'LISO ridf-cs across tlt�� be,-; of th-� Oep 1,,oje- that rn�y R_
S 1�� *ef t. If a ny ppe, -ire, or cable h.erpby aul-toriz-1 '-s !a;d
n -a,.- �an!!el- or to the b-nlis 0�
Ule e Lerwav shal! be avoided and the back ft'En.,Z;
--ccoss "-e I- �-d CF the wa
in a trericb. fo-11-Lon of permanent ial to be depos:-led, or
ry inater
shall be so done a.-5 not to iac,izase the coz;L oF fL,,ture �4'gin, for navigation. A
ark,
I shaii be deposited or
or on shore above higln�'ti�r rn
duurp,?']. 117.flor t'!is �"uthoriz-atio-, eit'rlcr i,i t.10 %V�_.tcry
1 thereon, within or behnd a �:rood
t so prescrioe'a
dumped at th�- 1101itY s"O"' or' tl`e 0 r t,�: r,,. - ' n-
scaDe at�!r,__j ir. the -waterwaY- If t! " mat -
and substan'al bui:zltead or bulki-ead's, suca as Nvi;l rl' -�r'.' e - 1
:-7 ad;--ent or tributary waters, or in Long Is,_-nd '_",rind, a
York, or in —
rial is to ba (I e p o s: �� e d i -, i t he h a rl)o r 0 Ta t..Ic Z�pervisor of New York H_--bor New York CitY.
permit therefor must be pre%iously cbtaind fro
(c) That there shall be no unrea-sonabie interference with na-vigation by the work herein authorized.
sary in the interest, of navigation,
(d) That ii. inspe&ion3 or any other ocerations by tlne United States are neces
all expenses connected therewith shall be borne by the -.ermittee.
M'Ltee or the owner to forbid the full and free use by the public of
(e) That no attempt shall be made by the per �
all navigable waters at or adjacent to the work or structure.
That if -luture operations by the United States require an alteration in the position Of the structure or work
-1 it shall cause unreasonable obstruction to the free
herein authorized, or if, in the opinion of the Secretary of the Army,
navigation of sai,! water, the ov.-ner -will be required upon due notice from the Secretary of the Army, to remove or
-without expense to the United States, so as to render navi..-a-
alter the structural work or obstructions caused thereby _.
tion reasonably -free, easy, and unobstructed; and if, upon the expiration or revocation of this permit, 'the structure,
fill, excavation, or other modification of the watercourse hereby authorized shall not be completed, the owners shall,
without expense to the United States, and to such extent and in such time and manner ans the Secretary of the Army
may require, remove all or any portion of the uncompleted structure or fill and restoreto its former condition the n---,i-
laim shall be made against the United States on account of anysuch removal
gable capacity of the viatercourse. No c
or alteration. woek herein
(g) That the United States shall no case be liab';e for any damage or injurry to the structure or
for the conserva-
authorized which may be caused by or result from future operations undertaken by the Government
ses, and no claim or right to compensation shall accrue from
tion or improvement of navigation, or for other purpo
any such damage. d signals on any work hereby authorized is not otherwise provided for by law,
(h) That if the display of lights an I , shall be installed a;nd maintained by and at the
such lights and signals as -may be prescribed by the U. S. Coast Guard
expense of the owner. the said dist I rict en-ineer at what time the work- will be commenced, and as
- (i) 'That the permittee shall notify
far in advance of the time of commencement as the sa:d district engineer may specify, and shall also notify him
promptly, in writing, of the commencement of work, suspension OIL work, if for a period of more than one weelk
resumption of work, and its completion.
M That if the structure or work herein au' thorized is not completed on or before ------------------- ? 3.6-t - --------- day
c fically extended, shall cease and
of - ------------- P,_� mb ft r --------- 19-11, this permit, if not previously revoked or spe i
be null and void.
(k) That the permittee shall comply promptly with any regulations, conditions,
or instructions afE.EL-ecting the work hereby authorized if and when issued by the
M p 1!"+;nn Control Administration and/or the State water pollution
rederall CLk.1;;J., -
control agency having jurisdiction to :---:bate or prevent water pollution.
�s t or prescribed by the
regulations, conditions or instruction in effec-
Water Pollution . Control Administration or State agency are hereby made
of this permit.
By authority of the Secretary of the Army:
LAROBEERT J.
Colonel, 1�,Mr
District Engineer,
C,
(CiVil) Th.s supersetles ED Form 96. dAted 1 Apr 43, wbich mAy be UY-.4 Untr a.xhauszod-
11 N S' EFT14mg 1721 'j. .. w' --y 0'r"t 1,1--13158-5
Such
Federal
a condition
Y Y; 7 C-,.
U
0, 'D 1:.-%TTjk1f-1T-1---
C 01vi M
-A "i _--�A- N -�l
-:�-b ru!,).1- y 13 of Jo -int Harbor C om -
N." e a -
the C'Osino c f Z ne
in, 0 1, b i n s a -posed. Questions
an Ryokoff and, la-bor Co-TiL:-dissi oiler LO
U
-I-.ri- Prorriontory Bav
,i tt-e oossible effaCt3 of U -p- o e- Is tidal ebb currents
uO-n the alre-ady eroding beacl--tes of' Ba]lboa, Island. '-�uastioils included ac-
count-.-::�b,'Ity, should this erosion be exacerbated wlth tha addit-on
al. ebb
VO -LIAMe 3 generated by the project.
C.
Also questioned, was identification of responsibility for waterwa-,rS
debris cleaning within the project itself after completion. Councilman
Kymala directed the staff to review these aspects of the project and make a,
report back to the Commit-11-ee,
1. EROSION: BALBOA ISLAND BE4CHES
According to t -he engineers I have consulted on this subject, the prob-
lem is t1hreefold. One problem, of course, is the littoraltransport- created
by existing currents during tidal ebbing. A port-iozi of t1nis has been retard-
ed by the groining project now being conducted in stages. Another aspect is
the -oroblem created by the profile slope toward the channel'
s middle* A
third.influence, interestingly so, was pointed out as being the transport
of rmaterial ayay from the beaches onto the sidewalks and strea.ts by sun-
bathers and bathers. This materialis then swept by maintenance crews and
hauled away., The exact order of value on these three sand 'Loss factors is
unkno-wn to ine One s ituat ion is apparent, however, and it is obvious that
groins are needed (and are installed) along the south side of the Little
Island. Thus, the Problem is occurring on three sides having open bay ex-
p o su, r -3 a -
The, effects upon this problem by the opening of' �Promontory Bay may, or
may not, have signi.-C-1cance., I base this upon the only mathematical values
i--\ T M, r
E Y
1\.1Q. �_ -.1 2
aVa_11ab'1e to at t1nils point iri time. (Exhibit 1) calculations; sub-
mitt,ed by Raub, Bein, Fros-t', and 1:_'Lss,�Dciates, on Plugust 20., 1969,'. are com-
pleted with a t] -dal ebb cu. ren' VelocIty of 0.34 feet per second. Convert-
ed, t1riis is 4.1 inclnes per second., or .2.27 miles per 'nour, Their conelusion
is that this _13 we!l, below the rate of erosion velocity,
R E C 0 111111i'llE N D A T 10 N
If the Joint Harbor Committee disa--ireas with the above calculations, and
their conclusions; recommend to Council tnat t1hey demand a performance bond
be posted by the developer to insure against any damaging effect upon +-he
beaches in question when the project is opened into the Balboa Island North
Channel., This might.require action through legal counsel. However, if the
Irvine Companydesires to stand on the calculations, they might be willing to
put up this bond in good fait -h, provided the cost is not prohibitive.
2* DEBRIS WITHIN THE PROJECT, ON WATERIWAYS;� CLEAi�ING RESPONSIBILITY
A further review of material reveals that the project's waterways,were
dedicated to the City, with an easement granted within the pierhead line to
the owners within the development,
Raub, Bein, Frost, and Associates address themselves to this problem in
a letter.to the Irvine Company, dated August 29,, 1969* It is attached as
Exhibit 2 Although the waterways are dedicated to the City,, and the debris
cleaning responsibility would be the Cityts, for the waterways alone, it
should not be a problem of much significance. The bay is projected to COM_
pletely flush during.a 38 hour period. If any problem develops, it will more,
likely be isolated within the granted local owners' easement area, landward
of the pierhead line.
I cannot firid anything in the engineering firm's material which is
T, Y
Y 3
A
d -1 T e c. t I v r-iated to oc,--acions deali,-nc- with hi-;�-,h winds. F'o-1 lnstanc�e,
t'Cle heavy sou"L-1heaste--lies leading orcomi-Lng rain storrias , 1aeavy westerlies on
the tl-ailing sides of rainst-orms, and the Santa. Ana. Winds. However, these
are not- Prevailinc'; wilnds, they are sporadic.
RECaOY,Y_'-NDAT!O_�,,TS
'At this stage of development, I do not know if a separate ED I.. R.. on
the watenways could be required. This is a matter.for legal counsel, in
view of the project's overall timing. However, permits have been granted,,
C.
and the developer has moved ahead within the parameters of these permits'*
Should the.Joint Harbor Committee want to pursue this issue, I recom-
mend that a special meeting be held with the Irvine Companyts representa-
tives. The bulkheading is proceeding toward the Balboa Island North Chan-
nel, and completion might be somewhat close to the next sch
eduled J, H. C.
meeting in March.
Submitted by
City of Newport Beach
Marine Safety Department
RO ED ReedY Director
Attached: 2 Exhibits.
By /16 12, DATEZ-0-,41969 13JECT,zZ:_?_ SHE
ET NO.----/ ---- OF. -Jo ----
JOB NO
CHKD. BY ------------ DATE --------------
- --- --------- - ---------------------------------
----------------------- TT ------- I ---------
-:22
A�D, 5
-3. 77c-) .0
000000��,,� J
74;71
�'d Ae- AV-
�7 (-7
7- Z). L__j .9:) r---1
L-4, k/
7-3
-------------
RAUE3, BEIN, FRoST & AssOCIATES
EN13INEERS Sc SURVEYORS
PHONE 548-7723 P- 13- BOX 117
136 ROCHESTER STREET
C13STA MESA, CALIFORNIA
August 21, 1969 -EXH)151T 2e
Mir. David A. Kaylor
The Irvine Comp,2ny
5510 Newport Cent-zr Drive
N"awport B . each, Cal-ifornia 92660
Dear,Vir. Kaylor:
Rev Promontory Point Laccon Study
Pursua'nt to your request-, I 1)ave analyzed Proxiontorij Point Lagoon
St"Idy "B" to diterl?,-Ine Whether a problem %,All ex -S I" deb jz-
biological pollu-40n. Also Ithe qu.-stion of e 1 t 1,11 , d , rl -. or
rosion or acCretion
,in t�,e entrance ti'jh'arinel and lagoon was investigated
..The pr
oposed Promontory Point Lagoon St-udy "B" encompasses -approxi-
mately 10.� acres of water, rancling in deptth from -5'mean sea level
daturn at the bul-head +.o a bo-l-L-
1,tcm "OPth Of -11 mean sea
n Z
in the laccoij, Ito feat ba3rviard froz��i tht bulkheadi The prevailinq
w1nds in ihe area are fro -m the sout�,westt direCtion. (See Exhibit "A").
-The entrance chan.n.-.l
tO the lag"On Joins the P-11orth Balboa island
channel and is protected by Balboa 'Island fron, the main channel of
Newport Bay.
There is go -d circulation in NOrth Bal
n- lboa Island channel. Any
.debris which would enji.- , the "a -c -on would derive from -1-rash thrc.-�-,,n
Into the lagoon %-Ithin the 11ago-r- itself or accasional "trash dri-fting
into the. eiitrance of the I lagoon 0 -being carried by the prevalling -wrind
and fleod t1ide.
This floating debris should be alrost inconseqventlal, ai-,d wi-!,,-'h M -le
'In
cl-an, un o 4bs r L, r, t -
d bulkheading, -�s proposed for th-e perimeter
of the lagoon, thle- d-ebris will col'11--ect at the f-irst bend in tfije cnLin-
t to t-
nel closes.. ne Bayside S!,onpi
Canter and be s1wept ou�C due to,
tidal flushing action. Since th-' cycle �ocCurs -twice daily -in 'Whis
area, it is MY Opinion that mos" -1-r
t i --lot all Of thle floating debris
would leave the lagoon bY.'elaY of the entranice channel on an- ebb tide
at tln!as �jhen the wind is calm.
Mr. David A. Kaylor
Page 2
August 21, 1969
One area of possible trash accumulation is in front of Lot 59 behind
the groin t-,restterly of the beach. This can be alleviated by proper
att-ention to th-c, dcsign oil the groin.
As far as biological pollution is concerned,thiere are no sources of
effluent discharge or larboe stom.,� drain systeris discharging Into this
lagoon. Due to the geo-metry of the entrance and the slz-2 of the
lagoon, the water will be replaced by the normal tidal action i-Mth
approxi,m,ately the.same rapidity i-,,hich occurs in t - he lo;�.-er Newport Bay.
It is therefore miy opinion that them. will be no biological pollution
in excess of the acceptable li.mits as established by the Health De-
partment.
We have also analyzed the.bea& processes in the area and find no
evidence of erosJon or accretion in the Balboa Island channel within
the vicinity of the en-t-rance to this lagoon. Due to the low nan-scour-
ing tidal velocity in this main channel, there appears to lbe no littoral
.drift o-14' sand in this area which could tend to block the entrance.
As far as accr"�Itlon of sand within the lagoon due to se-dement-ary de-
positing of sand fron Ithle storim drain system is concerned, I feel
that this is a problem o" temporary and minor consideration due to
t,he small size of ithe drainage area contributing to th�e discharge
into the lagoon. Any accretion should stop as soon as the residential
area surrounding the lagoon and Upper Promontory Point area'is de-
veloped and landscaping established.
if you have any further questions regarding these matters, please call
on me.
Sincerely,
RAUB, BEIN, FROST cot ASSOCIATES
L
-Jack G. Raub
Civil Engineer
JGR/cem.
—TO
Al
F 1� p
HEIjP047
A 6EAC, ISL !;D
y
A
C �r4
N DEL MAK
V EST
JETTY
VICINITY SKETCH EAST
14 E W P 0 XT bA? , CALIFORNIA 0 JETTY
GWAML S-CALE-141LES
NOTE : SOUNDINbS AKE E�PKESSED IN FEET AND DENOTE DEPTHS
16ELOW MEAN LOVER LOW WATEK. MA%IMUM WGE OF TIDE
APPRO%. 10 FT. 14ARP60K LINES AZE. ESTA,61.1514ED IN T91S SECTION
OF. 14EVPOFT 2, NY.
10 UL
4, le� CONC, LULKREhD
*9.0
3
_40
SECTI 0 N A -A
ILT.S.
77
.�j
"74
ea 1,d
.4 S
18e
114
't EXIST. WSIDE DR. P L A N
p
lot M 310 4141 Sao
ULMAD LINE ?_
SCALL IN
MEILHEAD
KAU&-bEIN- FROST iE, ASSOC.—
C15b UCHESTER
log' 110' GSTA
D R E D G I W G
80,milm. so 40'
Ail D 2, U L.K " E A D I M
p ROMONTOKY b A Y'
(-t ULOCATED JkfSIDE DK, 14EW P 0 KT ZZA(II, CALIFORNi�
SECTIO N U -THE MINE COMPAIlY
WTS SSO %4EV?UT UNTE2. DZ.
Promontory B_"ay Plan
The Irvine Company has been before Newport
Beach city government many times with plans for
housing developments. But their proposed Promontory
Bay plan is a horse of a different color.
The difference is that Irvine Company wants to
terminate a major thoroughfare — 11,000 -cars -per -day
Bayside Drive — and reroute traffic. The proposed
development is in the crook of Bayside Drive as it
-swings. from Coast Highway near the riverboat restaur-
ant toward Balboa Island.
To develop a lagoon ringed by waterfront homes
and yacht slips it is necessary to cut a channel through
the present roadway. A high-level bridge appears out of
the question. '
The plan is for old Bayside Drive to become a dead-
end with a new Bayside Drive constructed along the
foot of the bluff to handle through traffic. But that
would leave the six Balboa Yacht Basin businesses on
city -lease property isolated on the old Bayside Drive.
-And therein lies thei rub.
The businesses undoubtedly would suffer some from
loss of drive-by traffic that might see their signs and
turn in. It seems probable courts would decree some
severance damages.
The Irvine, Company representative told the New-
port Beach City Council the company would not pay
severance damages. Whereupon city councilmen called
for more study.
Real estate appraiser Cedric White says the market
value of the entire city -owned property would be in-
creased by the Promontory development because it
would create more exclusiveness for Beacon Bay
homes. Losses by the businesses in drive-in. trade
shouki be nominal by comparison, lie says. I � �!
Ci,,� councilmen need to satisfy themselves on this
point. They are in a bargaining position to negotiate with
the Irvine Company to share the cost of severance
damages.
Otherwise, the development looks de�sirable from
the city's standpoint. Waterfront homes and yachts fit
in nicely with the surroundings and there will be more
view of the water for the public than there is now.
The land on the overlooking bluff called Promon-
tory,Point is another matter, however. It provides a
natural vista and the city should hold out for no lbss
than a public street around the rim like Ocean Boiile�-
vard in Corona del Mar, as councilmen in the Prorrkpn
tory Bay discussion gave some indication they Will do.
-3�nt Ha--rt��,-
3 r. Uomr�,Ilttee Yep.-1-4-nLr -Feb. 1,35,
Bays):-Lores il!arina !,.Scussi-on:
IS "Vera distributed. Ba.Tward position of floats discuss -a
L
it Wa3 pointed out that the size of boats wcluld be 3malle-- -LIhan beffore.'
A1,90, that they were considering putting sailboats on insIde tie3.
A question fram t --hie Committee cam
Ili- _e up on 'he degree of input experienced
from.Bayshores residents Further, that PUtting sailboats on the inside
should be a condition of thepermit.
Sammson oointed out that exhaust fumes will.drift inshore because of the
PreVaUi�g winds. Also, that boats had been tied there since the 1930fa.
The homes had been built later. He said that sailboats will have a hard
time maneuvering to inside ties. He talked of the mi&r-,hief problem with
local children.0 He thought that any building constructed on the land.,
connected with the -marina, should be of minimum height. He recommended
approval of Alternate No. 1.
Mr. Frank James, a Bayshores resident, wanted the project held up until
a tract -map is filed with the Real Estate Commission. He talked of in-
gress and egress needs at both ends of the project. He reviewed public
,safety and traffic problems, both within Bayshores and on the highway
near the bridge. He wanted any additional homes construction stopped..
He showed pictures of.traffic problems,, and stated that the N.'.B. Police
were unable to enforce speeding within the Bayshores district, He also
pointed out that Bayshores is not incorporated within the City.
Alr..Kymla stated that the Bayshores Association should get together with
the 72-ty on enforcement. He recognized the effort of all positions in
working out the.problems related to the project, and that there had been
a lot of tgive and take' throughout this -period. He agreed with Sampson's
recommendation to adopt Alternate No. J.,
Mr. Ryckoff stated that he liked the E. I. R., and cited itts beneficial
aspects. He briefly talked of the ingress and egress problem. However
he posed the question of holding tanks. Were the . y.required? If not,_
they should be.
Ken Sampson said they were part of the lease requirements.
Mr. Ryckoff.wanted policing of holding tank requirements.
..Sampson said 1974 is the deadline.
R ekoff replied that policing should be active from thenon,
Samp�on then said that the entire field will ultimately pre empted.
Federal Government anyway. by the
Kymla. m ad e a. motion for approval of the project.
Motion passed with sailboats being tied inside as a
recommended condition.
L
eb. '3 - Con'!- -d 2.
I H
ull Cleanln- Or-ance �oro-oosal
Dave New of the Chamber of Commerce, reviev.,ef --he hist -----
of this o,-dinance proposal. and it Is enforcing problems. --e stated
it mialht, t --e too early for passing, and that it needed fu-1,7_-1--er st-udy,
especially in the area of bay bottom deposits. He also to get
the Daint manufacturers involved. He suggested that the Dunes
be the study zone since it was isolated from other areas.
Frank Robinson said.that the C of C letter states that we should do nothine
until a study is made, but statistics shot,�.r some things are happeningw
He discussed paints. He then posed the question,.Where do you start?"
Ryckoff asked Dave if his concern only relat-ed to boat yards.
Dave New replied that his corcern was for the general boat- I
ing pTb-lic.
Robinson stated thata conversion of presented figures translated itself
to approximately 1,000 boats of 261 to 301, and wanted to know if it
constituted about 75"f of the floating, berthed boats in the harbor*
Sampson said it was about 50%.9 maybe*
New stated that some boats were scrubbed about once 8. month, and some
at longer intervals. Also, that this would put s'ome firms out of busin-
ess, especially all divers. He pointed, out the difference between hard
and soft bottom paints,along with other problems* He thought that pas-
sing the ordinance might encourage the use of the wrong kind of paints.
KMla agreed with the need for further study, and ace-epted the Chamber
of Commerce report.
Coves DeveloDment
Harshbarger gave a staff report on this project, pointing out that the
Irvine Company hadrepresentatives on hand who could speak on it's be-
half.
Morris., of the Irvine Co. made a synopsis report using a demonstration-
mole_16f the proposal. He submitted a land title.report. He stated that
A- included city tidelands only, and therefore city policy was
the project
prevailing as far as they were concerned. He indicated that he wanted
to avoid controversy, so they *ere proceeding with the City Council,,
not the County for final approval* He addres&ed the question of exclus-
ive use of boat slips. Also� he addressed the question of fisheries
easement by identifying their ownership of land to extend to the bulk-
head line. He.said they wanted to fill to the bulkhead line in ace-ord-
ance with standard procedure per previous precedents.
Robinson said that since 1960 there has been a loss, of fishing waters by
bulkheading, and that perhaps now is the time to reconsider public needs
for recreation. He also stated that he wants to see more beaches.
1;Torris replied that as things are now, the area isprivately owned, with
`on`�--d 3.
I _tC 3 S 7 :D Ine is -proposir 'D C'. ces
-v
i_ib 11 c g ub J., ac
-le also observed tnat --he land had been offered
pro ec U T1 U
c, a e
C�l `-e lity did not buy it, Fle showed where -I-- - - -1 -1 -
,,Y, buL. 1111 1_1 - --- -he s =--a! was
cated oi.. the model.
Ryckoff wanted to know where the sidE.,-,!alk tied into the eIr-Ist- Lng public-
s i d e w al"K s
!.,,Iorris identified the locations on the modelo
Robinson stated the past policies are in error. Everyone.should now be
more responsive to,public need for recreation.
Morris showed where an existing crumbling seawall is behind a mudflat.
Ballinger wanted to.know who would maintain the public walkway.
Kymla replied,that the City would undertake it.
Ballinger then brought up the past problems with narrow walkways, citing
shrubbery encroacIments, etc.
Dave Kuhn said these walkway s would have a 'minimum width of five feet�.
Kl,-mla stated that maintenance crews could utilize clippers to maintain
wMkway width.
BallinEer asked some -questions about land support area identified with
public use. He also wanted to know about the "cut off"' of the existing
..marina to the westward, adjacent to this Droject. He asked if we should
have public walkways along the:waterfront of the westward marina alsoo
Morris then asked Ballin-er if it was practical. He stated that this'
area was operated by the Me Lean Company.
Kuhn said that there was not enough room at this time.
Ballinger then asked about public restrooms on the Me Lean oper,ated,mar-
ina.
Kuhn said that this was Me Leants option* He thourrht that Me Lean was
Tonsidering construction of restrooms.
Ryckoff wanted to know more about restroom facilities within the Coves
r-evelopments
Kuhn said there was one near the pool area, however at this time was -not
for public use.
Ryckoff replied that maybe it.will suffice for public use.
Kymla began finalizing by stating that exclusive use of the boat slips
was not on trial here. He went on by outlining how Irvine has complied
with City rules. Also, that the City did not purchase the land when it
was offered. He said the issue now is to whether or not we should recom-
Mend Council support.
Feb. L5 Contl'--'_�ed 4
sc�irl he --,:ic1-."d.qualifLJ*Ledly approve.
c ko
Kvm1a made A --rotion '['or Joint Harbor Committee app. -oval. 0
for lack of a second,
�K- --,an directed t'-rle staff to re -submit the pro�ect to ---e Council
ITm 1 a L___
Ir approval, showing that the motion died irn the C o mm 7' It, e e
T Fie U
Joint Powers Agreement
Samp s on a3ked that this item be carried over.
Shoreline Encroachments: Harbor Island.(Porter's Complaint)
This item was held over because Mr. Porter did not appear.
NewDort Dunes-Pro.lect Proioosal
Sampson requested that a joint meeting be held with tile City Council and
the Harbor Commission in attendance, to discuss this project.
Kvmla suggested that he make this request of the Mayor.
Miscellaneous Item
Robinson introduced Mr. Holmberg of the Department.of the Interior, Bu-.
reau. of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife,
Holmberg advised that they now had an office in Corona del Mar.
Promontory Bay
Ryckoff had a letter written by George Dawe -s to Sampson on the subject of
an E. I. R* for Promontory Bay. He expressed concern for the,project's
influence on erosion of Balboa Island beaches. He wanted to know who
would be financially responsible if these beaches were eroded-. He also
wanted to know who would pay for the cleaning of debris within the pro-
ject waterways,
Sampson stated that since this was a waterway dedicated to the City, that
it would be a City responsibility.
Robinson. talked of the current erosion problem on Balboa Island'now need-
ing,groins for control. He asked about how much more would occurr with
the introducing of the Promontory Bay channel into the North Balboa
Island channel.
Ryckoff stated that he was wondering if we should re -open the subject at
this time.
K7mla then said that the staff should review the project and make a re-
port to the Committee on this subject.
Robinson again po.sed the question of who would be responsible for further
--b 125 - "join t �Jd 5.
-ion which n
e 1,o C3 Ved ioro-oe-r,'y dama-xe.
It was -moved, and seconded., to close the -meeting. Vote E -�n an i -no u
January 29, 1973
Mr. Kenneth Sampson, Director of Harbors, Beaches & Parks
Harbors, Beaches and Parks District
County of Orange
1901 Bayside Drive
Newport Beach, California 92669
subject: Environmental Imp
__act Report, Promontory Bay Project
Dear Ken:
Thank you for your letter of January 26, 1973, in which you express
concern over the Promontory Bay project. The City has not received
an Environmental Impact Report on the Promontory Bay project. After
receiving your letter I checked with the Community Development De-
partment, the Public Works Department and the Marine Safety Depart-
ment, and have determined that all permits necessary have been issued
to The Irvine Company for the subject project. These permits were
issued prior to the City's requirement for an Environmental Impact
Report. It is, therefore, my understanding that the City cannot
require an Impact Report from the developer inasmuch as all City -
permits have been issued.
In addition to contacting the various departments, I have reviewed
the Promontory Bay folder and have found numerous pieces of zoxre-
spondence concerning this project. One report of interest was pre-
pared by Raub, Bein, Frost & Associates, dated April of 1970. This
report concerns itself with pollution and tidal current summary of
the proposed project. The report contains comments from Omar J.
Lillevang, a reputable marine engineer. While this report is not
considered an Environmental Impact Report, it does address itself
to possible erosion effect of the bay and proper circulation with-
in the bay. The City has only one copy of this report and I am
therefore reluctant to release it, but you and your staff are more
than welcome to come to the City Hall and review the file and spec-
ifically the report prepared by Raub, Bein, Frost & Associates.
