Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout120_2122NAME ADDRESS OF PROPOSED FACILITY PERMIT "" yN^', MAILING ADDRESS Se TELEPHONE NO. FEE - CK NO. DATE j/ APPROVED BY: DATE APPLICATION IS HEREBY MADE FOR A HARBOR PERMIT TO OCHD t ' ❑ AT THE ABOVE LOCATION IN ACCORDANCE. WITH THE CITY OF 'ENGR ., NEWPORT BEACHPERMITPOLICIES AND THE ATTACHED DRAWING. COUNCIL - ❑ BY COMPANY RU@LICe,�KB DATED DEPT. .° DATE ESCROW - INSPECTION a SIGNATURE t ✓�} L! f SPECIAL CONDITIONS:' x OF NEWPORT BEACH CALIF wx FORM 6ea010 iCITY NAME 14 MAILING ADDRESS APPROVED BY: DATE ❑ OCHD ❑ ENGR ❑ COUNCIL g FKS DEPT. ❑ ESCROW INSPECTION SPECIAL CONDITIONS: ADDRESS OF PROPOSED FACILITY �- TELEPHONE NO. FEE PERMIT A /Z-d-f� BECK NO. DATE APPLICATION IS HEREBY MADE FOR A HARBOR PERMIT TO�� •���/ OGP1&TRU6T/A€WSE A /a� A AT THE ABOVE LOCATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PERMIT POLICIES AND THE ATTACHED DRAWING BY DATED DATE I _ % SIGNATURE _ / 16,& CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIF. f COMPANY M FORM 66 I.,. NE 1 � I jjiwvirll� 829 Harbor Island Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 **Date of Applicaton: Permit Number: "Property Address - **Buyer's Names: SCQA;6A-1 Pkki--j�A Buyer's Signatures: UM "Seller's Names: Seller's Signatures: "Escrow Company: "Address **Escrow Numbe Closing Date (Estimatel **Fax #: �keinspection Date: Check!Wo: Harbor Resources Signature/Date Special Conditions' � This permit is revocable by the City Council in accordance;Nith Title 17 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 829 Harbor Island Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 **Date of Applicaton: Permit Number: "Property Address: Zge-vv, t "Buyer's Names: Buyer's Signatures, C-141t-filvt� Billing Address: Telephone No.: "Seller's Names: Seller's Signatures: "Escrow Company: "Address "Escrow Numbe Closing Date (Estimatel AM321"A **Fax #: ReinspeCtion Date: Check No: Harbor Resources SignaturelDate Special Conditions' - This permit is revocable by the City Council in accordance with Title 17 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Fidelity National Title Insurance Company old it POLICY NO.: CAFNT0925-0925-0199-0259927039-FNTIC-2012-05 OWNER'S POLICY OF TITLE INSURANCE Issued by Fidelity National Title Insurance Coinpany Any notice of claim and any other notice or statement in writing required to be given the Company under this Policy must be given to the Company at the address shown in Section 18 of the Conditions. COVERED RISKS SUBJECT TO THE EXCL USIONS FROM COVERAGE, THE EXCEPTIONS FROM COVERAGE CONTAINED INSCHED ULE B, AND THE CONDITIONS, FIDELITYRrATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, a California corporation (the "Company'9 insures, as of Date of Policy and, to the extent stated in Covered Risks 9 and 10, after Date of Policy, against loss or damage, not exceeding the Amount of Insurance, sustained or• incurred by the Insured by reason of L Title being vested other than as stated in Schedule A. 2. Any defect in or lien or encumbrance on the Title. This Covered Risk includes but is not limited to insurance against loss from (a) A defect in the Title caused by (i) forgery, fraud, undue influence, duress, incompetency, incapacity, or impersonation; (ii) failure of any person or Fntity to have authorized a transfer or conveyance; (iii) a document affecting Title not properly created, executed, witnessed, sealed, acknowledged, notarized, or delivered; (iv) failure to perform those acts necessary to create a document by electronic means authorized by law; (v) a document executed under a falsified, expired, or otherwise invalid power of attorney; (vi) a document not properly filed, recorded, or indexed in the Public Records including failure to perform those acts by electronic means authorized by law; or (vii) a defective judicial or administrative proceeding. (b) The lien of real estate taxes or assessments imposed on the Title by a governmental authority due or payable, but unpaid. (c) Any encroachment, encumbrance, violation, variation, or adverse circumstance affecting the Title that would be disclosed by an accurate and complete land survey of the Land. The term "encroachment" includes encroachments of existing improvements located on the Land onto adjoining land, and encroachments onto the Land of existing improvements located on adjoining land 3. Unmarketable Title. 4. No right of access to and from the Land. 5. The violation or enforcement of any law, ordinance, permit, or governmental regulation (including those relating to building and zoning) restricting, regulating, prohibiting, or relating to (a) the occupancy, use, or enjoyment of the Land; ALTA Owner's Policy (6/17/06) Copyright American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form is restricted to,LR ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. (b) the character, dimensions, or location of any improvement erected on the Land; (c) the subdivision of land; or (d) environmental protection if a notice, describing any part of the Land, is recorded in the Public Records setting forth the violation or intention to enforce, but only to the extent of the violation or enforcement referred to in that notice. 6. An enforcement action based on the exercise of a governmental police power not covered by Covered Risk 5 if a notice of the enforcement action, describing any part of the Land, is recorded in the Public Records, but only to the extent of the enforcement referred to in that notice. 7. The exercise of the rights of eminent domain if a notice of the exercise, describing any part of the Land is recorded in the Public Records. 8. Any taking by a governmental body that has occurred and is binding on the rights of a purchaser for value without Knowledge. 9. Title being vested other than as stated Schedule A or being defective (a) as a result of the avoidance in whole or in part, or from a court order providing an alternative remedy, of a transfer of all or any part of the title to or any interest in the Land occurring prior to the transaction vesting Title as shown in Schedule A because that prior transfer constituted a fraudulent or- preferential transfer under federal bankruptcy, state insolvency, or similar- creditors'rights laws; or (b) because the instrument of transfer vesting Title as shown in Schedule A constitutes a preferential transfer under federal bankruptcy, state insolvency, or similar creditors' rights laws by reason of the failu e of its recording in the Public Records (i) to be timely, or (ii) to impart notice of its existence to a purchaser for value or to a judgment or lien creditor. 10. Any defect in or lien or encumbrance on the Title or other matter included in Covered Risks I through 9 that has been created or attached or has been filed or recorded in the Public Records subsequent to Date of Policy and prior to the recording of the deed or other instrument of transfer in the Public Records that vests Title as shown in Schedule A. The Company will also pay the costs, attorneys'fees, and expenses incurred in defense of any matter insured against by this Policy, but only to the extentprovided in the Conditions. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, FIDELITYAATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY has caused this policy to be signed and sealed by its duly authorized officers. Countersigned Fidelity National Title Insurance Company BY �� V �i\TLE I l GI � SEAL - — PIeSI[IeM- 3 - ATTEST - - - Secretary ALTA Owner's Policy (6/1 Copyright American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form is restricted toa ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. SCHEDULE A Name and Address of Title Insurance Company: Fidelity National Title Company, 1300 Dove Street, Suite 310, Newport Beach, CA 92660 Policy No.: CAFNT0925-0925-0199-0259927039-FNTIC-2012-05 Address Reference: 2312 Newport Blvd, Newport Beach, California Amount of Insurance: $ 19,300,000.00 Premium: $ 14,475.00 Date of Policy: November 20, 2012 at 04:30 PM 1. Name of Insured: NPB Marina LLC, a Michigan limited liability company 2. The estate or interest in the Land that is insured by this policy is: A Fee 3. Title is vested in: NPB Marina LLC, a Michigan limited liability company 4. The Land referred to in this policy is described as follows: SEE EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF THIS POLICY VALID ONLY IF SCHEDULE B IS ATTACHED 1 ABTA owners Policy (6/17/06) Copyright American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form is restricted to d_s_ Wc-N ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under „"-i L,-I v license from the American Land Title Association. Policy No. CAFNT0925-0925-0199-0259927039-FNTIC-2012-05 LEGAL DESCRIPTION EXHIBIT"A" THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN BELOW IS SITUATED IN THE"CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: PARCEL I OF PARCEL MAP, IN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 68, PAGE 48, INCLUSIVE OF PARCEL MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. EXCEPT THEREFROM THAT PORTION OF SAID PARCEL LYING NORTHEASTERLY OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT BULKHEAD LINE AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP, OR NORTHEASTERLY OF THE ORDINARY HIGH TIDE LINE OF NEWPORT BAY, AS DESCRIBED IN THAT CERTAIN DECREE RENDERED IN SUPERIOR COURT CASE NO. 23682, ORANGE COUNTY, A CERTIFIED COPY THEREOF BEING RECORDED AUGUST 14, 1928, IN BOOK 191, PAGE 296, OFFICIAL RECORDS. A PORTION OF 'THE ARCADE" AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP WAS VACATED AND CLOSED TO PUBLIC USE BY RESOLUTION NO. 2163, OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, A CERTIFIED COPY OF SAID RESOLUTION BEING RECORDED IN BOOK 1095, PAGE 317 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. APN: 047-120-31 2 Copyright American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. ALTA Owners Policy (6/17/06) 1111MCan Policy No. CAFNT0925-0925-0199-0259927039-FNTIC-2012-05 SCHEDULE B EXCEPTIONS FROM COVERAGE This policy does not insure against loss or damage, and the Company will not pay costs, attorneys' fees, or expenses that arise by reason of: 1. Property taxes, including any personal propertytaxes and any assessments collected with taxes,for the fiscal year 2012-2013, Assessor's Parcel Number 047-120-31. Code Area Number: 07001 1st Installment: $103,170.61 PAID 2nd Installment: $103,170.61 PAYABLE, NOT YET DELINQUENT Land: $18,111,251.00 Improvements: $1,178,362.00 Exemption: Personal Property: 2. The lien of supplemental taxes, if any, assessed pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 75) of the Revenue and Taxation Code of the State of California, as a result of the transfer of title to the vestee named in Schedule A; or as a result of changes in ownership, new construction or other events occurring on or after the date of the policy. 3. Water rights, claims or title to water, whether or not disclosed by the public records. 4. Rights and easements for commerce, navigation and fishery lying beneath the waters of the Pacific Ocean in Newport Bay. 5. Any adverse claim based upon the assertion that some portion of said land is tide or submerged lands, or has been created by artificial means or has accreted to such portion so created. 6. Covenants, conditions and restrictions but deleting restrictions if any, based on race, color, religion or national origin contained in the deeds from Newport Beach Company, recorded September 19, 1906, in Book 138, Page 237, of Deeds; April 2, 1906, in Book 131, Page 71 of Deeds; May 16, 1907, in Book 155, Page 379 of Deeds; and February 23, 1906, in Book 123, Page 313 of Deeds. 7. Covenants, conditions and restrictions (deleting therefrom any restrictions indicating any preference, limitation or discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status or national origin) as set forth in the document Recorded: Book 131, Page 384, of Deeds ALTA Owners Policy (6/17/06) Copyright American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form is restricted to .,xrgic"K, ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under ,`" ;r`_; license from the American Land Title Association. 5� SCHEDULE B (continued) Policy No. CAFNT0925-0925-0199-0259927039-FNTIC-2012-05 S. An easement(s) for the purposes(s) shown below and rights incidental thereto as dedicated to the City of Newport Beach per instrument recorded in Book 11343, Page 1970 of Official Records of Orange County and as delineated on Parcel Map filed in Book 68, Page 48 of Parcel Maps of said County. Purpose: Pedestrian access and scenic view Affects: A portion of said land as depicted on said Parcel Map 9. An instrument entitled "Irrevocable Offer to Dedicate Public 'Access and Recreational Use Easements", recorded March 30, 2010, Instrument No. 2010000149322, Official Records. Reference is made to said document for full particulars. 4 ALTA Owner's Policy (6/17/06) SCHEDULE B (continued) Policy No. CAFNT0925-0925-0199-0259927039-FNTIC-2012-05 10. Any facts, rights, interests, or claims which may exist or arise by reason of the following facts disclosed by survey, Job No. 12-744, dated April 8, 2012, last revised November 6, 2012 prepared by DRC Engineering, Inc. (Pascal Apotheloz): A) An encroachment of a monument sign into the street right of way of Newport Boulevard, of an undisclosed distance. B) None Shown C) An encroachment of a building overhang into the street right of way of Newport Boulevard, of an undisclosed distance. D) An encroachment of a building overhang into the street right of way of Newport Boulevard, of an undisclosed distance. E) An encroachment of a building into the street right of way of Newport Boulevard, of an undisclosed distance. F) A metal cover. G) Asphalt concrete crosses the southerly boundary, of an undisclosed distance. H) An encroachment of a fence across the southeast boundary, of an undisclosed distance. I) An encroachment of a deck across the southeast boundary, of an undisclosed distance. J) A bulkhead crosses the southeast and northeast boundary. K) An encroachment of boat docks across the northeast boundary, of an undisclosed distance. L) A 4.6' encroachment of a bulkhead onto the subject property. M) A bulkhead crosses the northeasterly boundary. N) A bulkhead crosses over an easement for pedestrian purposes. Said easement is described in exception 8 above. 0) A wood bridge crosses over an easement for view purposes. Said easement is described in exception 8 above. P) The encroachment of Newport Bay and a boat dock. Q) The right of pedestrian and boat access across the subject property as evidenced by "0" above. R) A bulkhead crosses the northeasterly boundary. S) A bulkhead crosses the easterly boundary. T) A bulkhead located on subject property. U) Three monitoring wells located on the subject property. V) A cable TV pull box. W) An encroachment of a dock ramp over the easterly boundary, of an undisclosed distance. X) A minimum 2' to a maximum (undisclosed) encroachment of a bulkhead onto the subject property. Y) Pedestrian access to the docks adjoining subject property to the east as evidenced by a dock access ramp. Z) Newport Bay crosses the easterly boundary. AA) An encroachment of boat docks across the easterly boundary, of an undisclosed distance. BB) A boat ramp. 11. Any rights, interests or claims of the hereinafter listed parties in possession of a portion of said land as tenants only, including but not limited to those based on an unrecorded lease(s) and/or rental agreements as disclosed to the company in writing: Southcoast Shipyard, Inc. Pete Stewart ALTA owners Policy (6/17/06) SCHEDULE B (continued) Policy No. CAFNT0925-0925-0199-0259927039-FNTIC-2012-05 12. This is a Pro Forma Policy. It does not reflect the present state of the Title and is not a commitment to (i) insure the Title or (ii) issue any of the attached endorsements. Any such commitment must be an express written undertaking on appropriate forms of the Company. END OF SCHEDULE B 6 ALTA Owners Policy (6/17/06) ENDORSEMENT Attached to Policy No. CAFNT0925-0925-0199-0259927039-FNTIC-2012-05 Issued By Fidelity National Title Insurance Company The insurance provided by this endorsement is subject to the exclusions in Section 4 of this endorsement; and the Exclusions from Coverage, the Exceptions from Coverage contained in Schedule B, and the Conditions in the policy. For the purposes of this endorsement only, a. "Covenant" means a covenant, condition, limitation or restriction in a document or instrument in effect at Date of Policy. b. "Improvement" means a building, structure located on the surface of the Land, road, walkway, driveway, or curb, affixed to the Land at Date of Policy and that by law constitutes real property, but excluding any crops, landscaping, lawn, shrubbery, or trees. 3. The Company insures against loss or damage sustained by the Insured by reason of: A violation on the Land at Date of Policy of an enforceable Covenant, unless an exception in Schedule B of the policy identifies the violation; b. Enforced removal of an Improvement as a result of a violation, at Date of Policy, of a building setback line shown on a plat of subdivision recorded or filed in the Public Records, unless an exception in Schedule B of the policy identifies the violation; or C. A notice of a violation, recorded in the Public Records at Date of Policy, of an enforceable Covenant relating to environmental protection describing any part of the Land and referring to that Covenant, but only to the extent of the violation of the Covenant referred to in that notice, unless an exception in Schedule B of the policy identifies the notice of the violation. 4. This endorsement does not insure against loss or damage (and the Company will not pay costs, attorneys' fees, or expenses) resulting from: a. any Covenant contained in an instrument creating a lease; any Covenant relating to obligations of any type to perform maintenance, repair, or remediation on the Land; or except as provided in Section 3.c., any Covenant relating to environmental protection of any kind or nature, including hazardous or toxic matters, conditions, or substances. 1of10 ALTA Endorsement Form 9.2-06 (Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions - Improved Land - Owner's Policy) (4/2/12) CLTA Endorsement Form 100.10-06 Copyright American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form is restricted to Au€nics_�d ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. Attached to Policy No. CAFNT0925-0925-0199-0259927039-FNTIC-2012-05 This endorsement is issued as part of the policy. Except as it expressly states, it does not (i) modify any of the terms and provisions of the policy, (ii) modify any prior endorsements, (iii) extend the Date of Policy, or (iv) increase the Amount of Insurance. To the extent a provision of the policy or a previous endorsement is inconsistent with an express provision of this endorsement, this endorsement controls. Otherwise, this endorsement is subject to all of the terms and provisions of the policy and of any prior endorsements. Dated: November 20, 2012 i°i Fidelity National Title INSURANCE COMPANY Countersigned 1of10 ALTA Endorsement Form 9.2-06 (Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions - Improved Land - Owner's Policy) (4/2/12) CLTA Endorsement Form 100.10-06 Copyright American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form is restricted to +uc+y ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under a license from the American Land Title Association. ENDORSEMENT Attached to Policy No. CAFNT0925-0925-0199-0259927039-FNTIC-2012-05 Issued by Fidelity National Title Insurance Company The Company insures against loss or damage sustained by the Insured if, at Date of Policy (i) the Land does not abut and have both actual vehicular and pedestrian access to and from Newport Boulevard (the "Street"), (ii) the Street is not physically open and publicly maintained, or (iii) the Insured has no right to use existing curb cuts or entries along that portion of the Street abutting the Land. This endorsement is issued as part of the policy. Except as it expressly states, it does not (i) modify any of the terms and provisions of the policy, (ii) modify any prior endorsements, (iii) extend the Date of Policy, or (iv) increase the Amount of Insurance. To the extent a provision of the policy or a previous endorsement is inconsistent with an express provision of this endorsement, this endorsement controls. Otherwise, this endorsement is subject to all of the terms and provisions of the policy and of any prior endorsements. Dated: November 20, 2012 2of10 0 Fidelity National Title TNT LURANU COMPANY Countersigned ALTA Endorsement Form 17-06 (Access and Entry) (6/17/06) CLTA Endorsement Form 103.11-06 Copyright American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form is restricted to ucR c_a ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under ' :c license from the American Land Title Association. it ENDORSEMENT Attached to Policy No. CAFNT0925-0925-0199-0259927039-FNTIC-2012-05 Issued by Fidelity National Title Insurance Company The Company insures against loss or damage sustained by the Insured by reason of the failure of the Land to constitute a lawfully created parcel according to the subdivision statutes and local subdivision ordinances applicable to the Land. This endorsement is issued as part of the policy. Except as it expressly states, it does not (i) modify any of the terms and provisions of the policy, (ii) modify any prior endorsements, (iii) extend the Date of Policy, or (iv) increase the Amount of Insurance. To the extent a provision of the policy or a previous endorsement is inconsistent with an express provision of this endorsement, this endorsement controls. Otherwise, this endorsement is subject to all of the terms and provisions of the policy and of any prior endorsements. Dated: November 20, 2012 4 iilil Fidelity National Title: . INS:URANCE. COMPANY Countersigned 3of10 ALTA Endorsement Form 26-06 (Subdivision) (10/16/08) CLTA Endorsement Form 116.8-06 Copyright American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form is restricted to !TM ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under = '` license from the American Land Title Association. ENDORSEMENT Attached to Policy No. CAFNT0925-0925-0199-0259927039-FNTIC-2012-05 Issued by Fidelity National Title Insurance Company The Company insures against loss or damage sustained by the Insured by reason of the Land being taxed as part of a larger parcel of land or failing to constitute a separate tax parcel for real estate taxes. This endorsement is issued as part of the policy. Except as it expressly states, it does not (i) modify any of the terms and provisions of the policy, (ii) modify any prior endorsements, (iii) extend the Date of Policy, or (iv) increase the Amount of Insurance. To the extent a provision of the policy or a previous endorsement is inconsistent with an express provision of this endorsement, this endorsement controls. Otherwise, this endorsement is subject to all of the terms and provisions of the policy and of any prior endorsements. Dated: November 20, 2012 4 of 10 Fidelity National Title INSURANCE COMPANY Couritersigned ALTA Endorsement Form 18-06 (Single Tax Parcel) (6/17/06) CLTA Endorsement From 129-06 Copyright American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form is restricted to AM nre v ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. ENDORSEMENT Attached to Policy No. CAFNT0925-0925-0199-0259927039-FNTIC-2012-05 Issued by Fidelity National Title Insurance Company CLTA 103.5-06 The Company insures against loss or damage sustained by the Insured by reason of damage to existing and/or future improvements, including lawns, shrubbery or trees, resulting from the exercise of any right to use the surface of the Land for the extraction or development of water excepted from the description of the Land or shown as a reservation in Schedule B. This endorsement is issued as part of the policy. Except as it expressly states, it does not (i) modify any of the terms and provisions of the policy, (ii) modify any prior endorsements, (iii) extend the Date of Policy, or (iv) increase the Amount of Insurance. To the extent a provision of the policy or a previous endorsement is inconsistent with an express provision of this endorsement, this endorsement controls. Otherwise, this endorsement is subject to all of the terms and provisions of the policy and of any prior endorsements. Dated: November 20, 2012 `i" Fidelity National Title INSURANCE COMPANY Countersigned 5of10 Custom Endorsement SE-55 ENDORSEMENT Attached to Policy No. CAFNT0925-0925-0199-025.9927039-FNTIC-2012-05 Issued by Fidelity National Title Insurance Company The Company insures against loss or damage sustained by the Insured by reason of the failure of the Land as described in Schedule A to be the same as that identified on the survey made by DRC Engineering, Inc. (Pascal Apotheloz) dated April 8, 2012, and designated Job No. DR12-744, last revised November 6, 2012. This endorsement is issued as part of the policy. Except as it expressly states, it does not (i) modify any of the terms and provisions of the policy, (ii) modify any prior endorsements, (iii) extend the Date of Policy, or (iv) increase the Amount of Insurance. To the extent a provision of the policy or a previous endorsement is inconsistent with an express provision of this endorsement, this endorsement controls. Otherwise, this endorsement is subject to all of the terms and provisions of the policy and of any prior endorsements. Dated: November 20, 2012 6 of 10 ='ll" Fidelity National Title INSURANCE COMPANY Countersigned ALTA Endorsement Form 25-06 (Same as Survey) (10/16/08) CLTA Endorsement Form 116.1-06 Copyright American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form is restricted to auentea� ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. ENDORSEMENT Attached to Policy No. CAFNT0925-0925-0199-0259927039-FNTIC-2012-05 Issued by Fidelity National Title Insurance Company The policy is hereby amended by deleting Paragraph 14 of the Conditions, relating to Arbitration. This endorsement is issued as part of the policy. Except as it expressly states, it does not (i) modify any of the terms and provisions of the policy, (ii) modify any prior endorsements, (iii) extend the Date of Policy, or (iv) increase the Amount of Insurance. To the extent a provision of the policy or a previous endorsement is inconsistent with an express provision of this endorsement, this endorsement controls. Otherwise, this endorsement is subject to all of the terms and provisions of the policy and of any prior endorsements. Dated: November 20, 2012 0 Fidelity National Title WSURANCE 'COM AW Countersigned 7of10 Deletion of Arbitration Endorsement — ALTA Owner's Policy (6/17/06) SE-91 ENDORSEMENT Attached to Policy No. CAFNT0925-0925-0199-0259927039-FNTIC-2012-05 Issued by Fidelity National Title Insurance Company ALTA Endorsement Form 28.1-06 1. The insurance provided by this endorsement is subject to the exclusions in Section 4 of this endorsement; and the Exclusions from Coverage, the Exceptions from Coverage contained in Schedule B, and the Conditions in the policy. 2. For purposes of this endorsement only, "Improvement" means an existing building, located on either the Land or adjoining land at Date of Policy and that by law constitutes real property. 3. The Company insures against loss or damage sustained by the Insured by reason of: a. An encroachment of any Improvement located on the Land onto adjoining land or onto that portion of the Land subject to an easement, unless an exception in Schedule B of the policy identifies the encroachment; b. An encroachment of any Improvement located on adjoining land onto the Land at Date of Policy, unless an exception in Schedule B of the policy identifies the encroachment; C. Enforced removal of any Improvement located on the Land as a result of an encroachment by the Improvement onto any portion of the Land subject to any easement, in the event that the owners of the easement shall, for the purpose of exercising the right of use or maintenance of the easement, compel removal or relocation of the encroaching Improvement; or d. Enforced removal of any Improvement located on the Land that encroaches onto adjoining land. 4. This endorsement does not insure against loss or damage (and the Company will not pay costs, attorneys' fees, or expenses) resulting from encroachments of bulkheads, boat docks, boat ramps, dock ramps or Newport Bay including those listed in exception 10 of Schedule B, nor from the encroachments listed as Exceptions 10N and 100 of Schedule B. This endorsement is issued as part of the policy. Except as it expressly states, it does not (i) modify any of the terms and provisions of the policy, (ii) modify any prior endorsements, (iii) extend the Date of Policy, or (iv) increase the Amount of Insurance. To the extent a provision of the policy or a previous endorsement is inconsistent with an express provision of this endorsement, this endorsement controls. Otherwise, this endorsement is subject to all of the terms and provisions of the policy and of any prior endorsements. Dated: November 20, 2012 Fidelity National Title .., INSURANCE COMPANY Countersigned 8 of 10 Custom Endorsement SE-55 ENDORSEMENT Attached to Policy No. CAFNT0925-0925-0199-0259927039-FNTIC-2012-05 Issued by Fidelity National Title Insurance Company The Company insures against loss or damage sustained by the Insured by reason of an environmental protection lien that, at Date of Policy, is recorded in the Public Records or filed in the records of the clerk of the United States district court for the district in which the Land is located, unless the environmental protection lien is set forth as an exception in Schedule B. This endorsement is issued as part of the policy. Except as it expressly states, it does not (i) modify any of the terms and provisions of the policy, (ii) modify any prior endorsements, (iii) extend the Date of Policy, or (iv) increase the Amount of Insurance. To the extent a provision of the policy or a previous endorsement is inconsistent with an express provision of this endorsement, this endorsement .controls. Otherwise, this endorsement is subject to all of the terms and provisions of the policy and of any prior endorsements. Dated: November 20, 2012 lilll Fidelity National Title. INSURANCE COMPANY Countersigned 9 of 10 ALTA Endorsement Form 8.2-06 (Commercial Environmental Protection Lien) (10/16/08) CLTA Endorsement Form 110.9.1-06 Copyright American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form is restricted to Aurtic.tn ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. i. Attached to Policy No. CAFNT0925-0925-0199-0259927039-FNTIC-2012-05 ENDORSEMENT Attached to Policy No. CAFNT0925-0925-0199-0259927039-FNTIC-2012-05 Issued by Fidelity National Title Insurance Company The Company insures against loss or damage sustained by the Insured by reason of the failure of a Commercial Buildings, known as 2212, 2222 and 2312 Newport Boulevard, to be located on the Land at Date of Policy. This endorsement is issued as part of the policy. Except as it expressly states, it does not (i) modify any of the terms and provisions of the policy, (ii) modify any prior endorsements, (iii) extend the Date of Policy, or (iv) increase the Amount of Insurance. To the extent a provision of the policy or a previous endorsement is inconsistent with an express provision of this endorsement, this endorsement controls. Otherwise, this endorsement is subject to all of the terms and provisions of the policy and of any prior endorsements. Dated: November 20, 2012 10 of 10 ""' Fidelity National. Title INSURANCE COMPANY Countersigned ALTA Endorsement Form 22-06 (Location) (6/17/06) CLTA Endorsement Form 116.01-06 Copyright American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form is restricted to 'MMCaN ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE The following matters are expressly excluded from the coverage of this policy, and the Company will not pay loss or damage, costs, attorneys' fees, or expenses that arise by reason of: 1. (a) Any law, ordinance, permit, or governmental regulation (including those relating to building and zoning) restricting, regulating, prohibiting, or relating to (i) the occupancy, use, or enjoyment of the Land; (ii) the character, dimensions or location of any improvement erected on the Land; (iii) the subdivision of land; or (iv) environmental protection; or the effect of any violation of these laws, ordinances, or governmental regulations. This Exclusion 1(a) does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 5. (b) Any governmental police power. This Exclusion l (b) does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 6. 2. Rights of eminent domain. This Exclusion does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 7 or 8. 3. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims, or other matters: (a) created, suffered, assumed, or agreed to by the Insured Claimant; (b) not Known to the Company, not recorded in the Public Records at Date of Policy, but Known to the Insured Claimant and not disclosed in writing to the Company by the Insured Claimant prior to the date the Insured Claimant became an Insured under this policy; (c) resulting in no loss or damage to the Insured Claimant-, (d) attaching or created subsequent to Date of Policy (however, this does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 9 and 10); or (e) resulting in loss or damage that would not have been sustained if the Insured Claimant had paid value for the Title. 4. Any claim, by reason of the operation of federal bankruptcy, state insolvency, or similar creditors' rights laws, that the transaction vesting the Title as shown in Schedule A, is (a) a fraudulent conveyance or fraudulent transfer, or (b) a preferential transfer for any reason not stated in Covered Risk 9 of this policy. 5. Any lien on the Title for real estate taxes or assessments imposed by governmental authority and created or attaching between Date ofPohcy and the date of recording of the deed or other instrument of transfer in the Public Records that vests Title as shown in Schedule A. 1. DEFINITION OF TERMS The following terms when used in this policy mean: (a) "Amount of trmsurance The amount stated in Schedule A, as may be increased or decreased by endorsement to this policy, increased by Section 8(b), or decreased by Sections 10 and 11 of these Conditions. (b) "Date of Policy": The date designated as 'Date of Policy" in Schedule A. (c) "Entity": A corporation, partnership, trust, limited liability company, or other similar legal entity. (d) "Insured": The Insured named in Schedule A. (i) The term "Insured" also includes (A) successors. to the Title of the Insured by operation of law as distinguished from purchase, including heirs, devisees, survivors, personal representatives, or next of kin; (B) successors to an Insured by dissolution, merger, consolidation, distribution, or reorganization; (C) successors to an Insured by its conversion to another kind of Entity; (D) a grantee of an Insured under a deed delivered without payment of actual valuable consideration conveying the Title (1) if the stock, shares, memberships, or other equity interests of the grantee are wholly -owned by the named Insured, (2) if the grantee wholly owns the named Insured, (3) if the grantee is wholly -owned by an affiliated Entity of the named Insured, provided the, affiliated Entity and the named Insured are both wholly -owned bythe same person or Entity, or (4) if the grantee is a trustee or beneficiary of a trust created by a written instrument established by the Insured named in Schedule A for estate planning purposes. (ii) With regard to (A), (B), (C), and (D) reserving, however, all rights and defenses as to any successor that the Company would have had against any predecessor Insured. (e) "Insured Claimant": An Insured claiming loss or damage- (f) "Knowledge' or "Known": Actual knowledge, not constructive knowledge or notice that may be imputed to an Insured by reason ofthe Public Records or any other records that impart constructive notice ofmatters affecting the Title. (g) "Land The land described in Schedule A, and affixed improvements that by law constitute real property. The term "Land" does not include any property beyond the lines ofthe area described in Schedule A_ nor any right, title, interest, estate, or CONDITIONS easement in abutting streets, roads, avenues, alleys, lanes, ways, or waterways, but this does not modify or limit the extent that a right of access to and from the Land is insured by this policy. (h) "Mortgage": Mortgage, deed of trust, trust deed, or other security instrument, including one evidenced by electronic means authorized by law. (i) "Public Records": Records established under state statutes at Date of Policy for the purpose of imparting eonsuuctive notice of matters relating to real property to purchasers for value and without Knowledge. With respect to Covered Risk 5(d), "Public Records" shall also include environmental protection liens filed in the records ofthe clerk ofthe United States District Court for the district where the Land is located 0) "Title": The estate or interest described in Schedule A (k) "Unmarketable Title": Title affected by an alleged or apparent matter that would permit a prospective purchaser or lessee of the Title or lender on the Title to be released from the obligation to purchase, lease, or lend if there is a contractual condition requiring the delivery ofmarketable title. 2. CONTINUATION OF INSURANCE The coverage of this policy shall continue in force as ofDate of Policy in favor of an Insured, but only so long as the Insured retains an estate or interest in the Land, or holds an obligation secured by a purchase money Mortgage given by a purchaserfrom the Insured, or only so long as the Insured shall have liability by reason of warranties in any transfer or conveyance of the Title. This policy shall not continue in force in favor of any purchaser from the Insured of either (i) an estate or interest in the Land, or (ii) an obligation secured by a purchase money Mortgage given to the Insured. 3. NOTICE OF CLAIAI TO BE GIVEN BY INSURED CLAIMANT The Insured shall notify the Company promptly inwriting (i) in case of any litigation as set forth in Section 5(a) of these Conditions, (ii) in case Knowledge shall come to an Insured hereunder of any claim of title or interest that is adverse to the Title, as insured, and that might cause loss or damage for which the Company may be liable by virtue of this policy, or (iii) if the Title, as insured, is rejected as Unmarketable Title. If the Company is prejudiced by the failure ofthe Insured Claimant to provide prompt notice, the Company's liability to the Insured Claimant under the policy shall be reduced to the extent of the prejudice. - 4. PROOF OF LOSS In the event the Company is unable to determine the amount of loss or damage, the Company may, at its option, require as a condition of payment that the Insured Claimant furnish a signed proof of loss. The proof of loss must describe the defect, lien, encumbrance, or other matter insured against by this policy that constitutes the basis of loss or damage and shall state, to the extent possible, the basis of calculating the amount of the loss or damage. 