Attached you will find cop ies of material which may have been sub-
mitted to you earlier, consisting of the permit granted by Xhe
City of Newport Beach, a history of the Promontory Bay permits
Page -2-
compiled by the City's former Harbor and Tidelands Administrator,
and a staff report dated August 10, 1970.
While the City is unaware of any way to require an Environmental
Impact Report on Promontory Bay* we would be very interested in
knowing of any factual data or reports from your office which may
indicate adverse erosion effects -or inadequate flushing action in
the lagoon.
Sincerely,
ROBERT L. WYNN
City Manager
RLW:m
CC: Comissioner Robinson
Commissioner O'Keefe
Councilman Kymla
Councilman Ryckoff
bcc: Captain Harshbarger
Mr. Robert Shelton
;&� (�) (DUM7)r C:>F=
_ _"Y \ �
January 26, 1973
CA P_
HARBORS, BEACHES AND PARKS DISTRICT
KENNETH SAMPSON
DIRECTOR
1901 BAYSIDE DRIVE
NEWPORT BEACH,
CALIFORNIA 92662
TELEPHONE: 834-4794
AREA CODE 714
Mr. Robert L. Wynn, City Manager P -
City of Newport Beach
City Hall, 3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, California 92660
SUBJECT: Environmental Impact Report, Promontory Bay Project
Dear Mr. Wynn:
In response to our letter of November 27, 1972, your office recently trans-
mitted a copy of an Environmental Impact Report on the Promontory Point
Project. It is noted that the report covers the Promontory Point Project
only, and not the Promontory Bay Project. Therefore, the impact of the
Bay Project upon the waters of Newport Harbor is not included.
Our November 27 letter outlined a general concern of the Newport Harbor
Joint Harbor Committee as to the impact of the Promontory Bay Project on
the waters of Newport Harbor. The Committee was concerned about the Bay
Project, rather than the Promontory Point Project which apparently consists
of grading operations of the hillside and planned construction of condo-
minium units. The Committee's concern is in two principal areas and is
restated:
Area 1: The possible erosion effect on the shore of Balboa Island
resulting from the tidal flows in and out of the Promontory
Bay channel.
Area 2 The impact of the new Promontory Bay channel as to accumu-
lation of debris and its ability to be completely self -
flushing in relation to maintaining a satisfactory level
of dissolved oxygen to sustain aquatic life.
We are, by copy of this letter, advising the members of the Joint Harbor
Committee that a copy of the Environmental Impact Report on the Promontory
Point Project is on file in our office for the members to review. It is
anticipated that the Committee will discuss this matter at its February 13
meeting and that they will find this report does not address the issues
which are of primary concern to the Committee.
KS:LML:mph
cc: Councilman Ryckoff
Councilman Kymla
Commissioner Robinson
Commissioner O'Keefe
Yo2urs /ver truly,
I
MONETH SAMPSON, D—irector VT
Harbors, Beaches and Parks
January 10, 1973
Mr. Larry M. Leaman, Chief of Operations
County of Orange
Harbors, Beaches and Parks District
1901 Bayside Drive
Newport Beach, California 92662
Dear Larry:
Sorry for the delay in responding to your letter of Novem-
ber 27, 1972, concerning the Promontory Point project, and
specifically the requirement that the City require an en-
vironmental impact report. The City was in a transition
stage with respect to adoption of a policy concerning en-
vironmental impact reports. A decision has now been made
to require a complete environmental impact report and
process this report by the staff of the City. By carbon
copy of this letter, I am requesting the Community Develop-
ment Department to make a copy of the EIR available to you
if we have,extra copies.
It is the City's belief that the project has received all
discretionary approval required and the only act remaining
is ministerial in nature, such as the issuance of building
permits. The staff, therefore, will review the EIR rather
than the Planning Commission orthe City Council.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact either
myself or Dick Hogan, Community Development Director.
Sincerely,
ROBERT L.. WYNN
City Manager
RLW:mm
CC: Mr. Richard Hogan
Community Development Director
bcc: Mr. Robert Shelton
KENNETH SAMPSON
DIRECTOR
U M-rY C) F=
1901 BAYSIDE DRIVE
NEWPORT BEACH,
CALIFORNIA 92662
^N CA R
TELEPHONE: 834-4794
AREA CODE 714
L 1
Novem r 27, 1972 HARBORS, BEACHES AND PARKS DISTRICT
Mr. Robert L. Wynn, City Manager V,
o -
City of Newport Beach
City Hall, 3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, California 92660
Dear Mr. Wynn': -
As you are aware, the Newport Harbor Joint Harbor Committee expressed some
concern at its October meeting over the impact upon the waters of Newport
Harbor of the Promontory Bay development presently under construction.
Particular concern was expressed on the flushing aspects of the new Promon-
tory Bay waterway, its ability for self-cleaning, and the affect of tidal
flows out of the Promontory Bay project on the shore of Balboa Island
immediately across the channel from the Promontory entrance.
As a result of this discussion, the Committee requested that staff provide
copies of pertinent documents describing the history of the Promontory Bay
project and its analysis by District and City staff. With the assistance
of your office, such material was obtained and distributed to members of
the Committee, copies of which were also forwarded to you.
With this background and submittal information, the Committee at its Novem-
ber 14 meeting discussed the project further, with emphasis as to its impact
upon Newport Harbor. The concensus of the Committee was that, although several
independent studies of the Promontory Bay project may have been undertaken by
consulting engineers, City staff, and perhaps the Corps of Engineers, there
was uncertainty as to whether or not an analysis had been made on the impact
of the entire Promontory Bay project. In other words, the Committee felt that
a total impact evaluation had not been made, and that the fears of some over
tidal and water quality problems due to this development and its accompanying
population density have neither been dispelled, nor proven.
By unanimous vote of members present (Councilman Kymla being absent), the Joint
Harbor Committee agreed to request that the City of Newport Beach require a
full Environmental Impact Report on the Promontory Bay project, including both
the land and the water areas, and the affect of the project upon the waters of
Newport Harbor, as well as the water of Promontory Bay itself. The Committee
felt that such a report should be prepared and analyzed prior to cutting the
Promontory channel through to the Balboa Island channel.
This information is provided in order that the City of Newport Beach may be
aware of the Committee's concerns, and initiate whatever action the City deems
appropriate.
LML: mph
Yours very truly,
N
LAR1tM.V_EAMAI4,_Cffihf of Operations
Secre a r y to Joint Harbor Committee
14ARINE SAFETY DEPARTMENT
70 Newport Pier
14ovember 30, 1972
Mr, Paul Thakur
Project Engineer
Irvine Company
610 Newport Center Drive
Newport Beach, California
Dear Xro Thakar:
It has come to our attention that the Irvine Ccvipan7 is
possibly planning a maintenance dredging prodect in
connection with tile i5ayside Marina.
The U6 So Army Corps of Engineers and the California
Regional Water Quality Control Board now require a per-
mit for dredging in any amount. The current city liarbor
Permit Policies do not reflect these requirentents,, however
they are in the process of being amended to reflect these
changes, As soon as the changes have been made in the
Council Policies, we will forward you a copy. In the mean-
time, we will assist you however we can in acquiring the
needed permits.
Sincerely,
Do 11arshbargerl Captain
Marine Safety Department
DH:lf
CC: Chuck Saffellf Senior Dock Master
&0Z
hy
MARINE SAFETY DEPARTMENT
70 Newj�ort Pier
673-3360
November 16, 1972
Councilman Paul Ryckoff
City of Newport Beach
City Hall
Dear Mr. Ryckoff:
Attached hereto are documents and correspondence which
I believe are the most germane items# available within
our files, involving the grants of easements for the
Promontory Bay waters landward of the Pierhead Line*
Please note that Captain Harshbarger identifies some
papers which we would appreciate having returned, since
they are either originals or are difficult to copy.
if you have any further questions on this matter# please
let me know.
Sincerelyt
MARINE SAFETY DEPARTMENT
Ra Et Reed# Director
RER3 lf
cc: City Manager
Builders of Tomorrow's Cities ... Today
October 31, 1972
Mr. Richard A. Buee-rmann
Executive Officer
State of California
Resources Agency
Regional Water Quality Control Board
Santa Ana Region
6848 Magnolia Avenue
Riverside, California 92506
Subject: Promontory Bay Channel opening Plan
Dear Mr. Bueermann:
In conformancelwith the conditions.of the harbor permit and
the requirements of the.Santa Ana Regional.Water Quality
Con . trol Board, we are submitting for your review and approval.
the enclosed plan for the final opening of the Promontory
Bay channel.
The plan is self explanatory and takes the'precautions
necessary to preclude excessive turbidity. I would only
add, in reference to Step 8, that the discharge from.the
dredging operation will be behind the bulkhead into a series,
of settling ponds. Also, we will be sure to contact your
department and the City of Newport Beach at least forty eight
hours prior to opening the gate valve mentioned in Step 7.
our current schedule indicates this will occur in January
of 1973.
Should you have any questions concerning this plan, both
myself and Mr., Penhall are available to discuss the operation
in greater detail.
Sincerely,
David B. Kuhn, Jr.
Project Manager
Residential Project Admini-stration
Attachment "
cc: D. Harshbarger, City of Newport Beach
Mr.'B. Nolan., City of Newport Beach
Mr. J. Raub, Raub,, Bein, Frost and Associates
Mr. A. Penhall, Penhall Marine, Inc.
DBK:jdc
The Irvine Cornp3rly 610 Newport (.eiter Drive Nev.00rt Beach. Califnnt- 92660 (714) 64d-3011
,/EN11ALL TMARINE., 11,
CONTRACT -ORS 223 - 21ST STREET. NEWPORT BEACH. CALIFORNIA 92660 AREA CODE (714) 675-3728
October 20, 1972
Irvine Co.
610 Newport Center Drive
Newport Beach, California
Attention: David Kuhn
Dear Dave:
In order to alleviate any pollution of Newport Bay, we are proposing to use the following
steps to fill the Promontory Bay.project from the existing Balboa Island Channel:
I Remove the -existing concrete sheet piles which project into the channel
entrance area way -
2. Build the existing sand berm to form a levee approximately 15' across the
top, and to a +8 elevation.
3. At a low tide, instal I a 10" pipe at approximately +2 elevation with a
gate valve on one end.
4. Compact the berm by track rolling with the bulldozer.
5." Dredge the complete project from within, working outward to within
approximately 25' of the berm.
The water level should be at about a minus 3,at this phase of construction,
within the project limits.
7. On a minus flood tide, open the gate valve to bring the water level iA
the marina, to the approximste7 same. elevation as the bay.
8. After the waters on each side establish a common level, the berm will
be dredged out and discharged behind the bulkhead.
Should you have any questions, please contact me.
Very truly yours,
A. D. Penholl
ADP/mak
TO: Planning Commission 5.
Ar
Fi P ', /0 f! P *I 3e 4 7
in the street intersection that it should be deleted as a separate
parcel and the succeeding lettered lots be relettered.
The intended uses of the seven lettered lots are as follows:
Lot A - public waterway including private pier and mooring
facilities.
Lot B - planting area
Lot C - landscaping and scenic vista
Lot D - marina, parking and private beach
Lot E - publ ic park
Lot F - not specif ied
Lot G. - 1 andscaping and scenic vista
Lot 62 will be developed in conjunction with the property to t4e
south and east; most.likely as a restaurant site; and will require
a separate use permit.
Recommendation
The final map has been checked and found to be in compliance with
the approved tentative map, except as noted, and approval is recom-
mended subject to the following conditions:
1. That all conditions of approval attached to Tentative
. Map Tract 3867 be.satisfied except as amended herein.
2. That Lot "B" be deleted as a separated parcel and the
succeeding lettered lots be appropriately re -lettered.
3. That street dedications not provided for on the final
� map be completed prior torecordation of the final map.
4. That Condition No. 6 as attached to the Tentative Map
be amended to provide for a 3 foot wide parkway on the
northerly side of realigned Bayside Drive except where
sidewalks are required, in which case the parkway shall
be 6 feet wide, and that the parkway on the southerly
.side of -realigned Bayside Drive be 13 feet wide to
accommodate a bicycle trail.
5. That Condition No. 5 as attached to the Tentative Map
be amended to read as follows:
That access to Lots 44 through 61 shall be
provided by means of drives located on common
lot lines, each drive serving two parcels;
and that adequate turnaround areas be provided
so that vehicles need not back into the street.
Cross easements or non -barrier agreements satis-
factory to the City Attorney shall be provided
so as to guarantee perpetuation of the.access
arrangement.
6. That Condition No. 14 as attached to the Tentative Map
be amended to read as follows:
That all "side -on" garages shall observe a
setback of at leas -L-. 6 feet measured from the
Item No , 'I I
TO:, Planning Commission - 6.
property line. All garages which face onto a
street shall observe a setback of. at least .
24 feet measured from the back of the sidewalk,
or the back of the curb where there are no
sidewalks.
7. That the C.C.& R.'s controlling the development and
maintenance of this Tract shall be reviewed and approved,
by the City Attorney and Director of Community Develop-
ment.
r mes
eniorEVaunnzuemr
J E N : h h
Attachment: Vicinity Map
Enclosure: Final Map Tract 3867
Item No . 11
City Council Meeting June 12, 1972
Council Agenda Number G-8
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
June 8, 1972
TO: City; Council
FROM: Department of Community Development
SUBJECT: Final Map Tract No. 3867
Request approval of the Final Map of a previously
approved Tentative Map subdividing 26.073 acres
into 61 lots for development as single-family
residential, 6 lettered -lots for a waterway,
landscaped areas and a marina and 1 lettered lot
for future development.
LOCATION: Portion of Block 94 of Irvine's.Subdivision
located northerly of Bayside Drive between Marine
Avenue and Linda Isle Drive.
ZONE: Unclassified, C -N -H and C -1-H
APPLICANT: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach
ENGINEERS: Raub, Bein, Frost & Assoc., Costa Mesa
OWNER: Same as applicant.
Recommendation
At its meeting of May 4, 1972, the Planning Commission unanimously
(Commissioner Martin being absent) recommended approval of Final
Map Tract 3867 subject to the 8 conditions of approval as indicated
Jn the attached excerpt of -the Planning Commission Minutes -of May 4,
1972.
Staff Comment
Condition No. 8 provides that Lot "F" and future access over Lot
��acent city owned property shall be resolved to the
satisfaction of the City Council. Since the Planning Commission
meeting on May 4th the staff has met with'the subdivider to resolve
the use of this parcel. As indicated on the Sheet I of the Final
Map, Lot "F" is offered for dedication to the public for landscap-
ing, scenic vista and bulkhead maintenance purposes,
In addition the staff also feels that a means of guaranteeing vehi-.
cular access to the residual parcel formerly occupjed by the Shark
Island Yacht Club and lying easterly of the channel entrance should
be considered at this time. It is therefore recommended that an
additional condition to the Final Map of Tract No. 3867 be added
as follows:
4/ "That the subdivider shall record a covenant
satisfactory to the -0.41 ty Attorney and the
Director of Community Development which pro -
v 'des access for vehicular ingress and egress
from Bayside Drive across Lot B to the residual
parcel lying immediately east of the channel
entrance, Said access shall have a minimum
width of 20 feet and shall remain until Such
time as the -residual parcel is,combined with
adjoining property or alternate means of access
are provided,
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
HARBOR AND TIDELANDS DIVISION
May 19, 1972
Tot CITY MANAGER
FROM. Harbor and Tidelands Administrator
SUBJECT: PROMONTORY BAY PERMITS
You requested that I provid6 you information relative to the
permit for dredging and bulkheading Promontory Bay.
In December 1969, prior to Planning Commission action on the
entire project, The Irvine Company provided basic data relative to dredging
and bulkheading the proposed bay. These data were transmitted to the
Regional Water Quality Control Board. the Los Angeles District Corps
of Engineers, and the Director of the Harbor District for preliminary
information with a request that those agencies advise me if more infor-
mation was desired. The Corps of Engineers and the Harbor District were
specifically advised of concern over water quality and the possible impact
on beaches near the proposed bay and the Wate� Quality Board was asked for
recommendations pertaining to conditions that might be imposed, if any.
I n Ja nuary 1970, the Corps replied that the formal application,
when submitted, would require thdir review of tidal exchanges for possible
pollution problems and for impact on beaches and the North Balboa Channel.
In February 1970, The Irvine Company formally applied for a
permit from both the City and the Corps of Engineers. In that same month,
the Joint Harbor Committee.approved the project in concept subject to other
actions being taken by the City (master plan amendments, use permits, etc.).
In April 1970, the Corps of Engineers advlsedt�at they had
received no adverse comments or objections from any interested State or
Federal agency and that a permit would be issued only after the Corps
was advised of the City's position. Also in April, the Joint Harbor
Committee approved the project after hearing a verbal report from the Harbor
District Engineers and a report that the City Public Works Department had
reviewed the. engineering and had no objections. It its approval, the Joint
Harbor Committee conditioned the permit that "the applicant must take pre-
cautions against creating excess turbidity." In April. the Corps was advised
that the City had no objection at that time to issuance of a Corps permit
providing the Corps was assured that there would beno water quality or
beach erosion problems.
2
In May 1970, the Corps issued a permit conditioned as follows:
"That the permittee shall comply promptly with any
regulations, conditions, or Instructions affecting the
work hereby authorized if any when issued by the Federal
Water Pollution Control Administration and/or the State
water pollution control agency having jurisdiction to
abate or prevent water pollution."
A portion of the Corps permit was a letter of March 1970 to the
Corps from the State Resources Agency which reported thAt eight State
epa tments had reviewed the application and that the State had no objections
but that "all dewatering operations shall be done in a manner to prevent
nuisance or unsightliness, and that if it is proposed that discharges from
dewatering operations will be to the waters of the State, in this case to
Newport Bay, then the proponent is requested to file a report of waste
discharge with the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa
An& Region. The Department of Fish and Game notes that this project will
increase the habitat available to fish and wildlife, and recommends that
the following precautionary measures be taken: All excavated material will
be disposed of and,,,- stabilized in a manner that will not'significantly increase
the siltation into, or turbidity of, the waters of the State. For purposes of
this permit the maximum amount of settleablesolids allowable shall be one
milligram per liter per hour (lmg/l/hr) measured where runoff -water -enters
waters of the State; no petroleum products shall be disposed of in the
ex avated area; and all construction debris will be removed from the excavated
area prior to opening the are to Newport -Bay."
In August 1970,.the City Council approved the permit citing the
requirements for the Corps permit and the Resources Agency.
In December 197.1, The Irvine Company filed a request for waste
discharge (dewatering operation) with the Regional Water Quality Control
Vy/Board� After requiring an alternate contingency plan, the Executive Officer
of the Board in January 1:972 authorized The Irvine Company to proceed
adhering to the following requirements:
no discharge if such waters contain visible
solids, debris, oil or scum.
"2. The waters of Newport Bay shall not be depressed In
dissolved oxygen . . . below a level of 5.0 mg/l.
"3. . . . shall not contain sulfides greater than 0.1 mg/l.
"4. . . . no nuisances."
In March 1972, the full Water Quality Control Board confi med the
Executive Officer's action adding a requirement for chlorine control (less
than 0.1 mg/1) and a requirement for a monitoring and reporting program.
- 3 -
In April 1972, The Irvine Company complied with the new regulations
requiring applications for permits under the National Refuse Act of 1899.
The Regional Water Quality Board has been inspecting the discharge
operations at frequent intervals. To the best of my knowledge, The Irvine
Company has been and is complying with discharge regulations except for one
single event. The single exception was a limited sediment discharge which
occured when a section of pipe was changed and the new section had dirt in
it.
The Irvine Company is planning controls so that there will be no
massive inrush or outflow of water when the bay is opened up to the main
harbor.
The background file is located in the Marine Safety Department.
Jll
n� GEORGE M. DAWES
GMD-.sh
cc: Marine Safety Director
Community Development Director
City Attorney
Mr. Robert Snyder, The Irvine Company
Y
Planning Commission'—Meeting May 4, 1972
Item No.- 11
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
May 1 , 1972
TO:
Planning Commission
FROM:
Department of. Community Development
SUBJECT:
Final Map Tract 3867
Request approval of the Final Map of,a previously
approved Tentative Map subdividing 26.073 acres into
61 lots for development as single-family residential,
7 lettered lots for a waterway, landscaped areas and.
a marina and 1 numbered lot for future development.
LOCATION:
Portion of Block 94 of Irvine's Subdivision located
northerly of Bayside Drive between Marine Avenue and
Linda Isle Drive.
ZONE:
Unclass ified, C -N -H and C -1-H
APPLICANT:
The Irvine Company, Newport Beach
ENGINEERS:
Raub, Bein, Frost & Asso., Costa Mesa
OWNER:
Same as -applicant.
Application
This application requests approval of the final map.of a previously
approved tentative map subdividing 26'.073 acres into 61 lots for
development as single-family residential, 7 lettered lots for devel-
opment as waterway, landsca e areas, vista points and marina, and 1
numbered lot (Lot number 62� for future development. Planning Commis-
sion procedures are outlined in Section 19,16.140 of the Newport.
Beach Municipal Code.
Background
This fi.nal map covers the Irvine Company project known as "Promontory
Bay". The property is largely in an Unclassified District with
small portions.in the C -N -H and C -1-H Districts, and was approved
through use permit procedures by the Planning Commission on February
19, 1970 and by the City.Council on June 8, 1970 (UP -1466). The
following conditions of approval were attached to the use permit
by the Commi.ssion and confirmed by the Council:
1. That approval of Use Permit%No. 1466 be subject to
satisfactory demonstration of the engineering feas-
ibility of,the proposed lagoon design and issuance
of a harbor permit.
2. That an amendment to the Master Street and Highway
Plan is approved.
3. That Parcel No. 3 and Parcel No. 4 be approved in
principle only and be subject to a separate use
permit for each of the two parcels.
4. The Irvine Company:will undertake to rezone Parcel
No. 9 to single-family residential and Parcel No. 1,
to include any designated channel cut, to an un-
classified district.
Item No. 11
TO: Planning Commission -2.
5. Parcel No. 2 subject to approval of Planning
Director; however, Planning Commission does not
waive any part of the parking requirements of the
parcel .
The above conditions,have been satisfied as follows:
1. Harbor Permit No. 200-000 was approved by the
City Council on August 10, 1970.
2. Master Plan Amendment No. 25 was approved by the
Planning Commission on February 19, 1970 and by the
City Council on June 8, 1970 subject to the following
conditions:
a. That the Bayside Shopping Center parking
lot be redesigned to the satisfaction of
the Planning Director, and constructed con-
currently with construction of realigned
Bayside Drive. (Plans have been submitted
and approval is pending.)
b. That access requirements to the Shark Island
Yacht Club and the adjacent apartments be
restored to the satisfaction of the Planning
Director. (The Shark Island Yacht Club has
been relocated; access plans for the apartments
have been submitted and approval is pending..)
3. Parcel 3 is not a part of the tentative or final map.
Parcel 4 is shown as Lot 62 and will be developed at
a later date under a separate use permit.
4. Rezoning has been initiated.
5. Parcel 2 is shown as Lot "D" on the final map and is
indicated as being "for marina, parking and private
beac h pu rpo s es " .
Tentative Map Tract 3867 was approved by the Planning Commission
on March 5, 1970 and by the City Council on June 8, 1970 subject
to the following conditions ! :
1. That final approval be subject to the approval of
Use Permit 1466 and the conditions,thereto.
2. That final approval of the subdivision be subject to
approval of an appropriate revision to the Master
Plan of Stree t s and Highways.
3. That final approval of the subdivision be subject
to the abandonment of certain existing public rights-
of-way as contemplated and to satisfactory arrangements.
being made for dedication:and improvement.of the,new
rights-of-way required.
4. That final approval of the subdivision be subject to
satisfactory arrangements being made to relocate
existing facilities of the Orange County Sanitation
District and of other affected utilities.
5. That access to Lots,27 through 34, 42 through 44
(and unless a frontage road is provided - all parcels
al,ong:realigned Bayside Drive), be provided by means
Item No4 11
TO: Planning Commission - 3.
of drives located on common lot lines, each drive
serving two parcels; and that adequate turnaround
areas be provided so that vehicles need not back
into the street. Cross easements or non -barrier
agreements satisfactory to the City Attorney shall
be provided so as to guarantee perpetuation of the
access arrangement.
6. That unless a frontage road is provided, the right-
of-way width of realigned Bayside Drive be.at least
86' and the.curb-to-curb width be at least 70'. This
cross section will provide for 4 travel lanes, 2 eight
foot wide parkways, a 12' wide median left turning
lane and an 8' wide parking lane on the southerly
side. (Alternate "B" on the attached drawings.)
7. That the new cul-de-sac be located entirely on the
developer's land.
8. That the design of the new intersections of -re-
aligned Ba.yside Drive with existing Bayside Drive
be subject to review and approval by the City.
9. That all improvements be constructed as required by
ordinance and the Public Works Department.
10. That the boundary of the final tract ma.p be checked
by the County Surveyor before being submitted to the
City for approval .
11. That all grading be in accordance with grading plans,
and reports approved by the Public Works Director and
a qualified Soils Engineer. Upon completion of the
grading, the Civil Engineer and the Soils Engineer
shall certify that the grading has been completed in
accordance with the plans, the soils report.and the
grading ordinance. Reproducible copies of the plans
on standard size sheets.shall be furnished to the
Public Works Department.
12. That the connecting street southeasterly of Lot "B"
be 52' in width between exterior curbs in order to
provide for a,20' entering roadway, an 8' median and
a 24' exiting roadway.
13. That all driveways be a minimum of 20.' in length from
the property line to ensure no parking will be in the
public right-of-way.
14. The portion of Lot "E" not included in the public
right-of-way, resulting from the closing of Bayside
Drive, be dedicated to the City, and the existing
right-of-way of Bayside Drive west of the proposed
waterway be retained under public control.
15. A length of tangent be,provided between the two
reversing curves,at the east end of the development
adjacent.,to the existing Bayside Shopping Center.
16. Parkway trees be installed on all public rights-of-
way in accordance with Parks, Beaches and Recreation
Department specifications.
17. Appropriate landscaping be installed on all slopes
Item No.
TO: Planning Commission - 4.
and vacant spaces resulting from this development.
18. A setback plan allowing for a variation of front
and rear setback lines.be submitted to the Planning
Director for approval.
19 That there be no City financial obligations. connected
with construction of realigned Bayside Drive.
20. That realigned Bayside Drive be constructed to its
full width in connection with the development of
Tract 3867.
Conditions,added by the City Council.
21. That the Planning Department and Irvine Company work
out details,for a bicycle trail along Bayside Drive.
22. That provision be made for adequate off-site signing
for the Balboa Yacht Basin.
Analysis
The conditions applied to the tentative map have either been satis-
fied or are in the process.of being met with the exception of those
conditions which pertain to the actual development of the residential
units (driveway length, landscaping, setbacks, etc.). There have
been four significant changes -as follows:
I. The number of lots fronting on realigned Bayside
Drive has been reduced by one. Those lots shown
on the tentative map as 50 feet wide (t) have been
increased to 55 feet in width (±) and the total
number of residential lots fronting on Bayside
Drive (realigned) has been reduced fr-om 18 to 16.
(One lot was previously deleted by a revised design
which allows for private water access to each
parcel.)
2. The provision,for common driveways for each pair
of lots, as required by Condition 5, has.been
included in part. The applicant'has widened those
lots abutting Bayside Drive (realigned) in order to
provide a separate turn -around area on each lot.
The approved tentative map would permit a total of
48 driveway openings (including 9 on realigned Bayside
Drive) while the final map proposes 52 (including 8.
on rea.ligned Bayside -Drive).
3. Condition 13 requires that�all driveways be.a minimum
of 20.feet..in length and th.e applicant proposes
garage setbacks of 6 feet.for those lots fronting
on realigned Bayside Drive and 14 feet.for all other
1 o t s .