5. DEFENSE AND PROSECUTION OF ACTIONS (a) Upon written request by the Insured, and subject to the options contained in Section 7 ofthese Conditions, the Company, at its own cost and without unreasonable delay, shall provide for the defense of an Insured in litigation in which any third party asserts a claim covered by this policy adverse to the Insured This obligation is limited to only those stated causes of action alleging matters insured against by this policy. The Company shall have the right to select counsel of its choice (subject to the right ofthe Insured to object for reasonable cause)to represent the Insuredas to those stated causes cf action. It shall not be liable for and will not pay the fees of any other counsel. The Company will not pay any fees, costs, or expenses incurred by the Insured in the defense of those causes of action that allege matters not insured against by this policy. (b) The Company shall have the right, in addition to the options contained in Section 7 of these Conditions, at its own cost, to institute and prosecute any action or proceeding or to do any other act that in its opinion may be necessary or desirable to establish the Title, as insured, or to prevent or reduce loss or damage to the Insured. The Company may take any appropriate action under the temps of this policy, whether or not it shall be liable to the Insured. The exercise of these rights shall not be an admission of liability or waiver of any provision ofthis policy. If the Company exercises its rights under this subsection, it must do so diligently. (c) Whenever the Company brings an action or asserts a defense as required or peraitted by this policy, the Companymay pursue the litigation to a final determination by a court of competent jurisdiction, and it expressly reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to appeal from any adverse judgment or order. 6. DUTY OF INSURED CLAIMANT TO COOPERATE (a) In all cases where this policy permits or requires the Company to prosecute or provide for the defense of any action or proceeding and any appeals, the Insured shall secure to the Company the right to so prosecute or provide defense in the action or proceeding including the right to use, at its option, the name of the Insured for this purpose. Whenever requested by the Company, the Insured, at the Company's expense, shall give the Company all reasonable aid(i)in securing evidence, obtaining witnesses, prosecuting or defending the action or proceeding or effecting settlement, and (ii) in any other lawful act that in the ALTA Owner's Policy (6/17/06) Copyright American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form is restricted to a,w.Earc.N ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. opinion of the Company may be necessary or desirable to establish the Title or any other matter as insured. If the Comparry is prejudiced by the failure ofthe Insured to furnish the required cooperation, the Company's obligations to the Insured under the policy shall terminate, including any liability or obligation to defend, prosecute, or continue any litigation, with regard to the matter or matters requiring such cooperation. (b) The Company may reasonably require the Insured Claimant to submit to examination under oath by any authorized representative of the Company and to produce for examination, inspection, and copying, at such reasonable times and places as may be designated by the authorized representative of the Company, all records, in whatever medium maintained, including books, ledgers, checks, memoranda, correspondence, reports, e- mails, disks, tapes, and videos whether bearing a date before or after Date of Policy, that reasonably pertain to the loss or damage. Further, if requested by any authorized representative of the Company, the Insured Claimant shall grant its permission, in writing, for any authorized representative of the Company to examine, inspect, and copy all of these records in the custody or control of a third party that reasonably pertain to the loss or damage. All information designated as confidential bythe Insured Claimant provided to the Company pursuant to this Section shall not be disclosed to others unless, in the reasonable judgment of the Company, it is necessary in the administration ofthe claim. Failure ofthe Insured Claimant to submit for examination under oath, produce any reasonably requested information, or grant permission to secure reasonably necessary information from third parties as required in this subsection, unless prohibited by law or governmental regulation, shall terminate any liability of the Company under this policy as to that claim. 7. OPTIONS TO PAY OR OTHERWISE SETTLE CLAIMS; TERMINATION OF LIABILITY In case of a claim under this polic_the Company shall have the following additional options: (a) To Pay or Tender Payment ofthe Amount of Insurance. To pay or tender payment ofthe Amount of Insurance under this policy together with any costs, attorneys' fees, and expenses incurred by the Insured Claimant that were authorized by the Company up to the time of payment or tender of payment andthat the Company is obligated to pay. Upon the exercise by the Company of this option, all liability and obligations of the Company to the Insured under this policy, other than to make the payment required in this subsection, shall terminate, including any liability or obligation to defend, prosecute, or continue any litigation. (b) To Pay or Otherwise Settle With Parties OtherThanthe Insured or With the Insured Claimant. (i) To pay or otherwise settle with other parties for or in the name of an Insured Claimant any claim insured against under this policy. In addition, the Company will pay any costs, attorneys' fees, and expenses incurred by the Insured Claimant that were authorized by the Company up to the time of payment and that the Company is obligated to pay; or (ii) To pay or otherwise settle with the Insured Claimant the loss or damage provided for under this policy, together with any costs, attorneys' fees, and expenses incurred by the Insured Claimant that were authorized by the Company up to the time of payment and that the Company is obligated to pay. Upon the exercise by the Company of either ofthe options provided for in subsections (b)(i) or (ii), the Company's obligations to the Insured under this policy for the claimed loss or damage, other than the payments required to be made, shall terminate, including any liability or obligation to defend, prosecute, or continue any litigation. 8. DETERMINATION AND EXTENT OF LIABILITY This policy is a contract of indemnity against actual monetary loss or damage sustained or incurred by the Insured Claimant who has suffered loss or damage by reason of matters insured against by this policy. (a) The extent of liability of the Company for loss or damage under this policy shall not exceed the lesser of (i) the Amount of Insurance; or (ii) the difference between the value of the Title as insured and the value of the Title subject to the risk insured against by this policy. (b) If the Company pursues its rights under Section 5 of these Conditions and is unsuccessful in establishing the Title, as insured (i) the Amount of Insurance shall be increased by 10%, and (ii) the Insured Claimant shall have the right to have the loss or damage determined either as ofthe date the claim was made by the Insured Claimant or as of the date it is settled and paid. (c) In addition to the extent of liability under (a) and (b), the Company will also pay those costs, attorneys' fees, and expenses incurred in accordance with Sections 5 and 7 of these Conditions. 9. LIMITATION OF LIABILITY (a) If the Company establishes the Title, or removes the alleged defect, lien or encumbrance, or cures the lack of a right of access to or from the Land, or cures the claim of Unmarketable Title, all as insured in a reasonably diligent manner by any method, including litigation and the completion of any appeals, it shall have fully performed its obligations with respect to that matter and shall not be liable for any loss or damage caused to the Insured. (b) In the event of any litigation, including litigation by the Company or with the Company's consent, the Company shall have no liability for loss or damage until there has been a final determination by a court of competent jurisdiction, and disposition of all appeals, adverse to the Title, as insured. (c) The Company shall not be liable for loss or damage to the Insured for liability voluntarily assumed by the Insured in settling any claim or suit without the prior written consent ofthe Company. 10. REDUCTION OF INSURANCE; REDUCTION OR TERMINATION OF LIABILITY All payments under this policy, except payments made for costs, attorneys' fees, and expenses, shall reduce the Amount of Insurance by the amount of the payment. 11. LLABILITY NONCUMULATIVE The Amount of Insurance shall be reduced by any amount the Company pays under any policy insuring a Mortgage to which exception is taken in Schedule B or to which the Insured has agreed, assumed, or taken subject, or which is executed by an Insured after Date of Policy and which is a charge or lien on the Title, and the amount so paid shall be deemed a payment to the Insured under this policy. 12. PAYMENT OF LOSS When liability and the extent of loss or damage have been definitely fixed in accordance with these Conditions, the payment shall be made within 30 days. 13. RIGHTS OF RECOVERY UPON PAYMENT OR SETTLEMENT (a) Whenever the Company shall have settled and paid a claim under this policy, it shall be subrogated and entitled to the rights ofthe Insured Claimant in the Title and all other rights and remedies in respect to the claim that the Insured Claimant has against any person or property-, to the extent ofthe amount of any loss, costs, attomeys' fees, and expenses paid by the Company. If requested by the Company, the Insured Claimant shall execute documents to evidence the transfer to the Company ofthese rights and remedies. The Insured Claimant shall permit the Companyto sue, compromise, or settle in the name of the Insured Claimant and to use the name ofthe Insured Claimant in any transaction or litigation involving these rights and remedies. If a payment on account of a claim does not fully cover the loss of the Insured Claimant, the Company shall defer the exercise of its right to recover until after the Insured Claimant shall have recovered its loss. (b) The Company's right of subrogation includes the rights of the Insured to indemnities, guaranties, other policies of insurance, or bonds, notwithstanding any terms or conditions contained in those instruments that address subrogation rights. 14. ARBITRATION Either the Company or the Insured may demand that the claim or controversy shall be submitted to arbitration pursuant to the Title Insurance Arbitration Rules ofthe American Land Title Association ('Rules"). Except as provided in the Rules, there shall be no joinder or consolidation with claims or controversies of other persons. Arbitrable matters may include, but are not limited to, any controversy or claim between the Company andthe Insured arising out of or relating to this policy, any service in connection with its issuance or the breach of a policy provision, or to any other controversy or claim arising out of the transaction giving rise to this policy. All arbitrable matters when the Amount of Insurance is $2,000,000 or less shall be arbitrated at the option of either the Company or the Insured. All arbitrable matters when the Amount of Insurance is in excess of $2,000,000 shall be arbitrated only when agreed to by both the Company and the Insured. Arbitration pursuant to this policy and under the Rules shall be binding upon the parties. Judgment upon the award rendered by the Arbitrator(s) may be entered in any court of competent jurisdiction. 15. LIABILITY LIMITED TO THIS POLICY; POLICY ENTIRE CONTRACT (a) This policy together with all endorsements, if any, attached to it by the Company is the entire policy and contract between the Insured and the Company. In interpreting any provision of this policy, this policy shall be construed as a whole. (b) Any claim of loss or damage that arises out ofthe status of the Title or by any action asserting such claim shall be restricted to this policy. (c) Any amendment of or endorsement to this policy must be in writing and authenticated by an authorized person, or expressly incorporated by Schedule A of [his policy. (d) Each endorsement to this policy issued at any time is made a part of this policy and is subject to all of its terms and provisions. Except as the endorsement expressly states, it does not (i) modify any ofthe terms and provisions of the policy, (ii) modify any prior endorsement, (iii) extend the Date of Policy, or (iv) increase the Amount of Insurance. 16. SEVERABILITY In the event any provision of this policy, in whole or in part, is held invalid or unenforceable under applicable law, the policy shall be deemed not to include that provision or such part held to be invalid, but all other provisions shall remain in full force and effect. 17. CHOICE OF LAW; FORUM (a) Choice of Law: The Insured acknowledges the Company has underwritten the risks covered by this policy and determined the premium charged therefor in reliance upon the law affecting interests in real property and applicable to the interpretation, rights, remedies, or enforcement ofpolicies oftitle insurance of the jurisdiction where the Land is located. Therefore, the court or an arbitrator shall apply the law ofthe jurisdiction where the Land is located to determine the validityof claims against the Title that are adverse to the Insured and to interpret and enforce the terns of this policy. In neither case shall the court or arbitrator apply its conflicts of law principles to determine the applicable law. (b) Choice of Forum: Any litigation or other proceeding brought by the Insured against the Company must be filed only in a state or federal court within the United States of America or its territories having appropriate jurisdiction. 18. NOTICES, WHERE SENT Any notice of claim and any other notice or statement in writing required to be given to the Company under this policy must be given to the Company at Fidelity National Title Insurance Company P.O. Box 45023 Jacksonville, FL 32232-5023 Attn: Claims Department ALTA Owner's Policy (6/ 17/06) Copyright American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form is restricted to n,pyK Cary ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. 1 I► Iii�llli irl� CI I n o ipi �i � 1 I - �,ti�f,I�'i; LOS ANGELES DISTRICT U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PERMIT Permittee: Rick Puffer, Etco Homes Permit Number: SPL-2011-00063-JPL Issuing Office: Los Angeles District Note: The term "you" and its derivatives, as used in this permit, means the permittee or any future transferee. The term "this office" refers to the appropriate district or division office of the Corps of Engineers having jurisdiction over the permitted activity or the appropriate official acting under the authority of the commanding officer. You are authorized to perform work in accordance with the terms and conditions specified below. Project Description: To permanently discharge fill onto 0.11 acre of waters of the U.S., complete maintenance dredging, and to remove and replace existing boat docks within waters of the U.S., in association with the Newport Bay Marina Project at 2300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach as shown on the attached drawings. Specifically, you are authorized to conduct the following activities affecting waters of the U.S.: 1. Reconfigure the existing marina by removing 21 deteriorated slips with an overwater coverage of 6979 square feet and replacing them with 19 slips with an overwater coverage of 8762 square feet for improved marina use; 2. Replace 22 piles with 34 new concrete piles; 3. Dredge approximately 1,290 cubic yards from within the marina; 4. Install approximately 488 linear feet of new seawall around the new slip way; 5. Dispose of approximately 655 cubic yards of contaminated dredged material from the shoal area and two slipways at an approved landfill, or, if approved under a separate authorization, at the Port of Long Beach disposal site; and nJ 6. Excavate approximately 1933 square feet of upland area behind the existing seawall for conversion to open water habitat. Project Location: The proposed Newport Bay Marina Project site is located at 2300 Newport Boulevard, within the city of Newport Beach, Orange County, California. Permit Conditions: General Conditions: The time limit for completing the authorized activity ends on June 9, 2016. If you find that you need more time to complete the authorized activity, submit your request for a time extension to this office for consideration at least one month before the above date is reached. 2. You must maintain the activity authorized by this permit in good condition and in conformance with the terms and conditions of this permit. You are not relieved of this requirement if you abandon the permitted activity, although you may make a good faith transfer to a third parry in compliance with General Condition 4 below. Should you wish to cease to maintain the authorized activity or should you desire to abandon it without a good faith transfer, you must obtain a modification from this permit from this office, which may require restoration of the area. If you discover any previously unknown historic or archeological remains while accomplishing the activity authorized by this permit, you must immediately notify this office of what you have found. We will initiate the Federal and state coordination required to determine if the remains warrant a recovery effort or if the site is eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. 4. If you sell the property associated with this permit, you must obtain the signature of the new owner in the space provided and forward a copy of the permit to this office to validate the transfer of this authorization. 5. If a conditioned water quality certification has been issued for your project, you must comply with the conditions specified in the certification as special conditions to this permit. For your convenience, a copy of the certification is attached if it contains such conditions. 6. You must allow representatives from this office to inspect the authorized activity at any time deemed necessary to ensure that it is being or has been accomplished with the terms and conditions of your permit. Special Conditions: 1. Prior to initiating construction in waters of the U.S., the Permittee shall submit to the Corps Regulatory Division a complete set of final detailed grading/construction plans showing all work and structures in waters of the U.S. All plans shall be in compliance with the Final Map and Drawing Standards for the Los Angeles District Regulatory Division dated September 21, 2009 (http://www.spl.usace.army.mil/regulatory/Pn/SPL-RG_map-drawing-standard_fmal w-fig.pdf). All plan sheets shall be signed, dated, and submitted on paper no larger than 1 Ix 17 inches. No work in waters of the U.S. is authorized until the Permittee receives, in writing (by letter or e- mail), Corps Regulatory Division approval of the final detailed grading/construction plans. The Permittee shall ensure that the project is built in accordance with the Corps -approved plans. 2. Within 45 calendar days of completion of authorized work in waters of the U.S., the Permittee shall submit to the Corps Regulatory Division a post -project implementation memo indicating the date authorized impacts to waters of the U.S. ceased. 3. The permitted activity shall not interfere with the right of the public to free navigation on all navigable waters of the United States as defined by 33 C.F.R. Part 329. 4. Creosote treated pilings shall not be placed in navigable waters unless all of the following conditions are met: a. The project involves the repair of existing structures that were originally constructed using wood products; b. The creosote treated pilings are wrapped in plastic; C. Measures are taken to prevent damage to plastic wrapping from boat use. Such measures may include installation of rub strips or bumpers; d. The plastic wrapping is sealed at all joints to prevent leakage; and e. The plastic material is expected to maintain its integrity for at least ten years, and plastic wrappings that develop holes or leaks must be repaired or replaced in a timely manner by the Permittee. 5. No other modifications or work shall occur to the structure permitted herein. A pre -construction survey of the project area for Caulerpa taxifolia (Caulerpa) shall be conducted in accordance with the Caulerpa Control Protocol (see http://swr.nmfs.noaa.gov/hed/caulerpa/cep.pdf) not earlier than 90 calendar days prior to planned construction and not later than 30 calendar days prior to construction. The results of that survey shall be furnished to the Corps Regulatory Division, NOAA Fisheries, and the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) at least 15 calendar days prior to initiation of work in navigable waters. In the event that Caulerpa is detected within the project area, the Permittee shall not commence work until such time as the infestation has been isolated, treated, and the risk of spread is eliminated as confirmed in writing by the Corps Regulatory Division, in consultation with NOAA Fisheries and CDFG. 7. Once authorized impacts to navigable waters authorized by this permit have ceased, the Permittee shall conduct two years of post -construction eelgrass monitoring surveys per the mapping guidelines in NOAA Fisheries' Southern California Eelgrass Mitigation Policy (Policy) (http://swr.mnfs.noaa.gov/hcd/policies/EELPOLrevl l_final.pdf). All required post -construction monitoring surveys shall be submitted by the Permittee to the Corps Regulatory Division and NOAA Fisheries within 30 calendar days of each survey completion date. Based upon the post - construction monitoring survey results and in accordance with the Policy, the Corps Regulatory Division will determine the need and/or amount of Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) mitigation required to offset adverse impacts to such habitat. The Corps Regulatory Division will transmit its determination to the Permittee in writing. Within 60 calendar days of receiving the Corps Regulatory Division's determination specifying the need and amount of mitigation, the Permittee shall submit a draft EFH mitigation plan to the Corps for review and approval. The EFH mitigation plan shall be prepared in accordance with the Policy and the Corps' Los Angeles District Mitigation Guidelines and Monitoring Requirements, dated April 19, 2004. The Permittee shall fully implement the final EFH mitigation plan as approved by the Corps Regulatory Division. 8. The Permittee shall discharge only clean construction materials suitable for use in the oceanic environment. The Permittee shall ensure no debris, soil, silt, sand, sawdust, rubbish, cement or concrete washings thereof, oil or petroleum products, from construction shall be allowed to enter into or placed where it may be washed by rainfall or runoff into waters of the United States. Upon completion of the project authorized herein, any and all excess material or debris shall be completely removed from the work area and disposed of in an appropriate upland site. 9. The Permittee shall notify the Corps Regulatory Division of the date of commencement of operations not less than 14 calendar days prior to commencing work, and shall notify the Corps of the date of completion of operations at least five calendar days prior to such completion. 10. To ensure navigational safety, the permittee shall provide appropriate notifications to the U.S. Coast Guard as described below: Commander, 11th Coast Guard District (dpw) TEL: (510) 437-2980 E-mail: d11LNM@uscg.mil Website: http://www.useg.mil/dp/h=equest.asp U.S. Coast Guard, Sector LA -LB (COTP) TEL: (310) 521-3860 E-mail: john.p.hennigan@uscg.mil a. The Permittee shall notify the U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, 1 lth Coast Guard District (dpw) and the U.S. Coast Guard, Sector LA -LB (COTP) (contact information shown above), not less than 14 calendar days prior to commencing work and as project information 4 changes. The notification shall be provided by e-mail with at least the following information, transmitted as an attached Word or PDF file: 1. Project description including the type of operation (i.e. dredging, diving, construction, etc). 2. Location of operation, including Latitude / Longitude (NAD 83). 3. Work start and completion dates and the expected duration of operations. The Coast Guard needs to be notified if these dates change. 4. Vessels involved in the operation (name, size and type). 5. VHF -FM radio frequencies monitored by vessels on scene. 6. Point of contact and 24 -hour phone number. 7. Potential hazards to navigation. 8. Chart number for the area of operation. 9. Recommend the following language be used in the LNM: "Mariners are urged to transit at their slowest safe speed to minimize wake, and proceed with caution after passing arrangements have been made." b. The Permittee and its contractor(s) shall not remove, relocate, obstruct, willfully damage, make fast to, or interfere with any aids to navigation defined at 33 C.F.R. chapter I, subchapter C, part 66. The Permittee shall ensure its contractor notifies the Eleventh Coast Guard District in writing, with a copy to the Corps Regulatory Division, not less than 30 calendar days in advance of operating any equipment adjacent to any aids to navigation that requires relocation or removal. Should any federal aids to navigation be affected by this project, the Permittee shall submit a request, in writing, to the Corps Regulatory Division as well as the U.S. Coast Guard, Aids to Navigation office (contact information provided above). The Permittee and its contractor are prohibited from relocating or removing any aids to navigation until authorized to do so by the Corps Regulatory Division and the U.S. Coast Guard. C. Should the Permittee determine the work requires the temporary placement and use of private aids to navigation in navigable waters of the U.S., the Permittee shall submit a request in writing to the Corps Regulatory Division as well as the U.S. Coast Guard, Aids to Navigation office (contact information provided above). The Permittee is prohibited from establishing private aids to navigation in navigable waters of the U.S. until authorized to do so by the Corps Regulatory Division and the U.S. Coast Guard. d. The COTP may modify the deployment of marine construction equipment or mooring systems to safeguard navigation during project construction. The Permittee shall direct questions concerning lighting, equipment placement, and mooring to the appropriate COTP. 11. Within 30 calendar days of completion of the project authorized by this permit, the Permittee shall conduct a post -project survey indicating changes to structures and other features in navigable waters. The Permittee shall forward a copy of the survey to the Corps Regulatory Division and to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Service for chart updating: Gerald E Wheaton, NOAA, Regional Manager, West Coast and Pacific Ocean, DOD Center Monterey Bay, Room 5082, Seaside, CA 93955-6711. 12. The permittee understands and agrees that, if future operations by the United States require the removal, relocation, or other alteration, of the structure or work herein authorized, or if, in the opinion of the Secretary of the Army or his authorized representative, said structure or work shall cause unreasonable obstruction to the free navigation of the navigable waters, the permittee will be required, upon due notice from the Corps of Engineers Regulatory Division, to remove, relocate, or alter the structural work or obstructions caused thereby, without expense to the United States. No claim shall be made against the United States on account of any such removal or alteration. 13. For this permit, the term dredging operations shall mean: navigation of the dredging vessel at the dredging site, excavation of dredged material within the project boundaries, and placement of dredged material into a hopper dredged or disposal barge or scow. 14. Dredging authorized in this permit shall be limited to the areas defined in Figure 1 only. No more than 1290 cubic yards of dredged material are authorized for dredging from the project site by the Permittee. No dredging is authorized in any other location under this permit. This permit does not authorize the placement or removal of buoys. 15. For this permit, the maximum dredging design depth (also known as the project depth or grade) shall be 11 feet below mean lower low water (MLLW), with a maximum allowable overdredge depth of 13 feet below MLLW. No dredging shall occur deeper than 13 feet below MLLW (dredging design depth plus overdredge depth) or outside the project boundaries. 16. At least 15 calendar days before initiation of any dredging operations authorized by this permit, the Permittee shall send a dredging and disposal operations plan to the Corps Regulatory Division and EPA, with the following information: a. A list of the names, addresses and telephone numbers of the Permittee's project manager, the contractor's project manager, the dredging operations inspector, the disposal operations inspector and the captain of each tug boat, hopper dredge or other form of vehicle used to transport dredged material to the designated disposal site. b. A list of all vessels, major dredging equipment and electronic positioning systems or navigation equipment that will be used for dredging and disposal operations, including the capacity, load level and acceptable operating sea conditions for each hopper dredge or disposal barge or scow to assure compliance with special conditions on dredging and disposal operations. C. The results of a detailed analysis of all material to be dredged pursuant to an approved SAP. d. A detailed description of the dredging and disposal operations authorized by this permit. Description of the dredging and disposal operations should include, at a minimum, the following: 1. Dredging and disposal procedures for 1290 cubic yards to be dredged from the Permittee's project site. 2. A schedule showing when the dredging project is planned to begin and end. e. A pre -dredging bathymetric condition survey (presented as a large format plan view drawing), taken within thirty (30) days before the dredging begins, accurate to 0.5-foot with the exact location of all soundings clearly defined on the survey chart. The pre -dredge survey chart shall be prepared showing the following information: 1. The entire dredging area, the toe and top of all side -slopes and typical cross sections of the dredging areas. To ensure that the entire area is surveyed, the pre -dredge condition survey should cover an area at least 50 feet outside the top of the side -slope or the boundary of the dredging area, unless obstructions are encountered. 2. The dredging design depth, overdredge depth and the side -slope ratio. The total quantity of dredged material to be removed from the dredging areas and the side -slope areas. 4. Areas shallower than the dredging design depth shall be shaded green, areas between the dredging design depth and overdredge depth shall be shaded yellow, and areas below overdredge depth that will not be dredged shall be shaded blue. If these areas are not clearly shown, the Corps may request additional information. The pre -dredging survey chart shall be signed by the Permittee to certify that the data are accurate and that the survey was completed within thirty (30) days before the proposed dredging start date. f. A debris management plan to prevent disposal of large debris at all disposal locations. The debris management plan shall include: sources and expected types of debris, debris separation and,retrieval methods, and debris disposal methods. 17. The Permittee shall not commence dredging operations unless and until the Permittee receives a Notice to Proceed, in writing, from the Corps Regulatory Division. 18. The Permittee shall maintain a copy of this permit on all vessels used to dredge, transport and dispose of dredged material authorized under this permit. 19. The Permittee shall ensure that the captain of any hopper dredge, tug or other vessel used in the dredging and disposal operations, is a licensed operator under USCG regulations and follows the Inland and Ocean Rules of Navigation or the USCG Vessel Traffic Control Service. All such vessels, hopper dredges or disposal barges or scows, shall have the proper day shapes, operating marine band radio, and other appropriate navigational aids. 20. The Permittee's contractor(s) and the captain of any dredge covered by this permit shall monitor VHF -FM channels 13 and 16 while conducting dredging operations. 21. Upon request, the Permittee and its contractor(s) shall allow inspectors from the Corps Regulatory Division, EPA, or the USCG to inspect all phases of the dredging and disposal operations. 22. If a violation of any permit condition occurs, the violation shall be reported by the Permittee to the Corps Regulatory Division within twenty-four (24) hours. If the Permittee retains any contractors to perform any activity authorized by this permit, the Permittee shall instruct all such contractors that notice of any violations must be reported to the Permittee immediately. 23. The Permittee shall submit a post -dredging completion report to the Corps Regulatory Division within 30 calendar days after completion of each dredging project to document compliance with all general and special conditions defined in this permit. The report shall include all information collected by the Permittee, the dredging operations inspector and the disposal operations inspector or the disposal vessel captain as required by the special conditions of this permit. The report shall indicate whether all general and special permit conditions were met. Any violations of the permit shall be explained in detail. The report shall further include the following information: a. Permit and project number. b. Start date and completion date of dredging and disposal operations. C. Total cubic yards disposed. d. Mode of dredging. e. Mode of transportation. f. Form of dredged material. g. Percent sand, silt and clay in dredged material. h. A certified report from the dredging site inspector indicating all general and special permit conditions were met. Any violations of the permit shall be explained in detail. i. A detailed post -dredging hydrographic survey of the dredging area. The survey shall show areas above the dredging design depth shaded green, areas between the dredging design depth and overdredge depth shaded yellow, areas below overdredged depth that were not dredged or areas that were deeper than the overdredge depth before the project began as indicated on the pre -dredging survey shaded blue, and areas dredged below the overdredge depth or outside the project boundaries shaded red. The methods used to prepare the post - dredging survey shall be the same methods used in the pre -dredging condition survey. The survey shall be signed by the Permittee certifying that the data are accurate. The post -dredging report shall be signed by a duly authorized representative of the Permittee. The Permittee's representative shall make the following certification: I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision. The information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility of fine and imprisonment for knowing violations. 24. This Corps permit does not authorize you to take any threatened or endangered species, or adversely modify its designated critical habitat. In order to legally take a listed species, you must have separate authorization under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) (e.g. ESA Section 10 permit, or a Biological Opinion (BO) under ESA Section 7, with "incidental take" provisions with which you must comply). Further Information: 1. Congressional Authorities. You have been authorized to undertake the activity described above pursuant to: (X) Section 10 of the River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 403). (X) Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344). ( ) Section 103 of the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1413). 2. Limits of this authorization. a. This permit does not obviate the need to obtain other Federal, state, or local authorizations required by law. b. This permit does not grant any property rights or exclusive privileges. C. This permit does not authorize any injury to the property or rights of others. d. This permit does not authorize interference with any existing or proposed Federal project. 3. Limits of Federal Liability. In issuing this permit, the Federal Government does not assume any liability for the following: a. Damages to the permitted project or uses thereof as a result of other permitted or unpermitted activities or from natural causes. b. Damages to the permitted project or uses thereof as a result of current or future activities undertaken by or on behalf of the United States in the public interest. C. Damages to persons, property, or to other permitted or unpermitted activities or structures caused by the activity authorized by this permit. d. Design or construction deficiencies associated with the permitted work. e. Damage claims associated with any future modification, suspension, or revocation of this permit. 4. Reliance on Applicant's Data. The determination of this office that issuance of this permit is not contrary to the public interest was made in reliance on the information you provided. 5. Reevaluation of Permit Decision. This office may reevaluate its decision on this permit at any time the circumstances warrant. Circumstances that could require a reevaluation include, but are not limited to, the following: a. You fail to comply with the terms and conditions of this permit. b. The information provided by you in support of your permit application proves to have been false, incomplete, or inaccurate (See 4 above). C. Significant new information surfaces which this office did not consider in reaching the original public interest decision. Such a reevaluation may result in a determination that it is appropriate to use the suspension, modification, and revocation procedures contained in 33 CFR 325.7 or enforcement procedures such as those contained in 33 CFR 326.4 and 326.5. The referenced enforcement procedures provide for the issuance of an administrative order requiring you to comply with the terms and conditions of your permit and for the initiation of legal action where appropriate. You will be required to pay for any corrective measure ordered by this office, and if you fail to comply with 10 such directive, this office may in certain situations (such as those specified in 33 CFR 209.170) accomplish the corrective measures by contract or otherwise and bill you for the cost. 6. Extensions. General condition 1 establishes a time limit for the completion of the activity authorized by this permit. Unless there are circumstances requiring either a prompt completion of the authorized activity or a reevaluation of the public interest decision, the Corps will normally give you favorable consideration to a request for an extension of this time limit. 