4. Condition No. 6 requires an 8 foor wide parkway on each
side of realigned Bayside Drive. As a result of the
bicycle trail required by the City Council (Condition
No. 21) the parkway on the northerly side of Bayside
Drive has been reduced to 6 feet.where a sidewalk is
necessary and 3 feet in other areas, and the parkway
on the southerly side has been increased to 13 feet to
accommodate the bicycle trail.
The Public Works Department feels that since Lot "B" is an island
Item No. 11
TO: Planning Commission - 5.
i n the s treet i nters ec ti o n tha t i t s ho ul d be del eted a s a separa te
parcel and the succeeding lettered lots be relettered.
The intended uses of the seven lettered lots are as follows:
Lot A - public waterway including.private pier and mooring
facilities.
Lot B - planting area
Lot C - landscaping and scenic vista
Lot D - marina, parking and private beach,
Lot E - public park
Lot F - not specified
Lot G.- landscaping and scenic vista
Lot 62 will be developed in conjunction with the property to the
south and east; most,likely as,a restaurant site; and will require
a separate use permit.
Recommendation
The final map has been checked and found to be in compliance with
the approved tentative map, except as noted, and approval is recom-
mended subject to the following conditions:
1. That all conditions of approval attached to Tentative
Map Tract 3867 be.satisfied except as amended herei.n.
2. That Lot "B" be deleted as a separated parcel and the
succeeding lettered lots be appropriately re -lettered.
3. That street dedications not provided for on the final
map be completed prior torecordation of the final map.
4. That Condition No. 6 as attached to the Tentative Map
be amended to provide for a 3 foot. wide parkway on the
northerly side of realigned Bayside Drive except where
sidewalks are required, in which case the parkway shall
be 6 feet wide, and that the parkway on the southerly
side of -realigned Bayside Drive be 13 feet wide to
accommodate a bicycle trail.
5. That Condition No. 5 as attached to the Tentative Map
be amended to read as follows:
That access to Lots 44 through 61 shall be
provided.by means of drives located on common
lot lines, each drive,serving two parcels;
and that adequate turnaround areas be provided
so that vehicles need:not back into the street.
Cross easements or non -barrier agreements satis-
factory to the City Attorney shall be provided
so as to guarantee. perpetuation of the access.,
arrangement.
6. That Condition No. 14 as attached to the Tentative Map
be amended to read as follows:
That all "side -on" garages shall observe a
setback of at least 6 feet measured from the
Item No., 11
TO: Planning Commission - 6.
property line. All garages which face onto a
street shall observe a setback of at least
24 feet measured from the back of the sidewalk,
or the back of the curb where there are no
sidewalks.
7. That the C.C.& R.'s controlling the development and
maintenance of this Tract shall be reviewed and approved
by the City Attorney and Director of Community Develop-
ment.
ames L._"nuzum
enior PTanner
J E N : h h
Attachment: Vicinity Map
Enclosure: Final Map Tract 3867
Item No.— 11
0
AXY 0�-
7� 1
. ....... .
151
.14
SI
N
Sil
15)
A
co
Ing
Ilk
6D
n V.T
V
01 �101 CV
� AVlk
, :V, �iq.
(\j .
3.4y5ioE
, -4�
Iv
14
Aq,
OV
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACHz
April 27, 1970
TO: City Manager
FROM: Harbor & Tidelands Administrator
SUBJECT: OWNERSHIP OF PRIVATELY CREATED WATERWAYS
The proposed development of Promontory Bay again brings up
consideration as to whether privately created waterways should'remain
in private ownership, be dedicated as public rights-of-way, or be
granted to the City. The City Engineer and the Harbor & Tidelands
Administrator visited Ventura t&obtain their opinions and also separately
discussed the situation with Huntington Beach. These two cities have
situations analogous to ours�
In Ventura, a private developer created waterways leading into
the public marina and further established single family and multiple
family residences bordering the waterways. The residents were formed
into a community association. The waterways were subsequently granted
in fee to the City with a perpetual easement to the residents for pier
purposes. The reasoning in requiring granting of fee ownership to the
City was based on their experience in'pr'ivate' streets and they felt that
the association would, over a period of years, never give proper mainte-
nance to the channel -ways and that ultimately the City would inherit them
when they were in poor condition and with high maintenance costs. The
City now performs maintenance in these waterways, but assesses the water-
front owners to cover the cost,
In Huntington Beach, privately created waterways were also
granted in fee, from bulkhead line to bulkhead line, with perpetual water
easements for pier purposes. Huntington Beach cited the same reasons as
Ventura as far as maintenance was concerned, but the City also felt that
they were greatly simplifying police problems. They had had experie I nce in
one small privately owned waterway where they were constantly responding
to requests of the residents to chase public boaters away. The City is
of the opinion that their harbor patrol has no right to enter the private
waterways for enforcement purposes unless invited by the owner.
On April 14, the Orange County Harbor Commissioners expressed
their opinion that the dredged area at Promontory Bay should be dedicated
to a public agency. The rationale for their opinion was not included in
the letter from the Harbor District to the City Manager, but the Harbor
District Operations 'Officer states that they were.influenced by maintenance
and law enforcement considerations as outlined above.
t�COMMENDATION: It is recommended that the p . rivately created waterways
in the proposed Promontory Bay development should be granted in fee to the
City for the following reasons:
a. Maintenance: There should be little initial maintenance cost.
goweverl The Irvine Company intends to sell the individual lots fronting
- 2 -
on the waterway so that there will be multiple ownership of the shoreline.
Future maintenance problems could then involve a number of shoreline
owners, plus a private owner of the waterway, plus the City and the Harbor.
District. Future maintenance problems could best be handled in a coordin-
ated approach by the City or Harbor District. In requiring granting of
fee ownership, it should be taken from bulkhead line to bulkhead line with
the bulkheads themselves being the responsibility of the abutting property
owners as is the case in the'rest of the City. If necessary, conditions
can be imposed upon The Irvine Company in the harbor permit relative to
external factors that might affect the lagoon such as, for instance, excess
sedimentation from storm drains during upland development, or any possible
adverse affect creation of the lagoon might have on adjacent public areas.
b. Water Quality: It is possible that the lagoon could become
a catch basin for debris entering from the main harbor in which case the
City and the Harbor District could find themselves constantly harassed
by the waterfront owners who would claim., "The debris came from public
waters so you clean it out". It would be better to have the responsibility
in the first place.
C. Law Enforcement: It is difficult for boaters, particularly
those who may visit the City from other areas, to determine who owns the
land underlying the water. A rash of calls from residents at Promontory
Bay could occur -when other boats cruise around the.lagoon, which they
are sure to do. It would be better to have the waterways public in the
first place. Further, the Harbor District believes their enforcement
authority is questionable in private waterways.
d. Proliferation of Ownership: There are four different types
of ownership of submerged lands in Newport Harbor. By requiring granting
of fee ownership, the City would be taking a step towards eliminating one
type of ownership.
e. Future Contingencies: It is difficult to forecast con tin-,
qencies many years from now,, therefore, the City would be retaining an
option forthe future if it owns the waterways.
While granting of fee ownership is recommended, and present
harbor permit policies adequately protect shoreline owners insofar as pier
rights are�concerned, water easements for pier rights could also be reserved.
Should the Council agree in this recommendation, I suggest we
draft a formal policy to this effect for the Council Manual.
G. M. DAWES
GMD/db
California Regional Water Quality Control Board
Santa Ana Region
ORDER NO. 72-8
Waste'Discharge Requirements
for
The Irvine Company at Promontory Point,
Newport Beach
The California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region,
f inds that:
1. The Irvine Company submitted a report on waste discharge dated
December 21, 1971.
2. The Irvine Company proposes to discharge approximately 800
gallons per minute from a surface dewatering operation to
Newport Bay in connection with the construction of a marina a�
Promontory Point, Newport Beach.
3. The board adopted an Interim Water Quality Control Planion
. June 9, 1971.
4, The beneficial uses of Newport Bay are:
Water Contact Sports
Fishing
Propagation and Sustenance o.,l!' !,Iquatic Life
Boating
Aesthetic Enjoyment
S. The board has notified.the discharger and interested agencies
and persons of its intent to prescribe waste discharge require-
ments for the proposed discharge.
6. The board, in a public me eting, heard and considered all
comments pertaining to the discharLae.
3
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT The Irvine Company shall comply with the follow-
ing
A. Waste Discharge Requirements
1 Discharges to Newport Bay shall be limited to those
resulting from dewatering operations.
2. Discharges to Newport Bay shall not contain any visibl e
solids, debris, oil, or scum..
Order No. 72-8 - continued
The Irvine Company at Promontory Point Page 2
3. The dissolved oxygen of the waters of Newport Bay shall
not be depressed below 5.0 mg/l by this waste discharge.
4. The discharge shall not contain total sulfides greater
than 0.1 mg/l.
5. The waste discharge shall create no nuisances at the
dewatering site or at the point of discharge to Newport
Bay.
6. The dis ' charge shall not cause any scum accumulation or
discoloration in the waters of Newport Bay.
7. In the event chlorination of the discharge is required,,
then the discharge must be controlled so that the chlorine
residual is less than 0.1 mg/l.
13. Provisions
1. The discharger shall comply with the Monitoring and
Reporting Program No. 72-8 and the General Provisions for
C�
Monitoring and Reporting as specified by the Executive
Officer.
2. Compliance with Requirements (1), (2), (5), and (6) shall
be based on each visual observation by the staff of this
board or other responsible agency. A minimum of two
inspections per month shall be performed by the staff of
this board.
3. Compliance wit-1-1,Requirements (3), (4), and (7) will be
based on each analy.sis,specified in Monitoring Program
72-8.
I, Richard A. Bueermann, Executive Officer, do hereby certify the fore-
4 -
going is a -full, true, and.correct copy of an Order adopted by &.he
California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region, on
February 24, 1972.
RIC--YiRD A. BUEERMNN
Executive Officer
California Regional Water Quality Control Board
Santa Ana Region
Monitoring and Reporting Program No. 72-8
for
The Irvine Company, Promontory Point,
Newport Bay
Monitoring
Monthly monitoring reports shall be submitted to this board by The
Irvine Company prior to the 10th day of each month for the preceding
30 -day period.
2. In reporting the monitoring data, the discharger shall arrange the
data in tabular form so that the date, the constituents, and the
concentrations are readily discernible.
The following shall be included in the monitoring report:
a. A "grab" sample shall be collected each day and analyzed
for the following constituents:
Total Sulfides
Chlorine Residual*
b. Once per week, and when a discharge is occurring, a
representative sample of Newport Bay waters within 50
feet of the discharge point shall be taken and analyzed
for dissolved oxygen.
C. The total quantity of waste discharged to Newport Bay for
the reporting period shall be recorded.
d. The above reports shall be signed by a responsible officer
of -The Irvine Company and shall be submitted under penalty
of perjury.
3. All analyses shall be performed in a laboratory currently certified
to perform such analyses by the State Department of Public Health or
a laboratory approved by the Executive Officer. All sampling and
sample preservation shall be coordinated with the analytical
laboratory.
*Chlorine residual analyses will be required only if the
discharge is chlorinated.
Ordered by
RICHARD A. BUEER1,1AITIT
Executive Officer
February 24, 1972
J
-Infine Builders of Tomorrow's Cities ... Today
February 3, 1972
Mr. George M. Dawes
Harbor and Tidelands Administrator
City of Newport Beach
3300 West Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, California 92660
Dear Mr. Dawes:
Per your request, attached is correspondence
regarding the Water Quality Control Board permit
for Promontory Bay.
If you,need additional information, please do
not'heg-itate to contact me'.
Very truly yours,
David B. Kuhn Jr.
is
Project Engineer
Residential Engineering
DBK: j dc
Attachment
The IrvineCompany- 550 Newport Center Drive- Newport Beach, California 92660 -(714) 644-3011
'.,;TA7�� OF CALIFORNIA—RESOURCES AGENCY RONALD REAGAN, Governor
CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD -
SANTA ANA REGION
6848 MAGNOLIA AVENUE
RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92506
January 25,,.1972
Irvine Company
550 Newport Center Drive
Newport Beach, California 92660
Attention: Robert L. Snyder,
Residential Engineering
This will acknowledge receipt of supplemental information
necessary to complete your report on waste discharge dated
December 21, 19,71.
Based on the above, this board will be setting specific!
requirements in the near future. Due to your need to
proceed with construction, you may do so guided by the
following tentative requirements which may or may not be
materially altered by the board at adoption:
1. There shall be no discharge from dewatering
operations at this site to Newport Bay if such
waters contain visible solids, debris, oil or
scum.
2. The waters of Newport Bay shall not be depressed
in dissolved oxygen by these dewatering discharges
,below a concentration of 5.0 mg/l..
3. The dewatering discharge shall.not contain total
sulfides greater than 0.1 mg/l.
4. There -shall be no nuisances created at the de-
watering site or at the dewatering waste disposal
area in Newport Bay.
It might be advisable for the Irvine Company to avail itself of
some field test kits for sulfide,, dissolved oxygen and chlorine
residual.
,In the event that any problems occur where the above require-
ments are being exceeded, the contingency plan will have to
be implemented. This may require shutting the project down
C3 RECLIVED
for the short period necessary to receive the waste discharge
requirements which officially are adopted by the board. JAN 26 1972
THE IRVINE COMPANY
RESID&UT)AL ENGINREMBW
Irvine Company
Newport Beach, Ca 92660 -2- 1-25-72
Please notify this office prior to startup of this phase of
oonstruction so that a reasonable field monitoring program
will be set up.
eIC RD A. BUEERMANN
Executive Officer
January 17, 1972
Mr. John M. Zasadinski
State of California
Resources Agency
Regional Water Quality Control Board
Santa Ana.Region
6848 Magnolia Avenue
Riverside, California 92506
Subject: Promontory Bay
Dear John:
This will confirm our telephone conversation of January 14,
1972 concerning the availability of chlorination equipment that
might be required for this project. The Fisher Porter Company
indicated that a 250# Unit is stocked locally by Ecio-Matics
and, consequently, would be i -n -mediately available to us if the
need arises.
At the outside,, assuming the equipment was not locally
available, the distributor indicated that a chlorinator could
J -
be shipped in within 7 to 10 days.
Very truly yours,
Pobart L. Snyder, Manager
residential Engineering
V
RLS.- j dc
January 7, 1972
State of California
Resources Agency
California Regional Water Quality Control Board
Santa Ana Region
6848 Magnoliac' Avenue
Riverside, California 925006
Attention:. Mr. Richard A. Bueerman
Subj ect: P r omo n -I--- o ry Bay
Dear Mr. Bueerman:
Reference your letter dated January.3, 1972 re-,-:�irdin,- the need
for addit-iona'l details of our contingency plancin the event the
discharged ground water deterior
CP rates to an unaccept-able level
and requires chlorination.
I have discussed this problem with Mel Whitt and Len Har+L . --ford
of Brown and Caldwell. Their.r-ecommendation based on an assured
discha-rc-e rate of .4 to .8 M.G.D. and H S contamination -w
C� 2 as. to
construct a rapid mix chlorination system �vith a contact -1--ank or
b
basin. The ptim—ped discharge would be chlorinated, discharged into
C.")
the contact chamber, and t'h�e-n allowed to gravity flow to our
dischar-e line. A list of the major equi-rmatie-,I nd its availab-1_1-it'y
0 . L _L E -a L
is attached for your inforonatt-ion.
I estimate that such a system could be created easily wit"hin. a
-t,.vo week period. We anticipate that during this setup ti-,a.e
th.,a d-;Lsc;-iarce can be diverLed to niL_
ID the sa tary s-�wer. Preli-mi-Liary
arran-ements have beep, made With Mr. Roy L;2wis of
4 S I? j Sanitation
Ict -No. 5 for t' is al-i-er-na-iiVe. T E_ also seerints practical
'EhaL L!Iae pum-ping o-oeration could be ter-minat-ed durin'- setup
I CD
t-itne if required.
T -�,70uld also like 'to point our that our testinc, botil geo] ocic
;-In d water quality, has not indicat
I k U ed even a reimote -chance of high
,.i?S conCentration. i H-MIY b-21ieve that our construction siLe is
of an enti--cely di ' Eferent:. character from. the Nfewport 'high ri.se that
vresented so -much trouble. Deep e-xcavation of s-L:o�rm drains . a Ln- d
S -ewer lines in thils. VICInity have presented no problem in- the
p as t- . I can point -to rhe recent trunk se wer crossing at the Pacific
CD
Goast Highway bridge as a pri[me example. The excavation there,,
Tne Comp2ny 55,U) Cen�er Drive - N�'"m'O!-t
B��,)Oh, C.?Ilforn�a 92-660 - (714)S�4-�,01 i
-A
t
T-9,11orm"I's ciw�s
Today
January 7, 1972
State of California
Resources Agency
California Regional Water Quality Control Board
Santa Ana Region
6848 Magnoliac' Avenue
Riverside, California 925006
Attention:. Mr. Richard A. Bueerman
Subj ect: P r omo n -I--- o ry Bay
Dear Mr. Bueerman:
Reference your letter dated January.3, 1972 re-,-:�irdin,- the need
for addit-iona'l details of our contingency plancin the event the
discharged ground water deterior
CP rates to an unaccept-able level
and requires chlorination.
I have discussed this problem with Mel Whitt and Len Har+L . --ford
of Brown and Caldwell. Their.r-ecommendation based on an assured
discha-rc-e rate of .4 to .8 M.G.D. and H S contamination -w
C� 2 as. to
construct a rapid mix chlorination system �vith a contact -1--ank or
b
basin. The ptim—ped discharge would be chlorinated, discharged into
C.")
the contact chamber, and t'h�e-n allowed to gravity flow to our
dischar-e line. A list of the major equi-rmatie-,I nd its availab-1_1-it'y
0 . L _L E -a L
is attached for your inforonatt-ion.
I estimate that such a system could be created easily wit"hin. a
-t,.vo week period. We anticipate that during this setup ti-,a.e
th.,a d-;Lsc;-iarce can be diverLed to niL_
ID the sa tary s-�wer. Preli-mi-Liary
arran-ements have beep, made With Mr. Roy L;2wis of
4 S I? j Sanitation
Ict -No. 5 for t' is al-i-er-na-iiVe. T E_ also seerints practical
'EhaL L!Iae pum-ping o-oeration could be ter-minat-ed durin'- setup
I CD
t-itne if required.
T -�,70uld also like 'to point our that our testinc, botil geo] ocic
;-In d water quality, has not indicat
I k U ed even a reimote -chance of high
,.i?S conCentration. i H-MIY b-21ieve that our construction siLe is
of an enti--cely di ' Eferent:. character from. the Nfewport 'high ri.se that
vresented so -much trouble. Deep e-xcavation of s-L:o�rm drains . a Ln- d
S -ewer lines in thils. VICInity have presented no problem in- the
p as t- . I can point -to rhe recent trunk se wer crossing at the Pacific
CD
Goast Highway bridge as a pri[me example. The excavation there,,
Tne Comp2ny 55,U) Cen�er Drive - N�'"m'O!-t
B��,)Oh, C.?Ilforn�a 92-660 - (714)S�4-�,01 i
California Regional
Water Quality Control Board
Mr. Richard A. Bueerman January 7, 1972
much deeper.than ours, was dewatered without a trace of H2S or
any other contaminate. This project was completed as recently
as four months ago and the dewater operation continued for att
C:)
least 'Lour months.
Please advise me as soon as possible if any additional information
is required, or it is my understanding that the above information
is all that is required to complete ouOr reDort.
Very truly yours.,
Robert L. Snyder, Ma-oa-er
Residential Engineering
RLS:jdc
Attachment
IR
STAT_EOF . .-ifORNIA—RESOURCES AGENCY RONALD REAGAN, Governor
CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD -
SANTA ANA REGION
6948 MAGNOLIA AVENUE
RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92506
January,3, 1972
The Irvine Company
550 Newport Center Drive
Newport Beach, California 92660
Attention: Mr. Robert L. Snyder,
Manager Residential Engineering
This will acknowledge receipt of your report on waste discharge
for a dewatering operation connected with the development of
the Promontory Point Marina.
The report contains minimum information regarding the possibi-lity
of potential problems with the quality subsurface waters that.will
be pumped out and discharged to Newport Day. Having only one
sample for a project that will extend for one-half mile will
require, that these results be interpreted very conservatively.
The contingency plan which is necessary because of the uncertainties
of f5e `Crua_1i_t_v___o__fthe. subsurface waters is not sufficiently des-
cribed. Possibly this is the item referred -to in your report wherein
discharges that are found to be a problem will be diverted to the
sanitary sewers on a short-term basis. We do not believe this is
acceptable as stated because, if the problem is one of sulfide,
there would be immediate need for pre-treatment prior to discharge
to the sanitary sewer. Since this would require certain special
equipment which might not readily be available at the time of need
we believe that the previously mentioned contingency plan must be
more fully developed as part of this report on waste discharge.
Furnishing this information will complete your report on waste
discharge.
We hope you will have the contingency report available soon so
that we can begin processing your requirements.
RICHARD A BUEERMANN
Executive Officer
RECEIVED
jrt
B S 197Z
--it COMPARf
1 -1.11 Builders of Tomorrow's Cities ... Today
i -ul n , , I I
December 22, 1971
State of California
Resources Agency
California Regional Water Quality Control Board
Santa Ana Region
6848 Magnolia Avenue
Riverside, California 92506
Attention: Mr. Richard A. Bueerman
Executive Officer
Gentlemen:
Attached is our completed Report of Waste Discharge. The
grading plan and water analysis we delivered to your office
on December 10., 1971 should be made a part of this report.
In addition we attach a report from Associated Laboratories
showing the results of their analysis of a sample collected
on December 14, 1971. This sample was taken from the dis-
charge of a well point that was placed to a depth of
12 feet MSL. The discharge was allowed to run 30 minutes
before the sample was taken. The well point was placed
approximately 20 feet North of the bulkhead line adjacent
to Lot 17.
We anticipate that the wastewater generated will be of a
high enough quality that it can be discharged directly into
Newport Bay at the location indicated on the grading plan.
If the quality deteriorates to an unacceptable level we
have made arrangements to discharge water on a short -"term
basis in the sanitary sewer in Bayside Drive. During this
interim period we will be able to design and construct a
treatment facility to correct the unacceptable characteris-
tics of the discharge water.
We hope that thes.e arrangements will be satisfactory.
Very truly yours,
Robert L. Snyder, Manager
Residential Engineering
RLS:j 1p
Attachment
I I 10 Irv'('(', Compally - 5,,0 N,,wV;,(;, I C,w,l :)rl"'o -:,I �!,.%p )f! RE�!tich- Ca I, I wm�i 92660 - (7 14) 6,111-301 1
ASSOCIATED LABORATORIES
TESTING & CONSULTING
Chemical Microbiological* Environmental
-MAN ORANGE, CALIFORNIA 92668 7i4/639-1650 714/533-5303
I P 15 W. CHAP AVENUE
Fs -i' ;922
The Irvine Conilpany Laboratory No.--.— 20 1
55G Ne,.-ir)ort Center Dri ve 12 /2 1
Date-----
I'lewport Beach, California
We have receivedi ycur sample of--.-- water ---
R EC E i V E D._ 12/14/71 MARKED as
and fOUndi
B -0-D. (5 day @ 35.'F) 6 mg/liter (pQm.)
P H 7.00.
Electrical Conductivity (ECxl06@25'C) 6,250.0 mmho/cm.
SLI I f i des 4 0.01 ppm.
N', i t ra te s 0.25 ppm.
Color Nil
Odor Normal
Resygctfully submitted,
TLP/'f-r
Thf- is �j As,o,.!,iled
are confidnfi�:l
property of our clients and may
not be reproducer! or LISrt,171
for pt,blication in
-,r m fu!i
Nvilh:)ut
our permission.
Thii ;s in Mutual protection to
our clients and ourselvc,5.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
�AE RESOURCES AGENCY OF CALIFORNIA
CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
REPORT OF WASTE DISCHARGE
Pursuant to Division 7 of the State Water Code
(A) REPORT FROM:
Name The Irvine Company Attn: Mr. David B. Kuhn
(owner of Facility,Municipality,County,District,Firm or Individual)
Mailing Address 550 Newport Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Telephone No. 714- 644- 3419
(B). DESCRIPTION:
I. WASTE DISCHARGE: (check)
FOR USE OF REGIONAL BOARD
WRCB Form 200 Rec'd:
Duty Fee:
Letter to
Discharger:
Report Rec'd-.
Effective Date.
1. New discharge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (X:4
2. Existing discharge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.. increase in quantity of discharge . . . . . . . . . . . .
4. Change in character of waste . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5. Change in place or method of disposal . . . . . . . . . .
6. Exact location of point of disposal (describe)(attach map or sketch)
II. WASTE TREATMENT FACILITIES': (check)
1. Construction of entirely new facilities . . . . ... . . .
2. Enlargement of existing facilities . . .
3. other (explain)- Temporary treatment: ta�ciftiies' will
be constructed if required.
(C) TYPE'OF WASTE DISCHARGE: (check)
1. Sewage only i . . . . . . . .
2. Industrial wastes only . . . . . . . . . . . (xA Ground water only
3. Mixed sewage and industrial wastes . . . . . . . . . . .
4. Solid wastes . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(D) QUANTITY OF WASTES:
1. Present flow (in mgd) 4.
2. Design flow (in mgd)_ .4 to , 8 MGD 5.
3. Present population
(E)
SOURCE OF WATER SUPPLY:
1. Surface ( ) Ground (X)
2. Name of Stream
3. Type - Water Rights Riparian
4. Municipal or utility service (
Design population
Solid waste disposal site
(in cubic yards) —
Amount 1 .4 tn .8 mcm
Appropriation ( ) Permit or License ( )
(F) AMOUNT OF FILING FEES - (See attached Fee Schedule)
Amount of fee accompanying Preliminary Waste Discharge Report $_I 00
ALL OF THE STATEMENTS CONTAINED HEREIN ARE TRUE AND CORRECT TQ__rMjT_ BEST OF MY KNQWVDG
,r�� AND BELIEF AND
ARE SUBMITTED UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY. !::Z�4
SIGNATURE OF AUTHORIZED P1 B, Kuhn
Title Project L�ngineer
7Manaefer,Cierk,7,ngineer,consultant,etc.)
Date —December 21, 1971
You will be notified of the correctness of filing fee and submittal of any additional information
deemed necessary to complete your Report of Waste Discharge pursuant to Division 7, Section 13260
of the State Water Code.
WRCB Form 200,(12-69)
-;2 0 6 - e�'w
1kaub,'1;Beiq,'Fz-ost Qtc,9ssociates
PROFESSIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS & PLANNERS
November 1, 1971
Mr. George M. Dawes
Harbor and Tidelands Administrator
City of Newport Beach
3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, California
Dear Sir:
On behalf of our client, The Irvine Company, and in accordance with your
standard requirements for the application of a Harbor Permit for new
construction in the City of Newport Beach, we are hereby applying for
a revision to the harbor permit to dredge and bulkhead the Promontory
Bay development in the vicinity of Beacon Bay. The proposed two
revisions are: (1) the elimination of a boat slip marina and the
addition of a sand beach easterly of Lot #62 and southerly of relocated
Bayside Drive, and (2) the relocation of two lots, previously numbered
45 and 46, so as to provide an opening to the proposed bay from relo-
cated Bayside Drive.
Also transmitted hereby are finished dredging and bulkheading plans for
your review and approval. We have applied to the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers for a navigation permit, and they are now reviewing it and
setting it for public hearing.
Enclosed with this application are four copies of the drawing indicating
the revised new work which we propose.
As The Irvine Company is very anxious to begin work on this project, and
your approval is required before any construction can commence, we would
be most appreciative of anything you can do to expedite the approval of
this permit. If you have any questions or need any further information
in order to approve this revision, pleasjz—,pontact me.
nc rely,
JJick G. Raub
il I
ivil Engineer
JGR:cd
Encls.
cc: The Irvine Company
P.O. BOX 117 0 136 ROCHESTER STREET, COSTA MESA, CALIF
el"
ala-
9ZI5,27 (V711) 548 423 102
CD
---_--__-_......... ............... __-- --'-___'__............ '----------- ........ -
EAC
AMD
VEST
JETTY
T CH
VICINITY SKE EAST
GRAPHIC, SCALE MILES ----
N OT E. : SOUNDINbS ARE E�PRESSED IN FEET` AND DENOTE DEPTHS
15ELOW MEAN LOVER LOW WATER. MA11HUM RWE OF TIDE TION
OF 14EWPORT 6 NY.
100, LL
(59c. LULK9END
SECTION A -A
S141, 4
EXIST 6AYSIDE DR. tg
16ULKqEAD LINE
«v
PIEMAD
_JODI 841
SECTION 6-6
t-UiO@T0 MWDE DK.
&U ED D
AND �ULKHEADIMG
` THE IRVINE (DWANY
CITY OF NE.WPORT BEACH
MEMORANDUM: FroM Assistant City Manager
To ... T.I-DELAND.S...ADM I Ni STRATOR
Since this project with the bay configuration as drawn has been approved
by all necessary agencies, I think it would be inadviseable for the City
to independently reopen the question. I think this was understood at the
time the Beacon Bay -matter was considered.
Attachment
R6PlY wanted C)
Reply not neces"ry [3
By. .... . ............... ......
N4 20
July 26, 1971
TO: Assistant City Manager
FROM: Harbor & Tidelands Administrator
SUBJECT: RE-EVALUATION OF PROMONTORY BAY
You will recollect that when the issue arose of
transferring the Balboa Yacht Basin lease to The Irvine Company,
that the mayor was interested in a re-evaluation of entrances
to Promontory Bay. Since the lease has been transferred, I have
heard nothing further on this subject. Is it dead, or do you
desire me to proceed with a re-evaluation? Timing is rather
critical because The Irvine Company is beginning to accelerate
construction of the bay.
0
G . M . ADS'Ah TWAIE S9
GMD/db
OFFICE
2 So 1971
CM OF
WlYPORT 8E4C'4
CALIF.,
July 26, 1971
TO: Assistant City Manager
FROM: harbor & Tidelands Administrator
SUBJECT: RE"EVALUATION OF PROMONTORY BAY
You will recollect that when the issue arose of
transferring the Balboa Yacht Basin lease to The Irvine Company,
that the Mayor was interested,in a re-evaluation of entrances
to Promontory Bay. Since the lease has been transferred, I have
heard nothing further on this subject. Is it dead, or do you
desire me to proceed with a re-evaluation? Timing is rather
critical becaus e The Irvine C ompany is beginning to accelerate
construction of the bay.
G. M i DAWES
GMD/db
0 C3—
RONALD REAGAN, Gcyernor
S',AtE 'OF CALIFORNIA
CALIFORNIA COASTAL ZONE CONSERVATION COMMISSION
SOUTH COAST REGIONAL COWMSSION
666 E. OCEAN BOULEVARD, SUITE 3107
P. 0. BOX 1450 mun'tty
LONG BEACH, CALIFORNIA 90801 Com MeOt
Deqe%OP
(213) 4364201 (714) W-0648 Dept. 7AV-
RESOLUTION OF APPROVAL AIND PERMIT Cx of -V ,.C%A,
C
Application Number: P-12-28-73-2450
Name of Applicant: Mr. Russell S. Penniman
17802 Sky Park Circlev Suite 203, Irvine 92664
Permit Type: Standard,
Administrative
= Emergency
romentory Point, Ne fort Beach
Development Location: #3 P" W'P
Development Description: Construction and installation of a new slip
float within the established 50' pierhead line.
Commission Resolution:
I. The South Coast Conservation Coru-nission finds that the proposed,
development:
A. =W_ will not have a substantial adverse environmental or
ecological effect in that:
—the project will cause minimal environmental or ecologic
—impact.
W.6 njjjj.L %J V C" CA43." L -;.L L" -L V
B. Is/±mxmxrt consistent with the findings and declarations set
.forth in -Public Resources Code Sections 27001 and 27302 in
that:
it will not hinder preservation of coastal zone resources
for future maintenance plannin'-'*
C. Is sub4:e-.t to the folloi.,in- other resultant statutory provisions
and policies:
City of Newport Beach Ordinances.
D. Is/tzxm= consistent with the aforesaid other statutory pro-
visions and.policies in that:
approval in concept has been issued.
E. The following language and/or drawings clarify and/or facilitate
carrying out the intent of the South Coast Regional Zone Con-
servation Commission:
application, site map, plot plan and approval in concept.
II. Whereas, at a public hearing held on February 11, 1974
(date)
at Long Beach
(location)
by an unanimous vote hereby approves/&K���
the �TplicatFo_nfor Perm -it Ni=ber P-12-28-73-2450 pursuant
to the California Coastal Zone Conservation Act of 1972, sub—
ject to the following conditions imposed pursuant to the Public
Resources Code Section 27403:
None
Resolution of Approval and Permit
Page 3
III. Said terms and conditions shall be perpetual and bind all future
owners and possessors of the property or.any part thereof unless
other -wise specified herein.
IV. Section 560 of the Regulations of the California Coastal Zone
Conservation Conirission specifies that no structure or area of
land or water shall be used or occupied in the manner authorized
by the per -mit or in any other manner until the Executive Director
has issued a Certificate of Compliance -vrith the terms and con—
ditions of the permit.
.V. The grant of this permit is further made subject to the following:
A* That this permit shall not become effective until the verifi—
cation has been returned to the South Coast Regional.Conser—
vation Commission upon which copy all permittees have acknow—
ledged that they have received a copy of the permit and under—
stood its contents. Said acknowledgement should be returned
within ten working days following issuance of this permit.
Vi.
B. That upon completion of the activit L tth' zed by this permit
t � � Hi
y u . 0
the permit"!(sA shall e "Notice of
ComDletionll , 11 _- le i J& rector of this
nt�M
s
sl n
Regional Co s n.
C. That said development to.be commenced on or before
.180 days from effective date of approval
Therefore, said Permit (Standard ' kd=L zrnl�
Number P-12-28-73-2450 is hereby grantedAbente& for the above
described deveiop.rient only—, subject to the above conditions
and subject to all terms and provisions of the Resolution of
Approval by the South Coast Regional Conservation Commission.
VII. Executed at Long Beach California on behalf of
the South Coast Regional Conservation Commission on
February 27 1974�_.
A A A -A
M.J. CarUnterQ/
Executive Director
wk
8 1-73
Ad
Al
j,
SHT- NO.
T- NO.
DETAIL NO. OF
MEMBE 9 OF AMERICAN SOCIETY OF LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS SERIES OF DATE
"I
Its EAST 1100ADWAY. AWARCIM, CALIPOPINIA MIS - TELIPHON1 17141 771.3110
.41
al
Ad
Al
j,
SHT- NO.
T- NO.
DETAIL NO. OF
MEMBE 9 OF AMERICAN SOCIETY OF LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS SERIES OF DATE
"I
Its EAST 1100ADWAY. AWARCIM, CALIPOPINIA MIS - TELIPHON1 17141 771.3110
NF U_
CITY OF VvpoFj'T MEACH
AIND
PERMISSIOM
C�v
MAINTAIN Tl�
AT THE S'
THE
AMN
is mc___ q.
AND 4
A c RDINATO�ft
_z�
200-000 DATE
O-E-RMIT-NO-
Or
IA
751, t ---
WA
zz* co
VA
77:
VA
it co
jo
co
I 4:�; �-fjv
L lu
F
Foy.;
I.N
COMMISSIONERS
ROLL CALL
Motion
Second
Al 1 Ayes
CITY OF NEWPORT BEi A
,P MINUTES
June 3, 1971
INDEX
further that the proposed ordinance in its present
form has been sent to approximately 40 homeowners'
and civic associations, chambers of commerce, the
Newport Harbor -Costa Mesa Board of Realtors, etc.
This amendment contains several definitions which
would be added to the Code for off-street parking
purposes; a definition for the term "bedroom".
11carport" and "garage".
The following persons spoke in opposition, some
stating they had not had sufficient time to review
the ordinance.
Ed Vanden Bossche of 121 - 40th Street; Thomas H.
Blandi, 4109 Seashore Drive; Francis J, Horvath,
4525 Roxbury Drive, Corona del Mar; Harvey D. Peas(,
304 Collins, Balboa Island; Joe Casala, 812 West
Ocean.Front, Balboa.
Mr. George Woods of 115 Apolena Avenue, Balboa
Island spoke for the Balboa Island Improvement
Assn., and stated they feel as a general rule, the
proposal is desirable and no further postponement
should be made. Mr. Charles Griffin of 208 Opal,
Balboa Island, also spoke in favor of the proposed
amendment.
Mr. Tom Hyans of the Central Newport Beach. Communily
Association stated they received their copy on
May 27th and asked that the matter be deferred until
the next meeting.
Chairman Jakosky observed that it appears some of
the associations have not had an opportunity to
review the latest amendment to this ordinance and
in all fairness to them and to the -City, the item
should be continued.
x
The Commission concurred and the application was
x
continued until June 17, 1971.
Item 9.,
Request to permit the construction of a 536 unit
USE
apartment house complex.
TERMIT
NO. 7T94
Location: Portion of Block 94, Irvine's Subdivi-
sion, located on the southwest corner
APPROVED
of Pacific Coast Highway and Jamboree
Road, north of the proposed realign-
ment of Bayside Drive (Promontory
Poi nt) .
Page 9.
COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BE.* - _H
ROLL CALL. Junp 3-1971
MINUTES
INDEX
Zone: Unclassified
Applicant: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach
Owner: Same as applicant
Zoning Administrator Hewicker presented the appli-
cation to the Commission and explained the differ-
ence in this application and the original use
permit which was denied by the Commission on
January 5, 1971, subsequently appealed, and then
referred back to the Commission by the City Counci
Mr. James E. Taylor, Director of General Planning
Administration for the Irvine Company addressed
the Commission, introducing into the record the
following documents:,
1. A copy of the 1963 Master Plan for the
Promontory Point area which designates
this area for a combination of high
density, multi -family and commercial
development.
2. A copy of the Precise Land Use Plan
for Use Permit Application 1466 which
was considered and approved in part
relati.ve to the Promontory Bay Project.
3. A map indicating the land use that
existed as of February 1971 in the
general vicinity of Promontory Point.
4. A revised site plan and architectural
renderings.
5. The staff report written by the Planning
Department for the January 5, 1971
meeting recommending approval.
6. A copy of the traffic access and circu-
lation study that was conducted by
J.D. Drachmen, Associates, Transportation
Consultants hired by The Irvine Company.
7. Transcript of the meeting of January 5,
1971 containing the complete comments
of the traffic consultant Mr. Robert
Crommelin, who was hired by the Balboa
Island Association as well as the comments
of Mr. Robert Jaffe, City Traffic Engineer.
Page 10.
COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BE, _ZH
0
0
0
ROLL CALL — June 3. 1971
MINUTES
INDEX
8. A copy of a letter from Mr. Crommelin,
to the Planning Director for the City
of Newport Beach clarifying a state-
ment made At the public hearing of
January 5, 1971.
9. Minutes of the Planning Commission meet-
ings of November 5, 1970 and January 5,
1971 relative to this item.
Mr. Taylor explained the changes that had been
made in the proposed development and Mr. William
Watt, Director of the Multi -Family Development
Section of the Irvine Company indicated these
changes on a large display rendering.
There was a lengthy discussion regarding the various
phases of this development including the vista
corridor, vista points, the streets within the
development and a park which the Irvine Company
would dedicate to the City in exchange for the
excise taxes which would accrue to the City for
an apartment complex of this size.
Mrs. Lois Chambers of Balboa Island inquired
whether the streets would be available for public
u s e .
The following persons spoke in opposition to the
proposed development:
Bill Thompson, Balboa Island
Col. Selim Herring Franklin, Balboa Island
Al Kelso, 207 N. Bayfront, Balboa Island
Allan Beek, 28 Beacon Bay
Harvey D. Pease, 304 Collins
The following persons spoke in favor of the pro-
posed development:
Lee Henley,.Clown Cleaners
John J. Elliott, Resident
E. W. Dakin, 1220 Dolphin Terrace
Karl Barnum, 2901 Cassia Street
Chick Iverson, 445 E. Coast Highway
James P. Felton, 1839 Sabrina Terrace
Mrs. Anne Thomas Lundy representing the Women's
Civic League of Newport,Harbor.stated they had not
had ti.me to reply to the letter from the City and
requested a geology report of the area.
Page 11 .
COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEk �H
0
Un
0-1
ROLL CALL June 3, 1971
MINUTES
INDEX
Motion
X
After a further lengthy discussion, the applica-
Second
x
tion was approved subject to the following condi-
Ayes
X
x
xx
tions: (A complete transcript of the hearing is
Noes
X
xx
on file in the Community Development Department.)
1. That action of the Planning Commi.ssion
shall constitute a recommendation to the
City Council, and final determination of
this application shall be decided by.the
City Council
2. That a resubdivision and parcel map be
filed, prior to issuance of building
permits.
3. That utility and street improvements be
constructed as required in conjunction
with the resubdiviston and appropriate
surety and ' agreements provided guarantee-
ing completion of the improvements.
4. That private streets conform to the City
Private Street Policy, with the geometric
design and structural section to be
approved by the Public Works Department.
5. That public vehicular access to those
private streets serving the vista points
be irrevocable.
6. That precise design and location of all
entrances and exits to public streets
shall be subject to approval by the
Director of Public Works.
7. That a traffic signal and related
channelization be installed at the
developer's expense at the connection
with Coast Highway, with the design to
be approved by the Traffic Engi,.neer.
8. If the City Engineer and the City Traffic
Engineer feel that the Coast Highway
entrance, as signalized, is hindering
the flow of traffic in that area of the
City, a grade separation shall be
commenced (prior to January 1, 1974)
and that on or near that date, and prior
to the commencement of construction of
said grade separation., that those two
parties report to the Planning Commission
their analysis of the situation as they
have studied it.
Page 12.
COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT Bb. -'H
MINUTES
ROLL CALL June 3, 1971 INDEX
9. That easements providing public pedestrian
and bicycle access to the development shall
be provided in locations meeting the
approval of the Director of Community
Development, and in a manner meeting the
approval of the City Attorneyo
10. That detailed landscaping plans, includ-
ing a watering system and schedule for
installation, shall be prepared by a
landscape architect and shall be subject
to approval by the Director of Community
Development. Said landscaping may consist
of lawn, trees, shrubbery and other plant
materials and shall provide for immediate
erosion control and perimeter planting of.
the entire site. The landscaping and
watering system shall be installed in
accordance with the approved plan and
shall be properly maintained. In the
event installation of landscaping is not
completed on schedule, the City of Newport
Beach may require a reasonable guarantee
forcompletion of said landscaping.
11. That landscaping adjacent to Bayside Drive
be designed so that sight distance prob-
lems will not be created.
12. That all swimming pools shall be enclosed
with fencing as required by the Building
Code.
13. That all trash shall be stored in closed
containers located, within walled enclosures.
14. That all development shall comply with the
requirements of the Fire Marshal.
15. That identification signs not to exceed
forty square feet per face (double faced)
shall be allowed at one entrance on East
Coast Highway and two entrances on Bayside
Drive. Final design, including copy and
lighting, shall be subject to approval
by the Director of Community Development6
16. That the developer shall be responsible
for all precautionary actions necessary
to protect the quality of the waters of
Newport,Harbor during grading operations,
and shall prepare and submit erosion
control plans and specifications designed,
Page 13.
COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEA j-1
0 0
LA 0 V
0 tP
LA .&
ROLL CAL June 3- 1971
MINUTES
INDEX
to prevent deposition of sediment.
17. That the question of acquisition and dev-
elopment of the one and one-half acre
park site adjoining Bay5ide Drive for
public use shall be determined by the
City Council. If the City Council decides
not to acquire the park site said area
shall be developed for private recreation
use exclusive of a public vista and vehicu-
lar parking area. In either event, ease-
ments providing public vehicular access
to the park or vista shall be provided in
locations meeting the approval of the
Director of Community Development and in
a manner meeting the approval of the City
Attorney.
18. There shall be no obstructions projecting
above the. south curb elevation of East
Coast Highway within a triangle bounded
by Jamboree Road, the easterly end of the
south property line, and line projecting
southwest from the intersection of East
Coast Highway and Jamboree Road, at an
angle to be determined by.the Director of
Community Development that will encompass
the view of the Pavilion.
18(a) The main entrance shall be maintained as
as a view corridor with a width of
between 250 and 282 feet, and no grade
w *thin that strip of land shall be
above the elevation of the highway as
it passes that opening.
19. Thata building setback of not less than
sixty feet, measured from the curb faces,
be established from Jamboree Road.
20. That a beach area, available to residents
of the Promontory Point apartments,shall
be provided at Promontory Bay (south of
Bayside Drive). A legal description defin-
ing said area shall be submitted to the
Director of Community Development and made
a part of this application.
21. That the design and improvement of all
recreation and view areas, both public and
private, shall be subject to the review
and approval of the Director of Parks,
Beaches and Recreation.
Page 14.
E—i AQ' DEN37E DHTHS
U M RkMG� OF -FIDE
5LIS14ED IN IRIS SCLTION
OF �IEVUJ I�NY.
\C
LL
(09C. LULK�EAD
lu
S E C T 10 R A -A
4e -
x
/14�/
C// '174
)4
'64 S
4
4,o
t8
_4 ;li�T
DK- P L A N
0 �o all X0
ULYgEAD LI
NE
r7F',A:�U7 b E IN k 0 S i � A SS 0 CC.
sb sTKEz-,
Z,4 A N D 1, 0 L K A D 19 G
M 0 W T 0 KY b k Y,
'li EW P 0 RT 6E A (14, CALIFOKNIA
't- ULOCATIED V61DF H. 1 76. IM2
SECTIO N 6-6 THE RVINE CORANY
KEVISID V O(T igil SSQ IIEWPORT CENIEk N.
=11slull"Al
A
DEL MAR
�kv EST
JETTI
EAST
j! -L
'ETly
S�.,E
E—i AQ' DEN37E DHTHS
U M RkMG� OF -FIDE
5LIS14ED IN IRIS SCLTION
OF �IEVUJ I�NY.
\C
LL
(09C. LULK�EAD
lu
S E C T 10 R A -A
4e -
x
/14�/
C// '174
)4
'64 S
4
4,o
t8
_4 ;li�T
DK- P L A N
0 �o all X0
ULYgEAD LI
NE
r7F',A:�U7 b E IN k 0 S i � A SS 0 CC.
sb sTKEz-,
Z,4 A N D 1, 0 L K A D 19 G
M 0 W T 0 KY b k Y,
'li EW P 0 RT 6E A (14, CALIFOKNIA
't- ULOCATIED V61DF H. 1 76. IM2
SECTIO N 6-6 THE RVINE CORANY
KEVISID V O(T igil SSQ IIEWPORT CENIEk N.
MY OF NEWPORT' -ACH
HARBOR PERMIT
PERMISSION IS HEREBY GRANTED TO CONSTRUCT AND
MAINTAIN THE FACILITY SHOWN ON THE REVERrE HIEREOF,
AT THE SITE INDICATED, SURJECT TO THE PrG�;SIONS OF
THE HARBOR PERMIT POLICIES OF NEWPOPT REACH AN!,.
ANY SPECIAL CONDITIONS LISTED HEREON. TENS PERM.,
#S NOT TRANSFERABLE VV;T HOUT TI -Ir VVAiTTF-N C 0�15--NT
THE CITY HARBOR C0OjZD..1j1.�,jToT
.Z Oft CITY COUNCL. Ti;
RIGHTS GIVEN UNDER THIS PERMIT ARE P, k-- r , ISSIVE ONL.
AND THIS PERMIT MAY BE ft--V-0t',ED UY THE ITY COUNCIL
IN ACCORDANCE WITH .1 IT�ej 7 1
,,,qF,T51E filUN IPAL CODE.
-I-oo -000
PIEP?*V!T !6'-**
C I T V -H A Ft 9 6r--ZC
SPECIAL CONDITIONS REQUIRED:
1. Approval of the Corps of Engineers. (Corps of Engineers Permit
was issued on 20 May, 1970)
2.- Approval of the Joint Harbor Committee. (Approved on 14 April, 1970.)
3. That the applicant observe I precautions against creating excess
turbidity as outlined in the State Resources Agency's . letter
of 25 March, 1970.
4. That the waterway, up to but not including the bulkhead, be
dedicated to- the City of Newport Beach.
5. That the bulkhead design be approved by the Public Works
Director.
6. That there be no overhead wires or lines over the entrance
channel and that any underground utilities in the'water area
have a minimum of five feet of soil cover
7. That the Harbor and Tidelands Administrator and the Santa
Ana River Basin Regional Water Quality Control Board be
notified 48 hours in advance of opening the proposed channel
to the main harbor.
APPROVED
AUG 10/
By The
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF NEWPORT BEAC�-j
TO
Planning Commission '2.
4
Im
That u t i I i ty and street provements be. constructed as
required in conjunction with the resubdivision..
56
That private streets conform to. the C i, tY Private Street
Policy.
6'
That precise design and location of all e . ntrances and
exits to public street -s shal I be subject to approval by
the -Director of Public Works.
7
That all costs related to the design, purchase and
instal lation of traffic signals at the entrance to East
Coast Highway shall be the responsibili�ty of the developer.,,�,�'
8
That easements providing public pedestrian and i icycle
b
access to the development shall 'be provided in locations
meeting the approval of the Planning Director, and in a.
manner meeting the approval of the City Attorney.
9
That detailed-land'scaping plans, including a watering
system and s chedule for installation, shall be prepared by
a landscape architect and shall be subject to approval by
the Planning 'Director. Said landscaping may consist of
lawn, trees, shrubbery and other plant materials and shall
prov.ide for immediate erosion control and perimeter plantin.g.
of the entire site. The landscaping and watering system
shall be installed in accordance With the approved plan
and shall be properly mai,ntained. In the event i.nstallation
of landscaping is not completed on schedule, the City of
Newport Beach- may require a reasonable guarantee for
completion of said landscaping..
That landscaping adjacent'to Bayside Drive.be desi:gned so
that sight distance problems will not- be created,
i%:':�
That all parking spaces shall conform to City standards, and�
perpendicular parking spaces abutting aiproperty line or
s r
t ucture shall be provided with wheel 'Stops. Al I . dri veways
and off-street parking areas shall be paved, and parking
spaces shall be properly delineated,
:..I 21.��
Open and carport parking spaces adjacent t o Coast H i hwa
9 y
and Baysi.de.Drive shall be'screened with p.1 ant materials.
"I_ 113.
All lights shall be shielded or directed so:,as to%co'nfine
'direct rays to the subject property.
14.
Al f swi mming pools shall be enclos.ed.,wlth fencing as.
require'd by the Building Code.
15.1
All trash shall. be. stored Vn. closed containers Iocated
within walled enclosures.
Builders of Torn.orrow's Cities ... Today
irvoiflL
August 7, 1970
City of Newport Beach
3300 West Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, California 92660
Attention: Mr. Harvey L. Hurlburt
City Manager
Subject: PROMONTORY BAY
Gentlemen:
Our Promontory Bay project will generate approximately
300,000 cubic yards of surplus material that would be
very suitable for your beach replenishment projects.
We plan to make this material available during the next
three (3) months to contractors and other government
agencies on a "first come first served" basis.
Loading and hauling will be done at no cost to The Irvine
Company and there will be no charge for the material removed.
If the City of Newport Beach is interested in any of this
material, please contact Mr. Reg Glahn at (714) 644-3421
(The Irvine Company) at your earliest convenience.
Sincerel
yl
Robert L. Snyder
Project Engineer.
RLS/si
The Irvine Company - 660 Newport Center Drive Newport Beach, California 92660 - (714) 644-,3011
20 �%icjy 1970
The I.r-virla Cxm-p =,y
"lenter Drive
Californi4 92GG4
llcwport l3aach.
0.1
rQspcmioe to -vour request 0 r Lin, js inclos "
I j -A
-le con'struction of o. DO_khrl."
�,uthorizing excavation anfl 1_1
.l a 11. L' o m I'l
-I- Promontory 16,4,V, NCWPOrt C
Y
e r any to -mal c all mEltOrl.,21
7jacessary fo I. , 1)
'k, revised PLIT's
wor
,a � Ca-tj�gj o- nlams
0 t xjet to be utiobjr-c-
J.' 1, cc L-1 ur(�_r t,,",
TI.,uttej prnmptly to this Of.k- I
vjation, tbcy -aiy be am-moovld as
st�jndpoiyjt of P. a
tionable f'rom th
requiredA loy law be -fore construction i -S bl:,�17)1
T
licate, is illcloseet for your convenience i�l VOVO L
t�,e Stittlif3 f work under pernlit. One Copy is to he retaiuod in
0
to this office.
Your Ziles and the Othe".. r0tJrne�l
your a.ro co�
XILL;O lnclo:�ed fo_ livO
CAL
3.4 and the Ocean F �2 C
a
ociatio-a.
J.
Sincerely YOuvs,
2.
n
f-. Ocean FiSh Prot- As-wn.
Operations Branch.w,
R ;3,r, r% I ; � UEY
J. MA'
District
V-V
i, i rl" Ai
NOTE.—It is to be understood that this instrument does not give any property rights either in real estate or mate-
rial, or any exclusive privileges; and that it does not authorize any injury to private property or invasion of private
rights, or any infringement of Federal, State, or local laws or regulations, nor does it obviate the necessity of obtaining
State assent to the work authorized. T��WTV-PLYPRUIQ4.-P-Q 'TT-TV_A_Q5:Vb;1 QP R W IRIHNIP 80 P*ft-AVrAeM-
QQ";@ WHE PUBE&O ffiGHT19 eip NA-ViGATiON, (0ee Getonmings Y. Ghicago, HS U. S., 4iO.)
PERMIT
U. S. ArV Engineer DisSriet,oLos Angeles
orps f Engineers.
Los Angeles, California
-------------------------- 2a--N&y ------- 1 1970
"Ihe Irvine Company
550 Newport Center Drive
llewport.Beach,, California 92664
Gentlemen:
Referring to written request dated 4 February 1970 for pem. Ission to excavate
and construct a bulkhead
have to inform you that, upon the recommendation of the Chief of Engineers,
and under the provisions of Section 10 of the Act of Congress approved March 3,
1899, entitled nAn act making appropriations for the construction, repair, and
preservation of certain,public works on rivers and harbors, and for other pur—
poses," you are hereby authorized by the Secretary of the Army.
toL excavate an irvagular shaped area about 2,300 fiset long by 100 to 400 foet
(Here describe the proposed structure or work.)
wide and deposit approximately 290,000 cubic yards of material on shore off the
pite and construct about 50100 linear feet of conerate bulkhead-_
Day
(Here to be named the river, harbor, or waterway concerned.)
it a location shorwward of and about midway between U* S-. Bulkhead Stations
(Here to be named the nearest well-known locality—preferably a town or city—and the distance In miles and tenths from some.deflulte point in
the same, stating whether above or below or giving direction by points of compass.)