11 Your signature below, as permittee, indicates that you accept and agree to comply with the terms and conditions of this permit. PERMITTEE DATE This permit becomes effective when the Federal official, designated to act for the Secretary of the Army, has signed below. Corice J. Farrar DATE Chief, Orange and Riverside Section South Coast Branch When the structures or work authorized by this permit are still in existence at the time the property is transferred, the terms and conditions of this permit will continue to be binding on the new owner(s) of the property. To validate the transfer of this permit and the associated liabilities associated with compliance with its terms and conditions, have the transferee sign and date below. TRANSFEREE 12 DATE LOS ANGELES DISTRICT U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS NOTIFICATION OF COMMENCEMENT OF WORK FOR DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PERMIT Permit Number: SPL-2011-00063-JPL Name of Permittee: Etco Homes; Rick Puffer Date of Issuance: June 9, 2011 Date work in waters of the U.S. will commence: Estimated construction period (in weeks): Name & phone of contractor (if any): Please note that your permitted activity is subject to a compliance inspection by an Army Corps of Engineers representative. If you fail to comply with this permit you may be subject to permit suspension, modification, or revocation. I hereby certify that I, and the contractor (if applicable), have read and agree to comply with the terms and conditions of the above referenced permit. Signature of Permittee Date At least ten (10) days prior to the commencement of the activity authorized by this permit, sign this certification and return it using any ONE of the following three (3) methods: (1) E-MAIL a statement including all the above information to: Jason.P.Lambert@usace.army.mil OR (2) FAX this certification, after signing, to: (213) 452-4196 (3) MAIL to the following address: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Regulatory Division ATTN: CESPL-RG-SPL-2011-00063-JPL P.O. Box 532711 Los Angeles, California 90053-2325 PA LOS ANGELES DISTRICT U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS NOTIFICATION OF COMPLETION OF WORK AND CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PERMIT Permit Number: SPL-2011-00063-JPL Name of Permittee: Etco Homes; Rick Puffer Date of Issuance: June 9, 2011 Date work in waters of the U.S. completed: Construction period (in weeks): Name & phone of contractor (if any): Please note that your permitted activity is subject to a compliance inspection by an Army. Corps of Engineers representative. If you fail to comply with this permit you may be subject to permit suspension, modification, or revocation. I hereby certify that the work authorized by the above referenced permit has been completed in accordance with the terms and conditions of said permit. Signature of Permittee Date Upon completion of the activity authorized by this permit, sign this certification and return it using any ONE of the following three (3) methods: (1) E-MAIL a statement including all the above information to: Jason.P.Lambert@usace.army.mil OR (2) FAX this certification, after signing, to: (213) 452-4196 (3) MAIL to the following address: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Regulatory Division ATTN: CESPL-RG-SPL-2011-00063-JPL P.O. Box 532711 Los Angeles, California 90053-2325 3 California Regional Water Quality Control Board Santa Ana Region 3737 Main Street, Suite 500, Riverside, California 92501-3348 Linda S. Adams Phone (951) 782-4130 • FAX (951) 781-6288 • TDD (951) 782-3221 Arnold Secretary for www.waterboards.ca.gov/santaana Sghwarzenegger Environmental Protection Governor December 20, 2010 Afshin Eteber ETCO Homes 9952 S. Santa Monica Blvd., Suite 200 Beverly Hills, CA 90210 afshine@etcohomes.com CLEAN WATER ACT SECTION 401 WATER QUALITY STANDARDS CERTIFICATION FOR THE NEWPORT BAY MARINA PROJECT, CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH (ACOE REFERENCE NO. NOT AVAILABLE) (SARWQCB PROJECT NO.302008-05) Dear Mr. Eteber: On March 19, 2008, we received an application for Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Standards Certification (Certification) for the mixed use development (residential & commercial) of the Newport Bay Marina in the City of Newport Beach. This letter responds to your request for certification that the proposed project, described in your application anU summarized below, -will comply with State water quality standards outlined in the Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin (1995) and subsequent Basin Plan amendments: Project Description: Demolition of the existing buildings, excavation of the site to a depth of 12 feet below ground surface (bgs), construction of an underground parking structure followed by first floor commercial and second and third floor residential units, on a 2.37 acre site. Removal of shoals and contaminated sediment from Newport Bay immediately -adjacent to the site. Removal of and replacement of the existing pilings and dock structure with similar structures. Removal of the existing sheet pile and concrete bulkhead and construction of a new concrete bulkhead. The project is located at 2300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, within Section 33 of Township 6 South, Range 10 West, of the U.S. Geological Survey Newport Beach, California, 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle map (33' 36' 38" N/117' 55' 4 1 " W). Receiving water: Rhine Channel, Lower Newport Bay Fill area: 480 linear feet of temporary impact to a marine channel. California Environmental Protection Agency �Yecycled Paper Afshin Eteber - 2 - December 20, 2010 ETCO Development Dredge/Fill volume Federal permit: 420 cubic yards of contaminated sediment is to be dredged Rivers and Harbors Act Section 10 You have proposed to mitigate water quaiity impacts as described in your Certification application. The proposed mitigation is summarized below: Onsite Water Quality Standards Mitigation Proposed: • Site -specific Best Management Practices (BMPs) will be implemented as specified in the project's Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). • Site -specific BMPs described and illustrated in the project's City of Newport Beach -approved Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) will be implemented and maintained. • The following measures will be taken to assure discharges of dewatering wastes comply with applicable waste discharge requirements and NPDES permits: o Wastewater generated as a result of dewatering of the construction excavation will be stored in a 20,000-gallon holding tank, monitored as required by the applicable waste discharge requirements and NPDES permit(s) issued by the Regional Board, and discharged to surface waters only in accordance with waste discharge requirements and NPDES permit issued by the Regional Board. o Post construction dewatering wastes from the completed underground parking garage will be similarly stored; monitored and discharged in accordance with waste discharge requirements and NPDES permit issued by the Regional Board. • An existing groundwater monitoring well at the site will be abandoned using current industry standard methods, in order to protect groundwater underlying the site. All soils and waste effluent generated during this well abandonment will be contained and sealed in 55-gallon steel drums that meet Department of Transportation standards for hazardous material transport, and transported offsite for disposal. • Contaminated sediment excavated from slipways will be stabilized and disposed of at an approved landfill. • Mitigation measures for other environmental impacts are specified in the project's Environmental Impact Report (EIR). Offsite Water Quality Standards Mitigation Proposed: • No offsite water quality standards mitigation is proposed. Should the proposed project impact state- or federally -listed endangered species or their habitat, implementation of measures identified in consultation with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the California Department of Fish and Game will ensure those California Environmental Protection Agency .• Recycled Paper Afshin Eteber - 3 - December 20, 2010 ETCO Development impacts are mitigated to an acceptable level. Appropriate BMPs will be implemented to reduce construction -related impacts to Waters of the State according to the requirements of the State Water Resources Control Board's General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction Activity, Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ, including the preparation of a SWPPP. Construction and post -construction dewatering discharges from the proposed project are subject to regulation under Regional Board Order No. R8-2007-0041, NPDES No. CAG918002, "General Discharge Permit for Discharges to Surface Waters of Groundwater Resulting from Groundwater Dewatering Operations and/or Groundwater Clean u p.Activities at Sites within the San Diego Creek/Newport Bay Watershed Polluted by Petroleum Hydrocarbons, Solvents, Metals and/or Salts" , or under Regional Board,.. Order No. R8-2009-0003, General Waste Discharge Requirements for Discharges to Surface Waters that Pose an Insignificant (De Minimis) Threat to Water Quality, and subsequent iterations thereof. Please contact Regional Board staff to determine the appropriate permit requirements. On November 16, 2006, the City of Newport Beach certified an EIR for the project. Pursuant to California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, Section 15096, as a responsible agency, the Regional Board is required to consider an EIR or Negative Declaration prepared by the lead agency in determining whether to approve a Section 401 Certification. A responsible agency has responsibility for mitigating and avoiding only the direct and indirect environmental effects of those parts of the project which it decides to carry out, finance, or approve. Further, the responsible agency must make findings as required by Sections 15091 and, if necessary, 15093, for each and every significant impact of the project. As required by Section 15096, the Regional Board has considered the November 16, 2006, EIR prepared for the proposed project in issuing this Certification. More specifically, the Regional Board has considered those sections of the project's EIR relating to water quality. Based on the mitigation proposed in the EIR, and the conditions set forth in this Certification, Board staff concludes that the project's impacts to water quality will be reduced to a less than significant level and beneficial uses will be protected. The Regional Board independently finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or mitigate impacts to water quality standards to a less than significant level. California Environmental Protection Agency Recycled Paper Afshin Eteber - 4 - December 20, 2010 ETCO Development This 401 Certification is contingent upon the execution of the following conditions: Using generally accepted protocols, the discharger must survey for Caulerpa taxifolia, an invasive marine seaweed, to help locate and prevent its spread. If Caulerpa taxifolia is found prior to or during implementation of the project, the applicant must not begin or continue at that location until authorized by Regional Board staff. If the invasive seaweed is discovered, it is not to be disturbed, and the Regional Board must be notified within 48- hours of the location and date of the discovery. In addition, any sightings of Caulerpa taxifolia should be reported to the California Department of Fish and Game (William Paznokas at (858) 467-4218 (wpaznokas(Z_dfg.ca.gov)) or the National Marine Fisheries Service (Robert Hoffman at (562) 980-4043 (bob. hoffman(cD-noaa.gov)) within 24-hours of discovery. Further information regarding Caulerpa taxifolia sightings can be obtained at www.sccat.net. Should no Caulerpa be observed during the project, the applicant must notify the Regional Board of this fact when all construction has been completed. Please contact Wanda Cross at (951) 782-4468 concerning issues related to Caulerpa taxifolia. 2. Regional Board staff and other authorized representatives must be allowed: a. Entry upon premises where dewatering or storm water storage or treatment facilities are located, or where records are kept under the requirements of this Certification and applicable waste discharge requirements; b. Access to copy any records that are kept under the requirements of this Certification and applicable waste discharge requirements; c. To inspect any facility, equipment (including monitoring and control equipment), practices, or operations related to the treatment of dewatering wastes and storm water runoff from the project site; and d. To photograph, sample and monitor for the purpose of assuring compliance with this Certification and applicable waste discharge requirements. 3. Construction materials and all wastes must not be placed in a manner where they could be discharged to surface waters except as authorized by this certification. In the event that trash or debris is discharged to surface waters, the discharger must recover the material to the maximum extent practical. California Environmental Protection Agency %o Recycled Paper Afshin Eteber -5- December 20, 2010 ETCO Development 4. Project activities must not depress the dissolved oxygen content in any part of Lower Newport Bay below 5 mg/L as a result of controllable water quality factors. When natural dissolved oxygen content is less than 5 mg/L, the discharger must not cause further depression. 5. Project activities must not raise the pH in any part of Lower Newport Bay above 8.6 or lower pH below 7.0 as the result of controllable water quality factors; ambient pH levels must not be changed by more than 0.2 units. 6. Project -related activities must not cause the background natural turbidity, as measured in Nephelometriic Turbidity Units (NTUs), in the receiving waters to be increased by values greater than the following Basin Plan objectives at a distance of 100 feet from the activity: a. If natural turbidity is between 0 and 50 NTU, the maximum increase must not exceed 20% of the measured natural turbidity. b. If natural turbidity is 50 to 100 NTU, the increase must not exceed 10 NTU. C. If natural turbidity is greater than 100 NTU, the maximum increase must not exceed 10% of the measured natural turbidity. 7. Project -related activities must not cause exceedance of the constituents for which numeric targets are specified in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Toxics TMDLsi for the Rhine Channel and Lower Newport Bay. 8. An effective monitoring plan shall be developed prior to the initiation of construction and implemented to document compliance with conditions 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 above. The monitoring plan is subject to approval by Board staff, and shall be revised as requested by Board staff. Any suspected violation of these conditions must be reported to Regional Board staff in writing within 24-hours of discovery. The monitoring plan and records of monitoring activities must be maintained on site for the duration of the proposed discharge and be available for inspection by Regional Board staff. 9. Construction -related groundwater dewatering wastes and storm water runoff shall be retained on -site, and analyzed for construction -related pollutants and for the petroleum hydrocarbons that have been identified at this site, prior to discharge. Should said pollutants be identified in the samples analyzed, the stored wastewater shall be managed according to the project's SWPPP and applicable waste discharge requirements. 1 This document is located under San Diego Creek, Newport Bay Toxics TMDL at: http://www.epa.govlregion9/water/tmdi/final.htmi California Environmental Protection Agency �4 Recycled Paper Afshin Eteber - 6 - December 20, 2010 ETCO Development 10. In accordance with the project's WQMP, wastewater generated from post - construction dewatering activities, including runoff that may collect in the projects' underground garage, shall be collected and treated prior to discharge. These discharges shall conform with requirement contained in Regional Board Order No. R8-2009-0003, General Waste Discharge Requirements for Discharges to Surface Waters that Pose an Insignificant (De Minimis) Threat to Water Quality, and subsequent iterations thereof. 11. Impacts to eelgrass must be compensated for according to the National Marine Fisheries Service's Southern California Eelgrass Mitigation Policy, including the creation of eelgrass beds. Any deficiencies in the mitigation effort must be addressed according to the Policy. 12. A copy of this Certification must remain at the project site for the duration of the work and be available for inspection upon request. 13. The applicant must comply with the requirements of the applicable Clean Water Act section 404 permits. 14. All materials used in or generated from construction activities associated with this project shall be managed appropriately. This shall include identifying all potential pollution sources within the scope of work of this project, and incorporating all necessary pollution prevention BMPs as they relate to each potential pollution source identified. 15. AV all times, the project shall utilize BMPs to minimize the controllable discharges of sediment and other non -point source pollutants to drainage systems or other waters of the state and of the United States. 16. Substances resulting from project -related activities that could be harmful to aquatic life, including, but not limited to, petroleum lubricants and fuels, cured and uncured cements, epoxies, paints and other protective coating materials, portland cement concrete or asphalt concrete, and washings and cuttings thereof, shall not be discharged to soils or waters of the state. All waste concrete shall be removed_ 17. This Water Quality Certification is subject to the acquisition of all local, regional, state, and federal permits and approvals as required by law. Failure to meet any conditions contained herein or any the conditions contained in any other permit or approval issued by the State of California or any subdivision thereof may result in the revocation of this Certification and civil or criminal liability. California Environmental Protection Agency �a Recycled Paper Afshin Eteber - 7 - December 20, 2010 ETCO Development 18. This Certification is transferable only upon written notice to the Executive Officer. Notice of transfer must include written acknowledgement of this Certification by the transferee's authorized representative Under California Water Code, Section 1058, and Pursuant to 23 CCR §3860, the following shall be included as conditions of all water quality certification actions: (a) Every certification action is subject to modification or revocation upon administrative or judicial review, including review and amendment pursuant to Section §13330 of the Water Code and Article 6 (commencing with Section 3867) of this Chapter. (b) Certification is not intended and shall not be construed to apply to any. activity involving a hydroelectric facility and requiring a FERC license or an amendment to a FERC license unless the pertinent certification application was filed pursuant to Subsection. §3855(b) of this Chapter and that application specifically identified that a FERC license or amendment to a FERC license for a hydroelectric facility was being sought. (c) Certification is conditioned upon total payment of any fee required under this Chapter and owed by the applicant_ Although we anticipate no further regulatory involvement, if the above stated conditions are changed, any of the criteria or conditions as previously described are not met, or new information becomes available that indicates a water quality problem, we may formulate Waste Discharge Requirements. In the event of any violation or threatened violation of the conditions of this certification, the violation or threatened violation shall be subject to any remedies, penalties, process or sanctions as provided for under state law. For purposes of section 401(d) of the Clean Water Act, the applicability of any state law authorizing remedies, penalties, process or sanctions for the violation or threatened violation constitutes a limitation necessary to assure compliance with the water quality standards and other pertinent requirements incorporated into this certification. In response to a suspected violation of any condition of this certification, the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Board) may require the holder of any permit or license subject to this certification to furnish, under penalty of perjury, any technical or monitoring reports the Regional Board deems appropriate. The burden, including costs, of the reports shall be reasonable in relation to the need for the reports and the benefits to be obtained from the reports. California Environmental Protection Agency %.♦ Recycled Paper Afshin Eteber - 8 - December 20, 2010 ETCO Development In response to any violation of the conditions of this certification, the Regional Board may add to or modify the conditions of this certification as appropriate to ensure compliance. Pursuant to California Code of Regulations Section 3857, we will take no further action on your application. Please notify our office five (5) days before construction begins on this project. This letter constitutes a Water. Quality Standards Certification issued pursuant to Clean Water Act Section 401. I hereby issue an order certifying that any discharge from the referenced project will comply with the applicable provisions of Sections 301 (Effluent Limitations), 302 (Water Quality Related Effluent Limitations), 303 (Water Quality Standards and Implementation Plans); 306 (National Standards of Performance), and 307 (Toxic and Pretreatment Effluent Standards) of the Clean Water Act, and with other applicable requirements of State law. This discharge is also regulated under State Water Resources Control Board Order No. 2003-0017-DWQ (Order No. 2003-0017-DWQ), "General Waste Discharge Requirements for Dredge and Fill Discharges That Have Received Water Quality Certification" which requires compliance with all conditions of this Water Quality Standards Certification. Order No. 2003-0017-DWQ is available at www.swrcb.ca.-gov/resdeQlwqorders/2003/�%%6golwqo2003-0017.pdf. Should there be any questions, please contact Marc Brown at (951) 321-4584, or Mark Adelson at (951) 782-3234. Sincerely, Kurt V. Berchtoid Executive Officer cc (via electronic mail): U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles Office — Jason Lambert State Water Resources Control Board, OCC — David Rice State Water Resources Control Board, DWQ-Water Quality Certification Unit — Bill Orme California Department of Fish and Game — Naeem Siddiqui U.S. EPA, Supervisor of the Wetlands Regulatory Office WTR- 8 — Eric Raffini and Dave Smith AB Geoscience - Amir Rouhani xA401\certifications\newport bay marina _302008-05 final draft 20dec%wmccomments_1_doc California Environmental Protection Agency %• Recycled Paper HARBOR RESOURCES DIVISION 829 Harbor Island Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 (949) 644-3034 / Fax (949) 723-0589 Special Conditions December 6, 2010 Property Address: 2300 Newport Blvd. With reference to the plans currently under consideration to reconstruct or modify the subject bulkhead, dock system, slipway and site remediation of contaminated sediments, the following conditions will now be in effect: 1. The project proponent is aware of the Harbor Permit Policies (Council Policy H-1) and Title 17 of the City of Newport Beach Municipal Code. The project proponent understands that the above referenced structures are under the purview of these Policies and Codes. 2. Any future work on the above mentioned structures requires permits with the City of Newport Beach and any other applicable agencies. Painting and work considered to be cosmetic in nature does not require a permit. 3. The conditions set forth in this document pertain to the proposed bulkhead, dock systems, slipway and site remediation of contaminated sediments described in the project description. Any future modifications or alterations to the structures may require new conditions which may override or change these conditions. These conditions supersede all past conditions associated with this property. 4. In accordance with Municipal Code 10.08.030 A. the project proponent shall obtain the proper permits for equipment and materials storage. "Except as otherwise provided in this section, no person shall use any public street, sidewalk, alley or parkway or other public property for the purpose of storing or displaying any equipment, materials or merchandise, or any other commercial purpose. B. Public streets, sidewalks, alleys, or parkways may be used for the purpose of selling, storing, or displaying any equipment, material, merchandise or for other commercial purposes in the following cases: ... For the temporary storage of construction equipment or material provided a permit is issued pursuant to Chapter 12.62 of this Code and the storage is consistent with provisions of the Uniform Building Code." 5. The contractor shall post and update a two week schedule of construction activities at a location(s) easily accessible to local residents. Page 1 of 2 6. In accordance with Municipal Code 10.28.040 the following noise regulations apply: "A Weekdays and Saturdays. No person shall, while engaged in construction, remodeling, digging, grading, demolition, painting, plastering or any other related building activity, operate any tool, equipment or machine in a manner which produces loud noise that disturbs, or could disturb, a person of normal sensitivity who works or resides in the vicinity, on any weekday except between the hours of seven a.m. and six -thirty p.m., nor on any Saturday except between the hours of eight a.m. and six p.m. B. Sundays and Holidays. No person shall, while engaged in construction, remodeling, digging, grading, demolition, painting, plastering or any other related building activity, operate any tool, equipment or machine in a manner which produces loud noise that disturbs, or could disturb, a person of normal sensitivity who works or resides in the vicinity, on any Sunday or any federal holiday." 7. The project shall be implemented in conformance with the. Local Coastal Program - Coastal Land Use Plan. 8. The waterfront improvements listed in the project description shall be implemented in conformance with Resolution No. 1706 of the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach. 9. The conceptual design plans indicate slip fingers of a 5 foot width which is acceptable for commercial slips but not acceptable for loading and unloading of commercial charter vessels. Any future consideration of charter vessel operations in this marina will require slip facilities to meet applicable requirements listed in the City of Newport Beach Waterfront Guidelines and Standards Harbor and Design Criteria -Commercial and Residential Facilities" and Chapter 17.10 "Marine Activities Permits" of the City of Newport Beach Municipal Code. 10. Vessels that occupy slips number 6, 7, 16, and 17 shall not be allowed to extend more than 20 feet beyond the bayward end of the adjacent slip fingers. Vessels occupying all other slips are allowed to extend the width of the beam of the vessel beyond the adjacent slip finger. 11. All vessels shall be berthed in the Newport Bay Marina compliant with the City of Newport Beach Fire Code. 12. The project proponent shall prepare an operation plan for slip 8 that demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Harbor Resources Manager that vessels will be able to enter and exit the slipway without moving any other vessels. Slip 8 shall be operated as a dock to provide access to landside improvement for visiting vessels. The operation plan shall demonstrate the method(s) of daily monitoring employed to ensure compliance with the City of Newport Beach Fire Code. 13. Per City Council Policy H-1, no permanent structure shall be permitted on the cantilevered deck except (1) planters and benches not over 16 inches in height, and (2) railings not over 42 inches in height with approximately 95% open space. 14. The setback between the cantilevered deck and the headwalk shall be 1 foot, as approved by the Harbor Commission on October 10, 2007 as an exception to the City Standard Drawing requirement of a 2 foot setback between these structures. 15. The applicant will commit to work with the City on negotiating a lease for the commerical marina to conform to NBMC 17.60. Chris Miller, Harbor Resources Manager Date Applicant Signature iB�'��C�Pi��!", LLC Print Name Date Page 2 of 2 PTATE OF CALIFORNIA- NATURAL RESOURCES AGENCY ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, Governor CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION South Coast Area Office Page of,f/t/ h 200 Oceangate, Suite 1000 '- Long.Beach, CA 90802-4302 Date: April 22, 2010 (562) 590-5071 Permit No: 5-08-279 APR 7.510 COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT On February 5, 2009, the California Coastal Commission granted to ETCO Investment, LLC Coastal Development.Permit 5-08-279, subject to the attached Standard and Special Conditions, for development consisting of: Demolition of all existing on -site commercial buildings; construction of a mixed -use development comprised of eight (8) buildings consisting of 36,000 sq. ft. of;commercial uses (office and retail) and 77,100 sq. ft. for 27 residential units; 246 parking spaces; tentative tract map for condominium purposes; grading consisting of 36,000 cubic yards of export; bulkhead replacement along approx. 485 feet of waterfront; including new public access easements consisting of a 10' wide walkway -along the bulkhead and 6' wide lateral access easement from Newport Blvd.; demolition of an existing 21 slip marina and re -construction of a new 21 slip marina, plus up to 12 temporary docks including new lighting and water supply lines; dredging consisting of 1,100 cubic yards within the marina; and construction of a 75 sq. ft. pickle grass habitat. More specifically described in the application file in the Commission offices. The development is within the coastal zone at 2300 Newport. Blvd., Newport Beach (Orange County) 047-120-31.: Issued on behalf of the California Coastal Commission off 4/22/2010. PETER DOUGLAS Executive Director ACKNOWLEDGMENT Title: astai Program Analyst The undersigned permittee acknowledges receipt of this permit and agrees to abide by all terms and conditions thereof. _Theundersigned-permittee acknowledges that Government Code Section 818.4. which states in pertinent part, that: "A public entity is not liable for injury caused by the issuance .. of any permit ..." applies to the issuance of this permit. IMPORTANT: THIS PERMIT IS NOT VALID UNLESS AND UNTIL A COPY OF THE PERMIT WITH THE SIGNED ACKNOWLEDGMENT HAS BEEN RETNNED�TO THE COMMISSION OFFICE. 14 CAL. ADMIN. CODE SECTION 13158(a). Date Sig lfature of Per ' ee Please sign and return one copy of this form to the Commi Sion office at the above address. COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT No. 5-08-279 Page 2 of 14 STANDARD CONDITIONS 1. Notice of Receipt 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. ration. If development has not commenced, the permit will expire two years from the date on which the Commission voted on the application. Development shall be pursued in a diligent manner and completed in a reasonable period of time. Application for extension of the permit must be made prior to the expiration date. 3. Interpretation. Any questions of intent or interpretation of any 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: CONSTRUCTION RESPONSIBILITIES AND DEBRIS REMOVAL The permittee shall comply with the following dredging and construction -related -- - - - - _ req u i:r_e--r-rants:--------- -- — - - ----- ---- - -------- (a) No construction materials, equipment, debris, or waste shall be placed or stored where it may be subject to wave/wind erosion and dispersion; (b) Any and all debris resulting from the marina and bulkhead construction activities shall be removed from the site within 10 days of completion of construction; (c) Machinery or construction materials not essential for project improvements shall not be allowed at any time in the intertidal zone; COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT No. 5-08-279 Page 3 of 14 (d) Sand from the beach, cobbles, or shoreline rocks shall not be used for construction material; (e) If turbid conditions are generated during construction; a silt curtain shall be utilized to control turbidity; (f) Floating booms shall be used to contain debris discharged into coastal waters and any debris discharged shall be removed as soon as possible but no later than the end of each clay; (g) Divers shall recover non -buoyant debris discharged into coastal waters as soon as possible after loss. 2. LOCATION OF DEBRIS DISPOSAL SITE PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, the applicant shall identify in writing, for the review and approval of the Executive Director, the location of the disposal site of the construction debris resulting from the proposed project. Disposal shall occur at the approved disposal site. If the disposal site is located in the coastal zone, a coastal development permit or an amendment to this permit shall be required before disposal can take place. 3. CONFORMANCE WITH PROPOSED REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN (RAP) A. Applicant shall comply with all recommendations and mitigation measures contained in the Remedial Action Plan prepared for the- project by AB Geoscience & Environmental Consultants, dated September 15, 2007. The permittee shall undertake development .in accordance with the approved final plans. Any proposed changes to the approved final plans shall be reported to the Executive Director. No changes to the approved Remedial Action Plan shall occur without a Commission amendment to this coastal development permit unless the Executive Director determines that no amendment is required. 4. PERMANENT DRAINAGE AND RUNOFF CONTROL PLAN PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, the permittee shall submit to the Executive Director, two (2) copies of a final Permanent Drainage and Runoff Control Plan for the post -construction project site, prepared by a licensed civil engineer or qualified water quality professional. The Plan shall include detailed drainage and runoff control plans with supporting calculations. The plans shall incorporate Best Management Practices (BMPs) including site design, source control and treatment control measures designed to reduce, to the maximum extent practicable, the volume, velocity and pollutant load of stormwater and dry weather flows leaving the developed site. The consulting civil engineer or water quality professional shall certify in COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT No. 5-08-279 Page 4 of 14 writing that the final Permanent Drainage and Runoff Control Plan is in substantial conformance with the following minimum requirements: 1. The plan shall demonstrate the use of distributed small-scale controls or integrated Best Management Practices (BMPs) that serve to minimize alterations to the natural pre -development hydrologic characteristics and conditions of the site, and effectively address pollutants of concern. 2. Post -development peak runoff rate and average volume front the site shall be maintained at levels similar to pre -development conditions. 3. Selected BMPs shall consist, or primarily consist, of site design elements and/or landscape based systems or features that serve to maximize site permeability, avoid directly connected impervious area and/or retain, infiltrate, or filter runoff from rooftops, driveways and other hardscape areas, where feasible. 4. Landscaping materials shall consist primarily of native.or other low -maintenance plant selections which have low water and chemical treatment demands. An efficient irrigation system designed based on hydrozones and utilizing drip emitters or micro -sprays or other efficient design should be utilized for any landscaping requiring water application. 5. Runoff shall be discharged from the developed site in a non -erosive manner. Energy dissipating measures shall be installed at the terminus of outflow drains where necessary. The consulting engineer shall provide plan details and cross sections for any rock rip rap and/or other energy dissipating devices or structures associated with the drainage system. The drainage plans shall specify, the location, dimensions, cubic yards of rock, etc. for the any velocity reducing structure with the supporting calculations showing the sizing requirements and how the device meets those sizing requirements. The engineer shall certify that the design of the device minimizes the amount of rock and/or other.hardscape necessary to meet the sizing requirements. 6. Post -construction structural BMPs or su[tes of BMPs shall be desi ned fo treaf, infiltrate or filter the amount of stormwater runoff produced by all storms up to and including the 85th percentile, 24-hour storm event for volume -based BMPs, and/or the 85th percentile, 1-hour storm event, with an appropriate safety factor (i.e., 2 or greater), for flow -based BMPs. 7. All BMPs shall be operated, monitored, and maintained in accordance with manufacturer's specifications where applicable, or in accordance with well recognized technical specifications appropriate to the BMP for the life of the project and at a minimum, all structural BMPs shall be inspected, cleaned -out, and where necessary, repaired prior to the onset of the storm season (October 15th each year) and at regular intervals as necessary between October 15th and COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT No. 5-08-279 Page 5 of 14 April 15`" of each year. Debris and other water pollutants removed from structural BMP(s) during clean -out shall be contained and disposed of in a proper manner. 8. For projects located on a hillside, slope, or which may otherwise be prone to instability, final drainage planes should be approved by the project consulting geotechnical engineer. 9. Should any of the project's surface or subsurface drainage/filtration structures or other BMPs fail or result in increased erosion, the applicandandowner or successor -in -interest shall be responsible for any necessary repairs to the drainage/filtration system or BMPs and restoration of the eroded area. Should repairs or restoration become necessary, prior to the commencement of such repair or restoration work, the applicant shall submit a repair and restoration plan to the Executive Director to determine if an amendment or new coastal development permit is required to authorize such work. 10. The final Permanent Drainage and Runoff Control Plan shall be in conformance with the site/ development plans approved by the Coastal Commission. Any changes to the Coastal Commission approved site/development plans required by the consulting civil engineer/water quality professional or engineering geologist shall be reported to the Executive Director.`No changes to the Coastal Commission approved final site/development plans shall occur without an amendment to the coastal development permit, unless the Executive Director determines that no amendment is legally required. 