101 and 200
i ., n aa cordance with the plans shown on the drawing attached hereto marked "Proposed
(Or drawings; give file number or other definite identification marks.)
XYredging and Bulkheading, Promontory Bayq Nevrport Beach, Calif. Application by:
The Irvine Company, 550 Newport Center Dres Newport Beach..
6rU_.'5JWct to the following conditions:
is u
in charge of the locality, who may temporarily suspend the work at any time, if in ..a judgment the interests of navi
gation so require.
(b) That any material dredged in the prosecution of the work herein authorized shall be removed evenly and no
large refuse piles, ridges across the bed of the waterway, or deep holes that may have a tendency to cause injury to
navigable channels or to -the banks of the waterway shall be left. If any pipe, wire, or cable hereby authorized is laid
in a trench, the formation of permanent ridges across the bed of the waterway shall be avoided and the back filling
shall be so done as not to increase the cost of future dredging for navigation. Any material to be deposited or
dumped under this authorization, either in the waterway or on shore above high-water mark, shall be deposited or
dumped at the locality shown on the drawing hereto attached, and, if so prescribed thereon, within or behind a good
and substantial bulkhead or bulkheads, such as will prevent escape of'the material in the waterway. If the mate-
rial is to be deposited in the harbor of New York, or in its adjacent or tributary waters, or in Long Island Sound, a
permit therefor must be previously obtained from the Supervisor of New York Harbor, Now York City.
(c) That there shall be no unreasonable interference with navigation by the work herein authorized.
(d) That if inspections or any other operations by the United States are necessary in the interest of navigation,
all expenses connected therewith shall be borne by the permittee.
(e) That no attempt shall be made by the permittee or the owner to forbid the full and free use by the public of
all navigable watersat or adjacent to the work or structure.
M That if future operations by the United States require an alteration in the position of the structure or work
herein authorized, or if, in the opinion of the Secretary of the Army, it shall cause unreasonable obstruction to the free
navigation of said water, the owner will be required upon due notice from the Secretary of the Army, to remove or
alter the structural work or obstructions caused thereby without expense to the United States, so as to render naviga-
tion reasonably free, easy, and unobstructed; and if, upon the expiration or revocation of this permit, the structure,
fill, excavation, or other modification of the watercourse hereby authorized shall not be completed, the owners shall,
without expense to the United States, and to such extent and in such time and manner as the Secretary of the Army
may require, remove all or any portion of the uncompleted structure or fill and restore to its former condition the navi-
gable capacity of the watercourse. No claim'shall be made against the United States on account of any such removal
or alteration. cture or work herein
(g) That the United States shall in jno case be liable for any damage or injury to the stru
authorized which may be caused by or result from future operations undertaken by the Government for the conserva
tion or improvement of navigation, or for other purposes, and no claim or right to compensation shall accrue from
any such damage.
(h) That if the display of lights and signals on any work hereby authorized is not otherwise provided for by law,
such lights and signals as may be prescribed by the U. S. Coast Guard, shall be installed and maintained by and at the
expense of the owner. at what time the work will be commenced, and as
(i) That the permittee shall notify the said district engineer
far in advance of the time of commencement as the said district engineer may specify, and shall also notify him
promptly, in writing, of the commencement of work, suspension of work, if for a period of more than one week,
resumption of work, and its completion.
U) That if the structure or work herein authorized is not completed on or before ------------------- 31st --------- day
of --------------- DacanOor
------------------- 1 19-11, this permit, if not previously revoked or specifically extended, shall cease and
be null and void.
W That '96the permittee shall comply promptly with any regulations, Conditions.
or instructions affecting the work haroby authorizod if and when Issued by the
4 -or pollution
Vederal Wator Pollution Control Administration and/or the State wa%.
control agency having jurisdiction to abate or prevent water pollution. Such
regulations, Conditions or instructions in effect or proscribed by the Federal
.Water Pollution Control Administration or State agency are he-Mby maft 4 COndition
of thia perwit.
By authority of the Secretary of the Army:
ROBERT J. MALIXY
Colonel, CE
District Engineer
ING FORM (CIVII) This form supersedes ED Form 96, dated 1 Apr 48, which maybe used until exhausted. r
1721
'i SEP 48 a. 8. GOVINaMENT FRIKVING CFFJCC 16-13168-6
EM 1145-2-303
Nt-
ea'� -LR�v
Mrs. Gloria Gartz
1500 South Bay Front
Balboa I�land, California 92662
Dear Mrs. Gartz:
mayor Marshall has referred to
the harbor and the responsibilities
April 15, 1970
me your letter concerning
of the Harbor District.
In regard to any development proposed for Upper Newport
Day or for the so called Promontory Say project, you can be
assured that no work will be authorized by the City until such
time as we have permits from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
This is a routine procedure for any development of this scope,
and we are now in the process of determining if the Corps will
issue a permit for the Promontory Bay project.
We are also, as the Corps is, concerned about the effects,
of pollution and whether or not any construction will.contribute
to pollution problems. We maintain a continuing dialogue with
the Harbor District, the Regional Water Quality Control Board,
the Fish and Game Department, and the Corps of Engineers in this
respect.
Your interest in the harbor is greatly appreciated, and I
will be happy to answer any further questions you may have.
Yours truly,
G. M. DAWES
Harbor & Tidelands Administrator
GMD/db
July 28, 1970
TO: Public Works Director
Planning Director
FROM: Harbor & Tidelands Administrator
SUBJECT: PROMONTORY BAY
It in my intention to take before the city council the
Harbor Permit No. 200-000 for bulkheadin�g and dredging Promontory
Bay on August 10. The Corps of Engineers had indicated they have
no objections to the proposal, but they are awaiting City approval
before issuing their permit.
Could you forward to me by 31,july any special conditions
or prohibitions you desire on this harbor permit.
G. M. DAWES
GMD/db
-W—I%l
JJ I Du'-?
-promontory , ea , 6
Newport Orders Study of Irvine Proposal
The Irvine Company's chief attorney
Monday offered to exempt the city of
Newport Beach from payment of dam-
ages of up to $50,000 in suits that might
be brought as the result of'Promontory
'Bay development.
Newport city councilmen have been
holding out for the Irvine Company to
indemnify the city against damages in
loss of casual drive-by customers for
Balboa Yacht Basin business when Bay-
side Drive is terminated.
The Promontory Bay plan of 62 water-
front homes with boat moorings on a la-
goon calls for Bayside Drive to dead
end where the lagoon entrance channel
is cut and through traffic to be rerouted
on a new Bayside Drive. The Yacht Basin
businesses, on property leased from the
city, would be on the old Bayside Drive
arm.
Councilmen ordered City Attorney
Tully Seymour to explore further the Ir.
vine Company's indemnity offer and re.
ToFFE-a"M next Monday. t
Previously, Irvine Company represen.
tatives had said they did not think the
company should assume liability for
damages.
But in the face of City Council intran-
sigence, Irvine Company General Coun-
sel Guy Claire said Monday the company
would consider indemnifying the city up
to $50,000, the amount city -hired apprais-
er Cedric White had said would be the
probable extent of damages.
Claire told of the Irvine Company's re-
luctance to make such an offer. "Your
own appraiser said the benefit to the city
would outweigh the loss. tinder those
circumstances the Irvine Company wa . s
shocked to be asked to indemnify the
city. This is an additional benefit " a
windfall," he said.
Claire said the Irvine Company would
not be willing to give unlimited indem-
nity to the city.. "We have to establish
parameters of benefit to. both the city
and thia'Irvine Company," he said.
The offsetting monetary. benefit to the
city Claire spoke of is in increased value
of Beacon Bay residential property, also
on land leased from the city, caused by
making the access road exclusive.
City councilmen were still concerned
that damages might exceed $50,000, which
White said is the estimated loss in rental
value of the Yacht Basin property over
the remaining 17 years of the city lease.
Councilmen recalled that attorney for
the Balboa Yacht Basin properties. Harry
Westover, had warned damages could be
based on loss of income to the businesses
rather than loss of rent to the master
lessee.
But City Attorney Seymour discounted
that possibility. He said there is room
for different opinions on cases Westover
cited in his brief. "There are different
interpretations but sometimes cases are
loosely used in a brief," he said.
Seymour agreed with appraiser White
that loss of rental value is the measure
normally used by the courts.
April 28, 1970
Mr. Wendel Reece
Corps of Engineers
Los Angeles District
Post Office Box 2711
Los Angeles, California 90053
Dear Mr. Reece:
In reply to your letter of 23 April, 1970, concerning the
application by The Irvine Company to excavate and construct
bulkhead -to-i-0--ii -hax-ina opening into Newport Bay, you are
AdVils-e-&'that the City Council cannot take action until its
meeting of 11 May, 1970.
The City Staff has analyzed the application and has no
objection to the excavation and will recommend to the City
Council that the application be approved subject to certain
conditions. The conditions cannot be expressed until the
Council makes a decision as to whether or not the resultant
waterway should be granted in fee to the City or remain in
private ownership.
The City has no objection to your granting a permit at
this time if your office is assured that the engineering indi-
cates that there will be no subsequent water quality problems
or beach erosion problems on Balboa Island.
Yours truly,
G. M. DAWES
Harbor a Tidelands Administrator
GMD/db
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
April 27, 1970
TO-, City Manager
FROM: Harbor & Tidelands Administrator
SUBjECT: OWNERSHIP OF PRIVATELY CREATED WATERWAYS
The -proposed development of Promontory Bay again brings up
consideration as to whether privately created waterways should remain
in pr`va�e ownership, be dedicated as -public rights-of-way, or be
qranted to the City. The City Engineer and the Harbor & Tidelands
Adninist-rator.visited Ventura to obtain their opinions and also separately
discussed the situation with Hunting -ton Beach. These two cities have
situations analogous to ours.
In Ventura, a private developer created waterways leading into
the nublic otarina and further established single family and multiple
fam-i-ly rcasidences bordering the waterways. the residents were formed
ifito a cox=Liunity association. The waterways were subsequently granted
in -fee to the City with a perpetual easement to the residents for pier
purposes.. The reasoning in requiring granting of fee ownership to the
City was based on their experience in private streetts and they -felt that
the association would, over a period of years, never give proper mainte-
nan,ce to -the chanhel-ways and that ultimat-ely the City would inherit them
wh-en, -they were in -poor condition and with high maintenance costs. The
'City now -ce--f-forms ma-intenance in these waterways, bu---' assesse-s, t.he
In Huntington Beach, privately created waterways were also
granted in fee, from bulkhead line. to * bulkhead line, with perpetual water
easeLm,ents for pier purposes. Huntington Beach cited the same reasons as
L
4-
__�ara as far as 7-i,,aintenance was concerned, but the City also felt that
hay �.,Tere greatly simplifying police problems. They had had experience in
one sinall privately <Dwne-d waterway where they were constantly responding
to request -s of the residents to chase public boaters away. The City is
of the o-oinion 'that their harbor natrol has no right to enter the private
W,-_1ta_was for enforcement purposes unless invited b-,7 'the owner.
On April 14, 'the Orange County Harbor Commissioners expressed
-their opinion 'that the dre%,"Iged area at Promontory Bay should be dedicated
to a public agency. The rat4 onale for their opinion was not included in
the letter frrom the Harbor Dist-rict to the City Manager, but the Harbor
District O-perations Officer states.that they were influenced by maintenance
and law enforcement considerations as outlined above.
REC-OMMENDATION: It is recommended that the privately created waterways
Er7 t -he proposed Promontory Bay development should be granted in fee -to the
City for the foilowing reasons:
a. Maintenance: There should be little initial maintenance cost.
However, The Irvine Company in -tends to sell the individual lots fronting
0
- 2 -
on the waterway so that there will be multiple ownership of the shoreline.
Future maintenance problems could -then involve a number of shoreline ,
owners, plus a private owner of -the waterway, plus the City and the Harbor
District. Future maintenance problems could best be handled in a coordin-
ated approach by the City or Harb= District. In requiring granting of
fee ow.;ership, it should be taken from bulkhead line to bulkhead line with
the bulkheads -themselves being the responsibility of the abut -Ling property
owners as is the case in the rest of the City. If necessary, conditions
can be imposed upon The Irvine Company in the harbor permit relative to
external factors that might affect the lagoon such as, for instance, excess
sedirientat-ion from storm drains during upland development, or any possible
adverse affect creation of the lagoon might have on adjacent public areas.
b. Water Quality: It is possible -that the lagoon could become
a cat.ch basin for debris entering from the main harbor in which case the
City and the Harbor District could find themselves constantly harassed
by the waterfront owners who would claim,, "The debris came from public
waters so you clean it out". It would be better to have the..responsibility
in the -first place.
C. Law Enforcement: it is d 4ffiCUJt for boaters, particularly
those who may visit the City from other areas., to determine who owns the
land unde.rly4ng the water. A rash of calls from residents at Promontory
Bay could occur when other boats cruise around the lagoon, which they
are sure to do. It would be better to have the waterways public in the
fi-rst place. Further, the Harbor District believes their enforcement
authority is questionable in private waterways.
d. Proliferation of Ownershin: There are four different types
of ownership of submerged lands in Newport Harbor. By requiring granting
of fee ownership, the City would be taking a step.towards eliminating one
type of ownership.
e. Future Contingencies: It is difficult to forecast contin-
q-enc-Les many years from now, therefore, the City would be retaining an
oDiCion for the future if it owns the waterways.
Whii-e grant4 ng of fee ownership is recommended, and present
harbor permit policies adequately protect shoreline owners insofar as pier
rights are concerned, water easements for pier rights could also be reserved,
Should the Council agree.in this recommendation, I suggest we
draft a formal policy to this effect for the Council PQlir-y Manual.
G. M. DAWES
G:-,!D/db
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
LOS ANGELES DISTRICT. CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P. 0. BOX 2711
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90053
IN REPLY REFER TO
SPLCO-O
- Mr. G. M. Dawes
Harbor and Tidelands Administrator
City of Newport Beach
3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, California 92660
Dear Mr. Dawes:
23.April 1970
I-fAABOR- PeOQ,%I-r
zoo-ovep
Reference is made to our Notice No. 4, dated 17 February 1970,
regarding an application by the Irvine Coirpany for permission to
excavate and construct bulkheads to form a marina, opening into
Newport Bay.
No adverse comments or objections to the proposed work were received
from any interested Federal or State agency in response to our
notice.
To complete our records and enable us to take final action on the
application of the Irvine Company, it is requested that the position
of the City of Newport Beach, regarding the proposed work, be furnished
this office. Receipt of the views of the City by 5 May 1970 would
be appreciated.
Sincerely yfoprs,
C5
. J�11
District Engineer
J
ORANGE C D.
HARBOR COMMISSION
"W"I
C. C. (i CK) WOOLLEY,_CHA:RMAN
W. ALLEN GRUBB, VICE CHA RMAN
FRANK F. MEAD
DEAN E - SHULL ' JR.
ROBERT K. HENSON
April 20, 1970
Mr. Harvey L. Hurlburt, City Manager
City of Newport Beach
City Hall, 3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, California 92660
Dear Mr. Hurlburt:
NOR DISTRICT
KENNETH SAMPSON
DIRECTOR - HARBORS, BEACHES & PARKS
1901 BAYSIDE DRIVE
NEWPORT BEA C H. CALIF. 9 2662
DANA. PONT
?.4,2ARIOR
.Z TELEPHONE (714) 834-3800
At the regular scheduled meeting of the Joint Harbor Committee on April 14,
1970, the Harbor Permit for Promontory Point was approved, in principle,
subject to the following conditions:
1. The applicant must receive approval from the Corps of Engineers.
2. The applicant must receive approval from the City of Newport Beach.
3. The applicant must take precautions against creating excess turbid-
ity, as outlined in State Resources letter of March 25, 1970.
Later that day at its regular meeting, the Harbor Commission ratified the
above. However, the Commissioners had some additional thoughts which they
wanted to convey to you. First, it was felt that the ]I+ acres to be dredged
should be dedicated to a public agency.
Second, the Commissioners felt that if maintenance dredging of the area is
necessitated because of storm damage or silting from the adjacent, undeveloped
uplands, that the cost for such dredging should be the responsibility of the
developer. Thiswas a concern of the District staff in a memo to the Com-
mittee members.
The third concern was that, although engineers for the developer indicated
that the project will have no erosion effect on Balboa Island, some level of
responsibility should be placed on the developer in the event adverse condi-
tions might prevail.
The Harbor Commission is hopeful that you might place a high degree of cre-
dence on its observations in your negotiations on the Promontory Point project.
Yours very truly,
K. C. KLINGER, C14-ief
Operations Division, Harbors, Beaches & Parks
Asst. Secretary to the Harbor Commission
KCK:mph
071 -
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
April 13, 1970
TO: JOINT HARBOR COMMITTEE 10
FROM: Harbor & Tidelands Administrator
SUBJECT: HARBOR PERMIT No. 200-000
vi %
APPLICATION TO: Dredge approximately an 11 acre lagoo!n, co Wnected
to the Harbor with a 100 foot channel just east of Balboa Yacht
Basin, for the purpose of developing an additional waterfront
community. See attached drawing.
APPLICANT: The Irvine Company
4� "Zkon subject to the following
RECOMMENDATION: Approve t )eA applica
conditions:
1. Approval of the Corps of Engineers.
2. Approval by the City of Newport Beach.
3. That the applicant observe precautions against
creating excess turbidity as outlined in the
State Resources Agency's letter of 25 March., 1970.
DISCUSSION:
A. This application was.first discussed in the Joint
Harbor Committee meeting on 10 February, 1970. Since then the
following events have occurred:
1) The Corps of Engineers has reviewed the applica-
tion and has verbally advised that they have no
objections from the State Resources Agency or the
Department of Interior and that their engineering
studies confirm that there should be sufficient
tidal flow to permit a high water quality and that
their studies indicate there should be no adverse
effect on nearby beaches. The Corps has advised
it will confirm this in writing to the City in the
near future and that the Corps will not issue a
permit until they have learned the City's position.
2) The Harbor District Staff has reviewed engineering
calculations and will submit a verbal report.
3) The Public Works Department of the City of Newport
Beach has reviewed the engineering calculations
and has no engineering objection's to the project.
Harbor Permit #200-000
4/13/70
Pg. 2
B. It is understood that there are still a number of
actions to be taken by the City of Newport Beach in regard to the
overall project. These actions will include considering of tract
maps and a determination at that time as to whether or not the City
desires the waterways to be dedicated, and a responsibility for
t depths
maintenance of the Basin projec zii4i6A�
. AWES
GMD/db
Attachment
�c 4'
#
P
ME
1, a A
LEAtg
0.4
ELI SITE &PA
CE4
DEL MAR
14 ES
JETTI
V I C I N IT Y S KET C 14 EAST
IAEWF%tT bAY , C&LIFO&O I.A sit JfTTy
6RAPHIC. SCALE -MILE
NOTE : SOUNDINbS ARE UPIESSED IN FEET AND DENOTE DEITHS
16ELOW ME AN r LOVEK LOW WATEK. MA%IMUM R&UGE OF TIDE
APPKQ%. 10 FT. 14AL160K LINES Atli ESTAWSHED IN TKIS SECTION
OF HEVIOUT j� Jy.
100
allf- LOLKNEAD
'Vol 10
SEC 109 A_A
174
i 41,
)_4
14
'64
—qk EXIST. 6AYSIPE DR.
S ECTI 0 N P3_ 6
W T. S_
4
F41
41t
41,
94
17f"(4164
4 lrIfiflTrn llytinc fit 1-
KAW 6EIN- FKUST F, ASSOL
13 6 X 0 C 41 E S T W,;S T K E E T
Co STA M F C, A F0QN TA
ROPOSED D & E D 601 G
AND MKH EAD IN 6
K 0 M 0 9 T 0 K Y b A Y,
NEWPORT 16EACH, CALIFORNIh
PLICATION bY: I iLb. All
THE WINE COMPANY
SSO NEWORT (ENTER Dit.
V:WI)t7T fJ:),fVi. ULIP
N
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: Harbor & Tidelands Administrator
SUBJECT: HARBOR PERMIT NO. 200-000
APPLICATION TO:
pffi��
01. -1 -
August 10, 1970
ITEM NO. H-1
Dredge and bulkhead approximately an 11 acre lagoon, connected
to the harbor with a 100 foot channel just east of Balboa Yacht Basin,
for the purpose of developing an additional waterfront community. See
attached drawing.
APPLICANT:
The Irvine Company
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve the application subject to the following conditions:
1. Approval of the Corps of Engineers. (Corps of Engineers Permit
was issued on 20 May, 1970)
2. Approval of the Joint Harbor Committee. (Approved on 14 April,
1970.)
3. That the applicant observe precautions against creating excess
turbidity as outlined in the State Resources Agency's letter
of 25 March, 1970.
4. That the waterway, up to but not including the bulkhead, be
dedicated to the City of Newport Beach.
5. That the bulkhead design be approved by the Public Works
Director.
6. That there be no overhead wires or lines over the entrance
channel and that any underground utilities in the water area
have a minimum of five feet of soil cover.
7. That the Harbor and Tidelands Administrator and the Santa
Ana River Basin Regional Water Quality Control Board be
notified 48 hours in advance of opening the pro�2?sed 4annel
to the main harbor.
-kf�
Mayor and City Council
8/10/70
Pg. 2
DISCUSSION:
A. The granting of a harbor permit is the final action required
to initiate the dredging and construction phase of the Promontory Bay
project.
B. All other necessary permits or approvals have been obtained
from the Corps of Engineers and the Joint Harbor Committee. The Corps
of Engineers, in granting a permit, coordinated with the State Resources
Agency which in turn coordinated with the following State departments
and agencies:
Department of Navigation & Ocean Development
Department of Parks and Recreation
State Water Resources Control Board
Department of Fish and Game
Department of Public Health
Department of Conservation
Division of Highways
State Lands Division
C. In ratifying the approval of the Joint Harbor Committee,
the Orange County Harbor Commission recommended:
1. That the water area be dedicated to a public agency.
Dedication Of the w&ter'area to the City is a recommended
condition to the application.
2. That The Irvine Company be responsible for any maintenance
dredging that might be required because of siltation from
the adjacent, undeveloped uplands. This recommendation
has not been included in the conditions because the
Porter -Cologne Water Quality Control Act places the burden
for sediment control on builders and developers.
3. That some level of responsibility should be placed on
the developer in the event the proposed bay causes beach
erosion on Balboa Island. This recommendation has not
been included in the conditions because engineering
studies! reviewed by the Corps of Engineers and the
City Public Works Department, indicate that erosion is
improbable. The dedication of the waterway to the public
also alters the situation.
D. 'In approving the tentative tract 8 July, 1970, the
City Council directed that the water area be e icate to the City.
Z)
GMD/db
Attachment
Planning Commisbion Meeting Feb. 19, 1970
Ite rrps No . 18 , .19 & 20
February 13, 1970
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
Planning Commission
Planning Department
Master Plan Amendment,No. 25 (Item 18)
Proposal to amend Master Street and Highway Plan
by realigning Bayside:Dri-Ve between East Coast
Highway and Jamboree Road (Marine Avenue) and also
to close a section of existing Bayside Drive west-
erly of Jamboree Road (Marine Avenue).
Use Permit Application,No.___1_466 (Item 1gy r
Request to permit development of a residential
area of single family'dwelling units, with support-
ing commercial and.recreational facilities, to in-
clude a yacht basin and marina.
Tentative Map Tract No. 3867 .(Item 20)
Request to permit subdivision of 24.Ot acres into
6-2. re.sident.ial lo.ts., and Lot "A" reserved for
waterway purposes, Lot "'B"'reserved for planted
area, Lot "C" reserved for common waterway access
area, Lot 'T" reserved for parking and marina
facility, Lot "E" reserve.d for park site and
Lot 63reserved for commercial site.
LOCATION: Portion of-BI-ock-94 of Irvine's Subdivision located
between Pacific Coast Hi:ghway and Bayside Drive, west
of Jamboree Road (proposed Promontory Bay).7
ZONE: Unclassified, C-N�-;H and R-3
APPLICANT: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach
OWNER: Same as applicant
Background
Use Permit No. 1466 was continued from the meeting of January 15, 1970
at the request of staff and the Irvine Company. Subsequently the Pla-n-
ning Commission continued Master Plan Amendment No. 25, Use Permit No.
1466, and Tentative Map Tract No. 3867 at the.meeting of February 5,.
1970.
The staff report previously prepared for the meeting of February 5,
1970 is still pertinent.and should be reviewed concurrently.With this
report.
TO: Planning Commission - 2.
Master Plan Amendment No, 25
This application requests approval to realign Bayside Drive
between -East Coast Highway and Jamboree Road,,and to close a
section of existing Bayside Drive westerly of Jamboree Road.
Approval of this application would require that the information
presented show to the satisfaction of the Planning Commission
that the amendment to the Master Street and Highway Plan as con-
templated would not have a detrimental effect on adjacent pro-
perties, the neighborhood, or the community.
The proposed amendment could have the following benefits:
1. The new alignment would be more direct than
the existing alignment.
2. An existing sharp curve would be eliminated.
3. Direct access to the arterial street would be
eliminated from approximately 12 homes having
garages so located as to requi,re backing onto
the street.
4. An existing poor intersection connecting Harbor
Island Road to the arterial street would be
greatly improved.
5. The easterly entrance to Beacon Bay could be
opened and made usable.
6. Access to any future development north of the
proposed realignment could be taken directly
from Bayside Drive.
The proposed.amendment could rai-se the following questions:
1. The operators of businesses located on the Balboa
Yacht Basin property (land leased from City of
Newport Beach) believe they could be adversely
affected by the lower traffic volumes on existing
Bayside Drive.
2. The proposed realignment would necessitate re-
designing a portion of the Bayside Shopping Center
parking lot.
3. A portion of the apartments along the south side of
Bayside Drive adjacent to the Shark Island Yacht
Club would not have direct access to the proposed
realigned Bayside Drive.
It is the opinion of staff that Bayside Drive would more efficiently
TO: Planning Commission - 3..
serve the community in the capacity of a secondary highway in the
proposed realigned location. Staff, therefore, recommends ap-
proval of this application subject to the following conditions:
1. That the Bayside Shopping Center parking lot be
redesigned to the satisfaction of the Planning
Director, and constructed concurrently with con-
struction of realigned Bayside Drive.
2. That access
Yacht Club
restored to
Director.
requirements to
and the adjacent
the satisfaction
,Use Permit Application No. 1466
the Shark Island
apartments be
of the Planning
This application requests approval of the general land use concept
of parcels 1, 2, 3, 4 and 9 as shown on the proposed land use plan
submitted by the Irvine Company. Approval of this application
would require that the proposed use of these parcels would be com-
patible with and not detrimental to the ordinary maintenance, devel-
opment and redevelopment of the surrounding area as determined by
the Planning Commission.
It is the opinion of Staff that the lagoon and surrounding single
family residential development would be compatible with the gen-
eral character of the surrounding area and the Newport Tomorrow
Goals Report which stresses a harbor related environment.
It is also the feeling of Staff that commercial uses of Parcels
#2, 3 and 4 could be compatible with the surrounding land uses.
However, more detailed information regarding these parcels would
be desirable, and they are not subject to further review if un-
conditionally approved under this use pe . rmit.
It is the opinion of Staff that the proposed Promontory Bay Devel-
opment concept would be an asset to the community over alternative
traditional developments. Staff, therefore, recommends approval
of Use Permit No. 1466 subject to the following conditions:.
1, That approval of Use Permit No. 1466 be subject
to satisfactory demonstration of the engineering
feasibility of the proposed lagoon design and
issuance of a harbor permit. (See report to
Joint Harbor Committee from City of Newport Beach
Harbor and Tidelands Administrator attached.)
2. That an amendment to the Master Street and Highway
Plan is approved.
TO: Planning Commission - 4.
3. That Parcel No. 4 be approved in principal only,
and be subject to a separate use permit.
4. That final plans for the relocation of the Shark
Island Yacht Club on Parcel No. 3 be subject to
approval of the Planning Director.
5. That Parcel No.
be approved in
a separate use
2 (parking and
principal only,
permit.
Tentative Map Tract No. 3867
marina facility)
and be subject to
This application requests approval of the Tentative Tract Map for
Lots I through 63 and Lots "A" through "E" as shown on the tenta-
tive map which coincides with Parcels 1, 2, 4 and 9 as shown on
the Land Use Plan for Use Permit No. 1466.
A detailed description of the development characteristics was in-
cluded in the Staff report of February 5, 1970, and will not be
repeated in this report. However, there are other important
matters yet to be resolved.
Section 19.20.050 of the Municipal Code requires - "when the front
of any lots abuts any major, primary or secondary stree,t or high-
way; the subdivider shall be required to dedicate and improve a
service road to provide ingress or egress to and from such lots
The Irvine Company has asked a waiver of this requirement
stating the following reasons:
1. Traffic studies presented by consultants for the
Irvine Company indicate a potential reduction in
average daily traffic on Bayside Drive to 6,500
vehicles from the present flow of 13,000 to 16,000
vehicles. This is based on anticipated diversion
of traffic following completion of the Pacific
Coast Freeway.
2. The Irvine Company proposes driveways along
realigned Bayside Drive with adequate turn-
around areas provided so that vehicles need not
back into the street.
3. The Irvine Company states that their studies
indicate that a service road will not provide
a more desirable environment or enhance the
marketability of the lots in this proposed
development.
4. Reduction of existing curb cuts now taking access
onto Bayside Drive from 18 to 12 or 17 to 11.
TO: Planning Commission - 5.
The Planning Department believes a waiver of the service road
requirement should be denied for the following reasons:
1. The Staff agrees that there could be a diversion
of traffic when the freeway is completed and
that Bayside Drive could function with driveway
accesses. However, Bayside Drive is classified
as a secondary highway with a 45 m.p.h. speed
limit. Even if present traffic volumes should
be reduced, at these speeds it would not be
desirable to front single family residences on
Bayside Drive. Furthermore, due to minimum lot
area and maximum building coverage, driveways
fronting on this street will be one of the main
areas for children to play.
2. Due to minimum front yard setbacks and traffic
volumes, environmental qualities are jeopardized
by fumes and noise levels. A frontage road would
provide additional separation.
3. It will be a minimum of eight years until the
freeway will be opened for traffic.
4. In the location of the previously approved
turnaround type drives, Bayside Drive is not
serving in the capacity of a secondary highway.
With a parking lane to Bayside Drive which
could possibly limit sight distances and the
increased speed limit, the turnaround type
driveway is less desirable in this location.
Environmental values represent the essentially intangible, un-
quantifiable essence of a community's character and meaning.
The Planning Department believes that these values should not
be compromised.
Staff has previously noted the minimum setbacks as shown on the
tentative map are within the minimum requirements of�applicable
ordinances. However, front yard setback lines may be determined
by the Planning Commission in accordance with Section 19.20.110 (c)
of the Municipal Code. Staff believes that strict conformance to
minimum provisions of the ordinance could produce a very static
and sterile environment, both from land and water.. Staff suggests
that the Irvine Company file a setback plan as a part of this
application allowing for variation of front and rear setback lines.
Staff recommends approval of Tentative Map Tract No-. 3867 subj'ect
to the following conditions:
1. That final approval be subject to the approval
of Use Permit 1466 and the conditions thereto.
TO: Planning Commission - 6.
2. That final approval of the subdivision be subject
to approval of an appropriate revision to the
Master Plan of Streets and Highways. (Public
hearings required.)
3. That final approval of the subdivision be subject
to the abandonment of certain existing public
rights-of-way as contemplated and to satisfactory
arrangements being made for dedication and im-
provement of the new rights-of-way required.
(Public hearing required.)
4. That final approval of the subdivision be subject
to satisfactory arrangements being made to re-
locate existing facilities of the Orange County
Sanitation District and of other affected utilities.
5. That Section 19.20.050 of the Municipal Code re-
quiring a service road not be waived, and that
the cross section for realigned Bayside Drive
shall be in accordance with Alternate "C" of
the attached drawings.
6. That access to Lots 27 through 34, 42 through 44
(and unless a frontage road is provided - all
parcels along realigned Bayside Drive), be pro-
vided by means of drives located on common lot
lines, each drive serving two parcels; and that
adequate turnaround areas be provided so that
vehicles need not back into the street. Cross
easements or non -barrier agreements satisfactory
to the City Attorney shall be provided so as to
guarantee perpetuation of the access arrangement.
7. That unless a frontage road is provided, the
right-of-way width of realigned Bayside Drive
be at least 86 feet and the curb -to -curb width
be at least 70 feet. This cross section will
provide for 4 travel lanes, 2 eight foot wide
parkways, a twelve foot wide median left turning
lane and an eight foot wide parking lane on the
southerly side. (Alternate "B" on the attached
drawings.)
8. That the new cul-de-sac be located entirely on
the developer's land.
9. That the design of the new intersections of re-
aligned Bayside Drive with existing Bayside
Drive be subject to review and approval by the
City.
TO:
Planning Commission - 7.
10. That all improvements be constructed as required
by ordinance and the Public Works Department.
11. That the boundary of the final tract may be
checked by the County Surveyor before being sub-
mitted to the City for approval.
12. That all grading be in accordance with grading
plans and reports approved by the Public Works
Director and a qualified Soils Engineer. Upon
completion of the grading the Civil Engineer
and the Soils Engineer shall certify that the
grading has been completed in accordance with
the plans, the soils report and the grading
ordinance. Reproducible copies of the plans on
standard size sheets shall be furnished to the
Public Works Department.
13. That the connecting street southeasterly of
Lot "B" be 52 feet in width between exterior
curbs in order to provide for a twenty foot
entering roadway, an eight foot median and a
twenty-four foot exiting roadway.
14. That all driveways be a minimum of twenty feet
in length from the property line to ensure no.
parking will be in the public right-of-way.
15. The portion of Lot "E" not included in the
public right-of-way, resulting from the closing
of Bayside Drive, be dedicated to the City, and
the existing right-of-way of Bayside Drive west
of the proposed waterway be retained under public
control.
16. A length of tangent
reversing curves at
ment adjacent to the
Center.
be provided between the two
the east end of the develop -
existing Bayside Shopping
17. Parkway trees be installed on all public rights -
of -ways in accordance with Parks, Beaches and,
Recreation Department specifications.
18. Appropriate landscaping be installed on all
slopes and vacant s,paces resulting from this
development.
19. A setback plan allowing for a variation of
front and rear setback lines be submitted to
the Planning Director for approval.
TO: Planning Commission - 8.
20. That there be no City financial obligations
connected with construction of realigned
Bayside Drive.
21. That realigned Bayside Drive be constructed to
its full width in connection with the develop-
ment of Tract 3867.
=1\
G
RODNEY L. GUNN
Assistant Planner
RLG/kk
Attachments: Report to Joint Harbor Committee
from Harbor Administrator
Typical Cross Sections
Land Use Plan
lar;,
February
01
4
TO: Joint.Harbok Committee
FROM: City Harbor and Tidelands Administrator,
SUBJECTs Harbor Application 200-OOG
APPLICATION TO: Dredge and bulkhead an: _11 'acre 1agoon ,.,,connected
to the Harbor with:a'100 foot channel -just -east of Balboa Yacht -Basin
0
f r the purpose of developing an additional,-waterfr'ont comminity Selo.
attached drawing.'
APPLICANT -s The -Irvine Company,
S ITUATIOMi
Ae This application is part of a series of actions required;`,�-
for the full development,of the -additional community. These actions—
e
rrently b ing coordinated by the City Planning Departmentp include
�3
"A Master Plan Afiiendmentt�for.ch ling of. the"�
Street and Highway Flanii�--
2-: A Use Permit..
-,A Tentative Tract Map.
4
4 A study to determine the effect this develo ent
PM
would -have on the value of City property adjacent
to*Bayside Drive,
A separate study by.the City considering the*pros,-
and cons -of dedicating privately created waterways.
6. The basic Harbor Permit plus incremental additional
requests as the proposal develops. -
B. The'present request is -for dredging and'bulkheading onl . y,,
t further applica i
bu t"ons will have to be made for the detailed bulkheading-!'
plan and for proposed dock and slip facilities. Requests for private
residential slips and floats would be the responsibility of individual,,,',
waterfront residents in accordance with an,overall plan to be propose
b the:..Ir'ine Company.
y v
C. A Corps of Engineers permit is necessary And has been
lied for. The -Cor s ha
app p s already advised me that a detailed review.
will be given 'the request to include:
1. Tidal -exchange to determine possibl 8 pollution. effects':,.V
20 Ebb'tide currents to determine if'there are advbrse.-_',1'.�:.'1.l,
erosion ar,.,ohoaling.�offecto,on,.,the.-.bankt�,'of-the.existLng�chanft6'l'.,!.�
1 _W1.
Harbor Application 2 -000,
2/10/70
2
The Corps has further stated that it does not 'appear.
desirable to extend harbor lines into the proposed basin.
A). The Directors of the Harbor District have expressed
imilar.interests.in watek quality, water circulation'and erosion
of the banks of the existing channel. He further feel� that consi-`..',.
d ration.should be
e given to:
-16 -Responsibility for maintenance of basin project
depths.
2. Establishment of pier permit areas for individual
lots.
3.. Dedication of water areas to a blic a ency for
PU .9
enforcement.
E. Any approval of the Harbor Application at -this -time
e
would. have to be,,.in essence, an approval in concept and would hav
'to'be� -sub ect�to:
Approval of,the Corp.s of Engineers,
2 A proval of the City of New
P port Bqachl, which would'
mply approval of other concurrent actions by. -the'.
City.
J
�Other conditions that could be cdnsidered!..&te's,�
J. :Dedication of the waterway'
%tj,
�4
maintenance Responsibilitieo'.-"�","fl.'-"',"-'
:7
3
Public tight of e
4-d
4 parametersib'.:
A." Ir
pe
10
F�
-.:w%
L J
t
t
.. . ....... .
IV
t" jL
2.
y� v:;,
J�
:5 '66 . , 0 . '! ,
p
... .. .. . ......
Ao
"! �
It.
T
IN
q.
L1
Lf
t% A.,
a
A
unittee IA
Tidelands Administrator
Lon 200-000.
J1,Cr AJ JL %�,MX.LVLA ureage ana Duxjmeaa arr ju acre-lagoonl,connecte d
to the Ha`r_Fo_rwith�a*l00 foot channel'.Just-east at Balboa Yacht,Basin
for the purpose of developing an ad itio al-waterfiont c6mmItinity See'
d n
aw
:attached dr ing.'
TO:
Joint Harbor Cc
FROM;
City Harbor and
SUBJECT:
Harbor Applicat
for the full development -of the -additional community, These actions
currently�.being coordinated by the City Plannipg Department include
A Master Plan Amendmentt,for-ch"gin -of, the
g
unittee IA
Tidelands Administrator
Lon 200-000.
J1,Cr AJ JL %�,MX.LVLA ureage ana Duxjmeaa arr ju acre-lagoonl,connecte d
to the Ha`r_Fo_rwith�a*l00 foot channel'.Just-east at Balboa Yacht,Basin
for the purpose of developing an ad itio al-waterfiont c6mmItinity See'
d n
aw
:attached dr ing.'
APPLICANT: The,Irvine Company,
:'SITU JONI
AT
A. This application is part of a series of actions required
for the full development -of the -additional community, These actions
currently�.being coordinated by the City Plannipg Department include
A Master Plan Amendmentt,for-ch"gin -of, the
g
y-
Str eet and Highway Pllani'
.:!:: 2 A Use Permit.
3. ,,": A Tentative Tra'ct Map.
'A
study to determine the effect this development
would -have on the value of City property aajacent.
t o'Bayside Drive.
5 A separate study by the City considering-the7pro s
and cons of d6dicating privately created waterways.
6. The basic -Harbor Permit plus incremental additional
requests as the proposal develops.
B. The present request is -for dredging and bulkheading onl
A, but further applications will have to be made' for the detailed bulkheadipcjk,
p an and for proposed dock and slip facilities. Requests for private
N residential slips and floats would be the responsibility of individual..':.'��--.f
waterfront residents in accordance with an overall plan to be proposed
b the:,.Irvine
y Company.
0
C. A Corps of Engineers permit is necessary and has been
f
applied Vor. The -Corps -has already advised me that a detailed review
e
..,-..will b given "the request to include:
1. Tidal -exchange to determine possible pollution effects,"
j
2. Ebb tide currents to determine'if there are adverse-:�%._
erosion, or, shoaling ef feats ..on - the., banks'.. of the. existing chi ninelo'
Harbor Application 2,, -000
2/1.0/70
2
The Corps has further stated that it does not Appear.
desirable to extend harbor lines into the proposed basin.
1 4,
4), The Directors of the Harbor District have expressed
9 1 Uar interests in watek quality, water circulation and erosion
mi
of the banks of the existing channel. He further feels that consi-I.;...,
deration-should be given ti
o:
Responsibility for maintenance of basin project
depths..
2. Establishment of pier permit areas for individual
lots.
3.., Dedichtion of water areas to a public a ency-for
.9
enforcement.
Application at this -time
E. Any approval of the Harbor
would have to be.p in essence, an approval in concept and would have
-'be:subject:tos
1 Approval of the Corp.s of Engineers,
''.--2 Approval of the City of New
port Bqachp which would
imply,appro al of other concurrent actions by the'
v
City.
j
other conditions that could be colasidered;-.'ar4i's
Dedication of the waterw
ay's,
2 .'Maintenance, Responsibilities%,�..
q Y W o;
3 Public tight of entry
g.-paramete a
En iheerin r
9
4 i I -lei
-areas",
Pier'.permit'
0. AA,
K "vDAft19-
r, t,q
J,
Vq
lo
t
it
F J,
f
A"I
If:
j
jif i
V�:
Z
L---]
0 0 4, 0, 0 0 0 9 Is
0 0 0, 0 0 0
0 0 4, 0,
0 IN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, 0 0 19 0 0 9 0
0 0 0, * 4, a 0 0 0, 0 9 0 4, 9 0 0 0 4, 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 * 9 0 0,
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 w 0 * 0 0 0 0 0, 0 0, 0, 0 0, 4, 0, 0 0, 0 0 9 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 * Is 0 0 0 0 0 * 0, 4, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 * * 0
41 0, & 0 0 0 40 0 01 * 0 0 0 0 41 0, 0 41 Is 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0,
0 Is Is 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 9 0 01 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0, 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 0 0, 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0 Is 0 0 0
0 0 0 0, 0 9 0 0 0 40 0, 0 0 * 01 0 * 0 0 41 G, 0 0, 01 * 9 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, 0, 0 0
0, 0 9 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 4, 0 0 0, 9 0 0 Is 0, 0 0 0 0 0 s, 0 0 0 0 0, q 0 q 0 9 0,
0 0 0 0 0 0, 0 01 9 0 0, 0 * 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0, 0 9 0 0, * 0, 0 9 0 0 9 *
0 0 0 0 0 4, 0 0 0 0 01 9 0 0, 0 * 0 0, 0 * 0 9 0 9 01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0, 0 0 * 0 0 0 0 & Is 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 40 0, 0
* 0 0 0 0 0 * 0 0, 9 0, 0 * 0 0 0 * 0 0 0, 4, 0, 0 0, 0 0 0, 0 * * 0 9 0 0 f, 0 9 9 0 0 4, 0 9 9 0 0, 0
Is 9 0 0 0, 0 4, 0 0 Is Is 9 0 0 0 0 0 41 0 0 0 0, 0 9 0 0 0 0 9 0 9 0 0 0, 0, 0, 0
Is 0 * 0
109
0 0, 0 0 0, 0 4, 0 0 0 9�,* 0 0 0, 0 4, 0
9 0 ***-* 41 0 0, 0, 0 0 0 0 4, 0, 0 9
0 a * 0 0 0 G, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, 9 0 0 9 0 41, 4, 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0 9 4,
0 0 0 0 0 Is Is 0 0, * * 0, * 0 0 0 0 0 0 9
0, 0 0 9 0, 0 & 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 4, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 41 0, 4 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 4, 9 Is 0 9 0 0, 0, 0 0 0 0 0,
0 * Is 0 0 0 0 & 0 0 Is 0 0 4, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 IN a 0 0, 41, 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0 0 * 0, 111 0 0 9 0
0 0 CO
0 0 0 9 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 a 0 0 0 0 9 9 0 0 0 0 e 0 0 9 0 Is 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0, 0, 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0 01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 9 0 * 0 9 9 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0, 9 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0, 0, 0, * 9 0, 0 0 0 * 9 0 0
9 0 0 0 0 0 0, 0 41, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 4, 0 9 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 9 9 9 0 0 0 Is 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0 9 * 9 0 0 0 0 * 0 0 * 0 0 0 0 9 0 0, 0 4, 0 0 0 0 0 0, 0 0, 0, 0 0, 0 0, * 0 0 .0 0
0 0 Q1 41 0 0 0 Q, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 * 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, 9 0 0 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4, 0, 0 9 0 IN 4, * 0 0, 0 0 9
0 0 0 0 Q, 0 0 0 Is 9 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0, 0, 0 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, 0 0 4, & 0 0 9 0
Is 0 0 9 41 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, 40 0 0 41 0 0, 0, 0 0 41 0 0 0, 9 0 4, 0, 0 0 0 *0
0 0 0 *MA : " 0, 0
0 0, # 0, 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 * 0 0 0 Is 0 0 9 e 0 0 0 0 0 0, 01 0 0 0 Q,
Is 0 40 01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0 * * 0, Is * 0, 0 01 0 0 0 0 * 0 0 0 9 0 10. 0 0 4, *�* 0
Is 0, 0 0, 0 0, 4, 0 0, 0 0, * 0, 0 0 9 0 0 0 * 0 0 0 * 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 * 0 0 0 9 0 0 IS 0 9 0 0, 0 0 0, a 0 0 * 0, Is 0 0, 0 4, 0 0 0 41 4, 0, 0 Is 0 0 0 0 0 0, * 0, 0 4, a 0 4, 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 Is 41 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0, 9 0 Is 9 9
.0 0, 0 0 0 v 0 0 0 0, Is 0, 0 0 0 0 9 0, 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0, s, 0 Is 0 0 0 0 s, Is s, Is s, Is
0 0 0 411 0, 0, Is * 0 41 0 9 0, 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0 Is 0 0 0 0 0 0 41, 0 0 0
0 0 0 0, Q, 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 IN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 41 IN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0, 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, NJ N
0 0 0 0 1* Is 0 0, 0 * s, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Is 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 k 0 0 *00 0 **so* `0 Q, 0 0 0 0 0, 0, 0, 0*0 0 41, Isso * *00 0, 0 * 0*0 0 0 IS *00*00000*0 0 0*0 0 0 0 0 0 0 jp 0 0 0 4, 0 0 0 4, 0 0 0 IS 0 0 4, 0 0 4, 0 * 0 0 0, 41, * 0 0 0 0 0 0 Is 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, * 0 9 0, 41, 0, 0 Q, 0
Is 0 0 0 Is *00 0 000*0 0 *0000 0 000 0 *0000 9 0 9 9 0 0 0 0 00000, 0 0 0
004106, s, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1004000 0 * Is 0 0, * 0 Is . Is . . 0 0 Is 0, 0 0 0 '01 0 0 0 * 0 0, 0 Is 0
Is, It 0 0, 0 & 0 * 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, 0 0 & 0, 0 * 0 0 0 0, 0 * 0 0 0 4, 0 9 0 0 0 40 * 9 0 0, 0 0 0 so* 0 *** 0, 4, . . & 0 0 0 0 0, 9 0 01, 41 0 4, 4, 0, 0 0 0 0 0 &
0 0 9 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 s, 0 Is w 0 0 so* 0 Sk * 0 * 0 0 41, 0 0 0 0 0 9 009 0 0 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 9 0 111 0, * 0 0 4, 0 009 Is 0 0 4, 0 0, 4, 0 0 *00 0 0 0 0*0 0, 0 *so 0, 0000000 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0, 0 Is 0 0 0 e 0 0*0 0 0 4, 0, 0, 0 0, 0 0 0 0 9 0 0, O's
0006*49*0 Is 0 0 0 * 0 41 0 0 9 000 4, 0 0 Is 41, 0 * 0 9 & 009 0 0 0 0 0, 0 Is 0*0 0 000*0 111 0*0 0 0,
41 0 Q, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 41, 0 0 0 0, 0 * 0 0 0 0, * * 0, 0 0, 0, 9 0 0 4,
f r 0 9 0, 0 0 Is 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, s, 9 s, Is 0 0 01 0 0, 0 0 4, 0 '0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0, 0, 0 #0
Is 0 0 Is 4, . . . . Is s, . 0, . . . Is Is 0 . . Is . Is Is 4,
0 0 0 s, 0 s, Iv 0
Is 0, 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Is 0 41 0 0 9 0 01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 41 0, 0, 0 0 0 0 0, 0 0, 0, w 0 0, 0 0 * 0, 0 0 0 * * w 0 0
0 0 9 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0, 0 0, 90 0 Is 0, Q, 01 0 09 0 *0 9 4, 41 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 00, 0 * 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0, 0
0 Sk 0 Is 0 Is 0 IN 0 0 9 0 0 0 0, 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0, 41 0 0, *900
Is 9 9 0 40 0 0 0 0 0 41 0,
0:90AL 0*0* 0 *0 0009*0*,0000 0 0 0 Is 0 's Is 0, 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0, 0 0.0 0, 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, * 0 0 & 0 0 0 0 0 0 * 0 0, 0 9 0 0 0, 0 0 0 IN Is 0 0 0 0 .0 9 0
Is 41, * 0 * 0 # 0 & * 0 Is 0 & 0 0 0 # 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, 0 40 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Is 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0 0 's 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0, 0 0 0 0 40 0, 4, 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 9 0 * 0 9 9 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0, 9 0, 0 0
0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 41 00 0
0 0 9 Is 0 0 0, 0 Is Is 0 0 q 0 0 0 Is, s, 0 0 0 Is 9 0 0 Is 0 0 0 0 q
0 0 0 0 01 0 0 Is 0 0 41 0 0 0 9 0, 0 0
41 0 0 0, 0 0 Is 0 Is 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ap 0 0 0 Is Is 0 0 0 Is 0 0, 0 Is 0 0 0 0 0 0
41 0 0 0, 0 9 * & 0 9 * 0 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 4, * 0 0 9 4, 0 * 0 0, 0 0 0, 0 0 * e * 0 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0 0, & * 0 010 0 0
9 G, 0 0 0 9 41, 0 0 9 0 0 9 Is 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0, 0, 0, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 4, 0, 0 0 0 41 0, 0 0 0 * 0, 0, 0 01 0 0 * 0 0 * 0 0, 0 0, 0 0 0 0, 0, 0 0 0 0
Is 0 0 0 9 9 Is 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 Is 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Is 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 Is 0 a 0 0, 0 0 9
0 9 0 0 0 0 0 Is 0 0, 0, 0 0, 41 0 0, 0 0 Is 41, 0 0 0 0, 0 0, 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0 9 41, 0 * 0 9 * * 9 0 4, * 9 0 0 * 0 0 0 0 & 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q, 0 0 9 0, 0 0 0, 0 0, 0, 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0, 0 9 0 0, 0, 0 0 0, 0 * * 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 Q, 0 0 9 01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, 0 4, 0 0 Ok 0 0 0, 0 0 0,
0 0 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 41, 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q, 9 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0, 41, 0, 9 0 0 0 0 4, 0 & 0, 0 Is & 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 s, & 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, q q 0 0 Is 9, 0 0 0 0 0 0, lip
IS 41 0 0 0 9 0 0 Is * 0 Q, 0, 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0, 0 0, 9 * 0 0 0 0 0 * 0 Is 0 0 0 0 0 * * 0 Q, 0 0 0 0 0 0
41 0 0 0, 0 9 0 a 0 0 Is Is 0 01 0 0 0 0, 0 9 0 4, 0 0 0, 0 000"Ie"o, 0, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Is 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 , 0
Is 0 0 0 0 0 40 9 0 q 0 0 41 Is 41, q 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Is
0 0 4, 0 41 0 Is 0 0 0 0 Is 0 0 Is 0, 0 41, 41, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, 0, 0 0 0 0 0 Is 0 0 & 4, 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 Is 0 0 0 * 0 0
0 41 0 0 9 0 0 0 40 0, 0 0 0 0 0, Is 9 .%s`.*.*.*.s`.00*. 0 0
Is 0 9 0 0 0 4, 9 0 0 0 IS 0 Is 0 0 0 0 0, Is 0 0 0 4, & 0 41, 0 9 w 0 0 9 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0 0, 0, 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sk 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0 0, 9 a 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 * 0 * 0 40 0 0 0, 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0 9 0
Is 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 q 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0 0 Is 0 0 0 0 0 0 Is 0 0 * 0 0 41 4, 0, 0 0 0 0 0 9 0, 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0, 0, Is 0 0 0 9.0 0 9
01 0 0 0 0 Is 0 41 0 0 0 9 0 0, Is 0 0 0 4, 0 0 0 0, 0 0, 0 G, 0, Is # 0 0, 0 0 0 Sk 0 0, * 0 0 01 0 0 0 0 Q, 0 0, 0, 0 . 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, 0 0 9 0 0 4, 0 0 0 0 9 0 IS 0 0 0 0 0, 0, 0, 0, 0 0 0 0, Is 0 0 0 0
IN 0 9 0 41, 9 0, 0 0 41 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 01 0 0 Is 4, 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 111 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 IN 0, 9 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 4, Q, 0 0 9 * 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Qk 41 0 * 9 1* 4, 0 9 0 0 0 0, 0 01 0 9 0 41, 0 9 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0, 0 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0, 9
41 0 4, 4, 0 9 0 0 0 0 9 4D 0 0 0, Is Is 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0, 0 0 0, 0 0, Is 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Is 0, 0 0 0, 0, Is 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Is 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0, 10 0 01 0, 01 0 01 0 0, 01 0 0
V, 0, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, e 0 0 01 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 41 0, 0, 0
0 0 0, 41, * 0 0 0 0 0 Is
0 Is 41 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0 41 41 9 9 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ok 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, 9 0 0 0 IS 0 0 9 0 0 Is 0, 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0
4, 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 01 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 9 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0 41, 0 0 0 4, 0 0 0 0 Is 0 0 4, IS 01 0 0 0 9 0 01 0 0 0 0 0, 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0, 0 0 Is 0 4, * 0, 0 0 & 0 0 0 9 9 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 9 0 a 0 Is 41 0 0 0 & 0 0 0 Is 0 0 0 *****1
41 4, 0 0 41 9 9 Sk 0 * 0 0 0 0 0 0 * 0 0 0 0 0 * 0 9 0 0 0, 0 0, Is 0 0 0 0 Is 4, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 * 0, 0 Q, 0 0 0 0, 41 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0, 4, 0 0 Is 0, 0 0 0, 0 0 * 0, * 0 0, 0 * 0 0 Is Is 0 0
00 00 9 0- 0 0 0 0 41, 0 0 9 0 0 0 4, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, 0, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 *0 0, 0 0 * 9 9 0 0, 0 0e 9 01 0 0 * 0, 0 0 * & 9 0 0, 4, * 0 0 0 0 0 9
40 0 0 0 0 9 41, 0 0 0 0 & 0, 0 0, 0 IS 0 0 0 Is & 0 0 0 4, s, 0 0, 0 * 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0, 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 4, 0 Is 0 0 0 9 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 Is 0 0 Is 0 9 0 0, 0 0 4
41, 0 Is Is 0 41, 0 0 0 9 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 41 0 0 0 * * 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, * * 0 0 0, 0 0 0 01 0 IS 0, 4, 0 0 0 0 0 Is 0, 0 0
Der 0 0 0, 0, 0 0 4, 0 0 0 0 0 * 4, 0 0 0 0 0 0, 0 * 0 0 * 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0, 9 0 41 0 a 0, 0 IS 0 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0 Is 0 0 0 Q, 0 0 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0
coo 0 Is mAL-0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, 4, 0 0 0 0, 0, 0 0, 0 0, 4, 0 * * * 0 0 0 0 0 0 * * 0 0
0 0, 9 0 0 Is 0 &4 0 0 0 s, 0 0 4, 0 9 0 0 4, 0 Is, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 s, Is 9 0 0, 4, 0 0, 0, 0 0 0 0 9
Is 0 0 0 0 * 0 0 0 * 01 4, 0 0 0 0 0 * 0 0 0 0
A/ 0 0 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0, 9 0 0 0 41,
0 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0 0
Is 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 4, 9
Is 0 0
Ma
4, 0
BAYsIDE
DRIVE
L E G E N D
ww
Low Density Residential
High Density Residential
Commercial
THE IRVINE k,..0 I JANY
PLAN N ING DEPARTMENT
550 NEWPORT CENTER DRIVE * (714) 644-3011
V, EWPORT BEACH , CALI FORN I A 92660
TITLE: PRECISE LAND USE PLAN
DESCRIPTION: PROMONTORY POINT
0 100,
FILE:
SCALE: DATE: FEB 13 1970
B A y
WIA
0
rebruary,10,,, 1970,
TO; Joint Harbor Committee
FROM; City Harbor and Tidelands Administrator,
SUBJECT: Harbor Application 20G-000
APPLICATION'TO: Dredge and bulkhead an .11 acre lagQon,,...connected
to the Ha—r-So—rwith a'.100 foot channel -just�east of Balboa Yacht Basin,,.
for the purpose of developing an additional waterfront commtinity. See
attached drawing.