5. MARINA WATER QUALITY 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 docks and/or boat slips will be managed in a manner that protects water quality pursuant to the implementation of the following BMPs. Cl�anir�g��d=M�infe�ta-nee=M�astrre-s-- a. In -water top -side and bottom -side boat cleaning shall minimize the discharge of soaps, paints, and debris. b. In -the -wafer hull scraping or any process that occurs under water that results 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. COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT No. 5-08-279 Page 6 of 14 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. Boaters will practice preventive engine maintenance and will use oil absorbents in the bilge and under the engine to prevent oil and fuel discharges. Oil absorbent materials shall be examined at least once a year and replaced as necessary. Used oil absorbents are hazardous waste in California. Used oil absorbents must therefore be disposed 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. The use of soaps that can be discharged by bilge pumps is prohibited. b. If the bilge needs more extensive cleaning (e.g., due to spills of engine fuels, lubricants or other liquid materials), the boaters will use a bilge pump -out facility or steam cleaning services that recover and properly dispose or recycle all contaminated liquids. c. Bilge cleaners containing detergents or emulsifiers will not be used for bilge cleaning since they may be discharged to surface waters by the bilge pumps. 6. WETLAND RESTORATION PLAN AND BIOLOGICAL MONITORING A. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, the applicant shall submit for review and approval of the Executive Director in consultation with the California Department of Fish and Game and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as appropriate, a detailed wetland restoration and monitoring plan. The restoration and monitoring plan shall be prepared by a qualified biologist/ecologist and shall at a minimum include the following: COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT No. 5-08-279 Page 7 of 14 1. A baseline assessment, including photographs, of the current physical and ecological condition of the impacted site (intertidal mudflatlsaltmarsh) including a description and map showing the area and distribution of vegetation types and a map showing the distribution and abundance of sensitive species, if any. 2. A description of the impacted site restoration goals including, as appropriate, topography, hydrology, vegetation types, sensitive species, and wildlife usage. 3. A description of methods to control erosion and maintain water quality of the restoration area. 4. A planting plan identifying the natural habitat type that is the model for the restoration, description of the desired relative abundance of particular species in each vegetation layer and a rationale for and description of the size and number of plants and the rate and method of application. Plant propagules should come from local native. stock. If plants, cuttings, or seed are obtained from a nursery, the nursery must certify that they are of local origin and are not cultivars and the planting plan should provide specifications for preparation of nursery stock (e.g., .container size & shape to develop proper root form, hardening techniques, watering regime, etc.) Technical details of planting methods (e.g., timing, spacing, micorrhyzal inoculation, etc.) should also be included. 5. Restoration success criteria such that the restoration will be considered successful if the restored pickleweed displays similar percent cover (less than or equal to 200% difference) to pickleweed at a local reference site (s). 6. A description of the sampling method for evaluating pickleweed percent cover (e.g. photo plots, quadrats, transects). 7. Provision for submission of an annual report prepared by a qualified biologist/ecologist for up to five years or until the restoration meets the success criteria. An annual report must be submitted for a minimum of three years at which time the third year report may be the final report if the restoration success criteria-h-as bea a-c Teved:--AJm_al report-must-1 e submitted=to-tWE)- ecu ive Director. The report must evaluate whether the impacted site conforms to the goals and success criteria set forth in the approved monitoring/restoration plan. B. If the final report indicates that the mitigation project has been unsuccessful, in part, or in whole, based on the approved performance standards, the applicant shall submit a revised or supplemental mitigation program ' to compensate for those portions of the original program which did -not meet the approved performance standards. The revised mitigation program, if necessary, shall be processed as an amendment to this coastal development permit. C. The permittee shall monitor and remediate the wetland mitigation site in accordance with the approved monitoring program. Any proposed changes to COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT No. 5-08-279 Page 8 of 14 the approved monitoring program shalt be reported to the Executive Director. No changes to the approved monitoring program shall occur without a Commission amendment to this coastal development permit unless the Executive Director determines that no amendment is legally required. 7. FUTURE IMPROVEMENTS This permit is only for the development described in Coastal Development Permit No. 5-08-279. Additional development, including but not limited to construction of commercial structures, residences and associated structures and landscaping shall require an amendment to Permit No. 5-08-279 from the Commission or shall require an additional coastal development permit from the Commission or from the applicable certified local government. In addition, pursuant to Title 14 California Code of Regulations Section 13250 (b)(6) and 13253(b)(6), the exemptions otherwise provided in Public Resources Code Section 30610 (a) and (b) shall not apply to the entire parcel. Accordingly, any future improvements to the development authorized by this permit, including but not limited to repair and maintenance activities identified as requiring a permit in Public Resources Section 30610(d) and Title 14 California Code of Regulations Sections 13252(a)-(b), shall require an amendment to Permit No. 5-08-279 from the Commission or shall require an additional .coastal development permit from the Commission or from the applicable certified local government. 8. LANDSCAPING -- DROUGHT TOLERANT, NON INVASIVE PLANTS Vegetated landscaped areas shall only consist of native plants or non-native drought tolerant plants, which are non-invasive. No plant species listed as problematic and/or invasive by the California Native Plant Society (http://www.CNPS.org ), the California Invasive Plant Council (formerly the California Exotic Pest Plant Council) (http://www.cal-ipc.org/), or as may be identified from time to time by the State of California shall be employed or allowed to naturalize or persist on the site. No o plant species listed as a "noxious weed" by the State of California or the U.S. Federal Government shall be utilized within the property. All plants shall be low water use plants as identified by California Department of Water Resources (-See: http://www.owue.water.ca.gov/docs/wucols00. pdf). 9. COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS (CC&R'S) A. Consistent with the applicant's proposal, the applicant shall establish covenants, conditions and restrictions (CC&R's), or an equivalent thereof, for the proposed commercial and residential development to, among other things, address maintenance of the public access easement(s), water quality management plan, and view corridor from Newport Boulevard. The CC&R's COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT No. 5-08-27.9 Page 9 of 14 shall reflect the following requirements of this coastal development permit: 1) The location and presence of the 6' to 10' easements along the waterfront and long term maintenance; 2) the existence of two vertical access easements from Newport Blvd and from Arcade St.; 3) the existence of a water quality management plan required pursuant to Special Condition 4 of this permit with which the landowners are required to comply including but not limited to requirements to fund implementation and maintenance pursuant to the plan in perpetuity; 4) the presence and content of a requirement identified in Special Condition 7 of the permit regarding the need to obtain a coastal development permit for future development; and 5) the requirements identified in Special Condition 13 of this permit relative to a view corridor from Newport Boulevard. B. Consistent with the applicant's proposal, as soon as an owner's association or similar entity comprised of the individual owners of the development is created, the applicant shall transfer responsibility for the easement areas to that entity. C. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, and prior to recordation of any CC&R's, parcel maps or tract maps associated with the approved project, said CC&R's and Tract and parcel maps shall be submitted to the Executive Director for review and approval. The Executive Director's review shall be for the purpose of insuring compliance. with the standard and special conditions of this coastal development permit. Any CC&R's, parcel map conditions or notes, or tract map provisions which the Executive Director determines are not consistent with any of the Conditions of this permit shall be modified to be consistent before recordation. D. Simultaneous with the recording of the final tract map(s) approved by the Executive Director, the permittee shall record the covenants, conditions and restrictions approved by the Executive Director, against the property. —DEDIU_AT E_P_UffEf QKOCES S_AN­[YR EC REWT FG NA OSE — EASEMENT S Consistent with the applicant's proposal, PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, the landowner(s) shall execute and record document(s) in a form and content acceptable to the Executive Director, irrevocably offering to dedicate to a public agency or non-profit entity acceptable to the Executive Director, an easement(s) for public pedestrian access and passive recreational use of: 1) three, minimum 6 foot wide paved vertical public access easements with walkways (two from Newport Blvd. and one from Arcade St.) across the site to a 6-10 foot wide lateral public access easement walkway along the site's entire bayfront/waterfront bulkhead (excepting there from the portion of the 10 foot wide walkway that lies over public tidelands) as generally depicted on Exhibit 5 to the staff report dated January 15, 2009. COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT No. 5-08-279 Page 10 of 14 Minor adjustments to the aforementioned alignment may be authorized by the Executive Director to ensure that continuous 6 and 10 foot wide public access and passive recreation easement(s) is/are formed which connects with any accessways or public rights of way on adjacent lands. The recorded document(s) described above shall reflect the following restrictions: i) The public access and passive recreation easement area shall be open to the general public for use 24-hours per day; iiy The landowner(s) shall, or, at the election of the easement holder, the easement holder shall, maintain the easement area in accordance with the Management. and Maintenance Program approved by the -Executive Director in accordance with SPECIAL CONDITION 11; iii) Any development, as defined in Section 30106 of the Coastal Act, that diminishes permanent public pedestrian access and passive recreational use of the easement area is prohibited; iv) No development, as defined in Section 30106 of the Coastal Act, shall occur within the public access and recreation easement area except for the following development: grading and construction necessary to construct the public access walkway and appurtenances (e.g. signs, benches, trash receptacles, safety railing), underground utilities, bulkhead and parking areas beneath the public access walkway in the easement to serve the proposed development on the subject lot in accordance with the final plans approved by the Executive Director in accordance with the requirements of Special Condition 17, vegetation removaland planting in accordance with the requirements of Special Condition 8, construction of drainage devices in accordance with the final plans approved by the Executive Director pursuant to Special Conditions 4 and 17, and maintenance and repair of the approved development within the easements as identified in the Management and Maintenance Program approved by the Executive Director pursuant to Special Condition 11. The recorded document(s) shall include legal descriptions and graphic depictions, prepared by a licensed surveyor, of both the entire project site and the area of the offered public access and recreation easement(s). The offer(s) shall be recorded free of prioriiens and encumbrances that the Executive Director determines may affect the interest being conveyed. Subject to the review and approval of the Executive Director, ens-emar�t_s for the bulkhead and parking structures beneath the public access walkway, subsurface drainage devices and subsurface or overhead utilities within theeoo feted public access and recreation easement areas may be allowed provided such structures in those easements will not adversely impact public use of the public access and recreation easement. The offer shall run with the land in favor of the People of the State of California, binding all successors and assignees, and shall be irrevocable for a period of 21 years, such period running from the date of recording. 11. PUBLIC ACCESS AND RECREATION EASEMENT AREA MANAGEMENT AND MAINTENANCE PROGRAM A. Consistent with the applicant's proposal, PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, the permittee shall provide for the review and COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT No. 5-08-279 Page 11 of 14 approva[ of the Executive Director, a Management and Maintenance Program for the public access and recreation easement area. The final management and maintenance program shall include the following: (1) IDENTIFY ALL ENTITIES RESPONSIBLE FOR MANAGEMENT AND MAINTENANCE OF THE PUBLIC ACCESS AND RECREATION EASEMENT AREA. In general, the owner(s) of the land shall maintain the public access and recreation easement area(s) until such time as any easement required to be offered by this permit is accepted. Where an easement is accepted by an entity in accordance with the terms and conditions of the offer(s) to dedicate required by this permit, the landowner be responsible for management and maintenance of the public access and recreation facilities within the easement area unless the arrangements between the landowner(s) and the easement holder dictate that the easement holder shall retain all or part of said management and maintenance responsibility. All management and maintenance shall occur in accordance with the approved Management and Maintenance Program. (2) IDENTIFICATION OF MANAGEMENT AND MAINTENANCE AND ASSOCIATED FUNDING PROGRAM. The Management and Maintenance Program shall include a) a funding program sufficient to fund the actual cost of maintenance and periodic repair and replacement of the public access walkways and associated appurtenances including, but not limited to, surfaces, landscaping (if any), and signage; and 2) maintenance activities include but are not limited to trash collection, repairs or replacement of surfaces due to cracks, spalling, broken concrete, etc., maintenance of gutters, curbs and sidewalks (keep free of debris, wax, gum buildup, etc.), remove and/or trimming of vegetation that is interfering with public use of the -easement area, repair/replacement of public access signs, trash receptacles, benches, handrails, stairs, and lighting. B. The landowner(s) or entity assigned to be responsible for management and maintenance shall undertake management and maintenance in accordance with the approved final management and maintenance program. Any proposed changes to the approved final management and maintenance program shall be reported to the Executive Director. No changes to the approved final management and maintenance program shall occur without a-Cammissian aiimendrrment to this coastalevelopmectt permit unless the Executive Director determines that no amendment is legally required. 12. CONSTRUCTIONI©EVELOPMENT PHASING Consistent with the applicant's proposal, Construction of the public access improvements depicted on the final plans approved by the Executive Director pursuant to Special Condition 17 in the public access and recreation easement shall be phased so"that they are open and available to the public prior to or concurrent with initial occupation of the development approved by this coastal development permit. COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT No. 5-08-279 Page 12 of 14 13. RESTRICTIONS ON DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE VIEW CORRIDOR No development other than the proposed landscaped planters, public plaza, public walkways, vehicular/pedestrian bridge and dock slips, shall be sited within the view corridor, as generally depicted in Exhibit 6 of the staff report dated January 15, 2009. 14. PUBLIC ACCESS SIGN PROGRAM The final plans submitted for review and approval to the Executive Director shall include a detailed signage plan that directs the public to the public access and recreation easement areas on the project site. Some signs shall be included that are located and sized such that they are visible from existing publicly accessible areas (e.g. sidewalks, public roads) adjacent to the site. Signs shall invite and encourage public use of access opportunities and shall identify and direct the public to their locations. Signage shall include facility identification/directional monuments (e.g. location of amenities); informational signage; memorial plaque of the site's original historical significance, circulation; and roadways signs. Signs and displays regarding public access not explicitly permitted in this document shall require an amendment to this permit unless the Executive Director determines that no amendment is legally required. 15. EELGRASS SURVEY 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 for a period of 60 days with the exception of surveys completed in. August.- October. A survey completed in August - October shall be valid until the resumption of active growth (i.e., in most instances, March 1).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 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 COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT No. 5-08-279 Page 13of14 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 eelgrass has been impacted, the applicant shall replace the impacted eelgrass at a minimum 1.2:1 ratio on -site, or at another location, in accordance with.the Southern California Eelgrass Mitigation Policy. Ail - impacts to eelgrass habitat shall be mitigated at a minimum ratio of 1.2:1 (mitigation: impact). The exceptions to the required 1.2:1 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 legally required. 16. PRE -CONSTRUCTION CAULERPA TAXIFOLIA SURVEY A. Not earlier than 90 days nor later than 30 days prior to commencement or re -commencement 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 Caulerpa faxifolia. 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.-With-tn 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), or their successors. 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 COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT No. 5-08-279 Page 14 of 14 I evidence to the Executive Director that all C. taxifolia discovered within I 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 i 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. 17. FINAL PROJECT PLANS A. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF THE COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, the applicant shall submit, for the Executive Director's review and approval, two (2) full size sets of final project plans which.conform with the requirements of the special conditions of this perrimit and indicate the final layout of all development including, but not limited to: grading, buildings, driveways and bridges, bulkhead, docks and piers, utilities and easements, infrastructure, water quality management system, accessways, signs, interpretive amenities, walls, fences, and gates and any other appurtenances. B. The permittee shall undertake development in accordance with the approved final plans. Any proposed changes to the approved final plans shall be reported to the Executive Director. No changes to the approved final plans shall occur without a Commission amendment to this coastal development permit unless the Executive Director determines that no amendment is legally required. 5-08-279(ETCO).doc Printed on April 22. 2010 EI - BRIDGEPORT, LLC 9952 S. SANTA MONICA BLVD., BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90212 TEL: (310)691-5500 FAX: (310)691-5532 December 23, 2009 Mr. Chris Miller City of Newport Beach 829 Harbor Island Dr. Newport Beach, CA 92660 Re:. Vested Tract Map 16594 located at 2300 Newport Blvd., Newport Beach, also known as Newport Bay Marina. Mr. Miller, Pursuant to our meeting last month I wish to make some clarifications relative to your concerns for public and private access to and from the docks designated for public use. As I indicated to you in our meeting, all of our docks are currently designed to be accessed by two ramps at each end of our project (this includes the docks designated for public use to the middle of the project). Currently we have no plans to gate or otherwise restrict or deny access to anyone. If in the future it becomes necessary to install any kind of gates or restrictions, I will assure that our company will first approach and seek your department's approval on the design prior to doing any such work. Additionally, pursuant to our meeting in which we discussed potential access points, we will consider to add one additional access ramp to the center of the project in order to add one other (possible) dedicated access to the docks designated for public_ use. If we are able to achieve this additional ramp, then I believe that gating or restricting access on the other two will be approved by your department (subject to your review). If we decide to add this, additional ramp and or gates, we will be sure to add any such work to our final dock construction drawings prior to commencement of work. Once again, I hope that this is the clarification that you are seeking and look forward to answering any additional questions that you may have. Please don't hesitate to contact me anytime. Sinderely, ."o Afshil Etebar,-IVFa nager El -Bridgeport, LLC EI - BRIDGEPORT, LLC 9952 S. SANTA MONICA BLVD., BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90212 TEL: (310)691-5500 FAX: (310)691-5532 December 23, 2009 Mr. Chris Miller City of Newport Beach 829 Harbor Island Dr. Newport Beach, CA 92660 Re: Vested Tract Map 16594 located at 2300 Newport Blvd., Newport Beach, also known as Newport Bay Marina. Mr. Miller, Pursuant to our meeting last month I wish to make some clarifications relative to your concerns for public and private access to and from the docks designated for public use. As I indicated to you in our meeting, all of our docks are currently designed to be accessed by two ramps at each end of our project (this includes the docks designated for public use to the middle of the project). Currently we have no plans to gate or otherwise restrict or deny access to anyone. If in the future it becomes necessary to install any kind of gates or restrictions, I will assure that our company will first approach and seek your department's approval on the design prior to doing any such work. Additionally, pursuant to our meeting in which we discussed potential access points, we will consider to add one additional access ramp to the center of the project in order to add one other (possible) dedicated access to the docks designated for public use. If we are able to achieve this additional ramp, then I believe that gating or restricting access on the other two will be approved by your department (subject to your review). If we decide to add this additional ramp and or gates, we will be sure to add any such work to our final dock construction drawings prior to commencement of work. Once again, I hope that this is the clarification that you are seeking and look forward to answering any additional questions that you may have. Please don't hesitate to contact me anytime. Sincerely, ,t Afshil Etebar,,-Manager El -Bridgeport, LLC 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: Remove and replace existing docks stem and bulkhead; both existing slipways will be combined into one slipway; and remediation of contaminated sediments per an approved Regional Water Board Remedial Action Plan. See attached project description. Property Address: 2300 Newport Blvd. Legal Description: Lot 1 of Parcel Map P.M.B. 68/48 Harbor Permit Number: 120-2122 Plan Check Number: TBD Applicant: ETCO Investments, LLC., Attn: Steve Schapel Applicant's Mailing Address: 2222 Newport Blvd, Newport Beach, CA 92658-8915 Phone Number: (949) 200-7223 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. Page 1 of 2 And find X They comply with the current adopted Newport Beach General Plan, Municipal Code, Title 17 and any applicable specific or precise plans or, ❑ 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 concept and said approval has been written upon said plans, signed and dated. Should Newport Beach adopt an ordinance deleting, amending or adding to the Municipal Code 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 guidelines adopted thereunder, this development: ❑ Has been determined to be ministerial or categorically exempt. ❑ Has received a final Exemption Declaration or final Negative Declaration (copy attached). X Has received a Final Environmental Impact Report (copy attached). All discretionary approvals legally required of Newport Beach prior to issuance of a harbor permit and a building permit have been given and are final. The development is not subject to rejection in principal by Newport Beach unless a substantial change 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 Special Conditions. Chris Miller, Harbor Resources Manager Signature: mber 25. 2008 Attachments: Detailed Project Description Conceptual Project Drawings Special Conditions Environmental Impact Report State Clearinghouse # 2003071144 (available on request) Page 2 of 2 ETCO HOMES PROJECT COORDINATION MEETING APRIL 17, 2008 AGENDA • Introductions (M. Chichgar) • Overview & description of the project • Project schedule and current status of the project (Amir Rouhani, AB Consultants) • Explanation of the roles of the participants in the project approval process • Status of acquisition of project permits (Amir Rouhani, AB Consultants) • Comments and responses from attendees • Overview of the Public Participation process and requirements (M. Chichgar) • Discussion • Summary (Action items, etc) (M. Chichgar) t c" e ti sl d Newport Bay Marina Project Description Location The site is located at 2300 Newport Blvd., between Woody's Wharf and the Crab Cooker Restaurant. The site consists of 2.37 acres and is currently developed with approximately 44,300 square feet of commercial and office, existing bulkhead, and associated parking. demolished. Proiect Description i commercial marina, two boat slipways, an All current structures on the site will be The proposed Newport Bay Marina project will be a mixed use development with approximately 35,750 square feet of commercial and office uses and 27 residential units, located above the ground floor commercial uses. The project will consist of ten three-story buildings over a subterranean parking structure. The project includes a 10-foot wide public access easement along the property's entire bay frontage, as well as pedestrian accessways through the project. In addition to redevelopment of the site itself, the project will include: Replacement of most, if not all, of the existing bulkhead —The existing bulkhead was constructed in the late 1920's or early 1930's. Much of the bulkhead is in poor condition and showing signs of deterioration. Most, if not all, of the bulkhead will be replaced. To reduce the disturbance to the marine environment, areas of the existing bulkhead which are still in good condition will be retrofitted and/or renovated. The new bulkhead will be constructed in the same location as the existing bulkhead or behind it, extending along approximately 367+ feet of waterfront. Mitigation measures to avoid impacts to water quality are included in the certified Final EIR for the property. Reconfiguration of the existing 21-boat slip marina — Some of the existing slips in the marina are substandard. The new marina will be configured to be consistent with California Department of Boating and Waterways standards and will result in an improved marina use which will be able to accommodate between 21 to 25 boats on a permanent basis (the double slips, Slips 6/7 and 16/17, may accommodate up to four boats each). In addition, up to 12 boats can now be accommodated on a temporary basis in the large slip, Slip 8. Site remediation of contaminants — There are contaminated sediments at the mouth of one of the existing slipways. These sediments are associated with the previous shipbuilding/repair use of the property and are contaminated with metals that are considered hazardous waste. These contaminants will be excavated and disposed of at a licensed facility pursuant to mitigation measures included in the certified Final EIR. 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: Remove and replace existing docks stem and bulkhead; closure of an existing slipway and expansion of an existing slipway; and site remediation of contaminated sediments per an approved Regional Water Board Remedial Action Plan. See attached project description. Property Address: 2300 Newport Blvd. Legal Description: Lot 1 of Parcel Map P.M.B. 68/48 Harbor Permit Number: 120-2122 Plan Check Number: TBD Applicant: ETCO Investments, LLC., Attn: Steve Schapel Applicant's Mailing Address: 2222 Newport Blvd, Newport Beach, CA 92658-8915 Phone Number: (949) 200-7223 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. Page 1 of 2 And find ��,� X They comply with the current adopted Newport Beach General Plan, Municipal Code, Title 17 and any applicable specific or precise plans or, ❑ 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 concept and said approval has been written upon said plans, signed and dated. Should Newport Beach adopt an ordinance deleting, amending or adding to the Municipal Code 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 guidelines adopted thereunder, this development: ❑ Has been determined to be ministerial or categorically exempt. ❑ Has received a final Exemption Declaration or final Negative Declaration (copy attached). X Has received a Final Environmental Impact Report (copy attached). All discretionary approvals legally required of Newport Beach prior to issuance of a harbor permit and a building permit have been given and are final. The development is not subject to rejection in principal by Newport Beach unless a substantial change 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 Special Conditions. Tom Rossmiller,aanager, Harbor Re r Si October 26. 2007 Attachments: Detailed Project Description Conceptual Project Drawings Special Conditions Environmental Impact Report State Clearinghouse # 2003071144 (available on request) Page 2 of 2 Newport Bay Marina P Y Project Description \Illy Location The site is located at 2300 Newport Blvd., between Woody's Wharf and the Crab Cooker Restaurant. The site consists of 2.37 acres and is currently developed with approximately 44,300 square feet of commercial and office, a commercial marina, two boat slipways, an existing bulkhead, and associated parking. All current structures on the site will be demolished. Project Description The proposed Newport Bay Marina project will be a mixed use development with approximately 35,750 square feet of commercial and office uses and 27 residential units, located above the ground floor commercial uses. The project will consist of eleven three- story buildings over a subterranean parking structure. The project includes a 10-foot wide public access easement along the property's entire bay frontage, as well as pedestrian accessways through the project. In addition to redevelopment of the site itself, the project will include: Replacement of most, if not all, of the existing, bulkhead The existing bulkhead was constructed in the late 1920's or early 1930's. Much of the bulkhead is in poor condition and showing signs of deterioration. Most, if not all, of the bulkhead will be replaced. To reduce the disturbance to the marine environment, areas of the existing bulkhead which are still in good condition will be retrofitted and/or renovated. The new bulkhead will be constructed in the same location as the existing bulkhead or behind it, extending along approximately 485 feet of waterfront. Mitigation measures to avoid impacts to water quality are included in the certified Final EIR for the property. Reconfiguration of the existing 21-boat slip marina — Some of the existing slips in the marina are substandard. The new marina will be configured to be consistent with California Department of Boating and Waterways standards and will result in an improved marina use with 19 slips, one of which is an expanded slipway, allowing a variety of boat usage on a visitation basis. Closure of one of the existing slipways and expansion of the other slipway — The smaller slipway, which has been covered for several years, will be closed and the larger one will be expanded to a length of approximately 150 feet, with a width of approximately 34 feet. The expanded slipway will allow for the temporary berthing of five to ten smaller boats. Site remediation of contaminants There are contaminated sediments at the mouth of one of the slipways. These sediments are associated with the previous shipbuilding/repair use of the property and are contaminated with metals that are considered hazardous waste. These contaminants will be excavated and disposed of at a licensed facility pursuant to mitigation measures included in the certified Final EIR. W ztro 4 HARBOR RESOURCES DIVISION 829 Harbor Island Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 (949) 644-3034 / Fax (949).723-0589 Special Conditions October 22, 2007 Property Address: 2300 Newport Blvd. With reference to the plans currently under consideration to reconstruct or modify the subject bulkhead, dock system, slipway and site remediation of contaminated sediments, the following conditions will now be in effect: 1. The project proponent is aware of the Harbor Permit Policies (Council Policy H-1) and Title 17 of the City of Newport Beach Municipal Code. The project proponent understands that the above referenced structures are under the purview of these Policies and Codes. 2. Any future work on the above mentioned structures require permits with the City of Newport Beach and any other applicable agencies. Painting and work considered to be cosmetic in nature does not require a permit. 3. The conditions set forth in this document pertain to the proposed bulkhead, dock systems, slipways and site remediation of contaminated sediments described in the project description. Any future modifications or alterations to the structures may require new conditions which may override or change these conditions. These conditions supersede all past conditions associated with this property. 4. In accordance with Municipal Code 10.08.030 A. the project proponent shall obtain the proper permits for equipment and materials storage. " Except as otherwise provided in this section, no person shall use any public street, sidewalk, alley or parkway or other public property for the purpose of storing or displaying any equipment, materials or merchandise, or any other commercial purpose. B. Public streets, sidewalks, alleys, or parkways may be used for the purpose of selling, storing, or displaying any equipment, material, merchandise or for other commercial purposes in the following cases: ...For the temporary storage of construction equipment or material provided a permit is issued pursuant to Chapter 12.62 of this Code and the storage is consistent with provisions of the Uniform Buildina Code." 5. The contractor shall post and update a two week schedule of construction activities at a location(s) easily accessible to local residents. Page 1 of 2 6. In accordance with Municipal Code 10.28.040 the following noise regulations apply: "A. Weekdays and Saturdays. No person shall, while engaged in construction, remodeling, dig in , grading, demolition, painting, plastering or any other related building activity, o to any 61, equipment or machine in a manner which produces loud noise that distur s, o d ist it a person of normal sensitivity who works or resides in the vicinit on a yekda xcept between the hours of seven a.m. and six -thirty p.m., nor on any Sat u ay e cept l w en the hours of eight a.m. and six p.m. B. Sundays and Holidays. No person sh hile engaged in construction, remodeling, digging, grading, demolition, painting, plastering or any other related building activity, operate any tool, equipment or machine in a manner which produces loud noise that disturbs, or could disturb, a person of normal sensitivity who works or resides in the vicinity, on any Sunday or any federal holiday." 7. The project shall be implemented in conformance with the Local Coastal Program - Coastal Land Use Plan. 8. The waterfront improvements listed in the project description shall be implemented in conformance with Resolution No. 1706 of the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach. 9. The conceptual design plans indicate slip fingers of a 5 foot width which is acceptable for commercial slips but not acceptable for loading and unloading of commercial charter vessels. Any future consideration of charter vessel operations in this marina will require slip facilities to meet applicable requirements listed in the "City of Newport Beach Waterfront Guidelines and Standards Harbor and Design Criteria -Commercial and Residential Facilities" and Chapter 17.10 "Marine Activities Permits of the Citv of Newport Beach Municipal Code. 10. Vessels that occupy slips number 6, 7, 16, and 17 shall not be allowed to extend more than 20 feet beyond the bayward end of the adjacent slip fingers. Vessels occupying all other slips are allowed to extend the width of the beam of the vessel beyond the adjacent slip finger. 11. All vessels shall be berthed in the Newport Bay Marina compliant with the City of Newport Beach Fire Code. 12. The project proponent shall prepare an operation plan for slip 19 that demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Harbor Resources Manager that vessels will be able to enter and exit the slipway without moving any other vessels. Slip 19 shall be operated as a dock to provide access to landside improvement for visiting vessels. The operation plan shall demonstrate the method(s) of daily monitoring employed to ensure compliance with the City of Newport Beach Fire Code. 13. Per City Council Policy H-1, no permanent structure shall be permitted on the cantilevered deck except (1) planters and benches not over 16 inches in height, and (2) railings not over 42 inches in height with approximately 95% open space. 14. The setback between the cantilevered deck and the headwalk shall be 1 foot, as approved by the Harbor Commission on October 10, 2007 as an exception to the City Standard Drawing requirement of a 2 foot setback between these structures. Tom Rossmiller, Harbor Resources Manager Date Applicant Signature Print Name Date Page 2 of 2 9 mi-om mvw -XV41 azu-cm level wwm m c-ur lowl mvi a0294 a l 01V 'M()ffd C9996 Wo 'Novas lHodm3m .... . ................. . .... a= Call ums 141"Amflas volmall VIM" 7266 Z3 MO ............................ us%ud0jeA&a 0*.L3 3-n 1vujjvW Avg[ podmeN 081 is 00M oul 11 3,vl .S3j.V13xGSSV i Hiom I .............................. ...... IM dm3m ........... ........... ............. VNI VIM Ave"M, gem vo %-JvRS loodam ems vo Alumas .................... .................. 82 Z—, 2 .. ............. . I if I iff ......... ..... - 12 cc A -6 Pw 91 lu A > S� -- ------------- ----- % AS� 0 3.CC,t t.0j.N li; z 091 3.00."i N a 19 L . ....... .. i N Mli H &119 NO ` C), v, L.0 ,n LL—! z V ........ .. .... ........ .. .. . .... . .... E xb., zZaw .......... . . D .............. ........ .... fil .......... ram° 1. sn .71 ....... ... ... .! ........ ... . ....... ..... .......... 0 ...... ........ I I ul 2 cr) kr . . . . . ......... Z 0 LID LO c at- .......... . RE ii.4 -.1., . ........... ..... 39 Au (1) . ............ ....... ....... . ...... ... bc�P- (D ... ... .. ... . ... .. .. . .... ... ...... ... ... . .. .. LU z h 253 -41 CIF otL!•60L SQ#fl3 °]fV4 cau-i X S8#4F'3N0'sid ese-8®L iomE XY3 6®44-&88 (OSYi °aN0#8d av'd3ro NWMau,�t D �sd.3 rye' _- .,.<..< -,. S49L8 4II %*v38 $aods'm Ems Yo `S7'4R $7a3A38 - �.�.",o :fyF' +\�„X - _ aarA3inoe taadaa3et Lzas �z 3itlE$ aavA3zseos voaaae v$xvs zsas eaaLe vo hrsvia iaoadi3$& sez3wrxa lac us ^NLirr-M' aavAos aaodx aocz - •oul EguewdogeAsa 00,L3 ail Isuliew Asa tjodmeN-- WroaWn AVG LHOd i3 Q m af 0 UJ w z z �3 Yo ti 0 8„ n w . J y e.RJ gi co e c i H gil a z iCq .l; r Y SrtILa (jga U3'o£ 3,0£.Li.OLN a x �e I 4 2 1 I I j Nf \' 1 IM au, 2U Q. of W/ p—p 0 0 - �41 W L0 L.' 'Q ^i CO \V w T- N W� W W Z ❑❑ Memorandum To: Tom Rossmiller, Harbor Resources Manager From: David Lepo, Planning Director Date: October 26, 2007 Re: Zoning Code Section 20.60.080 - Marine Incentive Uses Last week's Harbor Commission meeting included consideration of an Approval in Concept for the marina associated with the planned Newport Bay Marina development. This included an incorrect interpretation of Municipal Code Section 20.60.080 by the Planning Department representative. The Commission was advised that the area of a marina outside the established property lines could be counted toward satisfying the minimum percentage for marine -related uses. Code Section 20.60.080 does NOT allow the area of the marina outside the established property to be included in the calculation of the area of marine -related uses. As was noted during the meeting, the City is currently preparing a comprehensive update of the Zoning Code to implement new General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan policy. We are evaluating Section 20.60.080 as to how it will need to be amended to implement new policies promoting marine - related uses. The new Zoning Code provisions will apply to uses proposed to occupy the Newport Bay Marina building upon its completion. We will send you the relevant provisions of the draft code when they are available for your review. Copies to: Sharon Wood, Assistant City Manager Jim Campbell, Senior Planner NEWPORT BEACH HARBOR COMMISSION MINUTES City Council Chambers October 10, 2007 CALL TO ORDER 6:00 P.M. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL: Chairman Lawrenz, Commissioners Seymour Beek, John Corrough, Tim Collins, Marshall Duffield, Karen Rhyne and Ralph Rodheim were in attendance. Staff: Lorrie Arcese, Chris Miller, Tom Rossmiller and Asst. City Manager Dave Kiff. MINUTES: The minutes from the last meeting were approved. PUBLIC COMMENTS: None ACTION ITEM: ITEM #1 Subject: Newport Bay Marina at 2300 Newport Blvd. Summary: ETCO Investments proposes to reconstruct Newport Bay Marina, a commercial marina at 2300 Newport Blvd, in essentially the same configuration as existing. The applicant is requesting an exception to Council Policy H-1 regarding the 2 foot setback required between the cantilevered deck and the headwalk. Should the Harbor Commission allow this exception and should the Harbor Commission advise Harbor Resources to issue and Approval in Concept for the project? Discussion: Chris Miller and Carol Mc Dermott (Government Solutions) gave a Power Point presentations on the project. There were concerns from the Commissioner's on the 20 foot overhand and the area under the bridge and landward. The Planning Staff has made sure that the project is consistent with the Harbor Element and the Coastal Plan. The Harbor Commissioner's feel that the project doesn't meet the 40% marine related activites that are required. Where the property line is located was in question. The Harbor Commission cannot change the 4 foot heigth limit or the 2 hour time limits that are restrictions on the project placed by the Planning Commission. Public Comments: Carter Ford feels that the height limit in the public slip should not include masts; so many more types of boats could fit in the slip. He said that the slip overhang issue will be a long time in coming and the overhang limit proposed for this project is a good one. Afshin Etevar, with ETCO, said that his company is pursuing marine related uses in his rentals and visitor services. He feels that the Coastal Commission may add more conditions to the permit still. They feel the more visitors the better. They will cooperate anyway they can with the Harbor Commission. Action: Co mission Collins made the motion to allow an exception for the pr osed 1' setback from the cantilevered deck. Harbor Resources is to sue the Approval in Concept for the project with the following conditions: remove the boat heigth requirement imposed by the Planning Commission for slip 19; slips 6 & 7, 16 & 17 will have a 20 foot overhang limit, but all other slips will follow the current code until a new policy is put in place. The motion was seconded and carried with all ayes. SUB -COMMITTEE REPORTS: • Commissioner Duffield said the Mooring sub -committee is working on the transferrability issue. HARBOR RESOURCES UPDATE — Tom gave an update on the harbor. Please refer to the following website: The update is posted at: http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/hbr (under Harbor Resources Updates). • Chris reported on the Coastal Commission hearing regarding the 15t" Street pump out. The item was approved with the stipulation that the fence at the American Legion must be taken down. • Chris advised that the application for the Rhine Wharf has been sent in. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON SUB -COMMITTEE REPORTS OR HARBOR RESOURCES UPDATE: Carter Ford said that Speak Up Newport was very informative Resources staff has done well with the 15t" Street pumpout. Mark Sites said the Eelgrass questionairre is great but do it results. He said that Harbor anonimously for better COMMISSIONER'S ANNOUNCEMENTS OR MATTERS TO BE PLACED ON FUTURE AGENDAS FOR DISCUSSION, ACTION OR REPORT • Commissioner Rodheim said that Councilman Selich said that the City cannot prohibit fishing on any dock, but they can be closed down for maintenance. • The Marine Committee will meet tomorrow at 5:30 pm at the Chamber to discuss Harbor Patrol issues. • Commissioner Beek said that the Olympic Finn trials are going on now. • A copy of the Newport Harbor Long Range Plan and Proposed Plan/Project Evaluation Structure report was distributed. RECOMMENDED TOPICS FOR FUTURE AGENDAS: DATE OF NEXT MEETING: ADJOURNMENT DATE CHANGE: Wednesday, November 7, 6:00 pm City Council Chambers CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HARBOR COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Agenda Item No.1 October 10, 2007 TO: HARBOR COMMISSION FROM: Harbor Resources Division (City Manager's Office) Chris Miller, Harbor Resources Supervisor, (949) 644-3043 cmiller@city.newport-beach.ca.us SUBJECT: Newport Bay Marina at 2300 Newport Blvd. ISSUE: ETCO Investments proposes to reconstruct Newport Bay Marina, a commercial marina at 2300 Newport Blvd, in essentially the same configuration as existing. The applicant is requesting an exception to Council Policy H-1 regarding the 2 foot setback required between the cantilevered deck and the headwalk. Should the Harbor Commission allow this exception and should the Harbor Commission advise Harbor Resources to issue and Approval in Concept for the project? RECOMMENDATION: The Harbor Commission may: Advise Harbor Resources to allow an exception to Council Policy H-1 regarding the proposed 1' setback from the cantilevered deck. Advise Harbor Resources to issue an Approval in Concept for the project. 2. Advise Harbor Resources to deny the request for an exception to Council Policy H-1. Advise Harbor Resources to issue and Approval in Concept for the project. 3. Advise Harbor Resources to deny the request for an Approval in Concept. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: ETCO Investments, LLC, owner of the property at 2300 Newport Blvd, between Woody's Wharf and the Crab Cooker restaurant, has gained approval from the City of Newport Beach to redevelop the 2.37 acre site into a mixed use development with approximately 35,750 square feet of commercial and office uses and 27 residential units located above the ground floor commercial uses. Newport Bay Marina October 10, 2007 Page 2 The project will consist of nine three story buildings over a subterranean parking structure, and a 10 foot wide public access easement along the property's entire bay frontage, as well as pedestrian access ways through the project. The land side portion of the project with a conceptual marina layout and the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was approved by the Planning Commission in November 2006. PROPOSED MARINA PLANS In addition to the land side development, the existing marina will be replaced with the following components included: Replacement of most, if not all, of the existing bulkhead The existing bulkhead was constructed in the late 1920's or early 1930's. Much of the bulkhead is in poor condition and showing signs of deterioration. Most, if not all of the bulkhead will be replaced. To reduce the disturbance to the marine environment, areas of the existing bulkhead which are still in good condition will be retrofitted and/or renovated. The new bulkhead will be constructed in the same location as the existing bulkhead or behind it, extending along approximately 485 feet of waterfront. Mitigation measures to avoid impacts to water quality are included in the certified (EIR) for the property. Reconfiguration of the existing 21-boat slip marina Some of the existing slips in the marina are substandard. The new marina will be configured to be consistent with California Department of Boating and Waterways standards and will result in an improved marina use with 19 slips, one of which is an expanded slipway, allowing a variety of boat usage on a visitation basis. Closure of one of the existing slipways and expansion of the other slipway The smaller slipway, which has been covered for several years, will be closed and the larger one will be expanded to a length of approximately 150 feet with a width of approximately 33 feet. The expanded slipway will allow for the temporary berthing of five to ten smaller boats. Site remediation of contaminants There are contaminated sediments at the mouth of one of the slipways. These sediments are associated with the previous shipbuilding / repair use of the property and are contaminated with metals that are considered hazardous waste. These contaminants will be excavated and disposed of at a licensed facility pursuant to mitigation measures included in the certified Final EIR. Newport Bay Marina October 10, 2007 Page 3 STAFF ANALYSIS Harbor Resources staff has worked extensively with the applicant in the development of the proposed marina. Although the proposal is in essentially the same layout as the existing layout, the new configuration utilizes the available water space in an efficient manner while also conforming to the City's dock design criteria. Some key features to note are: 1. An ADA compliant gangway will be positioned on the far right side of the marina. The headwalk on the right side continues along the entire marina, including through the slipway (Slip 19) and on to the left side of the marina, therefore providing full marina access for the disabled. 2. The slip fingers are 5' wide which is an acceptable width for commercial slips. However, this 5' width precludes the applicant from using most of the slips as a commercial charter loading location because the standards state that fingers must be greater than 6' wide in those applications. In addition, approved parking and an installed pump out facility must be approved prior to any future consideration for these facilities to be used as a charter loading / unloading location. The applicant agrees and this will be listed in their Special Conditions. 3. The slips are allowed to extend 20' beyond the Pierhead Line per Council Policy H-1 as stated on the drawing. This is an improvement over the current layout as can be seen on the Project Overlay (see Exhibit 3) which shows several slips extending beyond their allowable limits. 4. The applicant has agreed to limit the distance that vessels are allowed to extend in the harbor to 20 feet beyond the fingers. This is especially important for the two double -wide slips that are 43' and 36' wide because this precludes a larger vessel from extending the normal distance of the beam width. The applicant agrees and this will be listed in their Special Conditions. 5. Slip 19 — Guest Slip a. The applicant has agreed to berth vessels in a fire compliant manner in the marina, especially at Slip 19. Vessels must be able to exit the slip without having to move other boats. Since this is deemed a visiting dock, the applicant will need to monitor this activity on a daily basis or develop a plan to adhere to the fire code. The applicant agrees and this will be listed in their Special Conditions. b. The Planning Commission placed a 2 hour berthing restriction (no overnight) for visiting vessels. Newport Bay Marina October 10, 2007 Page 4 c. The Planning Commission placed a restriction that vessels may not exceed a height of 4 feet above the walkway. This may be difficult to manage due to tidal fluctuations throughout the day. 6. The applicant has incorporated a cantilevered deck that will project approximately 4' beyond the top of the bulkhead. This is permitted because the deck extends over private waterways which is the small strip of waterway landward of the Bulkhead Line. However, per Council Policy H-1, no permanent structure shall be permitted on the projecting portion of the patios except: 1) Planters and benches not over 16 inches in height, and 2) Railings not over 42 inches in height with approximately 95% open area. The applicant agrees and this will be listed in their Special Conditions. 7. The main headwalk of the marina is proposed to be setback 1' from the cantilevered deck. The applicant is requesting a exception be made from the 2' setback as required by the City Standard Drawings. The basis for the request is that headwalks are already required to be setback 1' from the bulkhead, so the applicant is requesting the same logic be applied to the cantilevered deck. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW It has been determined that the Newport Bay Marina project, pursuant to CEQA and CEQA Guidelines, could have a significant effect on the environment, and thus warranted the preparation of an EIR. On February 23, 2005, the City of Newport Beach, as lead agency under CEQA, prepared a Notice of Preparation (NOP) of the EIR then mailed that NOP to public agencies, organizations and persons likely to be interested in the potential impacts of the proposed project. The City thereafter caused to be prepared a Draft EIR which, taking into account the comments it received on the NOP, described the project and discussed the environmental impacts resulting there from, and on July 19, 2006, circulated the Draft EIR for public and agency comments. The public comment period closed on September 2, 2006. The staff at the City of Newport Beach has reviewed the comments received on the draft EIR, and has prepared full and complete responses thereto, and on September 22, 2006 distributed the responses in accordance with Public Resources Code section 21092.5. Subsequently, the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach did, on the 5th day of October 2006 and the 16th of November 2006, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider: 1) the certification of the Final EIR, 2) the adoption of certain findings and determinations and adopt statement overriding considerations, and 3) the information and the comments pertaining to the Draft EIR and the Final EIR at duly noticed meetings held on the 5th day of October 2006 and on the 16th of November 2006. The Planning Commission as the Newport Bay Marina October 10, 2007 Page 5 decision making body of the lead agency, considered the Final EIR for certification as having been completed in compliance with the provisions of CEQA and the state and local guidelines implementing CEQA. The Planning Commission also has determined that the project is consistent with the General Plan and Zoning Regulations of the City of Newport Beach. Therefore, the Planning Commission, having final approval authority over the project, has adopted and certified as complete and adequate the Final EIR, which reflects the Planning Commission's independent judgment and analysis. PUBLIC OUTREACH On September 18, 2007, Harbor Resources sent a letter (See Exhibit 5) to the surrounding residents and property owners within 300' of the project (See Exhibit 6) informing them of this Harbor Commission meeting where the marina side of the project will be reviewed. Approximately 200 letters were mailed and as of the date of publication of this report, only 1 letter signed by two interested parties was submitted. This letter showed support for the marina portion of the project but did not support the landside portion of the project which has already been approved by the Planning Commission as previously noted. This agenda item has been noticed according to the Ralph M. Brown Act (72 hours in advance of the public meetings at which the Harbor Commission considers the item). CONCLUSION The Harbor Commission is requested to consider the marina portion of the project so they may advise Harbor Resources to issue an Approval In Concept which is required for federal and state regulatory approval. In addition, the Harbor Commission is requested to review the applicant's request for an exception to the Council Policy H-1 as described in the Staff Analysis, Item #7 section of this report. Harbor Resources staff has concluded that, based on the project design and the environmental analysis, the proposed project is consistent with all City and State codes, guidelines and standards. As previously noted in the Recommendation Section of this report, staff therefore requests that the Harbor Commission provide advice on the following three items: 1. Advise Harbor Resources to allow an exception to Council Policy H-1 regarding the proposed 1' setback from the cantilevered deck. Advise Harbor Resources to issue an Approval in Concept for the project. Newport Bay Marina October 10, 2007 Page 6 2. Advise Harbor Resources to deny the request for an exception to Council Policy H-1. Advise Harbor Resources to issue and Approval in Concept for the project. 3. Advise Harbor Resources to deny the request for an Approval in Concept. Prepared by: Chris Miller Harbor Resources Supervisor Attachments: Exhibit 1: Vicinity Maps Exhibit 2: Proposed Project Plan Detail Proposed Project Plan - Color Exhibit 3: Proposed Project Overlay Exhibit 4: Deck Level Plan Exhibit 5: Public Outreach Letter Exhibit 6: Public Outreach Mailing Area Newport Bav Marina October 10, 2007 Page 7 Exhibit 1 Vicinity Map Newport Bay Marina October 10, 2007 Page 8 Vicinity Map Newport Bay Marina October 10, 2007 Page 9 Exhibit 2 Proposed Project Plan Newport Bay Marina October 10, 2007 Page 10 Proposed Project Plan — Color Newport Ba'v Marina October 10, 2007 Page 11 Exhibit 3 Proposed Project Overlay Exhibit 4 Deck Level Plan Newport Bay Marina October 10, 2007 Page 12 BLDG BLDG BLDG qua y : N . g BLDG Li Of ,q R D Newport Bay Marina October 10, 2007 Page 13 Exhibit 5 Public Outreach Letter September 18, 2007 Subject: Newport Bay Marina Dear Residents and Business Owners, As some of you may be aware, ETCO Development is proposing to redevelop the property at 2300 Newport Boulevard; the proposed project is known as Newport Bay Marina. In addition to redevelopment of the site itself, the project also includes: • Replacement of most, if not all, of the existing bulkhead along approximately 485 feet of the waterfront; • Reconfiguration of the existing 21-boat slip marina; • Closure of one of the existing slipways (the other will be widened and remain open); • Site remediation of the contaminants located in sediment near and within the boat slipways; these contaminants are related to the previous shipbuilding/repair use of the property. The marina portion of the project will be considered by the Harbor Commission at their October 10, 2007 meeting at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers at 3300 Newport Boulevard. You are invited to provide comments at this meeting or you may submit your comments to me in writing prior to October 10, 2007. The Harbor Commission will be requested to advise the City's Harbor Resources Division on the Approval in Concept necessary for the marina portion of the project to be considered by the City's Building Department and federal / state regulatory agencies. The Harbor Commission will also be requested to advise Harbor Resources on any proposed special conditions that may be placed on the marina portion of the project. The landside portion of the project was approved and an Environmental Impact Report certified at the November 16, 2006 Planning Commission Public Hearing and is currently on file with the Coastal Commission for their review and approval. Enclosed is the following information: • Project Description; • Deck Level Plan of the Newport Bay Marina Project, which shows the proposed project at the street level and provides the context for the seawall and marina aspects of the proposed project; • Site Plan — Seawall/Dock Layout; and • Proposed Dock Overlay. Additional information and project plans as well as the Harbor Resources staff report will be available on the City's website at : http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/HBR/Hottooics.htm Sincerely, [^iris 91Iiffer Harbor Resources Supervisor cmiller(a')city newport-beach.ca.us (949) 644-3043 Newport Bay Marina October 10, 2007 Page 14 Exhibit 6 Public Outreach Mailing Area 300' Radius of Site Approximately 200 Letters Sent CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HARBOR COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Agenda Item No.1 October 10, 2007 TO: HARBOR COMMISSION FROM: Harbor Resources Division (City Manager's Office) Chris Miller, Harbor Resources Supervisor, (949) 644-3043 cmiller@city.newport-beach.ca.us SUBJECT: Newport Bay Marina at 2300 Newport Blvd. ISSUE: ETCO Investments proposes to reconstruct Newport Bay Marina, a commercial marina at 2300 Newport Blvd, in essentially the same configuration as existing. The applicant is requesting an exception to Council Policy H-1 regarding the 2 foot setback required between the cantilevered deck and the headwalk. Should the Harbor Commission allow this exception and should the Harbor Commission advise Harbor Resources to issue and Approval in Concept for the project? RECOMMENDATION: The Harbor Commission may: 1. Advise Harbor Resources to allow an exception to Council Policy H-1 regarding the proposed 1' setback from the cantilevered deck. Advise Harbor Resources to issue an Approval in Concept for the project. 2. Advise Harbor Resources to deny the request for an exception to Council Policy H-1. Advise Harbor Resources to issue and Approval in Concept for the project. 3. Advise Harbor Resources to deny the request for an Approval in Concept. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: ETCO Investments, LLC, owner of the property at 2300 Newport Blvd, between Woody's Wharf and the Crab Cooker restaurant, has gained approval from the City of Newport Beach to redevelop the 2.37 acre site into a mixed use development with approximately 35,750 square feet of commercial and office uses and 27 residential units located above the ground floor commercial uses. Newport Bay Marina October 10, 2007 Page 2 The project will consist of nine three story buildings over a subterranean parking structure, and a 10 foot wide public access easement along the property's entire bay frontage, as well as pedestrian access ways through the project. The land side portion of the project with a conceptual marina layout and the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was approved by the Planning Commission in November 2006. PROPOSED MARINA PLANS In addition to the land side development, the existing marina will be replaced with the following components included: Replacement of most, if not all, of the existing bulkhead The existing bulkhead was constructed in the late 1920's or early 1930's. Much of the bulkhead is in poor condition and showing signs of deterioration. Most, if not all of the bulkhead will be replaced. To reduce the disturbance to the marine environment, areas of the existing bulkhead which are still in good condition will be retrofitted and/or renovated. The new bulkhead will be constructed in the same location as the existing bulkhead or behind it, extending along approximately 485 feet of waterfront. Mitigation measures to avoid impacts to water quality are included in the certified (EIR) for the property. Reconfiguration of the existing 21-boat slip marina Some of the existing slips in the marina are substandard. The new marina will be configured to be consistent with California Department of Boating and Waterways standards and will result in an improved marina use with 19 slips, one of which is an expanded slipway, allowing a variety of boat usage on a visitation basis. Closure of one of the existing slipways and expansion of the other slipway The smaller slipway, which has been covered for several years, will be closed and the larger one will be expanded to a length of approximately 150 feet with a width of approximately 33 feet. The expanded slipway will allow for the temporary berthing of five to ten smaller boats. Site remediation of contaminants There are contaminated sediments at the mouth of one of the slipways. These sediments are associated with the previous shipbuilding / repair use of the property and are contaminated with metals that are considered hazardous waste. These contaminants will be excavated and disposed of at a licensed facility pursuant to mitigation measures included in the certified Final EIR. Newport Bay Marina October 10, 2007 Page 3 STAFF ANALYSIS Harbor Resources staff has worked extensively with the applicant in the development of the proposed marina. Although the proposal is in essentially the same layout as the existing layout, the new configuration utilizes the available water space in an efficient manner while also conforming to the City's dock design criteria. Some key features to note are: 1. An ADA compliant gangway will be positioned on the far right side of the marina. The headwalk on the right side continues along the entire marina, including through the slipway (Slip 19) and on to the left side of the marina, therefore providing full marina access for the disabled. 2. The slip fingers are 5' wide which is an acceptable width for commercial slips. However, this 5' width precludes the applicant from using most of the slips as a commercial charter loading location because the standards state that fingers must be greater than 6' wide in those applications. In addition, approved parking and an installed pump out facility must be approved prior to any future consideration for these facilities to be used as a charter loading / unloading location. The applicant agrees and this will be listed in their Special Conditions. 3. The slips are allowed to extend 20' beyond the Pierhead Line per Council Policy H-1 as stated on the drawing. This is an improvement over the current layout as can be seen on the Project Overlay (see Exhibit 3) which shows several slips extending beyond their allowable limits. 4. The applicant has agreed to limit the distance that vessels are allowed to extend in the harbor to 20 feet beyond the fingers. This is especially important for the two double -wide slips that are 43' and 36' wide because this precludes a larger vessel from extending the normal distance of the beam width. The applicant agrees and this will be listed in their Special Conditions. 5. Slip 19 — Guest Slip a. The applicant has agreed to berth vessels in a fire compliant manner in the marina, especially at Slip 19. Vessels must be able to exit the slip without having to move other boats. Since this is deemed a visiting dock, the applicant will need to monitor this activity on a daily basis or develop a plan to adhere to the fire code. The applicant agrees and this will be listed in their Special Conditions. b. The Planning Commission placed a 2 hour berthing restriction (no overnight) for visiting vessels. Newport Bay Marina October 10, 2007 Page 4 c. The Planning Commission placed a restriction that vessels may not exceed a height of 4 feet above the walkway. This may be difficult to manage due to tidal fluctuations throughout the day. 6. The applicant has incorporated a cantilevered deck that will project approximately 4' beyond the top of the bulkhead. This is permitted because the deck extends over private waterways which is the small strip of waterway landward of the Bulkhead Line. However, per Council Policy H-1, no permanent structure shall be permitted on the projecting portion of the patios except: 1) Planters and benches not over 16 inches in height, and 2) Railings not over 42 inches in height with approximately 95% open area. The applicant agrees and this will be listed in their Special Conditions. 7. The main headwalk of the marina is proposed to be setback 1' from the cantilevered deck. The applicant is requesting a exception be made from the 2' setback as required by the City Standard Drawings. The basis for the request is that headwalks are already required to be setback 1' from the bulkhead, so the applicant is requesting the same logic be applied to the cantilevered deck. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW It has been determined that the Newport Bay Marina project, pursuant to CEQA and CEQA Guidelines, could have a significant effect on the environment, and thus warranted the preparation of an EIR. On February 23, 2005, the City of Newport Beach, as lead agency under CEQA, prepared a Notice of Preparation (NOP) of the EIR then mailed that NOP to public agencies, organizations and persons likely to be interested in the potential impacts of the proposed project. The City thereafter caused to be prepared a Draft EIR which, taking into account the comments it received on the NOP, described the project and discussed the environmental impacts resulting there from, and on July 19, 2006, circulated the Draft EIR for public and agency comments. The public comment period closed on September 2, 2006. The staff at the City of Newport Beach has reviewed the comments received on the draft EIR, and has prepared full and complete responses thereto, and on September 22, 2006 distributed the responses in accordance with Public Resources Code section 21092.5. Subsequently, the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach did, on the 5th day of October 2006 and the 16th of November 2006, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider: 1) the certification of the Final EIR, 2) the adoption of certain findings and determinations and adopt statement overriding considerations, and 3) the information and the comments pertaining to the Draft EIR and the Final EIR at duly noticed meetings held on the 5th day of October 2006 and on the 16th of November 2006. The Planning Commission as the Newport Bay Marina October 10, 2007 Page 5 decision making body of the lead agency, considered the Final EIR for certification as having been completed in compliance with the provisions of CEQA and the state and local guidelines implementing CEQA. The Planning Commission also has determined that the project is consistent with the General Plan and Zoning Regulations of the City of Newport Beach. Therefore, the Planning Commission, having final approval authority over the project, has adopted and certified as complete and adequate the Final EIR, which reflects the Planning Commission's independent judgment and analysis. PUBLIC OUTREACH On September 18, 2007, Harbor Resources sent a letter (See Exhibit 5) to the surrounding residents and property owners within 300' of the project (See Exhibit 6) informing them of this Harbor Commission meeting where the marina side of the project will be reviewed. Approximately 200 letters were mailed and as of the date of publication of this report, only 1 letter signed by two interested parties was submitted. This letter showed support for the marina portion of the project but did not support the landside portion of the project which has already been approved by the Planning Commission as previously noted. This agenda item has been noticed according to the Ralph M. Brown Act (72 hours in advance of the public meetings at which the Harbor Commission considers the item). CONCLUSION The Harbor Commission is requested to consider the marina portion of the project so they may advise Harbor Resources to issue an Approval In Concept which is required for federal and state regulatory approval. In addition, the Harbor Commission is requested to review the applicant's request for an exception to the Council Policy H-1 as described in the Staff Analysis, Item #7 section of this report. Harbor Resources staff has concluded that, based on the project design and the environmental analysis, the proposed project is consistent with all City and State codes, guidelines and standards. As previously noted in the Recommendation Section of this report, staff therefore requests that the Harbor Commission provide advice on the following three items: 1. Advise Harbor Resources to allow an exception to Council Policy H-1 regarding the proposed 1' setback from the cantilevered deck. Advise Harbor Resources to issue an Approval in Concept for the project. Newport Bay Marina October 10, 2007 Page 6 2. Advise Harbor Resources to deny the request for an exception to Council Policy H-1. Advise Harbor Resources to issue and Approval in Concept for the project. 3. Advise Harbor Resources to deny the request for an Approval in Concept. Prepared by: Chris Miller Harbor Resources Supervisor Attachments: Exhibit 1: Vicinity Maps Exhibit 2: Proposed Project Plan Detail Proposed Project Plan - Color Exhibit 3: Proposed Project Overlay Exhibit 4: Deck Level Plan Exhibit 5: Public Outreach Letter Exhibit 6: Public Outreach Mailing Area Newport Bay Marina October 10, 2007 Page 7 Exhibit 1 Vicinity Map Newport Bay Marina October 10, 2007 Page 8 Vicinity Map Newport Bay Marina October 10, 2007 Page 9 Exhibit 2 Proposed Project Plan Newport Bay Marina October 10, 2007 Page 10 Proposed Project Plan - Color Newport Bay Marina October 10, 2007 Page I 1 Exhibit 3 Proposed Project Overlay Newport Bay Marina October 10, 2007 Page 12 Exhibit 4 Deck Level Plan 7 r t�i tit; �3t nC� Rt C7c� 9 i ti4 t k RI fx� ,r ouzz asfE n,14,r7 Fn' Newport Bay Marina October 10, 2007 Page 13 Exhibit 5 Public Outreach Letter September 18, 2007 Subject: Newport Bay Marina Dear Residents and Business Owners, As some of you may be aware, ETCO Development is proposing to redevelop the property at 2300 Newport Boulevard; the proposed project is known as Newport Bay Marina. In addition to redevelopment of the site itself, the project also includes: • Replacement of most, if not all, of the existing bulkhead along approximately 485 feet of the waterfront; • Reconfiguration of the existing 21-boat slip marina; • Closure of one of the existing slipways (the other will be widened and remain open); • Site remediation of the contaminants located in sediment near and within the boat slipways; these contaminants are related to the previous shipbuilding/repair use of the property. The marina portion of the project will be considered by the Harbor Commission at their October 10, 2007 meeting at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers at 3300 Newport Boulevard. You are invited to provide comments at this meeting or you may submit your comments to me in writing prior to October 10, 2007. The Harbor Commission will be requested to advise the City's Harbor Resources Division on the Approval in Concept necessary for the marina portion of the project to be considered by the City's Building Department and federal / state regulatory agencies. The Harbor Commission will also be requested to advise Harbor Resources on any proposed special conditions that may be placed on the marina portion of the project. The landside portion of the project was approved and an Environmental Impact Report certified at the November 16, 2006 Planning Commission Public Hearing and is currently on file with the Coastal Commission for their review and approval. Enclosed is the following information: • Project Description; • Deck Level Plan of the Newport Bay Marina Project, which shows the proposed project at the street level and provides the context for the seawall and marina aspects of the proposed project; • Site Plan — Seawall/Dock Layout; and • Proposed Dock Overlay. Additional information and project plans as well as the Harbor Resources staff report will be available on the City's website at: http://www.city�newport-beacl7.ca.us/HBR/Hottopics.htm Sincerely, Chris 1Iiffer Harbor Resources Supervisor cniiller@city,riewpprt-.beach,ca.us city.riewport-.beach.ca.us (949) 644-3043 Newport Bay Marina October 10, 2007 Page 14 Exhibit 6 Public Outreach Mailing Area 300' Radius of Site Approximately 200 Letters Sent uot n zaa 5ervot szo� rva5 zno �I nm zao ry yf��t ri zoe k l09 t N Y0Y �yop*'' 2' 5 tazS � Yz n v bY5 YtY Yell �} 5 �x of Y te05 d5� M1 }� R2Y 2 Y Yz t£Yn V +� tY) kta10 �'{N�d� t 5j�y i5'+" �'a, zv is i � t oaf e.:�+ rtt6 'K Us U K"� t044N, s d f 3 z tt Y Ue r rc%S� 3y � ^ 4 W1 I , .o %fie t RIUt - nv zz un '� a j t � f �lJ» PI 21IU Y vn Y Slrz t s£ J' T ' RA ry ao:� P t'Y5 Y Yoh tnt5 �� ,ar 0 383ft Yty Buffer Selection for Labels < % V Site Address Planning Commission Minutes 11/16/2006 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Page 1 of 20 DRAFT Planning Commission Minutes November 16, 200& Regular Meeting - 6:30 p.m. INDEX ROLL CALL Commissioners Eaton, Hawkins, Cole, Toerge, Peotter, McDaniel and Henn - all present STAFF PRESENT: David Lepo, Planning Director Patricia Temple, Advisor Aaron Harp, Assistant City Attorney Rich Edmonston, Transportation/Development Services Manager Jim Campbell, Senior Planner Ginger Varin, Administrative Assistant and Planning Commission Secretary PUBLIC COMMENTS: PUBLIC COMMENTS Mr. Hawkins congratulated the Commission and staff for their work on completing he General Plan Update for the City, and Commissioner Henn for his election to the City Council Ms. Temple introduced Mr. Lepo who is the interim Planning Director and has taken over the responsibility of the Planning Department. Chairperson Cole noted this is Commissioner Henn's last meeting as a Commissioner. He thanked him for his vision of the City and the sharing of his business acumen. POSTING OF THE AGENDA: POSTING OF THE AGENDA The Planning Commission Agenda was posted on November 10, 2006. HEARING ITEMS SUBJECT: MINUTES of the regular meeting of November 2, 2006. ITEM NO. 1 Motion was made by Commissioner McDaniel and seconded by Commissioner Approved Peotter to approve the minutes as corrected. Ayes: Eaton, Peotter, Hawkins, Cole, McDaniel, and Toerge Noes: None Abstain: Henn ITEM NO. 2 SUBJECT: Newport Beach Brewing Company (Use Permit No. 3485) 2920 Newport Boulevard http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mul l-16-06.htm 10/01 /2007 Planning Commission Minutes 11/16/2006 Page 2 of 20 he Newport Beach Brewing Company has operated a restaurant/brewpub Continued to ursuant to Use Permit No. 3485 since 1994. This permit was issued by the City in 12/07/2006 993 and it was subsequently amended in 1999. City has received several omplaints related to the operation of the use and the Planning Commission will valuate the complaints, the operational character of the use and the conditions nder which the use operates. At the conclusion of the hearing, the Commission iay require alteration of the operation or it may delete or modify conditions o pproval. The Commission also may conclude that no changes are necessary and avocation of the Use Permit is not being considered at this time. s. Temple reported that this item is to be continued to December 7, 2006. Motion was made by Commissioner Hawkins and seconded by Commissioner McDaniel to continue this item to December 7, 2006. Ayes: Eaton, Peotter, Hawkins, Cole, McDaniel, Toerge and Henn Noes: None Abstain: None SUBJECT: Newport Bay Marina (PA2001-210) ITEM NO. 3 2300 Newport Boulevard PA2001-210 Site Plan Review, Use Permit, Modification Permit and Vesting Tentative Tract Approved Map to allow the construction of a mixed -use development on a 2.4 acre site located north of the intersection of Newport Boulevard and Balboa Boulevard. The project consists of the demolition of all structures on site and the construction o approximately 36,000 square feet of commercial uses and 27 dwelling units (condominiums). Eleven three-story buildings are planned to be built over a subterranean parking garage. The reconstruction/reconfiguration of the existing bulkhead, boatways and docks is also planned. The Site Plan Review application would authorize the entire project and the Vesting Tentative Tract map would permit a subdivision map to allow for the residential units to be individually sold. The Use Permit would establish a building height limit of up to 35 feet and the Modification Permit would allow portions of the proposed buildings to encroach within the 5-foot front yard setback. A Draft Environmental Impact Report (SCH 2003071144) including mitigation measures was submitted to and reviewed by the Planning Commission. Cunningham, contract planner for the City, noted the following: This item was continued from October 5th. In response to concerns expressed by the Commission, the applicant made these changes: All structures have been relocated outside of the front yard (Newport B setback thereby eliminating the need for a modification. The areas between buildings F and G, H and I have been eliminat resulting in an additional six feet along the northern property line. That feet results in the ability to place a delivery area between building K a northerly property line. A condition has been added that the space modified to allow delivery vehicles to gain access and egress from 0 space so there will not be multiple turn movements. http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mnl 1-16-06.htm 10/01/2007 Planning Commission Minutes 11/16/2006 Page 3 of 20 The residential component along the deck level has been eliminated replaced with commercial and parking spaces. Subterranean garage has been re -designed. Commercial floor area has been increased slightly by 250 square feet an( residential floor area has been decreased by 3,330 square feet. The tota number of proposed dwellings remains the same as the units have beer re -designed. The paseo area between buildings C and D has been widened to al additional landscaping. The total landscaping throughout the site has been increased. 1r. Campbell, referencing a sketch, added that the building height ranges in th rea are 35 feet, 17 feet, 21 1 /2 feet, 25 feet, 19 1 /2 feet, 35 feet, 22 feet, 28 fee 9 feet, 43 feet (on site) and 27 1/2 feet (on site). He confirmed that those buildin ver the height limit set forth in the Specific Plan pre -date adoption of the Specifi 'Ian. mmissioner McDaniel noted that it appears the average is in the 20 foot range. 1r. Campbell added that a required finding that discretionary approval of ar icrease in building height would not result in an abrupt change of scale betweer djacent structures may be made in this case because of the horizontal separatior etween the proposed structure and adjacent structures which have heights of 3E ;et and 17 feet, respectively. Chairperson Cole asked if there are low building: djacent to the 28th Street Marina. The response was that there is no building or 6th Street and the shipyard is across the street. North of that building are eries of two story buildings along Lafayette Street around 25 - 26 feet. iiscussion continued. Commissioner Toerge added there is a significan- ifference between this project and the 28th Street Marina project. Unlike the urrent case, the 28th Street Marina project is two buildings with residential unit: et back a substantial distance from the street. The project now before the ,ommission is a series of buildings with facades of all floors rising in the samE lane from the street edge . The 28th Street Marina project has a staggered roo attern and the structures are not simply squares but rather angle back from the treet. The product type is significantly different in that the residential units arE onsolidated into two buildings instead of 7 or 8 buildings. This issue is not jus ne of building height, but rather one of height of the buildings at the perimeter o ie project site. One of the proposed buildings exceeds the building height limi nd is in the middle of the site and I find no problem with that one. It is the heigh nd adjacency at the perimeter of the property and the vertical nature of the roposed building that causes the abrupt scale change, not just the height. TherE ; a trade off and the Code supports the idea of making buildings higher so that WE an gain more view corridor. In the 28th St. Marina there is a 50 foot wide corrido iat widens to 100 feet. This project has a much narrower corridor and narrow: own towards the bay instead of widening out so that it restricts the view and iven the height, doesn't represent an appropriate the trade off. I am looking fo reater view corridors. I don't think the project does that. It is only fair to compar( ie two projects in a more complete fashion than the just the height of the highes http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mnl 1-16-06.htm 10/01 /2007 Punning Commission Minutes 11/16/2006 Page 4 of 20 II Cunningham added: The Commission also asked for a Parking Management Plan and Construction Parking Management Plan. The applicant has supplied the and they have been reviewed by staff and are contained in your packets. There was a request for clarification on the marina parking which is in in the staff report. A buyer notification form has been developed by the applicant and i., contained in the packet. Staff would like to see more detail (on this form at the time the project is developed and that it be more generic and cover < wider range such as potential boat operation and/or additional restaurants. Some of the issues yet to be discussed are the buffering issue on the northerly property line adjacent to Woody's, re -design of the subterranean parking with triple tandem parking which staff recommends be eliminated; the use of the 19-slip area has been clarified and is included in the staff report; the southerly ramp from the deck level to the arcade area stays as one way; and, a second resolution with underline and strikeout is in the packet with changes to conditions. Staff recommends approval of the project subject to the conditions. rol McDermott of Government Solutions, representing the applicant, introdu staff and noted the following changes to the project in response to kerns expressed by the Commissioners at their last meeting as well inges made in response to the concerns of neighboring property owners: All structures have been relocated outside of the front yard. (Newport Boulevard) setback. All residential uses were eliminated from the main deck level and have been replaced by commercial uses. The structures on the bay side of the property were consolidated to increase the separation at the westerly (Woody's Wharf) property line. Building K adjacent to Woody's has been modified with the removal of all windows on northerly side and the building has been shifted 6 feet for a buffer of 13 feet and an 8-foot masonry wall is now proposed and a loading zone for bldg A has been added. An additional condition is proposed to read "An 8-foot high block wall with 4- foot high glass panel on top consistent with the architectural design of the project to be provided along the northerly property line to provide screening between the Woody's Wharf Restaurant and the proposed mixed uses consistent with condition 72 which requires adequate site distances." An additional loading space was added in the western portion of the project on the deck level. Additional parking spaces were added to both the subterranean parking http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mnl 1-16-06.1itm 10/01 /2007 Planning Commission Minutes 11/16/2006 Page 5 of 20 cture and the parking deck. Landscaping enhancements along the bay front and slipway. There are eight buildings with two units per building for a total of 16 dwelling units. Building C office has been redesigned to pull the stairway back away from the right-of-way to have pedestrian landing area located on -site and out of the public right-of-way. Bridge elevation at Newport Boulevard is at 8 feet with an increase of 2 feet up to the deck area. The railing is designed to be vertical tubular steel. Discussion then focused on the following areas of concern: Landscaping and architectural articulation of the proposed 8-foot wall on the westerly side of the project. The width of the view corridor, especially on the bay side of the property. The timing of preparation of the detailed Construction Management and the Parking Management Plans. Width of the sidewalks is 10 feet. The second and third stories set back 2 feet on the front of the building facing Newport Boulevard. ,ssistant City Attorney asked if there was a condition related to filling the de rea of the bridge with tables and chairs, etc. such that you won't really have iew corridor. Is there any type of restriction related to this? r. Campbell answered there isn't a condition that would limit that. s. McDermott continued: The rendering for the bridge area is shown as outside the view corridor part of the easement that we have to provide. The parking has been revised in the subterranean level with an increase i number of spaces. The number of spaces that exceed the Cod requirement is 24. All the residential units have garages. Retail office parking includes 16 commercial carports and 152 stalls. Marina parking is 15 stalls for the 19 slips and is provided in subterranean parking and so marked and enforced. All deck level parking consist of garages and parking for commercial uses in carports. The subterranean parking has been redesigned and allows for very http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mnl 1-16-06.htm 10/01 /2007 Punning Commission Minutes 11/16/2006 Page 6 of 20 rculation. She then noted where the parking attendant placement could be. The view corridor consists of 5,327 square feet, the proposed expande view corridor will now be 13,204 square feet to be protected by a easement that perhaps would allow for tables and chairs. View corridors were then discussed as were the pedestrian and car usa across the bridge. ommissioner Hawkins asked if the bridge was an integral part of the rculation and what the proposal was for Slip 19 and Condition 67 regard armanent berthing. s. McDermott answered it would be difficult as they would end up with t\ ;parate projects without access across the bridge. She then referred to the s an and discussed ingress/egress and fire access. She then discussed t nction of the slipway and the ability to have the berthing capability. scussion continued on berthing types, keeping the view corridor opened and lated condition(s). s. McDermott continued: The Statement of Overriding Conditions in Exhibit B regarding cultu resources states the buildings are in good condition. We suggest using t term "poor." Condition 14 - clarified that the noise ordinance standard should be fc mixed use not for multi -family. The mixed use standard is 60 dBA betwee the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. Condition 46 - requirement that elevators be gurney -accommodating. WE would like to clarify that the commercial elevators will be gurney accommodating but would prefer that elevators that only go the residentia floors be residential elevators. According to the Code, elevators arE required for certain commercial areas over a certain square footage Because of the size of the square footage added into the 2nd and 3rc floors on building K, building areas are below the threshold that requires ar elevator. Therefore, there will be no commercial elevator because the handicap access is not required for that small of a space. Temple noted it is not necessary for the Commission to designate spE )es of elevators; the Codes will be applied. We can, therefore, elimi ndition 46 as the Fire and Building Codes dictate these uses. ntinuing, Ms. McDermott noted: Condition 67 - limiting Slip 19 berthing operations will need to be discussed. Conditions 51 and 66 - refer to the Construction Traffic Management PI,, and to the Parking Management Plan which have been submitted and tl applicant offers to bring these back for your review and ultimate approval. http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mnl 1-16-06.htm 10/01 /2007 Planning Commission Minutes 11/16/2006 Page 7 of 20 She then noted the parking attendant locations on the exhibit. There wil either be booths or a gate system. ssion continued on the easement, the recordation and orientation of � :)r. Staff recommended that this recordation be conditioned along with Map. Malak, architect, noted: The configuration gives more opportunities for views. The prior we( shaped configuration is a view from a small area and he referred to exhibit. The rectangular configuration allows for more opportunities for views and an expansion. iscussion continued on the view corridor along with the ten -foot easement on ant waterway and access. missioner Toerge noted: The Specific Plan stipulates that the property has to provide a view co and part of the nexus for allowing the height is an effort to create the corridor. The existence of the existing view corridor is irrelevant. The relevant consideration is an effective view corridor. He then compared this to other projects within the City. Referencing the exhibit, he noted the configurations. fission continued on view corridor, pedestrian access, signs, parking ements. :ommissioner Toerge noted that this site cannot be developed without a USE 'ermit. There are a multitude of trade-offs in this proposed project and it can bE eveloped in a significantly different way to reflect some of his concerns. TherE re a number of places throughout the City that give you FAR entitlement that yoL an't attain when you are obligated to meet the current Code. This may, in fact, bE ne of them. While the project may be under the FAR maximum limitation, it stil lust meet the requirements of development standards and guidelines in order tc ;ceive approval, and in some cases, that means you can not get to the maximurr AR or density. The entitlement of the property is subject to all applicabl( tandards and codes, not simply the maximum floor area ratio and densities. . McDermott noted that the entitlement allows for 43 units and they )osing to do 27 units so there are fewer residential units than would be allc the mixed use designation. nmissioner Henn noted we should consider a balanced view of this where licant requests a project that is less (intense) in some respects. http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mnl 1-16-06.1itm 10/01/2007 Planning Commission Minutes 11/16/2006 Page 8 of 20 :ommissioner McDaniel noted he is in favor of not having the 19th slip be a be lip due to the discussion on the view corridor. It is a valuable asset to the City ave that view corridor without a boat in the way. We need to keep this o pecial. mmissioner Hawkins suggested having this slip for loading and not having -thing at all. He indicated his appreciation that the applicant has made anges based on the Commission's concerns. He then asked about the c w corridors gaining footage. imissioner Henn noted his concern of having available space for boaters t using the bay to tie up for a short periods of time to patronize a shop Durant. Ken McKently, architect, referencing the exhibit, discussed the orientation buildings, elimination of windows, and narrowing paseos as to extend 1 dth) of the view corridor by approximately 6 feet. iscussion continued on view corridors and paseos. 1s. McDermott noted that the applicant is requesting that sale of small boats t Ilowed so that there might be small boats that are stored here in some respe onnected to the marine uses that would be encouraged in those commerci )cations. continued on a possible height restriction. ublic comment was opened. mary Steinbrecker, local resident, noted: 30-year resident of the City. 3-story height limit of the buildings on the street is a shock for people to see. Is a 35-foot wall along Newport Boulevard really what you want to see? This is a massive facade and recommends that it be staggered back frorr the street. This development will put pressure on the City when future develo come in with their project. Three-story buildings will change things and be detrimental to the feel of area. She suggested staggering the roof height. rk Sarventi, partner of Woody's Wharf, noted: Having residences next to their establishment is problematic. http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mul l-16-06.htm 10/01 /2007 Planning Commission Minutes 11/16/2006 Page 9 of 20 Following discussions with the proponent, they (proponent) have offered t put buffers on that side of the project as well as the sound wall and th offer to maintain that wall with no windows on that side of the buildin and beefed-up those disclosures. They have offered to bring in their nois consultants to attenuate noise inside our restaurant. We feel better aboi this development. The buildings along that area are in poor shape and a development such this is a positive thing for the City. The concerns raised in the letter from their attorney have been met and feel much better about this proposed project. Traffic and parking and noise complaints coming from the development their biggest concerns. mmissioner Hawkins suggested a condition be added related to the 3nuation in Woody's Wharf. mmissioner McDaniel noted that Woody's Wharf also has the responsibility strolling noise and traffic on their property for the benefit of other neighbors II. lim Wasco, representing the Crab Cooker, noted: He noted that considerable consideration has been given to Woody's Wha in the form of increased setback, sight and sound wall, no windows facin their establishment and removal of residential next to that wall. Referring to the elevation with the Crab Cooker on it, he noted that thl have zero lot lines and have residences looking straight down. They a concerned with the mitigation done for Woody's. He suggests that a consideration of not having balconies on their side of th project and possible more than a zero lot line. ;ommissioner Hawkins noted that the Crab Cooker was represented at the le ieeting and no real concerns were noted other than the stability of the comm( call. Woody's is a different type of operation than the Cooker. Odors may be Dncern with the open walkway and perhaps there may be some way to wo round that. Perhaps the applicant can work with the Crab Cooker to addee ieir concerns. imissioner Henn noted the issue of the abruptness of the height change ha n raised and asked Mr. Wasco how troubled he was by the height chang veen the Crab Cooker and the higher building. 1r. Wasco noted if this is within the Code then it is the landowner's right evelop his property as such. He noted that another view corridor can onsidered that leads back to the bay by the area of the Crab Cooker. Griffith, representing Mr. Rubian, owner of the Crab Cooker, noted: http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/nml l-16-06.htm 10/01 /2007 Planning Commission Minutes 11/16/2006 Page 10 of 20 They suggest that in the balcony area sound glass be installed to smoke, odor and noise. The Construction Management Plan should not allow staging in the arcad area as it will be problematic for their delivery trucks and patrons. On the disclosure to the public, it would be appropriate to get input both Woody's Wharf and them before it would be adopted. iscussion followed on the disclosure, protection, input and approval by lanning Director and notification to the Planning Commission. Campbell then noted a minor change to condition 51. hard Pappas from Woody's Wharf noted their concern about residential an imercial uses. He noted his appreciation for the applicant and the work bein posed. lic comment closed. missioner Toerge noted: Notice requirement to residence buyer - Condition 64 should referenc( buyers and owners and not lessees. The last sentence needs to be re worded. Notice should be given at the time a purchase agreement is executed and not at the time a deed is executed. This way it is up fron and not after the fact. The notice needs to be re -worded and should be a notice to not just the firs buyer but to subsequent buyers. Existing uses will change over time an( that fact needs to be reflected in the verbiage. racing the site plan he continued noting his concerns: The largest retail building on the project has no adjacent loading area. All parking for this retail building is in the garage and there is no de parking and there should be some. Dissatisfied with the overall site plan and questioned if it meets the intent the Specific Plan and the Codes that we have. Appreciates the changes to the subterranean parking as presented tonic which makes it far more reasonable to use. There should be an ingress/egress on the southerly lane to create joir access into the deck level to give residents and visitors a more reasonabl alternative to get in and out of the site. Asked for and received an explanation of the locations of trash enclosu throughout the project by Mr. Malak. http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mnl 1-16-06.htm 10/01 /2007 Planning Commission Minutes 11/16/2006 Page 11 of 20 r. Absha Anabar, of ETCO Investments, noted: Trash enclosures have been addressed and the site is designed so that al office, retail and commercial uses will be provided with professiona janitorial services. All of these units will have this janitorial service that will bring the trash d, to the parking structures or to various locations on site. Referring to site plan, he pointed out the various locations. All residential units will have curb pick-up according to City standards. uing, Commissioner Toerge noted further concerns: Coastal access issues: 919 Bayside access 8 feet unrestricted; 28th Marina - 9-10 feet unrestricted Six feet for this project is too narrow to provide reasonable access along bulkhead and not consistent with the projects that have been cited. Pedestrian access needs to be provided on the bridge and large enough fo people to circulate safely. 19th Street slip - allowing permanent access impedes the view easem and there needs to be a definition between temporary and permanent there is no dispute. Parking - no surface or deck level parking for the multitude of commercia and retail facilities that are going to be here; this is a serious flaw of the plan. Parking Management Plan (PMP) and parking layout plan go hand in hand. Thi: plan is not really clear as it references stations where people might come in to pay or gates. These need to be firmly established and referenced on the PMP that tie: into the specifics of the physical development. This project does not do this yet. A complete PMP needs to be reviewed by the Planning Commission an needs to be prepared in conjunction with the site plan. Deck level parkin is important as an attraction element for potential customers. He then discussed potential enhancements for the subterranean facility. The 35 foot wall on the newer plan may lessen the noise impact for Buildin K; it makes the property less compatible with the adjacent property which i open. He then noted several abrupt height changes on the property lin which he feels compromises the compatibility issue The 8-foot wall on the property line would need some specific approval. encouraged that the wall as it moves toward the street step d somewhat as there is an abruptness of an 8-foot tall with a 4-foot g panel on top. http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.usiP1nAgendas/2006/mnl 1-16-06.htm 10/01 /2007 Planning Commission Minutes 11/16/2006 Page 12 of 20 The sound attenuation needs to be addressed on Newport Boulevarc according to the EIR and along the property line by the Crab Cooker. Double -paned windows or other measures need to be implementer throughout the whole project as this is an integration of commercial an( residential uses. There should be more than one ingress point to the decl level of the project. The southerly drive to the deck level at 22nd Stree and Arcade should allow ingress and egress. There is a requirement to have a view corridor. The effectiveness of view corridor is relevant to the redevelopment of this entire site. l proposal to have boats taller than the bridge seems to obstruct the vi and defeats the purpose of the view corridor. The Construction Management Plan (CMP) contains a lot of variables. does represent a positive effort by the owner/development. However, doesn't measure up to the detail that I want to see as it relates to satisfyin the requirements of the EIR. ;. McDermott noted that they can bring the Construction Management Plan a Parking Management Plan back to the Commission. The idea of not enuation is appropriate and they are willing to provide the glass walls over t ab Cooker and intend to meet all of the noise requirements. They agree to we a step down wall by Woody's Wharf. Noting the exhibit, she identified retail rts adjacent to the buildings in addition to parking below grade. Dommissioner Hawkins noted a correction on the draft resolution for the Tract Ma n paragraph 11 which talks about archeological and historic resources. Followin a brief discussion it was suggested to add, "....to the extent possible." rperson Cole referenced the following issues: height request. immissioner Eaton - findings can be made. We will be seeing more 35-foot ildings in the future. mmissioner Henn - agrees with these comments adding this increase in heig :s allow for more view corridor. mmissioner McDaniel - wall next to Woody's Wharf is a concern. The wal ild be shorter as it gets to the water. He suggests some sort of articulation an( a flat wall. :)mmissioner Eaton suggested a condition regarding articulation and utilization otected windows subject to the approval of the Planning Director and the sar ing on the 8foot plus 4foot wall as it approaches Newport Boulevard. ff agreed this could be done and conditioned. mmissioner Hawkins noted his concern of the view corridor with the additional I as a benefit. hairperson Cole noted consensus on the height and adding a condition on http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mnl 1-16-06.htm 10/01 /2007 Planning Commission Minutes 11/16/2006 Page 13 of 20 lation on Building K and staff will decide how it drops down. ion continued. irk Sarventi noted that the 8-foot wall was suggested as a means to block ise. ntinuing with the list, Chairman Cole noted: Residential use on the deck level has been addressed. Delivery service vehicles access has been addressed. Edmonston noted that there is no established City criteria on the proximity of ing spaces and where they are provided in some of the older commercial is. We try to place them where they are most useful for the majority of nesses. The problem may be if you have delivery drivers who are in a rush, will park where it is convenient for them. However, we get few complaints or Is. mmissioner Hawkins noted there should be no parking on the bridge. nuing with the list, Chairman Cole noted: Parking/Construction Management Plan - is it City protocol to require at this stage of an application for our review? r. Campbell answered not usually; however, with projects of this size that co e whole site with excavation, we have required them up front for review. l )nditions have been made that these are subject to review by the Plann irector and City Engineer. ollowing a discussion on a possible public hearing for the review of t :onstruction Management Plan, it was decided to amend Condition 51 to bri its back for review by the Planning Commission. The Parking Management PI oes not necessarily need to be publicly noticed. Edmonston noted that the Parking Management Plan as presented is plete. ommissioner Toerge noted the PMP and CMP provided by a previous applica �r Our Lady Queen of Angels proposed project was reviewed in-depth by tt lanning Commission. He went on to list the deficiencies in this proposal. :)mmissioner Peotter noted this is a proposal for a shopping center that eeting all the requirements per Code. They are not proposing that there be p; irking now, and if they do, they will need to come back and have it reviewed e satisfaction of the City Engineer. Most of the issues that may come up will chnical in nature and not public in nature and staff can handle it. nmissioner Eaton noted his agreement with previous comments. H gested that Condition 66 have an added noticing requirement and that th ision is appealable. http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mnl 1- 1 6-06.htm 10/01 /2007 Planning Commission Minutes 11/16/2006 Page 14 of 20 mmissioner Henn noted his agreement. mmissioner McDaniel noted the concerns of the Crab Cooker proprietor. :d to know what is going on especially in the arcade area and how it will in �idents. iscussion continued on parking resulting in possible changes to the site plan. mmissioner Hawkins noted that if there is a design change in the site plan, :ed if such change wouldn't have to come back for review. Ir. Campbell answered it would unless the Planning Director felt it was it ubstantial conformance with the Conditions of Approval. If the driveways change uildings change or are not within staffs comfort level, changes would be brough ack for review. irperson Cole noted consensus as follows; )prove Condition 66 with the added language that we provide notice to t Ijacent owners and that the decision of the City Traffic Engineer and Planni rector are appealable to the Commission. The Planning Commission agreed. a parking issues - consensus was met. uffer on Crab Cooker side, full height glass on balcony level - consensus as aw condition. ging in Arcade Street - Condition 51 covers this; consensus to include wordi arding poor performance pursuant to the PMP will be further reviewed by t ffic Engineer. nput on disclosure language - subject to City Attorney approval referenced ;ondition 64. There was consensus to add content and change "lease" to "deE ind provide notice at time purchase contract is executed. Noticing will be done vithin 300 feet. Discussion continued. andscaping issues - Commissioner Hawkins noted it should not restrict the vi( :)rridor. Staff suggested memorializing the view corridor as presented by t pplicant tonight including specifics. The consensus was that landscape plan is e reviewed by staff and incorporated within the easement referenced in Conditi 1. �w corridor - reducing the walkways down to 6 feet to allow an additional 4 the right hand side of the slipway. There was consensus to require this. ccess - joint ingress and egress on the south side of the property instead of just ne-way. missioner Henn noted he prefers one-way egress. >mmissioner Toerge noted the restriction of left hand turn into the cui ration. The only way someone coming down the peninsula can access this to drive down 22nd Street and make a U-turn. http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mul l-16-06.htm 10/01 /2007 Planning Commission Minutes 11/16/2006 Page 15 of 20 ,ssistant City Attorney Harp added that there is a no parking area in the publi ght of way and ultimately a decision will have to be made whether to allow that c of and possibly increase parking there. Referencing the site plan, this parkin ras identified. Ir. Edmonston added that the City Council can make the decision if that could n entry area, or if the overall benefit would suggest having additional parking. iiscussion continued on Encroachment Permit requirement, limited parking in th rea, entry way access point, no loss of parking in the public right -of way, surplu f parking on site, access to water benefit, aesthetics of the arcade area, an afety. Consensus was to keep as proposed on the current plan. iy front walkway issue - Mr. McKently, architect for the project, noted that uld make the sidewalk wider, 8 feet for sidewalk with 2 feet for landscape. iff noted this would be an aesthetic call for the Planning Commission. 8 rks well. 2 feet can work for landscaping. ollowing discussion, the consensus was for the wider walkway at 8 feet with ;et for landscaping along the bay. The walkway will be widened on the side ie bridge to 6 feet for pedestrian access. ight wells in the deck going down into the subterranean parking - Mr. McKently rchitect for the project, noted there are two concerns: they might lose stalls an( ou are taking landscaping from the top and moving it below. There are som( laces where this can be done and not affect the parking count. We are open tc fund attenuation - needs to be done throughout the project site. This dressed in Condition 61. Commissioners agreed. r. Campbell noted Condition 14 should reflect the standards in the Municipa ade; 45 dBA for interior noise and 60 dBA for exterior noise. �oi ovrn might parkpgff people at the shops. The height feet above the dock. No masts and used by Duffy boats a' 1/2 1r C. o atwthe�i any I. ee i P tab ;, r �:r j6h e a e o°gel ` in°there. ' s�IlowirTcl,,tilAsft�.lt:!md�crded that Slip 19 be used for two-hour berthing for,s r. Campbell added a condition that the garages be unobstructed and used fo irking only with no storage. There are at least 8 to 10 more conditions an( iother 8-10 being amended. He does not have the language for all of these ani iggested that these be brought back at the next meeting for review if thi ommission would like. an Cole noted that would be acceptable. http://www.city-newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/Mnl 1- 1 6-06.htm 10/01 /2007 Planning Commission Minutes 11/16/2006 Page 16 of 20 Mr. Anabar of ETCO noted that they are in agreement with all of the proposed -onditions. Ms. Temple noted that a condition needs to be added that the public access needs to be signed from all public right-of-way entries. The proponent agreed to that. Motion was made by Commissioner Peotter and seconded by Commissioner Hawkins to approve Use Permit No. 2001-038, Site Plan Review No. 2001-004, Newport Beach Tract Map No. 2004-003 and certification of the Environmental Impact Report as presented tonight subject to all the findings and conditions including those to be affirmed by the Commission at the next meeting. Commissioner Toerge noted the accommodations requested in the application and the complexity of the project. He noted he would not be in support of the project due to the abrupt scale of the box -like structures, poor parking distribution for the commercial uses and lack of a secondary ingress/egress point at 22nd Street. Chairperson Cole noted that the applicant has addressed the major concerns o the Commission; this is a type of project that meets the intent of the McFadden Square Specific Plan for a mixed -use development; we had very little public dissent for his project and it will greatly enhance the area. Ayes: Eaton, Pe,otter, Hawkins, Cole, McDaniel and Henn Noes: Toerge Abstain: None SUBJECT: Thirty First Street, LLC (PA2006-031) ITEM NO.4 407, 409, 411 & 413 31 st Street PA2006-031 Use Permit to establish a height limit of 31-feet, exceeding the base height limit of Continued to 26-feet, for the construction of four mixed -use buildings and approval of a 12/07/2006 commercial floor area ratio (FAR) less than the minimum 0.25 FAR required for mixed -use development projects. In addition, the applicant is requesting the approval of a Modification Permit to allow parking spaces to encroach within the front and rear setbacks and a lot line adjustment to adjust the interior property lines of four lots into four equally -sized parcels. Ms. Temple reported that this item is to be continued to December 7, 2006. Motion was made by Commissioner Hawkins and seconded by Commissioner McDaniel to continue this item to December 7, 2006. Ayes: Eaton, Peotter, Hawkins, Cole, McDaniel, Toerge and Henn Noes: None Abstain: None ITEM NO. 5 SUBJECT: Hoag Healthcare Center (PA2006-113) PA2006-113 500-540 Superior Ave Continue to Use Permit to allow the conversion of 97,000 square feet of research and 12/07/2006 development (R&D)/general office use to medical office use. The project includes he demolition of one of the existing buildings and the construction of an additional parking structure that exceeds the maximum building bulk limitation for the site. dditionally, approval of a Traffic Study is being requested pursuant to the City o rewport Beach Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO). http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mnl 1-16-06.1itm 10/01 /2007 Planning Commission Minutes .11/16/2006 Page 17 of 20 Ms. Temple reported that this item is to be continued to December 7, 2006. Motion was made by Commissioner Hawkins and seconded by Commissione McDaniel to continue this item to December 7, 2006. Ayes: Eaton, Peotter, Hawkins, Cole, McDaniel, Toerge and Henn Noes: None Abstain: None ITEM No. 6 SUBJECT: Code Amendment 2006-007 (PA2006-211) PA2006-211 Day Care Regulations Recommended for Should Title 20 (Zoning Code) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code be amendedl approval o revise the land use regulations to distinguish day care centers for children and those for adults and establish spacing, concentration, and operational standards? ;hairperson Cole noted that this item would be heard first as a member of ublic has requested. missioner Henn noted he would abstain from discussion and vote on 3r as he had not participated in the initial meeting on this subject. itrick Alford, Senior Planner, gave an overview of the staff report noting lowing: This item had been heard at the public hearing on October 19th. This is a set of regulations dealing with large family child care homes and i intended to allow the City to avail itself of the land use controls permitte under State Law. Staff was directed to return with this item with an off-street parking standard which in our report deals with the standards in the Institute o Transportation Engineers publication Parking Generation an( representative standards for parking from other communities. The staff report includes a recommendation that the off street parki standard be set as two off-street parking spaces and a drop-off and pick - area approved by the City's Traffic Engineer and that a driveway could used for this purpose. This is in addition to any required off-street parki for the actual dwelling unit on the property. ublic comment was opened. Garrett, local resident, noted: He lives next to a day care center. Concerned with lighting with flood lights in a residential area. Concerned also with the noise and traffic issues related to this use as well. He asked that something be added to the current Municipal Code http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/nml 1-16-06.htm 10/01 /2007 Planning Commission Minutes 11/16/2006 Page 18 of 20 ards to lighting in a residential neighborhood. Commission inquiry, he added: Pick-up and drop-off occur at a red -painted curb in front and sometim there are cars waiting in line. We have 3-foot setbacks. At times he has to use ear protection in order to rest during the day becau it is so loud with the children playing outside in the front yard. The front yard is fenced. lic comment was closed. 