APPLICANT: The Irvine Company,
SITUATION:
A. This application is part of a series of actions required
for the full development of the additional community.- These actions,.
currently being coordinated by the City Planning Department include:
A Master Plan Amendmentt for changing of.the.
Street and Highway Plan. -
2 A Use Permit.,
.3.. A Tentative Tract Map.
4. A study to determine the effect this development
..would have on the value of City property adjacent
to Bayside Drive.
separate study by the City considering the pros....
and cons of dedicating privately created waterways.
6. The basic.Harbor Permit plus incremental additional
requests as the proposal develops.
B. The present request is for dredging and bulkheading onlyl
but further applications will have to be made for the detailed bulkheadin -
91
plan and for proposed dock and slip facilities. Requests for private
residential slips and floats would be the responsibility of individual
waterfront residents in accordance with an overall plan to be proposed
by the:..Irvine Company.
C. A Corps of Ehgineers permit is necessary and has been
applied for. The Corps:has' already advised me that a detailed review
will be.given;the request to include:
1. Tidal exchange to determine possible pollution effects..
2., Ebb,tide currents to determine if there.are adverse
erosion or shoalin -effects on the banks -of -the existing -ch npel.
.9" n �aL
'14 at
C, - ;e_ ' C.- . I �
Harbor Application )-000,
2/10/70
2
The Corps has further stated that it does not appear
"4-- 4- 1, - - - - - - - -
D. The Directors of the Harbor District have expressed
..similar interests in water quality, water circulation and erosion.
of the banks of the'existing channel. He further feels that consi�_
deration.:,should be.given-to':
1. Responsibility for maintenance of basin project
depths.
2. Establishment of pier permit areas for individual..
lots.
3. Dedication of water areas to a public agency for
enforcement.
Ee Any approval of the Harbor Application at this time
would have to be, in'essence, an approval in concept and would have,
to be.subject to:,
A. Approval of the Corps of Engineers -
2. Approval of the City of.Newport Bqach, whichwould
imply approval of other concurrent actions by the -
City.
F. Other conditions that could be considered.are.,
1. Dedication.of the waterway-.
,2'. Maintenance Responsibilities -i
3. Public right of entry.-,
4.: Engineering parameters,
5.16� - Pier-perMit areas. -
00
G., Me DAWES
LI
GMD/db
TO "t"tox
rRoKs' Mwbor & Tidolan" mmijaistrator
susirM PROMMTORY DAY
OU 30 jam"YO I not With Dave mylor "d ja0k Raub
to diocuss Pro"Osil"O Of 14 hazloor Perskit for 'Pro"Mtory say.
we arrived at tua i�llowiaq conalusimmt
a. jadk R*ub will i=aodiatoly appl-y for & Corp$ ot
XnVineors'navigation permit in am*%,done* with the emlosod
lwtt*r f rots the Corp* *
b. Jack R"b will,, for Tho Irvi" compamy, imediately
apply for a City Haxbor Vomit for tU6 drodgling. *".rstion. In
a subs-Oquout 41scussion with Ro4 Guano I aqr"d to got this up
for Comwil oonsideration or* 9 Marab along with your *W of the
vxajeat.
oo we will apply- for Joint narlxw comittea avvnwal
on 10 rebr,"-ry. Tbis will, Otart the. ball rollino in tho co"ty
AX*& 16
Thor* will have to be a Oftaidorable amunt of *06"tioning
of *PPxQV&U and Pozzits UU0.1, we got soxe, sAvauoed and furthov
4*taiis A" resolved. I am howul of having the. Carps of Sugimoto
Persit prior to go to co"OUL tot tho co" will MS&TS the 460assary
-bog
wator q4auty oxA bydraulics studLes 4"Jxod by boo the Mor
DMt am "X* Tb* carps I s4sailt 141" &Utomatically ts)UM 0"0
Of &"nat4w suah as the Departmat of State Fish
w4 am* oad Ue ftSional 'Water Owaity: Centxel bmvd
on* other &r#^ raw ro"iros atteatica. The cowmil will
want 00aw"ts relative to tho d*strOLUty of dedioati" privatoly
created W4kt*xV4Ys# "VO xeyter will w"d up The Irvi" Coqpa-ny#s
Positiou* x Will sadoav*x to 000rdizate * Staff positiou.
Go M , 0 Ok"s
Attadh"At
CO.' City, MA"OV
PUblic Works DiXWO"r
*Wim satoty Dixector
IN REPLY REFER TO
SPLED-E
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
LOS ANGELES DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P. 0. BOX 2711
LOS ANGELES. CALIFORNIA 90053
Mr. George M. Dawes
Harbor & Tidelands Administrator
City of Newport Beach
3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, California 92660
C livo,111+11-
ZZ January 1970
Dear Mr. Dawes:
4
A copy of the proposal to alter a portion of lower Newport Harbor,
as outlined in your submission to Mr. Herron of this office, has
been reviewed by the Coastal Engineering and Operations Branch.
Mr. Herron discussed our preliminary findings with you in a
telephone conversation on 15 January 1970.
A detailed review will be given this proposal when your formal
request for a navigation permit is made. Our initial reaction is
asfollows:
a. Tidal exchange of waters in the newly created bay should
be studied to determine possible pollution effects.
b. The effect of ebb tide currents from the proposed new
entrance should be studied to avoid any adverse erosion and/or
shoaling effects on the banks of the existing channel.
c. It does not appear desirable to extend harbor lines into
the proposed basin.
d. A navigation permit will be required to connect the pro -
posed basin and entrance channel to the existing navigation channel.
At'least 30 days should be allowed to process this permit request.
If you desire further information on the proposal, please do not
hesitate to call on us.
Sincerely ours,
FM
e �, L/ --vv U
STATE OF CALIFORNIA— RESOURCES AGENCY RONALD REAGAN, Governor
SANTA ANA RIVER BASIN REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
6848 MAGNOLIA AVENUE, SUITE 14, RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92506
E. DANA BROOKS
LAWRENCE E. COFFEY
ROBERT A. DAILY
WILLIAM H. McGURTY
DONALD F. MITCHELL
EVERETT C. ROSS
ANDREW L. HOLTZ
RICHARD A. BUEERMANN
Executive Officer
January 13, 1970
City of Newport Beach
City Hall
Newport Beach, California 92660
Attention: Mr. G. M. Dawes,
Harbor & Tidelands Administrator
This will acknowledge receipt of your letter dated
December 29, 1969 regarding d)Z� �et�ivit�ies in
Newport Bay and a proposed lagoon development.
This board is certainly interested in maintai-ning the
waters within this region in the best possible condition
and dredging and other construction activities can create
problems in surface waters such as Newport Bay. Therefore,
in any case relating to man's activities involving potential
degradation of any waters of the state, we would appreciate
any information to enable us to institute proper controls.
The staff of this board and personnel of the Department of
Fish & Game reviewed several dredging and other construction
proposals in the Newport Bay area on January 5, 1970. Among
the proposals reviewed was the Irvine Lagoon you mentioned.
Although it appears that this will not be a dredging opera-
tion, according to information from the Harbor Department,
we would like to be fully informed about the project and
its water quality implications.
We appreciate your concern and believe that past cooperative
endeavors in water quality matters have been most helpful
and should he continued.
RICHARD A.- BUEERMANN
Executive Officer
JOVAWXY 30, 1970
TO:
PWK: U61bor & WidelWa" Administrator
subjums PROOMTORY DAY
On 30 JauwaY If I mot with Dave JUWJL*r and Jack Raub
to disauss Prooessi" of & Harbor ft=it for ftemwtogy Day.
Ue arrived at tb* follovinq O"Olusious
a, Jack xaub will imudiately apply for a Corps of
A;"iU**WA*' A&Vijj&tiOfA POMit ib aGO*Vd&AG* WitAl the 04010004
letter frm the Carpt,
D. Jack Raub will$ 90V The Irvin* copwanyt ins"i&tOly
apply for a City harbor Vomit for the 4z*dqiag operation. in
a subsequout disoussion with ft4 Qwnj I aqr*#A to sot this up
for Council Consideration (a 9 March along with your WW of the
Projoet.
a,, We will opply for Joint k4urlxw Ccmitta* approval
on I* r"ruaXy. This will start the ball rolluiv to the covaty
at" 0
There will hav* to be a considerable amoust of comutioning
of approvals and Vomit* uAtil we got more advawmd *ad ftrthor
dotails am xesolved* I am hapeftl of having the Corps of Bagifteers,
P*rnit prior to go tv Opmailt for the Corps Win Oak* tho Aecossavy
water quallty *W hydraulUm studies 4asired by both, tho maxbox
biguict WW 1. TUO Corps I pax -Nit also Utonatically takes aare
Of other &qsnot" such " the Popartwout of interior " su" Fish
nod Goo and th* ft9i"al water Quality C"trol ftaxd,*
QW other area now requjxos attentioa. TUS Council will
W"t 00meats relative to t1W 40sirability of dodioatUq privately
created waterways, Dave Kaytor will round up Tho Xrvino Compauy t a
position* I will ondea"r to aoarftuata ak Staff position.
0. U. DAWAS
Attadvant
00.- city Hana"r
Pubuo Works Diroator
"rine safety Director
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
LOS ANGELES DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P. 0. BOX 2711
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90053
IN REPLY REFER TO
SPLED-E
- Mr. George M. Dawes
Harbor & Tidelands Administrator
City of Newport Beach
3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, California 92660
Dear Mr. Dawes:
22 January 1970
A copy of the proposal to alter a portion of lower Newport Harbor,
as outlined in your submission to Mr. Herron of this office, has
been reviewed by the Coastal Engineering and Operations Branch.
Mr. Herron discussed our preliminary findings with you in a
telephone conversation on 15 January 1970.
A detailed review will be given this proposal when your formal
request for a navigation permit is made. Our initial reaction is
as follows:
a. Tidal exchange of waters in the newly created bay should
be studied to determine possible pollution effects.
b. The effect of ebb tide currents from the proposed new
entrance should be studied to avoid any adverse erosion and/or
shoaling effects on the banks of the existing channel.
c. It does not appear desirable to extend harbor lines into
the proposed basin.
d. A navigation permit will be required to connect the pro -
posed basin and entrance channel to the existing navigation channel.
At least 30 days should be allowed to process this permit request.
If you desire further information on the proposal, please do not
hesitate to call on us.
Sincerely your s,
CE
SJ4
District Engineer
C&se
j
Waterway status studied Y',
Attorney Tully Seymour said
Private versus public water� that the city,s powers were
a topic of st& limited the same as on private
ways will be
streets. Harbor
study before the Newport Beach Administra-
the Ir - tor George Dawes expressed
City Council acts On
for development however, that the
vine Co. plans the opinion;
of Promontory Bay near the harbor policies provide for re -
north Balboa Island channel. gulation of boating on both pub -
on was reached lic and private waterways.
This decisi still
ning's dis- The ri
during Monday eve ght of entry is
cussion of the 12-10t tract fron- shaky, Mr. Parsons thought.
ting on a dredged out area along Councilman Paul Gruber ex -
Bayside Dr. below Irvine Ter- pressed opposition - to any
incil approved the further approval of private
race. The Col
the tract, leaving waterways, because of difficul-
final map for in the
the newly created water area ties with such features
City Mana- Dover shores and Linda Isle
ite butdirected
priv�
ger Harvey Huriburtto under- developments.
a study. Following results of having
take
Vice Mayor LindsleY Parsons the waterways dedicated to the
ested: the pror-
x,,cought up the issue with a city were sugg
que-tion about the city,s police erty would be taken off tte t x
powe-,�s on private lots, in- rolls, and the city could c' r-ge
rs.
eluding underwater lots- City tidelands use fees for
ORANGE C
HARBOR COMMISSION KEWPOly
NA1101
C. C , (JACK) WOOLLEY,_CKA:RMAN
W. ALLEN GRUBB, VICE CKA RMAN
FRANK F. MEAD
DEAN E. SHULL, JR.
ROBERT K. HENSON
January 14, 1970
Mr. George M. Dawes
Harbor and Tidelands Administrator
City of Newport Beach
City Hall, 3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, California 92660
Dear Mr. Dawes:
F IL
.Arkz,
RMH
R DISTRICT
KENNETH SAMPSON
DIRECTOR - HARBORS, BEACHES 81 PARKS
19 0 1 BAYSIDE DRIVE
NEWPORT BEACH. CALIF. 9 2662
TELEPHONE (714) 834-3800
By letter, dated December 29, 1969, you requested that this office review
The Irvine Company's marina development proposal for the area commonly
referred to as Promontory Point.4 The District's reply as regards to the
specific inquiries in your letter, is as follows:
a. The Irvine Company's proposal, in our opinion, will affect the
use of Newport Harbor and, therefore, should be presented to
the Joint Harbor Committee.
b. Additional data is not desired at the present time. However,
upon submittal of the proposal to the Joint Harbor Committee, it
may be necessary to request information regardi-ng possible effects
on water quality, water circulation, and erosion of the public
beach area across from the entrance channel.
c. Special conditions that may be desirable to incorporate into any
approvals should include the following:
(1) Responsibility for maintenance of basin project depths.
(2) Establishment of pier permit areas for individual lots.
(3) Dedication of water areas to public agency for enforcement.
d. The possible effect of the development on the items you mentioned
cannot be determined without a detailed study. (See reply to Item B
above).
Should you desire to discuss this matter in detail, it is suggested that you
contact the District's Development Engineer, Mr. R. Wingard, 834-3814.
Yours very truly,
KENNETH SAMPSO-K-, Directeof
KS:RFW:mph Harbors, Beaches and Parks
A
9
January 12, 1970
Mrs. Doreen Marshall
City of Newport Beach
3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport'Beach,'California
J':
Honorable Mayoi Marshall. -
We are very much concerned and oppoacd t--. the proposed
Irvine Company:. developement north clff for
the following reasonst
We would find ourselves at the ez-,e-�, -.n.1-ard to
find dead end street with little;
exposure which we certainly nead We
think our whole operation would be afr-e-cted, and
our Yacht brokerage in.particular.
We would be in the same unfortur, that
h 3tate
the gas station owner would be i,. -
.changed the highway passing.his r,.,. business.
Also, would not the value o -o'--- ti�..: p-1-c-,per'i - Ly,
which the City owns, be substa-t,-,�'Jally reduced by
isolating it as this proposal
It is hard for us to understand how Ci-c,k; Govern-
ment could destroy a public street for the sole
benefit of the Irvine Company and at the expe'r.se
of ourselves as well as the resLa,"-.-ant, 'Ahardware
store and shipyard on the Basin
Sincerely yovr;�,
BALBOA YACR'-'�, ILNC�
Carl H. Flac--a, Mana�.,.-,r
CHH: 1
c.c. Newport Beach Planning Commi.-,s.-i6on
ALLAN SEEK
Planning Commission
City of Newport Beach
3300 Newport Boulevaid
Newport Beach, California.92660
Gentlemen:
January 12., 1970
Re: Promontory Point
As a neighbor of the subject development, I wish to endorse
it. I feel it will be an asset to the community and to my neigh-
borhood. There are some points to which I think you should give
attention.in granting apprqval,, however:
Dredging the entrance channel will reiftove 100 linear fe'et
of public beach on the north side of the Balboa _Lsland Channel.,
and some compensation should be made, such as ded4b-cating the
Promontory Lagoon as a public waterway, and aslking the Corps of
Engineers to run their harbor lines into the lagoon. I admit that
L
the 100 feet of beach to be destroyed are not at resent in a
condition to be used or enjoyed by the public, but the practice
of letting privated developers dredge away public beaches at will
has resulted in the loss of nearly a mile of public beaches in
Newport Harbor (notably on the south and west sides of Linda Isle)
and it is time for the City to start requiring compensation.
2. The permit which has been requested includes -che blufftop
("Promontory Point" proper.) one of the most insistent desires of
the Newport Tomorrow Townscape Committee was that all future bluff -
top developments provide for a view drive., somewhat similar to
Cliff Drive in Corona del Mar. Since no sp�ecific plans for bluff -
top development are shown on the permit, it may be premature to
raise zhis point.. but the City should be assured that a height
limit of 45 feet above mean lower low water will be inj_Dsed on all
building in the proposed high-density area below the to]� .-,,.f the
bluff. Otherwise the! question of a view drive might ' becone academic
because the view had all been obscured. If possible, a similar
L
'ing along the bluff.
limit should be placed on trees and other plant
-Ba side
The existing 7 Drive has oeen designated as par-� of
the bicycle path network. Care should be taken that the new 3a'y-
side Drive is saf
,er and more appropriate for this use than the
.existing one, which is really quite dangerous. I trust -�';hat the
strip 8 feet wide along the north side. of the new Bayside Dr"wve
will be a bicycle path.
Very truly -yours,
cb
Allan Beek 28 Beacon Bay
Newport Beach California 92662
Waunry 10
ecc-C Eaton
To the Newport Bepch City Pla-D-1-ling coyn-riij-�,, im).:
I see by the local press that the Irvinn AMU-
any's plan foxa new lagoon, additional boat sliph
and housing is.to.be pre.onnted to your body this
month.
is one Atizeny I would like to express myself
as being opposed to making our exisi.-ing bay another
�Huntington Harbor. i realize that a company such
as the Irvine, can pretty well dictate wbat,direction
it would lite Newport to grow since it is the largest
single landowner within our boundaries,
,However, they can Set enough housing on the
sAid property, nnd orobably,will, without dredging"
another inlet, Tt wo-ld indeed be pleasant to see
some of our iriSinal contours reamin static, 5y
no mc�.,-ns can such a plan.be called progressive in
my book.
Th�-nk you for you attention in this hatter, and
happy wrestling with future Amhplanning�problems
as t5ey must ond,will arise,- I replize the numbcr
,of.brickbats you-re.ceive far outnumbpr the bouquets.
Cordi.ally..
Charles Sj)
-0,.-nton
V
PROMONTORY POINT MEETING
Planning Director's Of f i1ce :11 170
People in Att6ndance
Wade B eye 1 er,:,,
General Services Department
Jan Briscoe
Fire -Department
Mike Stang
Planning Department
Dave Kaylor
The Irvine Company
Ben Nolan
Public Works Dep a rtmen t.,,,,
Bob Jaffe
P u b I i c Works Department.
Chuck Thompson
The Irvine Company
Jack G. Ra b
u
Raub, Bein & Frost
'Rod Gunn
�Pianning Department.
Bill. Foley
Planning Departmen.t
B,ob Bein
Raub, Bein, Frost & Asso-ciates
Jim Tay.lor
The Irvine Company
Dick Dusterhoff
C
Parks, Beaches A Re r6i' ion
Larry Wilson
Planning Department
i ver Grant
Building Departmen
George Dawes
Harbor & 'Tidelinds�
_ ,2
3
4
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
PLAN REVIEW REQUEST
/HARBOR COORDINATOR - G. Dawes
ED PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
C3 FIRE DEPARTMENT
E3 BUILDING DEPARTMENT
El PARKS & RECREATION
APPLICATION OF— Tke Irvin* Company
FOR A
r1VARIANCE
EIRESUBDIVISION
Date
Dec. 24'. 1969
EE PLANS ATTACHED
PLANS ON.FILE IN
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
rr1USE PERMIT No. 1466
M TRACT MAP
TO PERMIT d4V9l0,#0*nt, Of & Small* hOMOSVIONS POSidVAtial arria Con-
sisting of single family 404 multiple family dwelling units$ with
SUPPOrtifts -CeMerti4l facilities and recreational amenities to
inv,lu4e a ya-cht basin and *&ring.
0 N 04 1 PORTON OF —BLOCK 94 TRACT—IrV1005 SUbdIVIS180
Approximately 60 acres of land lot&tod between Pacific Coast Highways,
48ySiOG DriVe, West of Oamborot Road (Promontory Point).
REPORT REQUESTED BY January so 1970
COMMISSION REVIEW jafivary Is$ 1970
COMMENTS
THE IRVINE COMPANY
NEWPORT FINANCIAL PLAZA 550 NEWPORT CENTER DRIVE NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92660 (714) 644-3011
December 22, 1969
Planning Commission
City of Newport Beach
3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, California
Gentlemen:
PROMONTORY POINT
Submitted herewith is the development plan of the Irvine
Company for the property commonly referred to as Promontory
Point.- The plan proposes a homogenous community of single
family lots for the construction of custom homes, multiple
family residences and supporting commercial facilities,
which are oriented toward a.,yacht basin and lagoon.
The project is divided into two (2) phases. Phase I, which
constitutes the basis of the present Use Permit application,
IS Comprised of sixty-two (62) single family lots, a ten (10)
acre lagoon with access to Newport Ba a commercial marina
with ancillary facilities, and two (2� commercial sites
totalling approximately two (2) acres.
It is anticipated that construction of -the thirty (30)
acre Phase I will commence in the early part of 1970.' The
remaining thirty-two (32) acres containing medium high
density residential units and an approximate-two'(2) acre
commercial site,would be developed at a later date and be
subject to the approval of an additional Use Permit which
will provide specific information relative to densities,
circulation and performance standards. It is proposed
'that Bayside Drive be realigned to accommodate the lagoon.
Therefore, it is requested that the City of Newport Beach
initiate vacation proceedings forthat portion.of existing
Bayside.Drive that will'be eliminated by.the access channel
and realignmept of �said'/ street.
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
PROMONTORY BAY PHASE I
RESIDENTIAL
Type
Area
Acres DU/Ac.
DU
Per/DU Population
Single Family
'11.5 1
62
3
Sub Total
11.5
18
SUPPORT FACILITIES
Tvpe
Commercial
2
2.1
3
.4
1.2
Lagoon and
Marina
1
11.0
Sub Total
14.7
Grand Total
186
V
796.
C17),
or
!&4cff,
R— E02 ; —bla
lan d-�, Marnia
Ilroi-nor-tory.Point, rising between East planning Commissioners on Jan.'15.,
.Oast Highway and Bayside Drive east of Tile 62 -lot residential-inarina develop-
J,miborec Road, is the site of a new -ment proposal calls for relocation of
�Uter-oriented community propose - d for Bayside Drive to.a.route along,the base
(levelopment by the Irvine Company, Of the bluff, city aides said today—The
Ph"--. for, thQ project just inland of road would be shoved inland, thus pro.
iblk,i Island, called Promontory Bay, viding an area for construction of a
�,Jll 1.7,� considered by Newport Beach lagoon marina behind Beacon Bay and
the Balboa Yacht Basin.
The marina would contain 17 piers and
would provide waterfront sites fbr�,
restaurants. The lagoon itself would i�
average about 100 feet in width� ac-
cording to Irvine plans. Its length would
be about a half a mile.
A total of 60 acres is encompa�sed by
tile project, about half of which involves
the marina lagoon development, . . "
In their application for a use f"r" .1
Pe mit
that would allow the development Irvine
officials describe the project as a ",small,
homogeneous residential area consisting
of single family and multiple family
,dwelling units, with 'Supporting com-
mercial facilities and r e c r e a t i o n a ' ,
amenities to include a yaclit.basin and
marina."
Entrance to the lagoon would b
between the Balboa Yacht Basin and thel
Villa Marina Motel. At the waterway'
easterly end, the Irvine plans show a gu
float and small boat'storage area. 4.
The Promontory Bay w a t e r f r o n
residential lots would be developc�.-
similarly to those on nearby Linda Isle;
another Irvine project. At the top of thd
point, which i1ses some 50 feet above tho
bay, high density apartment development
is envisioned -Cr.ord;.-,g to Irvine
spokesmen.
=I
,W waterway in,
e. develo ment
I . P
r747�A
new waterway to the bay and
a lagoon lined with slips and
a little less than a half mile in High density development is
length, will be lined
3!
W
luxury homes are features of a
with 62 planned for Promontory Point
residential lots, according to itself, which rises some 45 to
spectacular, new development
50
the preliminary land use plan feet above the lowlands.
revealed this week by the Irvine
Co.
submitted by the Irvine Co. A The se permit app -
u Ilea
guest float, smaR boat storage tion will be considered by the
The location includes Pro -
montory Point
area and a marina are shown Planning Commissionat its Jan.
at the easterly end of the lagoon. 15
along Coast
meeting.
Hwy., westerly of Irvine Ter-
race and the lowlands between
the ;Iuff and Bayside Dr. The
p ans call for relocation of Bay -
We Dr. to a route along the
base of the bluff to make way
for the lagoon development west
of the Bayside shopping center.
The Irvine Co. is applying to
the Newport Beach P],anning
COmmissioli for a use permit
for "development of a small,
homogenous residential area
consisting of- single f4mily and
multiple family dweRing'uaits,
With supporting commercialfa-
cilities andrecreationalameni-
ties to inclyde.a yachtbasinand
marina."
The waterway entrance con-
necting the proposed lagoon to
Balboa Island's North Bay,
Channel is located hetween the
Balboa Yacht: Ba3hl': and the
Villa Marina motel. The lagoon,
December 30, 1969
TO., Planning Director
PROM.- Harbor and Tidelands Administrator
SUBJEOT: USE PFJWT #1466, Prorontory Point
If the Planning Comaission approves Use Permit #1466,
it is recomended that it do so subjeot to the condition that the
City Council approves a Harbor Permit for dredging and.bulkheading---'
the proposed 11 -acre lagoon.