1r. Alford noted that there are no current standards for residential lighting and it is lore of a common standard regarding shielding direction away for commercia reas. State preemptions limit us to controls dealing with issues of concentratior nd spacing, traffic, parking and noise. Effects of light impacts may not fall withir lose categories. Our noise control standard would limit the overall operation tc 4 hours between the hours of 6 a.m. and 8 p.m. and outdoor activities betweer ie hours of 7 a.m. and 7 p.m., so this might provide some relief from the lighting. le suggested that this issue be addressed in a general standard for residentia rea dealing with light and glare. s. Temple added that perhaps the designation for outdoor lighting of swimmi )ols and tennis courts might be applicable. She noted that the State preempti ay restrict this application and staff will, therefore, work with the City Attorne fice and present findings at the Council meeting, if the Commission wishes. Alford added that the proposed standards have added language that thes ngs be essentially residential in character. The care provider residenc indard states that this use is clearly residential in use and. character an ;idental and secondary to the use of the property as a residence. The Zonin Iministrator, in reviewing these future use permits, can use this as a way c ntrolling lighting and some other types of activities that might deviate from 3idential character of the area. Commission request, Ms. Temple read Section 20.60.050 entitled mmissioner Peotter asked about the employee parking. Alford noted the survey was taken on a number of day care facilities ferent settings and are not the small ones in residential neighborhoods and th ;y are the larger commercial facilities as the number of children indicates, wi average of 85. He noted there are no set staffing requirements and can opera .h a single care provider. It would be problematic to try and enforce a standa it could change over time by adding/removing employees, adding/removing ti mber of children. scussion continued on review processes. http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/nml 1-16-06.htm 10/01 /2007 Planning Commission Minutes 11/16/2006 Page 19 of 20 hairperson Cole noted we could recommend approval of this item to the ouncil and request that staff add additional language regarding lig strictions. ;ommissioner Hawkins noted that perhaps another standard relating to residentia ghting needs to be inserted in the Code. The staff report needs to include thi; onsideration. ssistant City Attorney Harp noted his agreement that there may be gen tandards in the code that need to be altered and that general regulations pply• Motion made by Commissioner Hawkins and seconded by Commissioner McDaniel to recommend approval to the City Council by adopting the resolution and staff is directed to do further research regarding residential lighting for these and all residential facilities. Ayes: Eaton, Peotter, Hawkins, Cole, McDaniel and Toerge Noes: None Abstain: Henn DDITIONAL BUSINESS: I ADDITIONAL BUSINESS City Council Follow-up - Ms. Temple noted the City Council considered a approved the Marine Charter Land Use Parking Regulations; the Gro Residential Facilities Code Amendment; continued the Big Canyon Coun Club General Plan Amendment until January 9th at the request of t applicant as there was concern over the pending EIR litigation and t appeal for Our Lady Queen of Angels expansion was denied. Report from Planning Commission's representative to the Econom Development Committee - no report. Report from the Planning Commission's representative to the Local Committee - no meeting. Matters which a Planning Commissioner would like Staff to report on at subsequent meeting - Commissioner Peotter would like to see tl meetings organized better and suggested that there be an annual Zoi Code clean-up. Discussion ensued and this item will be brought back January. Matters which a Planning Commissioner may wish to place on a futu agenda for action and staff report - none. Project status - none. Requests for excused absences - Commissioner Henn has been elected tc the City Council, therefore, this is his last meeting he will be attending. Following a brief discussion, it was decided to start the next meeting a 5:00 p.m. ADJOURNMENT: 11:15 P.M. ADJOURNMENT ROBERT HAWKINS, SECRETARY http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mnl 1-16-061tm 10/01/2007 Planning Commission Minutes 11/16/2006 Page 20 of 20 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mnl 1-16-06.htm 10/01/2007 Nov- :'_anning Commission Minutes 10/05/2006 Page 1 of 36 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Planning Commission Minutes October 5, 2006 Regular Meeting - 6:30 p.m. INDEX ROLL CALL Commissioners Eaton, Hawkins, Cole, Toerge, Peotter, McDaniel and Henn - all were present. STAFF PRESENT: Patricia Temple, Planning Director Aaron Harp, Assistant City Attorney Rich Edmonston, Transportation and Development Services Manager James Campbell, Senior Planner Jaime Murillo, Associate Planner Brandon Nichols, Assistant Planner Gaylene Olson, Department Assistant Ginger Varin, Planning Commission Executive Secretary Cheryl Hodge of Hodge and Associates, City Contract Planner Bill Cunningham of Lawrence and Associates, City Contract Planner PUBLIC COMMENTS: PUBLIC COMMENTS None POSTING OF THE AGENDA: POSTING OF THE AGENDA The Planning Commission Agenda was posted on September 29, 2006. CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM NO. 1 SUBJECT: MINUTES of the regular meeting of September 21, 2006. Approved Commissioner Hawkins made a correction. Ayes: Eaton, Peotter, Hawkins, Cole, McDaniel and Toerge Noes: None Absent: None Abstain: Henn ITEM NO.2 SUBJECT: MINUTES of the regular meeting of November 17, 2005 Approved Ayes: Eaton, Hawkins, Cole, McDaniel and Toerge http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mnl0-05-06.htm 10/01/2007 Planning Commission Minutes 10/05/2006 Page 2 of 36 Noes: None Absent: None Abstain: Peotter and Henn SUBJECT: Newport Beach Brewing Company (Use Permit No. 3485) ITEM NO. 3 2920 Newport Boulevard The Newport Beach Brewing Company has operated a restaurant/brewpub Continued to pursuant to Use Permit No. 3485 since 1994. This permit was issued by the City October 19, 2006 in 1993 and it was subsequently amended in 1999. City has received several complaints related to the operation of the use and the Planning Commission will evaluate the complaints, the operational character of the use and the conditions under which the use operates. At the conclusion of the hearing, the Commission may require alteration of the operation or it may delete or modify conditions o approval. The Commission also may conclude that no changes are necessary and revocation of the Use Permit is not being considered at this time. Staff requests to continue this item to October 19, 2006. Motion was made by Commissioner Hawkins to approve the consent calendar as modified. Ayes: Eaton, Peotter, Hawkins, Cole, McDaniel, Toerge and Henn Noes: None Absent: None Abstain: None HEARING ITEMS SUBJECT: Big Canyon Country Club ITEM NO.4 1 Big Canyon Drive PA2006-160 General Plan Amendment to increase the maximum allowable gross floor area Recommended allocated to the Country Club by 10,000 square feet. for Approval Commissioner Toerge asked what the boundaries of Statistical Area L2 are and hat was the development contributed to the prior General Plan Amendment 2003-002. Ms. Temple answered that L2 is surrounded by San Joaquin Hills Road, Jamboree Road, Ford Road and MacArthur Boulevard. The other amendmen within that statistical area was St. Mark's Presbyterian Church. Mr. Larry Tucker, speaking on behalf of the County Club, requested the Commission approve this application. Public comment was opened. Public comment was closed. Motion was made by Commissioner Toerge to recommend approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2006-06 to the City Council by adopting the resolution contained in the staff report. Ayes: Eaton, Peotter, Hawkins, Cole, McDaniel, Toerge and Henn http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mnl0-05-06.htm 10/01/2007 Planning Commission Minutes 10/05/2006 Page 3 of 36 • I None nt: None ITEM NO. 5 IUBJECT: Housing Element Review Recommended 'he Annual Housing Element Implementation Report is being provided to the for Approval 'lanning Commission for review. Irandon Nichols, Assistant Planner, gave an overview of the staff report noting: . An annual report, required by the California Government Code, is prepared for submission to the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) and the Governors Office of Planning and Research (OPR). . This reports outlines the goals and policies of the existing Housing Element and the City's progress towards meeting those goals. . The report typically is part of a larger report that analyzes the City's General Plan; however, since the City is in the midst of the General Plan update, the entire report is not required. . The status of the General Plan update does not exempt the City from preparing the Housing Element section on an annual basis. . The Housing Element Implementation Report has been prepared for review prior to submission to the OPR and HCD. . Staff recommends that the Planning Commission forward this report to the City Council for their final approval. 'ublic comment was opened. 'ublic comment was closed. ;ommissioner Eaton asked about goals 2.2.1 and 2.2.4 referencing the City rocess of updating its in -lieu fee and affordable housing ordinance. It had been uggested by staff last year to drop that reference because we had converted to n individual affordable housing implementation plan. Is this language still ertinent? 1r. Nichols answered that currently the Housing In -lieu Ordinance study is on old pending the outcome of the General Plan update. However, during the past scal year the City has been operating under the existing Housing Element and sere was some work done on the Ordinance and the In -lieu Housing Fee Study. ,s stated, the purpose of the report is to analyze the progress the City has made )wards achieving the current Housing Element goals during the past fiscal year. 'hat is the reason it still exists in the report. ;ommissioner Eaton suggested changing the wording to, 'The City has been in 7e process.' http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mnl0-05-06.htm 10/01/2007 Planning Commission Minutes 10/05/2006 Page 4 of 36 otion was made by Commissioner Eaton to approve and forward the Annua busing Element Implementation Report to the City Council for final review witl• e suggested change. missioner Henn asked about Goal 2.1.1. He asked what the result of recent vacancy rate survey is. r. Nichols noted he is still getting the information through the mail on irrent report and will email it to the Commissioners. Temple noted the survey is done quarterly and the last report was below th Ayes: Noes: Absent: Eaton, Peotter, Hawkins, Cole, McDaniel, Toerge and Henn None None SUBJECT: Newport Bay Marina formerly known as the Bridgeport Mixed Use ITEM NO. 6 Development PA2001-210 2300 Newport Boulevard Continued to Site Plan Review, Use Permit, Modification Permit and Vesting Tentative Tract November 2, Map to allow the construction of a mixed -use development on a 2.4 acre site 2006 located north of the intersection of Newport Boulevard and Balboa Boulevard. The project consists of the demolition of all structures on site and the construction of approximately 36,000 square feet of commercial uses and 27 dwelling units (condominiums). Eleven three-story buildings are planned to be built over a subterranean parking garage. The reconstruction/reconfiguration o he existing bulkhead, boatways and docks is also planned. The Site Plan Review application would authorize the entire project and the Vesting Tentative Tract map would permit a subdivision map to allow for the residential units to be individually sold. The Use Permit would establish a building height limit of up to 35 feet and the Modification Permit would allow portions of the proposed buildings to encroach within the 5-foot front yard setback. Finally, consideration of a Draft Environmental Impact Report (SCH# 2003071144) including mitigation measures. iairperson Cole noted the applicant will make a presentation followed by a port and then questions by the Commission. Carol McDermott of Government Solutions, representing Newport Bay Mai introduced her staff and then made a PowerPoint presentation highlighting project: . The project is now named Newport Bay Marina. . Computer generated model done to scale is as realistic a picture of wh the project will be. Entitlement request includes approval of a Vesting Tentative Tract M that allows the sale of the residential parcels on the mixed use site. A U Permit to allow 35 foot height on a portion of the site; a Modification Perr for the front yard setback; and a Site Plan review for the mixed u http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mnl0-05-06.htm 10/01/2007 Planning Commission Minutes 10/05/2006 Page 5 of 36 development of the residential and commercial uses including renovated marina. The Environmental Impact Report is being presE by the City's consultant and staff as well. Community outreach efforts - they have met with the Central Newpor Community Association representatives on the 28th of September. Included in your packet is a letter that was sent during the review perioc on the EIR. We met with those representatives and they have sent < revised letter that has narrowed those issues, many of which can be easily addressed. We invited all property owners within a 500 foot radius to meeting earlier this week. We did not have a very good turn out, but all o them were notified according to the latest ownership roles on the Count Assessor's list. We met with adjacent business owners and have a lette of support from the South Coast Shipyard that is immediately to the soutl of this project. . Project overview including setting, site plan and architecture. The prc site is 2.4 acres and is located on Newport Boulevard. She then noted site plan and the surrounding businesses. . The mixed use development is 36,000 of retail/commercial uses, currentl). there is 40,000 square feet of retail and office and boat sale uses on the property. There are proposed 27 residential units and a 19 slip marina. Also proposed is subterranean parking to serve visitor, retail and offic( needs, as well as some evening activities for surrounding uses. . She referred to the site plan and noted the placement of the pier an McFadden Square portion of the Cannery Village McFadden Squar Specific Plan. . The 28th Street marina project is a mixed use that was approved year ago. Property to the north is a small mixed use development with Kantin and Woody's Wharf restaurants. The subject property begins where th Johnston Yacht Sales is located and ends where the Crab Cooker begin on the Newport Boulevard frontage. Further views were noted along 22n Street; Arcade Street fronted by the project as well; and, the currer shipyard is immediately to the south of the project. Simulated views wer then presented from the 485 foot water front section. Existing conditions - 44,000 square feet of existing mixed uses o commercial office and retail shops. There is an existing commercia marina with an extended slipway that has been used variously. WE consider this a 19 slip marina. There is associated parking scatterer along the site at grade level; there is very limited public access. Views tc the water are blocked by parking, trees and boats. Public access is limiter by trees and out of code types of improvements. A visual site tour was shown noting entrances to the location. Since 1 this site has become used for office uses and a variety of c commercial uses. . There are two slipways on the site. http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mnl 0-05-06.htm 10/01 /2007 Planning Commission Minutes 10/05/2006 Page 6 of 36 The existing marina is old and does not meet current code or marir specifications. There are a variety of circumstances along the bulkhe� that have led to drainage directly into the harbor. Part of the Water Quail Plan is to assure that there is no direct water run off into the bay. The will be a Water Quality Management Plan to address this. The marir requires a complete renovation of docks, bulk heads and pump c facilities. The slipway that has been covered for a number of years h,, been used to launch boats. Boat repair was done on the top of tl covered slip way, which will be eliminated in return for a widened al enhanced slipway as part of the major access to the water. The marina will be reconfigured to make it more efficient. It will allow fc handicap access in two locations from the 10-foot public walkway th, exists across the front of the property. It allows for the expansion an widening of the existing slipway. It will allow for the replacement of th existing bulkhead. This construction will be done with all the be: management practices in the industry and under the auspices of th Harbor Resources Division as well as the Department of Public Works. The abandoned and covered existing boat slipway will be filled. This wil allow for increased access and some boat berthing, enhanced bay view; and recreational activities for small boats to pick up and drop off people. Referring to the site plan, she then noted Building A with proposed retai on the ground floor and residential on the second and third floors. Buildinc B has retail on the ground floor on Newport Boulevard, office on the second floor and residential on the third floor with parking underneath thi: building in garages. Building C is an office/retail building and is two stories approximately the same height as the rest of the buildings but with highe floor plates. Buildings D thru K are a combination of residential and retai and retail parking spaces are available as well as garage parking fo residential. Parking is individual with landscaping surrounding them. . Most of the residential units have either balconies or other private o spaces as demonstrated in exhibits contained in the packet. . The conceptual landscape plan has landscape between each of the buildings so that in the 10-foot walkway, there was room for a 6 foot clea access way and also allows for landscape planters as well as benches an( seating to enhance the visitor access and experience to the water.. . Public access is along either side of the slipway with landscapi everywhere we can. . There is an existing recorded easement that will cover a more extensh area, as relayed by the referenced presentation. She noted t[ surrounding buildings and bridge and how they relate to the visu enhancements. The bridge will not impede the views and will be a Ic elevation change. . She noted an illustration on how the area will function with opportuniti for seating areas and pedestrian access to the water. http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mnl0-05-06.htm 10/01/2007 Planning Commission Minutes 10/05/2006 Page 7 of 36 . Public access is reached from Newport Boulevard via the plaza area with walkways on either side and via a paseo, an easement between the office building and Building D to the boardwalk from the Arcade Street. Stairways and elevators will allow convenient public access to the water. . Woody's Wharf has no public access. . The 28th Street marina has a ten foot walkway. . Small electric boats will have some access through the slip up to bridge at low tide. . Vehicular access to the project site will be from 22nd Street or fron Newport Boulevard. There are left turns and stop signs to direct the traffil flow. Discussion followed on additional street lighting and vehicula access via ingress and egress for separate parking areas. . The elevator shaft and public access were viewed. . Deck level parking provided by carports and garages, delivery parking visitor parking at deck level, which is different from the parking at subterranean level, retail and residential parking and exits out to streets were noted on the presentation. . Subterranean parking functions through two way circulation in al directions. . Trash enclosure details have not been finalized but there are a number locations that are feasible and it will be worked out during the trai department review of the circulation plan. She noted a few possil locations on the site plan. . Parking includes 2 spaces per 27 dwelling units, including 39 garages a the deck level, 15 carports at the deck level, 14 guest spaces, 10 of whicl are at the deck level and 4 on the parking level. The retail office is parkec at one stall per 250 square feet consisting of deck level carports so tha the owner/operators or employees of small retail shops less than 1,00( square feet, will have convenient parking to their stores while customer: are given a nice level of parking of 135 spaces. There will be a parkins company operating the structure to assure that the parking is use( appropriately and is managed and does not create circulation problem; onto the street. . The marina is parked at .8 stall per slip resulting in 15 stalls in the parkin( level as well as the necessary showers required for a commercial marina.. This ratio has been determined to work both by the Planning Departmen and the Harbor Resources Division. The total parking is 226 spaces pe the Code. As a developer we want to assure that there is adequate parking and ti Codes here on parking are valid and have been tested; therefore, we a comfortable that there is adequate parking. http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mn10-05-06.htTn 10/01/2007 Planning Commission Minutes 10/05/2006 Page 8 of 36 In this location, which is clearly related to McFadden Square, there is historic theme that should be re-created by using turn of the centu architecture. Materials suggested such as ceramic the stone, brick ai brass would fit the image. Looking where 21 Ocean Front is, you see tI feeling of what we are going to try to address with our designs with t roofs, awnings, windows, brick facade and separation of treatments. SI then presented a color and materials board while presenting views of tl area. Looking at the view simulations, she noted setbacks of the buildings wit balconies and two and three story heights to provide a variety of buildin configurations. She then noted and discussed the floor plans of the buildings wi associated assigned parking, retail/office spaces, elevator shafts and b< units. . She ended the presentation with a video rendering and a copy of the I of support received from the operator of the Shipyard. II Cunningham, Contract Planner representing staff, noted: The Land Use Element, current and past, designates the property marine related commercial with residential on the upper floors. The Harbor and Bay Element denotes water related and water fron access and public spaces and non -conflict with surrounding land uses. Staff notes Building C provides a buffer for the shipyard to the south. Given the policies and goals in the Element, the reconstruction of thf seawall, the boat slips, new pump out facilities, and public access that thf project is consistent with this Element. .T,be,,,.pr,jectwas presented to the Harbor Commission in May of 2003. Corafission ecommended,denial of the project; however, staff contra to feel t4q,' O"adt is consistent witifthe Harbor an "`Bay E"jement"'of` General Plan. The project is located in the Cannery Village/McFadden Square Specifi Plan #6 and is designated Recreational and Marine Commercial wit residential uses allowed above the first floor. The first floor i subterranean commercial parking therefore, the first floor on the dec level used for residential can be consistent with the City's plan. Th Coastal Land Use Plan regulations and language are almost identical wit the McFadden Square Specific Plan and reiterate the use c recreational/marine commercial with residential above the first level. Sta noted in the staff report the various policies relating the public access an enhancement of biological resources and have discussed in detail how th 10 foot pedestrian easement being provided along the Bay Front an through the property, as well as the enhancement of the various marin related uses in deteriorated condition now, will be re -built. e The project is consistent with the Specific Plan #6 development standards http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mnl 0-05-06.htm 10/01 /2007 Planning Commission Minutes 10/05/2006 Page 9 of 36 with the exception of height and front yard setback, which are two of t discretionary items before the Commission tonight. In terms of height, t Specific Plan calls for a 26 foot height limit; however, it does allow tl height can be exceeded up to 35 feet with a Use Permit, which is part this application. The number of mandatory findings can be made, nam, the physical and visual access provided by the easements along the wa front and through the property and from the public streets, the public c gain access to the property. The proposed view easement will result in an increased view acces through the property, the upper floors are set back and there i considerable wall articulation in the project, and is consistent with th design theme and materials recommended by Specific Plan #6, consister with other development within the vicinity and does not result in increase overall FAR then otherwise permitted. The maximum FAR is bein decreased over that which is permitted. A Modification Permit for the front setback, in terms of findings, th columns that are being provided along up to property line in order t provide safety for the outward swinging doors of the commercial on th first floor level along Newport Boulevard, in reality the actual storefront themselves are setback 2 1/2 to 4 feet from the front property line. Th upper floors of the project are set back. The project is in line with the Cra Cooker, which is adjacent, and is similar to other development in th McFadden Square that go up to the front property line. . Another issue is if this project had been located on an interior lot, thei would be a 5 foot front setback but no rear yard setback. This proper being located on the bay front is required under the CLUP and the Specif Plan to provide for at least a 6 foot setback along the water front and th project is proposing a 10 foot setback along the bay front. The Vesting Tentative Tract Map is to allow the sale of residential units condominiums and in staffs opinion all the required findings for granting tentative tract map can be found for this project. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) initial study was done or February 22, 2005 and at that time the findings were made that an EIF would be required for this project. The Technical Studies were done for al of the pertinent measures that led to that finding, particularly noted are the biology, traffic, and cultural historical resources and those are contained it the EIR. During the comment period there had been discussion on traffic. T traffic analysis for the project was done in terms of the TPO analysis a resulted in a slight decrease in the a.m. peak and a slight increase in t p.m. peak overall. All of the intersections studied did not exceed the ' threshold with the exception of Newport Boulevard at Via Lido. accordance with the TPO, an ICU analysis was done and that particu intersection remains at LOS A during the p.m. peak. . In terms of the historical analyses, under the State and Federal criteria foi evaluating the historical significance of buildings and sites, it is noted of al http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/nml0-05-06.htm . 10/01/2007 Planning Commission Minutes 10/05/2006 Page 10 of 36 those criteria the one that stands out is that any building that exceeds 50 years in age would automatically throw it into that category and we have to make a statement of overriding considerations. In accordance with the study, the consultant determined that the mitigation measures as presented and included in the Mitigation Monitoring Program, as well as the conditions of approval plus the statement of overriding considerations will be done for that particular aspect of the project, as well as all the other mitigation aspects of the project that can be mitigated to an acceptable level. . The EIR was sent to the State Clearinghouse on July 19, 2006 for the 45 day review period. During that period and after, the consultant received five comment letters. The comment letters and responses to the letters are included in the staff report. Three documents have been distributed today: the Errata to the Draft Environmental Report, the Statement of Findings and Facts, and the Mitigation Measure Monitoring Program. In all three, revisions are included by strikeout and underline. Staff feels all the mandatory findings for the Site Plan, Use Permit, Modification Permit and Tentative Tract Map can be made. then noted the following changes: Section 4 of the Resolution for the EIR, adding ".....Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program...." In the second Resolution for the project itself, page 3 under Site Plan Review, the second finding, staff recommends it be amended to read, " The proposed eleven buildings are consistent with the development standards of the Cannery Village/McFadden Square Specific Plan with the exception of building height and front yard setback. In addition a Modification Permit for reduction of front yard setback has been requested and findings supporting the reduction are made herein below. Their height and bulk is comparable to other structures located in the vicinity. In the conditions of approval on page 8 of the Resolution condition 5, should read, "In lieu of the requirement of 20%..." . Page 15 under Mitigation Measures -Geology and Soils, part c, eliminate the word 'partially'. . Page 17, Mitigation Measure 61, change the word missed to "mixed" . Page 18, add condition 65 to add a mandatory notification program for future buyers of the condominium users regarding the adjacent shipyard and restaurants in the area. . We inadvertently left out a condition related to traffic, so condition 66 needs to be added. "As currently proposed, left turn access to project http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mnl0-05-06.htm 10/01/2007 Planning Commission Minutes 10/05/2006 Page 11 of 36 driveways along Newport Boulevard is prohibited. The project shall consist of a four foot wide raised median along Newport Boulevard to prevent left turn access into and out of the site or other improvement acceptable to the City Traffic Engineer. imissioner Peotter asked about the prohibition of left turn access and the ian. . Edmonston noted this condition applies to the southerly driveway. The rtherly driveway with the upper deck would still have the left turn. The problem the roadway narrows and there is no room for a car to stop and be in a parate left turn lane for the access to the subterranean garage. We looked at widing a wider median; however, any further widening impacts the public rking lot across the street iirperson Cole asked to start the Commission discussion on the land use and ing issues. airperson Cole asked: The land use conflict between residential marine and industrial uses and particularly the Harbor Commission concern of the adjacent boat yards. r. Cunningham answered: . Building C (office building) in our estimate provides a buffer between the future residential uses and the shipyard. . The restaurants may not provide a nuisance but they could change the use characteristics in the future. Therefore, staff added the new condition relative to the disclosure to address that concern. . The :.project has=neat changed subataatially, since,,, the first preserotig . made to the Harbor Com�nissi In May 200. We would'`assume they would continue to have the same recommendations today. mmissioner Eaton asked the applicant if they would present this plan to the rbor Commission. s. McDermott answered that if the Commission directs this, it would be done; )wever, their thoughts were that in terms of the issues that were addressed by e Harbor Commission we did not think there would any changes on the plan at would change their position. _ Vg,by eve. we 'hav provided a marina, which consistent with the goals of the Harbor Element.%The Harbor Commission -ea of purview relates only up to the bulkhead and we have done everything ;yond the bulkhead to address those concerns. We have protected the iipyard with appropriate location of an office building that will protect the sidential, and we think basically there is a difference between planning views mixed use and Harbor Commission views of mixed use. We were not sure the fference could be addressed any further. r. Campbell added the project has not changed since the original plan. The http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mn10-05-06.htm 10/01/2007 Planning Commission Minutes 10/05/2006 Page 12 of 36 rbor Commission makeup has not changed and they felt quite strongly that i s simply the residential land use in proximity to the South Coast Shipyard, the wport Harbor Shipyard and the Balboa Shipyard and the restaurants. I don' a change in their position, even though the project is subtly different. Thf rbor Commission recommendation is that this is an incompatible {and use an( "consistent"' w th thearbor Element of the General Plan. Building C doe; wide„a'fauffero the adjacent shipyard end the project will incorporate sounc hairperson Cole noted that the Planning staff believes this project is cons ith the General Plan given the buffer. �p "e ar a red the. h'arkoo (o�t►m�n .nlape. a recc mmenaazran. to t com §s� aid �t rs, .,; the Pla g Commission to determin ;onsistency with the Harbor and Bay Element The Harbor Commission is nc nvolved with the permitting process. The only thing they would be reviewing i he Harbor Permit for the new marina. That would be considered by the Harbc R,esources Manager and would only go to the Harbor Commission on appeal. missioner Eaton asked: An issue raised by the Central Newport Homeowners Association is marina parking, particularly if there are charter boats. . Are there any charter boats now and will it continue, and what about th parking? . What about joint use parking? McDermott answered: There is a small boat charter that does six-packs, where they take out foul fishermen at a time. It is a very small operation. The boats are no necessarily docked there and parking is included on site. We believe tha parking is adequate. . There are no slips large enough to accommodate large charters, Hornblower and others can not be served and we don't intend to s( them. . Parking is adequate and because the party boats and charter boats do fit, there should not be any incompatibility. r. Campbell added that the parking arrangements for charters are reviewed b) e Harbor Resources Department. Parking for charters is required at 1 spac( r every 3 passengers and that also includes crews. A large charter boat is no ;cessarily going to work on this site. Off site parking arrangements ar( )ssible, but in review of that future permit we would have to take int( )nsideration existing land uses and hours and days of operation. There is ar >portunity for shared parking arrangements depending upon the nature of the ture use if a parking waiver is sought for a restaurant. That would be brough rward to the Planning Commission, but that is not before you tonight. http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mn10-05-06.htm 10/01/2007 Planning Commission Minutes 10/05/2006 Page 13 of 36 scussion continued. mmissioner Toerge, referring to page 11 in the staff report, noted t luired parking for fishing vessels is noted as a parking stall for every ;upants including crew members. So the use on site today would not ;ommodated. Mr. Campbell noted the .8 is for the entire marina and is for the boat owners tc park and use their slips and does not account for commercial activities at all. The Harbor Resources and the Planning Department will review and ensure that adequate parking is provided through a Marine Activities Permit. Thal application is not before us. However, the small charter boat operation is no' accommodated after this project is implemented. Through a separate permi- process that parking will be addressed at a later date. missioner Toerge noted the .8 is the standard for privately owned vessels. t is the standard for a commercial marina? r. Campbell answered it would depend on the nature and type of charters auld be presented. Discussion continued. s. Temple noted: Parking is provided for individual homeowners' private docks, which i presumed to be the on -site parking for the residential use, and commercial marina such as the Irvine Company Marina, which is not use for commercial activities vessels they are used for privately owned sli rentals for just individuals. That is what the .8 addresses. . Once you move to a commercial activity either within a commercial mari or any place in the harbor, then we assess those parking arrangemei through the Marine Activities Permit. )mmissioner Toerge asked who has the right to use the slips? Are they goi be for the residents or not? s. McDermott answered there will be designated parking within the parkin, ructure that will relate directly to the marina. To the extent that the sma carter is occupying a retail space, they also have spaces connected with the .tail operation. One of the things staff can do as part of that business license i evaluate how much space they have and how much parking they have comin. it of the total allocated to that retail space as well as whether or not the boE ip that they have connected with their operation in combination will b taluated in the parking allocated to that use. The boat slips will not b located only to the residential. scussion continued on the responsibility of the small charter business. r. Campbell discussed the differences between privately owned vessel parki id commercial activity parking in the marina. issioner Henn asked if party boats could be prohibited from using ps? http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mn10-05-06.htm 10/01/2007 Planning Commission Minutes 10/05/2006 Page 14 of 36 iff answered we are looking at land use entitlements for a development proj 1 the permitting beyond the bulkhead will be done by a separate Har :ivities Permit and whatever activities occur is a separate permit that is issL the Harbor Resources Director. mmissioner Henn asked for further clarification of charter boats as it relates :quate parking in this facility. followed. mmissioner Hawkins noted the land use part is for 19 slips. Can we conditio use of party boats? answered they will get the information. ommissioner McDaniel noted his concern of the parking and the conditiona ;e permits that will follow. This is a major concern he had relayed to the )plicant. We need to consider what business will be in there and how muct irking is adequate for these commercial uses as well as for the residentia yes. It looks now that it is under parked as presented with the residentia location as opposed to any commercial application that might take place there. 