In regard to the Harbor Permitg which has not yet been
applied for, itis quite possible that recommendationo from outside
will be required in order to insure maintenance of water
quality standards and to make sure that the proposed construction
will not adversely affect maintenance of nearby beaches. Outside
agencies who may have aza interest are:
a. Corps of nngiueers
b. "gional Water Quality Control Board
'00 Orange..County Harbor District
if therefis a tinit element involved,, it would be helpful
if T40 Irvine Company would provide all engineering data for the
dredging and bulkhea ding. I I am particularly interested in any data
available on flushing characteristics of the lagoont locations.of
storm drains, and any studies on the -possible alterations of currents
in the North Balboa Island Channel that may affect nearby beaches.
G. M. DAMS
cc: Public Works Director
December 29, 1969
Mr. Kenneth Sampson,D�rector
Orange County Harbor District
1901 Bayside, Drive
.Newport Beach, California
Dear Ken:
.1 have enclosed an application for a Use,Permit by the Irvine
Company for a proposed new development that would,involve dredging
out an 11 acre lagoon just.below Promontory Point. The Use Permit.
is.proliminaky, and�ariy,dredging would require A Harbor Permit.
A Harbor Permit has not yet been applied for, but it is anticipated
that the City will want to process the whole development as one
package.
would appreciate your opinions regarding The Irvine Company
proposal. Specifically, I'd like your thoughts regarding.the
following:
a. Should the proposal be considered by the Joint Harbor
Committee?
b. Is there additional data that you desirefor an evaluation
of the proposal?
c. What special conditions or restrictions would the Harbor
District desire on a permit for the dredging of�thelag.00n and the
,-proposed use'of the lagoon? For example, should there -be a prohi-
bitibn of storm drains emptying into'the lagoon?
d. is the proposed construction likely to adversely affect
water quality, water circulation or maintenance of beaches elsewhere
in the bay?
Please don't feel constrained to comment only on the above specific
points.
.The proposal is on the calendar for the Planning comission for
15 January; however, it is the intention of the City Staff to request
Mr. K. Sampson
12/29/69
Pg. 2
deferment pending further evaluation. I would
preliminary response indicating your interest,
to 15 January. Details can follow at a later
Sincerely .
G. M. Dawes
Harbor and Tidelands Administrator
GMD/db
Enclosures
appreciate a
if any, prior
date.
Mr. William J. Herron
Coastal Engineering Branch
Los Angeles District
U. S. Corps of Engineers
Post Office Box 2711
Los Angeles, California 90053
Dear Bill:
I have attached a copy of
to alter lower Newport Harbor.
applied for a harbor permit for
Planning Commission procedures.
package the whole proposal.
December 29, 1969
the latest Irvine Company proposal
The Irvine Company has not yet
they wish to go through some
Ultimately, however, we$ll
� In the meantime, would you mind looking over their plans
to see if there is any Corps.interest. Even though all dredging
is behind the bulkhead line, it is my present thinking that a
Corps permit should be required because of the postible impact
on.the remainder of the harbor.
Regardless of permit requirements, I would appreciate your
thoughts on the possible impact on water quality, water cirdula-
tion and maintenance of beaches elsewhere in the harbor.
If possible, I'd like your indication of Corps interest by
15 January. If you feel the Corps has an interest, I'll follow
up with a formal request which will include any engineering data
I can get from The Irvine Company.
I hope that -you will find the New Year happy and prosperous!
Sincerely,
G. X. Dawes
Harbor & Tidelands Administrator
GMD/db
Enclosures
December 29, 1969
Mr. Richard Bueerman
Santa Ana River Basin Regional
Water Quality Control Board
6848,,Magnolia Avenue
Riverside, California 92506
Dear Dick:
Thanks very much for sending me a copy of your letter to
the Harbor District requiring them to clear their dredging plans
with your office. I am delighted to see youand your Board taking
such an active interest in the waters of Newport Harbor.. I'm
afraid Vm going to need all the help I can get in maintaining
a dynamic interest in the quality of harbor�waters.
I am taking theliberty of enclosing a recent Irvine Company
proposal to create an 11 -acre lagoon connected'to-the harbor.
'I'd appreciate your review -of the.�roposal to see'i,f th'ere is a
Boardinterest. Even though the dredging is behind the U. S.
Bulkhead Lino, my present thinking is to require approval of your
'Board and the Corps of Engineers prior to recommending approval
of the City Council-- if in fact -1 do recommend appr�.1.
I would appreciate knowing by 15 January:
a. Whether or not -the Board has an interesto in which case
I'll send you an official letter with a formal requ6st for Board
action.
b. Any recommendations you may have concernin �_,the proposal.
For example, if approved, I am thinking of conditioning a permit
with a prohibition of storm drains in the lagoon.
I hope that you'll find the New Year happy and prosperous!
Sincerely,
G. X. Dawes
Harbor & Tidelands Administrator
GMD/db , ,
Enclosures
....... ... . ...... ..
> --t-f
7
06
T
EAZ
4
VLA
QA
N
\V EST
V I C I N IT Y SKETCH JETTI EAST
JE
E w P 5 K I b A le C A L I F 0 k N I A
RAP91L SULE - MWES,
NOTE SOUWDINbS ARE E�PUSSED IN FEET AND.�DCNOTE DEPTHS
I�ELOW MEAN LOVER LOW WkJEK� MAJIMUML Rk�gGE OF. TI Di
191 $ SECTION
Es�TxbusViEb IN
APPRO%. 10 FT. HAR60K LINES Pvr=
mtkIPUT �Y.
c
1 0,
0
CO A C, Ld LKIIE �D�
—ta
Sl CT 10 W� k'A
v
A
1-4 1 4
%
?
J�
�J,
4/j,
"4 Ile f I,,)
4
4
`%J
eg
V L A N
4 EXIST. 6AYSIDE DR. s
- . 1. �— /1 0 104 too 100 411 Soo
&
LULKRE&D LINE SCALF IN FFET
RO C HE: �T E F�,L'STILE ET
Ito' 8 4' A, c iFoPN [A
too 1� COSTA VASS
P KQ P 0 S E D KED,�6 IN G
SO' 80, MIN. st, 44' 4
XND bU LKA E k -D I'M 6
'PRO M ONJOKY 6A y
NEWPOKT tEk(%,, ChLIFORNA
+-kEUCATED WSIDE K.
5 Mb. 1570
THE IRVINE. C09fANY
SECTION 6-6 TABIPUT CENTER Dz.
)j. T. S. K E V I S 17 OCT, 1971
, jave
t XELOCATED UYSIDE Pt.
SE TIGH 6-6
(�7
kS-SOL
i E Er
'N IA
HT 0 KY b k y"
VEA(H EhLIFO&HIh -
by: 5 r=lm
THE WINE COMPANY
SSO 14EVPDIT CENTEt Dt.
MS"/PqVT Uk(14. ULIF
®r
C)
lot
1/,00
HE VFUXT
SEA
C
Y.
C004A
DEL '14AIL
WEST
VICINITY SKETCH
JETTV EAST
i ETTY
NOTE : SOUNDINH ARE EllgeSSEV 10
-MILES
FEET AND DENOTE DE?THS
16ELOW MEAN LOVER LOW ATEK. Mh%IMUM
IthIGE OF TIDE
CIA
APPROI. 10 fT. HAU60K LINES AkIlE
F REWtO&Y b kyj
ESUbUSHEID IN US SECIIIIII
10
0
44
X
u
SEC
109 A -A
,'4 41
4
, jave
t XELOCATED UYSIDE Pt.
SE TIGH 6-6
(�7
kS-SOL
i E Er
'N IA
HT 0 KY b k y"
VEA(H EhLIFO&HIh -
by: 5 r=lm
THE WINE COMPANY
SSO 14EVPDIT CENTEt Dt.
MS"/PqVT Uk(14. ULIF
Crff OF NEWPORT BEACH
HARBOR PERMIT
PERMISSION IS HERERY GRANTED TO CONSTRUCT AND
MAINTAIN THE FACILITY SHOWN ON THE REVERSE HEREOF,
AT THE SITE INDICATED, SUBJECT TO THE PROV:SIGNS Or
THE HARBOR PERMIT POLICIES OF NEWPOPT REACH AN!'.
ANY SPECIAC CONDITIONS LISTED HEREOH. TFiS PERM.,
IS NOT TRANSFERABLE WiTHOUT THE WF?,-,Tr-lll CONS'ENT C -r
THE CITY HARBOR COORDIIN.ATOR OR CITY COIJNC�L. Th
RIGHTS GIVEN UNDER THIS PERMIT ARE P-E-ItIkIISSIVE ONL-.
AND THIS PERMIT MAY BE RE
YOKED 13Y THE JITY COUNCM
IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLC 17 -OF "E MUNWIPAL CODE.
CITY HARBOR :�71
�2-00 -0co jz" -I- / ? P0
PERMIT v
SPECIAL CONDITIONS REQUIRED:
711. Approval of the Corps of Engineers., (Corps of Engineers Permit
was issued on 20 May,.1970)
2. Approval of the Joint Harbor Committee. (Approved on 14 April, 1970.)
3. 'That the applicant observe precautions against creating excess
turbidity as outlined in the State Resources Agency's . letter
of 25 March, 1970.
4. That the waterway,. up to but not including the bulkhead, be
dedicated to- the City of Newport Beach.
5. That the bulkhead design be approved by the Public Works
Directo'k.
6. That there be no overhead wires or,lines over the entrance
channel and that any underground utilities in the water area
have a minimum of five feet of soil cover.
7. That the Harbor and Tidelands, Administrator and the Santa
Ana River Basin Regional Water ouality Control Board be
notified 48 hours . in advance of opening the proposed channel
to the main harbor.
-A-PPROVED
AUG 10,
By The
CITY COUNCIt
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
777-
0
t
It
Y. A
0
VA
p Z� -- -
2oo-000
�'Vm I
i
MA
DETAIL NO.
a, I T d -
MEMBERS OF A [RICAN SOCIETY OF " OSCAPE ARCHITE TO SERIES OF
1, a , AST GPOADWA�. ANAHEIM. CALIFORNIA 62691 TELEPHONE (714) I?IC3110-__ JWDATR 4-6-75�
SHT- NO.
OF
4r
p Z� -- -
2oo-000
�'Vm I
i
MA
DETAIL NO.
a, I T d -
MEMBERS OF A [RICAN SOCIETY OF " OSCAPE ARCHITE TO SERIES OF
1, a , AST GPOADWA�. ANAHEIM. CALIFORNIA 62691 TELEPHONE (714) I?IC3110-__ JWDATR 4-6-75�
SHT- NO.
OF
CITY OF NEIN"EMOK7,
4= J
Hu A 6 Li
PERMISSION IS C'M.-MM D NNIO
MAINTA.'M Ttln-' S �,�t U, 7-171 LE 0 a
AT THE
TH E Hinvnr;
ANY 'E'
E2 E
C U t u iCu
ly H
cl Alyki, MOR COOM"'MIATOR
6/- 2 7
PERMIT NO. DATE
go 4"
ZZ �:!z
JI.
W
�1-
Planning Commission Meeting Feb. 5, 1970
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
February 5, 1970
Items No. 5, 6 & 7
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Planning Department
SUBJECT: Master Plan Amendment No. 25 (Item 5)
Proposal to amend Master Street and Highway Plan
by realigning Bayside Drive between East Coast
Highway and Jamboree Road (Marine Avenue) and also
to close a section of existing Bayside Drive west-
erly of Jamboree Road (Marine Avenue).
Use Permit Application No. 1466 (Item 6)
Request to permit development of a residential
area of single family and multiple dwelling unitsi
with supporting commercial and recreational facili-
ties, to include a yacht basin and marina.
Tentative Map Tract No. 3867 (Item 7)
Request to permit subdivAsion of 24.0± acres into
62 residential lots, and Lot "A" reserved for
waterway purposes, Lot "B" reserved for planted
area, Lot "C" reserved for common waterway access
area, Lot "D" reserved for parking and marina
facility, Lot "E" reserved for park site and
Lot 63 reserved for commercial site.
LOCATION: Portion of Block 94 of Irvine's Subdivision located
between Pacific Coast Highway and Bayside Drive,
west of Jamboree Road (Promontory Point and proposed
Promontory Bay) .
ZONE: Unclassified, C -N -H and R-3
APPLICANT: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach
OWNER: Same as applicant
Application
Bayside Drive is designated as a secondary highway on the Master
Street and Highway Plan and, therefore, the proposed realignment
of Bayside Drive.requires an amendment to the master plan in
accordance with Section 19.20.010 of the Municipal Code.
TO: Planning Commission - 2.
The proposed development is located in an unclassified "U"
district and, therefore, requires a use permit in accordance
with Section 20.34.020 of the Municipal Code.
Section 19.12.101 of the Municipal Code requires the filing of
a tentative map as the first step in subdivision of the land
into separate building lots for sale or lease.
Background
Use Permit No. 1466 was continued from the meeting of January 15,
1970, at the request of Staff and the Irvine Company so that all
three items which require Planning Commission action regarding
this proposal could be brought before*the Commission concurrently.
Staff has consolidated the reports for these items.
Subject Property
The subject property includes Phase I of the proposed development
consisting of Parcels 1, 2, 3, 4, and 9 as shown on the proposed
Land Use Plan for Use Permit No. 1466, as submitted by the Irvine
Company. Phase II of the proposed development would be the subject
of a separate use permit application in the future. This phase
would include Parcels 5, 6, 7 and 8, which are shown for informa-
tion only. These parcels lie north of the proposed realignment
of Bayside Drive,and comprise the existing Bayside Shopping Center,
a limited expansion of this center to the west, and an apartment,
development of all the high ground known as Promontory Point as
well as a small area of land at a lower elevation bordering Bayside
Drive.
The legal description filed with the application for Use Permit
No. 1466 includes all of the land in both Phase I and Phase II.
However, Phase I is the only portion for which specific informa-
tion has been submitted.
The existing and proposed uses and existing zoning of the parcels
comprising Phase I are approximately as follow:
Zoning Existing Use
Parcel #1 _U_ Vacant
R-3 Boat Repair
Facility
Parcel #2 _U_ Vacant
Parcel #3 R-3 Yacht Club
Proposed Use
Lagoon
Channel
Marina Facility
and Parki'ng
Marina Related
Commercial
TO: Planning Commission - 3.
Parcel #4
Parcel #9
Surrounding Uses
Zoning Existing Use
R-3 Vacant and
Public Right -
of -Way
Proposed Use
Commercial
_U_ Vacant Single Family
Residential
The following properties surround the proposed development and are
affected by the realignment of Bayside Drive:
1 Balboa Yacht Basin (land leased from City of Newport
Beach). City Manager's office is investigating
the possibility of retaining an appraiser to study
the effect which realignment of Bayside Drive
would have on this property.
2. Beacon Bay (land leased from City of Newport Beach).
This property would also be included in the ap-
praiser's study. However, the Staff feels that
due to the reduction of traffic on existing Bay-
side Drive (which could permit use of the rear
access to Beacon Bay), the Beacon Bay residential
property would benefit.
3. Residences adjacent to Harbor Isle Drive.
At present these residences front on a very busy
street with potentially dangerous problems of
driveway access. Staff feels the reduction' in
traffic resulting from the realignment of Bayside
Drive would benefit these homes and decrease'
the traffic hazards.
4. Bayside Shopping Center. The proposed realignment
of Bayside Drive would cut through the southwest
corner of the parking lot which would necessi-
tate redesigning a portion of the driveway access
and parking layout. The driveway connection -shown
on the Tentative Map would require further study.
5. Apartments along south side of Bayside Drive be-
tween Villa Marina Motel and Shark Island Yacht
Club. These apartments'how have direct frontage.,
on Bayside Drive but would not have direct frontage
on the proposed realignment. Further,study of
access would be necessary.
TO: Planning Commission - 4.
Statistical Analysis
3 Marina
Related .4
Commercial
4 Commercial 1 .2
9 S i n g 1 e
Family 11.5 62 3 186
TOTAL 26.2 62 3 186
Development Characteristics
RESIDENTIAL (Lots 1-62) - The Tentative Map proposes 62 single
family residential lots surrounding the greater part of the pro-
posed lagoon. The Tentative Map includes a typical cross section
showing the proposed lagoon and the relationship of lots and
streets on both sides. Other drawings on the Tentative Map show
typical building sites and street sections. Single family resi-
dential lots have the following characteristics:
A. Size and Shape. The proposed development is in
conformity with the minimum requirements of
Section 19.20.110 of the Municipal Code regarding
area (not less than 5000 sq.ft. average), width
(not less than 50 ft. average), and depth (not
less than 80 ft. average).
B. Access. Access to lots adjacent to the proposed
realignment of Bayside Drive would utilize drive-
ways located on common lot lines with turnaround
areas so that vehicles would not necessarily be
required to back into the street. The Planning
Commission recently approved this concept of
driveway design for another Irvine Company devel-
opment of 12 lots along Bayside Drive near El Paseo
Drive. Access to lots adjacent to existing Bayside
Drive is provided by conventional driveways. How-
ever, Lots 29 through 34 and 42-44, due to their
location at intersections and on the curvature of
the road, have limited sight distances. The turn-
around driveway concept properly could also apply
to these lots.
Estimated Estimated
Parcel Proposed
Population Total
No.— Use
Acres D/U per D/U Population
Lagoon
and
11.0
Marina
2 Marina
Faci 1 ities
2.1
3 Marina
Related .4
Commercial
4 Commercial 1 .2
9 S i n g 1 e
Family 11.5 62 3 186
TOTAL 26.2 62 3 186
Development Characteristics
RESIDENTIAL (Lots 1-62) - The Tentative Map proposes 62 single
family residential lots surrounding the greater part of the pro-
posed lagoon. The Tentative Map includes a typical cross section
showing the proposed lagoon and the relationship of lots and
streets on both sides. Other drawings on the Tentative Map show
typical building sites and street sections. Single family resi-
dential lots have the following characteristics:
A. Size and Shape. The proposed development is in
conformity with the minimum requirements of
Section 19.20.110 of the Municipal Code regarding
area (not less than 5000 sq.ft. average), width
(not less than 50 ft. average), and depth (not
less than 80 ft. average).
B. Access. Access to lots adjacent to the proposed
realignment of Bayside Drive would utilize drive-
ways located on common lot lines with turnaround
areas so that vehicles would not necessarily be
required to back into the street. The Planning
Commission recently approved this concept of
driveway design for another Irvine Company devel-
opment of 12 lots along Bayside Drive near El Paseo
Drive. Access to lots adjacent to existing Bayside
Drive is provided by conventional driveways. How-
ever, Lots 29 through 34 and 42-44, due to their
location at intersections and on the curvature of
the road, have limited sight distances. The turn-
around driveway concept properly could also apply
to these lots.
TO: Planning Commission - 5.
C. Setbacks. Setbacks are as follow:
1. Rear Yard - 10' Minimum
2. Side Yard - 4' Minimum
3. Front Yard - 10' Min. -Realigned Bayside Drive
17' Min. -Existing Bayside Drive
Staff recommends that the front yard setback on existing
Bayside Drive should be 20 feet minimum in the drive-
way area to prevent blocking of the public sidewalk
and right-of-way.
C. Grading. Lots 46 through 62 are split-level with
approximately 9' difference in pad elevations. A
retaining wall separates a portion of Lot 45 from
Lot 46.
WATERWAY (LOT "A") - The entry channel to the proposed lagoon is
proposed to be cut through property owned by the Irvine Company,
now occupied by Basin Marine Incorporated and a portion of the
Shark Island Yacht Club. The channel location would be immediately
adjacent to City -owned property occupied by the Balboa Yacht Basin.
The Irvine Company has applied to the Army Corps of Engineers for
the necessary navigation permit. The Corps as part of the proces-
sing of the permit will make water quality and hydraulic determina-
tions as well as coordinate with other agencies such as the Depart-
ment of Interior, State Fish and Game, and the Regional Water
Quality Control Board. Approximately thirty days are required
for,the Corps to process a navigation permit, at which time the
results Will be included in the application for a harbor permit.
The City Council has asked the Staff to prepare a study on the
question of private vs. public waterway for the lagoon proposal.
Thi,s topic will be discussed at the joint Harbor Committee Meet-
ing on February 10, 1970, and will also be a consideration in
the application for a harbor permit. One of the questions for
Planning Commission consideration regarding the lagoon is the
general concept of adding additional waterways to the existing
harbor.
LOT "B" (Planted Area) - This is a planting area that forms
part of the intersection between the proposed realignment of
Bayside Drive and the existing Bayside Drive. (Note: A new
name would be necessary for the portion of existing Bayside Drive
which would no longer be part of the through route. One name
which has been suggested is Harbor Isle Drive.) Staff is of the
opinion that the proposed intersection would function satis-
factorily; however, the connecting street should be 52 feet i.n
width between exterior curbs in order to provide for a 20 foot
entering roadway, an 8 foot median, and a 24 foot exiting road-
way.
TO: Planning Commission - 6.
LOT "C" - This is a common waterway access area and beach for
Lots 42 through 45.
LOT "D" (Marina Facilities and Parking) - Lot "D" is located
adjacent to the proposed realignment of Bayside Drive and is an
adjunct to the marina, providing space for parking and rest room
facilities. The parking lot, 17 -slip marina and dry boat storage
facility provide a window -to -the -bay approximately 800 feet in
1 e n g t h .
Parking requirements for the marina and small boat dry storage
include:
17 slips @ .75 space per boat slip
= 13
40 storage spaces @ .25 space per dry storage spaces = 13
Total Required Spaces 26
The proposed parking area presently shows 18 parking spaces.
Redesign would be necessary to provide 8 additional parking
spaces, or reduce the'number of slips and/or dry boat
storage spaces.
This,portion of the project offers an opportunity to create a trul-Y
outstanding relationship between water,docks, roadway, pedestrian
ways, and the development inland from Bayside Drive. Maximum advan-
tage should -be obtained from the differences in elevation and the
area should be thoughtfully designed to provide for landscaping,
benches, etc.
LOT "E" (Park Site) - Lot "E" is located adjacent to the west side
of the proposed waterway at the point where existing Bayside Drive
would be closed and terminated in a cul-de-sac. The Tentative Map
shows the cul-de-sac centered on Bayside Drive and overlapping onto
City property at the Balboa Marina; this could raise certain prob-
lems. However,,it is important that the turning area be fully
adequate for larger vehicles,in view of the length of the cul-de-
sac, and possible use of the road by large vehicles, trailers
transporting boats, etc.
The park site would be an additional asset to the community, pro-
viding a window -to -the -bay with possibilities for adjacent parking.
The portion of Lot "E" not included in the public right-of-way,
resulting from the closing of Bayside Drive, should be dedicated
to the City, and the existing right-of-way of Bayside Drive should
be retained under public control.
LOT 63 (Commercial Site) - One proposal for this site is a
restaurant to be located on that portion north of the present
right-of-way of Bayside Drive. Further information and study
would be necessary concerning the relationship between Lot 63
and Parcel No. 3 as shown on the proposed land use plan, as well
as the previously mentioned apartment complex.
TO: Planning Commission - 7.
PARCEL 3, AS SHOWN ON PROPOSED LAND USE PLAN FOR USE PERMIT 1466
(Commercial Site) - The proposed channel would necessitate the
removal of the existing Shark Island Yacht Club. One proposal
for use of Parcel 3 would be to accommodate replacement facilities
for the Yacht club. Further information and study is necessary
regarding this parcel.
UTILITIES - This project involves major questions of reconstruc-
tion and/or relocation of existing utilities to avoid conflict
with the proposed channel crossing. The largest single question
involves rerouting of the existing 21" trunk sewer line of Orange
County Sanitation District No. 5 which serves Balboa Island and
Irvine Terrace as well as a large part of Corona del Mar. One of
the alternative plans now under consideration for serving the future
requirements of Sanitation District No. 5 would involve expansion
of this sewer,to 39" diameter. The questions involving utility
relocation have been identified and are under study by the Irvine
Company, the public and private utility agencies involved, and the
City Public Works Department.
STRE ET STANDARDS - Comments from the City Engineer are contained
in the attached memorandum dated January 28, 1970. Standards shown
.on the Tentative Map for existing Bayside Drive appear to be satis-
factory, with the exception of questions concerning the cul-de-sac
at the east end, and the intersection between existing Bayside
Drive and the proposed relocation of Bayside Drive.
The alignment shown on the Tentative Map appears to be satisfactory,
except that a length of tangent should be provided between the two
reversing curves at the east end of the development adjacent to
the existing Bayside Shopping Center.
Consideration has been given to designing the relocated Bayside
Drive to intersect Pacific Coast Highway east of the Iverson Volks-
wagen Agency rather than west of the Bayside Inn. Inform-ation has
been received from the California Division of Highways indicating
that such a connection would be feasible so far as design of the
Pacific Coast Freeway is.concerned; however, a freeway crossing of
Bayside Drive east of the Volkswagen Agency would not be compatible
with a freeway grade separation serving a north entrance to Promon-
tory Point, west of Jamboree Road. Such a relocation of Bayside
Drive might offer opportunities for increasing the available land
area adjacent to the upper end of proposed Promontory Bay and sim-
plifying intersection design. The advantages and disadvantages of -
any such relocation are under study. Any of these proposed relo-
cations of Bayside Drive offer opportunities for shortening the
length of the main thoroughfare, improving alignment and reducing
traffic past single family homes along the west side of existing
Bayside Drive.
The attached drawings illustrate three possible typical sections
for the relocation of Bayside Drive. Alternate A is the proposal
of the Irvine Company as shown on the Tentative Map. Alternate B
TO: Planning Commission - 8.
has been proposed by the Public Works Department and is based on
four travel lanes, an optional left -turn median and parking'along
the south side only.. Alternate C has been proposed by the Plan-
ning Department and is based on a separate frontage road serving
single family dwellings and a four lane major street with no park-
ing on either side and a variable median allowing left turns only
at intersections.
Traffic studies have been presented by consultants for the Irvine
Company indicating a potential reduction in average daily traffic
on Bayside Drive to 6,500 vehicles from the present flow of 13,000
to 16,000 vehicles. This is based on anticipated diversion of
traffic following completion of the Pacific Coast Freeway.
E—AVRENCE WTU—SON
Planning Director
LW/kk
Attachments
Im
#
fly,
NEVIpU XT
S OA
&EAtf
c c
A
AAL11A
MONA
DEL MAt
WEST
JETTY
VICINITY SKETCH EAST
9 1- W P I k T b A'? CALIFOINIA o i ETTY
6RAPHIC, SCALE -MILES
NOTE: SOUNDINbS AILE MUSSED IN FEET AND DENOTE DEITHS
bELOW MEAN LOVER LOW WATER. MUIMUN HUGE OF TIDE
APPROL 10 FT. IMILUR LINES AXIE. ESTAbLIS-1461) IN 'TAI S, SECTIOU
OF NEW?Q&T &Ay.
ClAf- LULKAUD
2
X�
SECTION A -A
ILT4
%
S.
�'4
"4
44
411
qk; 4
4",
z
EXIST. 16AYSIDE
ULKAEAD LIKE
L A N
iii sit Sao
SCALF IN rEET
AD
9. A u ROST I, ASS 0
A
NbEIN-
�"f , 6.r, K 0 C H E S T E K
14'
So'
PROPOSED D R E D 6 1 N G
144, AND 1� U L K H I A D 19 6
0 b hL Y'
P K 0 14 0 N T 0 Ky
NEWPDXT MAU. CALIFOXIIIIIi
I(ELOCATED UYSIDE Dt.
AIPLICATIQN bY: S il-b. 1=11
SECTI 0 H b-6
THE WINE (IMPARYDtL
SSO NEV?oxT UNTElt
9. T. S.
IIV-jp17,T C.&LIF