3istant City Attorney Harp added that it does not have parking for comme ivities even though it has a commercial designation. missioner Eaton asked at what point restaurants require extra parki nd the standard 1 for 250 requirement. Campbell noted the Zoning Code classifies restaurants in a variety tegory. He went on to explain the differences noting that the small 3taurant, with limiting seating of 6, is parked at the same rate a retail or ofi e is, which the project is designed for. mmissioner Toerge asked staff to outline the differences in the allowable regular commercial project versus a recreation marine project. How are erent? . Campbell answered: . Retail and office uses are both permitted. . Within the RMC zone there is a requirement that 40% of the site actual be devoted to what is known as marine related uses. Most of th; requirement is satisfied by the marina itself. . The 40% is calculated on the project area or site, which also inclu, submerged lands. The area devoted to the marina, including the party for the marina, which is in the garage, is tabulated. If that is 40% of entire project site, then they may indeed satisfy that requirement. . It is the entire lot area times 40% is the target goal. http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mn10-05-06.htm 10/01/2007 Planning Commission Minutes 10/05/2006 Page 15 of 36 If the area that is devoted to the marina, which includes the subme land, boat slips and parking areas is totaled and meets that standard, they would satisfy the requirement. There would be no need to I further restriction of commercial occupancy. I ommissioner Toerge asked how the residential development on the site app n that equation? If 60% of the site is residential and 40% is marine rely ;ommercial, it seems you have a disconnect. 1r. Campbell answered the standard is based on the lot area and is a simplE ibulation. 40% of the lot area is a numeric number we are trying to achieve. he marina and parking is included in that. If it does not satisfy it on its own ien we would be looking at the floor area of the commercial tenants to achievE iat 40%. Once that 40% is achieved, you can have other office uses that arE of marine related. )mmissioner Toerge noted that should have been explained during t meral Plan update process as he had no idea that lands under the wa )uld qualify for the marine commercial component for these retail opportuniti it the Planning Commission will be reviewing. I don't know if a )mmissioners knew that and it seems very confusing and illogical as it relai promoting marine related commercial in the building, not just on the water. 1s. Temple noted the zoning regulations in place for residential mixed use an )creational marine commercial areas are implemented from the existing Lan Ise Element via the Zoning Code. These are the development standard eveloped shortly after 1988. If the General Plan continues forward there will b further zoning implementation effort and the Commission and City Council < iat time can refine the actual zoning regulations that would implement thos olicies. They don't have to be the same as they are today. ;ommissioner Toerge noted that he was comfortable with that and express is hope that this would be brought up at that time. He went on to say tl ssuming the marina occupies 40% of the land area, that there is no n ifference in marine related commercial retail, they can do whatever they w< o long as the other planning requirements are adhered to in terms of hours peration, parking, etc. hairperson Cole clarified that the site is located in Sub Area 6 in McFadde quare and under the current Land Use Element of the General Plan it provide -id allows for recreation marine commercial designation which does allow fc :sidential mixed use. The proposed General Plan designation is MUW2, whic Mixed Use Water that also allows for residential development. Is th,, 3curate? Staff stated yes. mmissioner Hawkins asked if the only rational of the Harbor Commission icern that residential was not going to be compatible with the operation of pyards. Was that the only rational or was there something else? C�rx�p bell , answered that the South Coast Sh. rar0 which is die-ctly. to the .: tea, yus�ed to lease a 'porti6in of the site where' they actually sto d 4oat srn, some ;repa: on .Boats: ''`The crane would haul boats :out of the water: nston's Boat SaI"es was there as well. At`that time, the Harfjar Commission http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mnl0-05-06.htm 10/01/2007 Planning Commission Minutes 10/05/2006 Page 16 of 36 )ss of those uses occurring and that was a serious concern. Since that Guth_Coast Shipyard no longer leases the space, the crane is gone and �ened due to economical conditions and was not a result "of this" project. The` only `land use'tn'at is otherWise 'marine related is the achf Sales occurring on tte northern part of the site. )mmissioner Hawkins asked if they have an opportunity to condition thi )ject to say that the commercial uses over and above the 40%, assuming slip d parking associated with those constitute the requirement for marine relate es, dome have.an opportunity to further condition this project so that anothe diti�e porfion of lhea " " 4° s c d honed as marine related to assist th rbo rr Commission in its review and hope for adoption of the project? r. Campbell answered no. airperson Cole asked the Commission if there were any concerns that thi eject would not be consistent with either the existing or proposed Gener< in? Toerge noted he sees no benefit referring this back to the Ha .ommissioner Eaton noted he wanted to see if the revised project would chang ieir opinion; however it is within our purview to determine whether or not it 1 Insistent. Whichever way the Harbor Commission went, it would not imping n our ability to make that determination. 3sistant City Attorney Harp clarified the Harbor Commission is there to advis( e Planning Commission in these matters, but you are not bound by thei :ommissioner Hawkins noted this is an important site and the project is a bi ne than the earlier proposed project. He stated he would like to have enefit of a consultation from the Harbor Commission. ;ommissioner Toerge noted that we are not going to get to the point o approving this matter tonight. It would be appropriate for us to express ou :oncerns and allow the applicant to ask questions of us. It is not appropriate tc ;ngage in a solution tonight but rather to come back at a later date in order tc let an approval. He then noted: . On site circulation - Where do you propose delivery trucks, trash trucks postal trucks, and moving trucks service the commercial and retai activities on the site? He noted he is not prepared to approve a site plar unless this is understood and designed. It is a critical component as the project is tightly developed. s. McDermott referring to the site plan answered: . The route of the trash pick up for residential was high lighted. . A trash facility serving the office building will be used by the janitor service bringing out the trash and emptying it into the bins, which are th http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mnl0-05-06.htrn 10/01/2007 Planning Commission Minutes 10/05/2006 Page 17 of 36 emptied out by the trash trucks. . In a commercial operation a special pick up can be done by smaller tru that can go into the parking structures and into the trash enclosure to I up the trash. . The trash management of a mixed use project is handled differently than is on a single use project so we will have a couple of different types contracts to accommodate residential and commercial trash both of whic can be accommodated by the existing circulation. . She noted that the residential trash cans will be located within the ca and or garages. . All other types of trucks will access in the same fashion. There is delivery space located on the site plan. mmissioner Eaton asked about the size of the trucks. McKently, project architect, noted: . The garage has a minimum of a two bay clearance to get in and will be restricting element under the units. . A typical van will be allowed to enter and because of divided access the slipway, we are providing 8'2" all the way across. . The idea was that the larger scale commercial delivery would happen b, traveling up and across and backing into the loading stalls on grade o back to Building C. . The restaurant uses will be minimal so the amount of garbage other from residential units will be fairly limited. . There is only one large loading space being provided. intinuing, Commissioner Toerge opined that the property is under -served fc it kind of use especially if there is more than one truck at a time particularl rving the large office building. He noted that there seems to be no deck Iev( rking for Building A. All the parking for this building is subterranean, which estion the appropriateness of. Referencing the simulated views, he noted hi ncern of the circulation regarding ingress/egress and turning capabilities. H ked to view the underground garage layout. He noted the access reference emergency only has yellow gates across it. Why is that? McKently noted the intent of the deck level parking was not to be restricts) to provide access for the residential parking in the small commercial be er the residential on the bay side. We tried to create a simple segregation commercial from the residential parking by putting the commercial parki m below for the most part and the residential parking above. The resident ass and exit would be from the north end. He then explained the course http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mn10-05-06.htm 10/01/2007 Planning Commission Minutes 10/05/2006 Page 18 of 36 scussion continued on the size, width, parking, circulation and placement immercial and residential parking. Also discussed was the primary use sidential, shortness of queue and orientation of ingress and egress off 22 missioner Eaton asked if there was an intent to gate the deck. )I McDermott discussed their intent to provide some sort of mechanism th Id allow exit only; ussion continued on the two opportunities to access the site, volumes c, the separation of commercial and residential to the greatest exti ;ible, the design of access if required to have two-way access at the eastE of the deck, signage of deck, potential re -design and security of control. McDermott noted that a Parking Management Plan will be provided to wo the parking. mmissioner Eaton asked how the people coming from Balboa Boul uld access this site. r. Campbell described a couple of scenarios. McDermott offered another possibility. Joe Foust, Principal of Austin Foust and Associates, noted the following it answer to Commission's questions.: . The trip demand in the morning you can anticipate 20 to 35 cars will coming in to this project in the morning peak period. . In the afternoon it will be about 40 trips coming in. . Outbound in the p.m. peak because it is commercial related, we about 60 trips. . The highest number in the peak period is 60 in the p.m. going out. . Figure about 30-40 arrivals in both the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. . The directionality, because of the residential, is different compared tc today. In total trips for this site, the morning is about two less. In the afternoon there is about 28-30 more trips generated by this project that exists there today. . He then discussed the queue lines for the northerly and soutt driveways as well as the counts that have been taken there and amount of cars that can be handled. . Peak hour in the afternoon for this project is 5-6 o'clock in the evening. http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mn10-05-06.htm 10/01/2007 Planning Commission Minutes 10/05/2006 Page 19 of 36 mmissioner Toerge noted that is the time when a lot of beach traffic is leavin peninsula. mmissioner Henn noted that as a resident of the Peninsula he is icerned with the traffic during the non -summer months; however, during nmer traffic will back up and it will be a problem for the residents. r. Foust opinioned that with regard to the position of the Crab Cooker and r uch the traffic backed up into the Arcade area it is a big issue that ad( affic to 22nd Street would compound the situation. He supports the idea :eping it as an egress only on the southerly end. :ommissioner Toerge proposed that the Parking Management Plan become pa f the application so that the Commission can review it. It is an integral part ( its project and needs to be reviewed concurrently with the site plan in order R s to gain any kind of confidence that the circulation is going to work. nmissioner Hawkins asked about the straightway onto 22nd St. Has n a thought of signalizing that area to allow for the traffic directions? Edmonston answered no. There is a signal at 21 st Street, a very short blo y and may cause problems in this intersection. was noted that copies of the Errata and other materials were on the table. blic comment was opened. )I Wichman, local resident, noted she supports the project. She noted thi: of the peninsula has more obsolete buildings than other areas in the Cit), this development improves the area. )bent Rubian, owner of the Crab Cooker and local resident, noted he is i pport of this project; however, he has some concerns He thanked th >mmission for the work they were doing. ht Griffith, representing Mr. Rubian, noted: . While in support of the project, the way the southerly driveway is ci it is problematic. He distributed some pictures of the traffic gridlock. . The southerly drive should be one way. . The existing layout works, but it is not perfect. . They are concerned about the construction noise and asked for a 4 p.m. work stoppage. . During demolition, Building B that abuts the Crab Cooker on a zero wal common wall may necessitate the closure of that restaurant area. The) are looking for some help for alternates. missioner McDaniel noted that parking is a major concern. Citing http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mnl0-05-06.htm 10/01/2007 Planning Commission Minutes 10/05/2006 Page 20 of 36 suing problems in the area, he noted that truck delivery and valet parking will problematic. h Hill, property owner across this project site, noted: . This area needs improvement as it is an aging area. . There is tremendous economic opportunity for the City and for the area both the land use and harbor as well. . There is no view of the harbor today. . This project will enhance the local property values. . He does not believe there is a traffic problem except during the su months. . Traffic problems relate to beach and bar use and do not relate to retail normal restaurant use. . We do not have a parking problem as the parking problem relates beach use. . If you look at the summertime when you can not find a place to park, o local business can not handle anymore business than they do. If you lo( at the wintertime when the local business could handle much mo business there are places to park where you would like. . The parking is not related to the projects, the parking issue is related to beach. . He urged consideration of this project and to allow it to move forward. race Dove, Vice Chairman of the Central Newport Beach Communit 3sociation, noted their concerns with the responses to comments to their lette garding the EIR: . Comment 4.1 - the response doesn't address the loss of view. . Comment 4.3 - the response doesn't address the loss of view or the blockage by the bridge of the view corridor with the waterway. . Comment 4.4 - Says see answer 3-15 and 3-16; but those are cultura responses and are not construction mitigation measures. . Comment 4.5 - doesn't address referring the historic resource to the Arts and Cultural Commission, which is charged by the City with hi; review. . Comment 4.5 - references 3-15 and 3-16 and does not answer quality mitigation. http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mnl0-05-06.htm 10/01/2007 Planning Commission Minutes 10/05/2006 Page 21 of 36 . Comment 4.7 - gives an answer related to the construction activity bu does not address the year round concerns and especially the summe concerns we have, nor emergency response when there is total gridlock. . Comment 4.8 - references 3-25 and 3-31 which are totally irrelevant to transportation question. . She then suggested that the business owners and employees should prohibited from purchasing parking passes. Saventi, business owner and partner in Woody's Wharf, noted: . Project redevelopment does need to be done on that site. . Residential is not the best use as this site today is 100% commercial will go to 2/3 residential if this plan was to be approved. . There are restaurants at either end of this proposed project who h; customers and his restaurant stays open later than the Crab Cooker as are open until 2:00 a.m. We have customers going to their cars ; smoking on the side of the building. In the proposed plan there is no buffer between the condos that a proposed and our restaurant, so I can see future problems there. This is problem for us. . The setbacks that are proposed being taken away, the site line to ou property and restaurant will be taken away by doing that and this is ai issue for us. . There are going to be parking problems as you have already discussed. . If you put a condo up on a second or third story next to a restaurant, stanc behind the Crab Cooker 100 feet away and see if you can smell the vents it's like having a barbecue all day. Our vents run continuously. . Without any mitigation for those kinds of things, we are going to problems here. There is no buffer on our side of the proposed project. . This is the first we have talked or seen this proposal so we have not bee included in any outreach program during this process. . At Commission inquiry, he added that they have live entertainment a amplified music. We have this entertainment five nights a week. airperson Cole noted that this area is currently zoned for residential, are sing for some sort of buffer? r. Saventi answered yes, at a minimum as the site today has no residential. in only see problems when residential is placed there. The shipyard closes p.m. He stated that getting into this project and five years from now a reside http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mnl0-05-06.htm 10/01/2007 Planning Commission Minutes 10/05/2006 Page 22 of 36 ; sitting in his living room and complains that it is like sitting next to a barbecue ecause the vents go day and night. I don't want to have noise problems. The lewport Beach Brewing Company is getting ready to limit their hours because ie residential that just moved in next door to them. This is an issue and out usiness has been there for over 40 years. Me and my partners support out imilies with this business. This is a big issue for us. g Pappas, partner of Woody's Wharf and local resident, noted: . Strongly opposes the residential portion of the project. *Supports the commercial side even though there is going to be disruption for 2 or 3 years during the construction phases. . His concern is whether residential and restaurants can co -exist. . The Cannery about ten years ago lost their entertainment permit and thei closing time changed from 2 a.m. to 10 p.m. all due to the high rist condos. . Newport Brewery is fighting for their life. You can't have a restaurant clo at 10:00 p.m. from 1:00 a.m. and exist and be able to support their famili because of the loss of time. . It is very expensive owning a business down here as you lease th property and then lose three hours of business that impacts the revenue. . Windows and Studio Cafe had the same problem with the loss of time, which impacted their revenues. . Their biggest fear is that a year or two down the road they will be befo the Commission. . The restaurant has been in business for over 40 years and when th bought it they were asked not to make any changes, which they haven't. . He noted that what is being referred to as the northern access into project as proposed won't work. . They are very busy on Sunday afternoons and do a lot of brunches ; does the Kantina. He has a hard time getting into his restaurant especia during the summertime and this new access will block their driveway at cause backups to his customers. . The Kantina also exits through our parking lot, which will create noise la at night. We will have additional noise and whatever we can to keep tf noise at a minimum we will do, but we have a lot of issues that can ups potential nearby residents. Stewart, owner of South Coast Shipyard for the last 27 years, noted: http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mn10-05-06.htm 10/01/2007 Planning Commission Minutes 10/05/2006 Page 23 of 36 . This proposed project and the process are good . He is on his facility 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. five to six days a week. . This area as it is now is dangerous at night, attracts vagrants and can stay like it is today. . As the Shipyard owner, he supports this project. can Anthony, a tenant of South Studio, noted: . After seeing the presentation tonight, this is something that will be benefit to the community. R. Dilding, local property owner, noted: . His concern with condition 36 regarding on -site parking. It should ad these concerns in the whole area. As a member of the State Public Commission representing specialty contractors for the past 24 years. Realizing the urgency and complexity of construction particularly refers tc this project as a redevelopment or infill project. Condition 51, provides fo a full traffic management control plan to be submitted. This project witl grading and demolition could be started before you get involved in makinc a final decision as a developer in who they are going to use fo subcontractors, etc. . A provision should be made that they can have a second filing so th< once they get in, they can come back with a refined plan. I don't thin there is a structural engineer involved at this time and what is going to b the actual construction materials, they may end up with a batch plant t bring onto site for concrete. . Things have changed from what it used to be. The biggest problem in construction industry we deal with is that we are a nuisance; however, end results benefit everyone. . These people are a couple of years off in putting this together and thin may change. They may line up sites today and submit this plan, they m be gone when the time comes. airperson Cole asked that these suggestions be given to staff. ig Morrisette, local resident and board member of the Central Newport neowners Association, noted: . The response for re -development of that area is positive. . There are a lot of good features to this plan. . Summertime traffic is the problem as it backs up from 15th Street all http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mn10-05-06.htm 10/01/2007 Planning Commission Minutes 10/05/2006 Page 24 of 36 way up the peninsula. . If the counts were made off season, the traffic counts are not valid. ublic comment was closed. :)mmissioner Hawkins asked about the additive traffic during the summer, is studied? Ir. Foust answered that the project traffic in the summertime and the project affic in the wintertime is not a great deal different. The figures given earlier o. 0 to 40 more cars coming and making the left turn in, that is fairly constant. art of these are residents (27) and the rest are commercial and does no uctuate that much. The volume on Newport Boulevard fluctuates betweer inter and summer. The numbers of this project are relatively constant, so wher told you the left turns, it will be same whether it is winter or summer. We takE ie peak hour period as being a one hour period. For the 4 fifteen intervals tha re the highest during the morning period from 6 a.m. to 9 a.m. and the fternoon is from 3 p.m. to 6 p.m. Again the 4 fifteen minute intervals that arE ie longest turns out 5 p.m. to 6 p.m. in the afternoon and 7:30 a.m. to 8:30 a.m i the morning. That is a one hour period we are talking about. Discussior ontinued. I McDermott, representing the applicant, noted: . We met with the property owner of Woody's and apologize for not meetinc with the operators. We were not aware there was a distinction and they we just found out he recently sold the operation versus the land. We wil talk with the operators soon. . We talked to the owner about doing extensive glazing and nois( attenuation along that wall and intensifying noise mitigation that will occu on that end unit. . We are set back more than 10 feet from the bulkhead and have a little of setback from the right of way. There is some advantage from a nc standpoint and we will be talking to staff about it. . The height of the project in contrast to what would be allowed on sit( having separated the buildings into the harbor frontage and the stre( frontage and with the deck in between, there is quite a bit of separatio between the buildings. The intensity of the development is a lot less tha what is permitted by Code. We are asking for up to 35 feet but hav devised a variety of ways to meet the findings for the height limit. . Regarding the primary entrance to the deck, hopefully the Commission will give direction how you want it handled. nmissioner McDaniel asked how deliveries to Building A, are made to it sections. It looks as the only pass through goes down into the parking i comes back up. http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mnl0-05-06.htm 10/01/2007 Planning Commission Minutes 10/05/2006 Page 25 of 36 3. McDermott answered that all the businesses along Balboa Boulevard tal sir deliveries from the front. Deliveries usually occur in non -peak hours. The parking in front to allow deliveries. Given the size of the retail spaces, the II not be the demand for large deliveries. r. McKently, architect for the project, referring to the site plan noted Fferent ramp access for use by delivery services. There would have to be a ;sign of the site to create a delivery or loading zone area for Building A. issioner McDaniel noted the parking problems with no pass through to t He noted that this is a major problem especially during the summertime. iscussion continued. :ommissioner Toerge, noted we are trying to balance the benefits of this proje nd how it will be viable to the community and existing businesses ar eighbors. He then asked: . What is the width of the pedestrian walkway? - Ms. McDermott answerE they are offering a ten foot easement and within that 10 feet there will be feet clear. There is 4 feet to be used for landscape and benches. The feet is the dimension Public Works has asked for. . What was allowed at 919 Bayside by Council? - Ms. McDermott answe it was allowed an 8 foot easement with no room for benches within t easement. Along the side at Promontory Bay, there was 10 foot easem with six foot clear. Along the frontage on Balboa Island, there was 8 f and there was no distinction between whether to allow landscaping or r but it was understood to be 6 foot clear. As this relates to the vertical and the easement, is that going to required to be handicapped accessible? - Mr. Campbell answered there is going to be an elevator. McKently, referring to the site plan, added that the elevator is double sided. ntinuing, Commissioner Toerge asked about the floor plans for the reside ts. The units are hard to identify along with the parking. He then asked al ;cific items on the layout and the parking. McKently, referring to the floor plans explained the plans and noted the ite the diagram and garages and elevators. missioner Toerge discussed: . The number of bedrooms including the 4 on the ground level is 80. . He disagrees with the interpretation that the deck level is someh construed to be the second floor and is allowed to have residential on it. . He opined that the purpose of the Code was to put the ground floor u as retail/commercial, so he won't be supporting any residential on http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mn10-05-06.htm 10/01/2007 Planning Commission Minutes 10/05/2006 Page 26 of 36 floor. He asked to see a Parking Management Plan, how the distribution parking is going to be restricted, accessed, controlled, how non -reside and non guests, non patrons, and non customers are going to be restric from using this. The Parking Management Plan should be part of review and is critical for this project to have this because of the der project and tight allocation of parking. . With no street parking in this development and recognizing there are on 14 guest parking spaces but with 80 bedrooms and all the other parking the parking structure being allocated to the retail and commercial uses, c we have the authority or right to demand more parking for the residenti units? 3. Temple answered that if it is above and beyond what the Code requireme then no. City Attorney Harp agreed. ntinuing, Commissioner Toerge discussed: . Size of parking spaces in the ground floor area, some are 9 and 8. Is by design? Are there areas where 8 1/2 feet wide would work? r. McKently answered stalls closer to columns or walls are wider as required ode. He doesn't believe there are 8 1/2 feet wide stalls. mmissioner Toerge continued: . There is a location in there that is 60 feet wide with 7 cars parking there, that seems narrow to me. . My concern, as it relates to trash enclosures and Parking Managem( Plan, because this project is so tight on parking and is at the minimum the Code, if there is a dimensional correction after Planning approval may lose some parking. . I want to confirm how that happens should it occur. . What determines if this is not in substantial conformance to come back the Planning Commission? Ir. Campbell answered that in that respect the project is not finally designed and fter staff reviews it some of the dimensions may shift. We have a condition that :quires review by the Traffic Engineer that all parking spaces and maneuvering isles meet our code and standards. If the parking garage loses spaces, then ie applicant will have to lose square footage in the project. That is how the iechanism works and that is at the plan check stage. With a loss of 4 parking paces that means there is 1,000 square feet of commercial building lost. 1 fould depend on how the applicant chooses to reduce the square footage. http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mnl0-05-06.htm 10/01/2007 Planning Commission Minutes 10/05/2006 Page 27 of 36 mmissioner Toerge continued: . He does not see a nexus between the requirement to provide the in the back and the requirement for setback. There are two s issues. . I can not make the finding based on what I see today that there unusual circumstances that compel this property to not put a five setback in the front. . The argument aligning with the Crab Cooker is a weak argument as it is small building and is 50 years old and likely will be there for a long time. . Using that same argument (referring to the site plan) there is not a build until you get further down the Boulevard. . 1 do not support this argument at all, and the five foot setback is required. . As it relates to building height, I do not agree with staffs conclusions all. I don't see any 35 foot tall buildings in the area. Three stories is abrupt scale change. I think 35 feet in this area will be an abrupt scc change and I don't agree to the findings to support a 35 foot height. . He asked if any bulk calculations had been done. Mr. Campbell ansm the project meets the requirement for building bulk within the Zoning C which is presented in the staff report. The applicant prepared a volun analysis and is contained in the staff report. He continued by giving a overview. . The design features need to be at both ends of this project to act as buffer between the residential components and restaurant and shipya facilities. . He stated he was concerned about the construction schedule, t restriction on summertime weekend use of truck traffic in this area hauli debris or materials to the site, where the construction workers will park a other applications of projects of this magnitude. We need a parki program for construction parking to review with this application as well. . We should review this in a public hearing format prior to certifying the El as opposed to leaving it to staff approval at some later date. issioner Henn noted: . He is concerned about the construction management and would like to the plan in a public hearing format. . He would like to see how the landscape softens the building mass. . He asked about the view corridor and the elevation changes from street. http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mnl0-05-06.htm 10/01/2007 Planning Commission Minutes 10/05/2006 Page 28 of 36 r. McKently answered: . The street elevation is approximately +8 and the deck level is assumed be at +11. . The intention is not to have the bridge higher than that and it will transparent railings. mmissioner Eaton asked: . Why are some parking spaces in garages and some in carports? r. Campbell answered it has to do with the floor area limitation for residenti ;es which is .75. If they were enclosed it would be gross floor area and it wou counted against the residential square footage. The carports that are coverE i three sides do not count as floor area. missioner Eaton noted: . He could not make a finding that the garage is the first floor for 1 purposes of non-residential. To make the findings of consistency, 1 residential has to rise above the deck level and not be on the deck level. . He agrees leaving the southerly access as exit only based upon the consultant's advice. . Both the Parking Management Plan and the Construction Manageme Plan should be brought to the Commission and preferably now in conte of the project and be a part of the overall approval process. . The units next to Woody's Wharf need to be protected and buffered noise and nuisance factors. He agrees to the added condition a noticing to potential homeowners. . Agrees to the issue of the setback on Newport Boulevard and has heard good reasons as to why it should not be provided. This project is symbolic of what will happen in the mixed use areas as fa as building heights are concerned. The trend in the future will see more c this kind of project with a high floor area and intensity and therefore yoi will be seeing more 35 foot high buildings. . Question of a delivery area next to Building A, having only one space so far away from Building A is not enough. Maybe a loading zone can provided, somewhere or another. You are going to need a loading sp; for Building A. . Never got missing page 16, so that needs to be provided. . On what basis was it reported that 22nd, 23rd and 28th Streets we operating at an acceptable Level of Service, the response referred http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mnl0-05-06.htm 10/01/2007 Planning Commission Minutes 10/05/2006 Page 29 of 36 Traffic Engineer. . The most important issue to me is the first floor/second floor residential. mmissioner Henn noted: . Encourage the applicant to find solutions to the questions and con that have been brought up. . He favors a re -development of this property that works. missioner Hawkins noted: . The current use is not the best use of the project site. . The commercial parking does not work. . The circulation needs to be enhanced. . 22nd Street provides an opportunity that should be looked at. . The video was impressive and helpful; however, it showed the Duffy b going out of slip 19 and I am not sure how it will work if you have day transport moving easterly of the slip. How will that work? . Condition 64 addresses some of the concern raised by the owners Woody's Wharf but more needs to be done. missioner McDaniel noted: . This appears to be a condo project that has retail and commercial ad to it. . Some of the detail of retail and commercial requirements were overlooked. . We have identified things such as access, trash enclosures, etc. . Parking is a major concern Not knowing what the applications are for the other buildings, with the slips we are already under parked so it appears. What is planned on going in there and what parking will be required an( will there be space for it? . It is difficult to give up parking spaces and this future requirement needs be included in order to make businesses viable. We have used all t space available for the buildings and requirement for future needs to done. . 35 foot building with one story buildings on either side will stand out. If thi makes it viable, I am not against it totally, but it would be nice if some c the buildings were pushed back. http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mml0-05-06.htm 10/01/2007 Planning Commission Minutes 10/05/2006 Page 30 of 36 . We may need a deed restriction to identify potential nuisances. chairperson Cole noted the consensus that a development of this site esirable. There are concerns from the neighbors, Commissioners and ublic on certain areas. He noted the following: . Prohibiting party boats from using slips. -Staff will get back on this. . Restriction of large restaurant use on bay front because of the addition parking load. . Additional parking has been brought up by several people. . Site plan that includes trash enclosures and delivery/postal circulation. . Revised subterranean circulation plan/flow and deck circulation flow well. . The Arcade entrance as exit only. - Staff to discuss. . Condition of multiple parking attendants as part of Parking Managem Plan. . Construction Parking Management Plan part of the approval process. McDermott noted her concern of the Construction Management Plan a rking Management Plan is whether we can do it in the time they have. S Jed that they have to be in substantial conformance. She then elaborated potential problems. Discussion continued. :ommissioner Toerge noted he wants to see a plan and if that has to hanged then it is brought back at some future date on a deferred basis. The lans have been available prior to approval of an EIR in the past and certainly ie most recent project for Our Lady Queen of Angels. He noted his concern pproving a project without those opportunities in place. I learned tonight tf• ou might be charging to park there. That was not on the plans nor mentioned ie staff report. This project appears premature as the Errata is lacking and t lans aren't accurate in terms of emergency and regular vehicle access. I oted there are a lot of issues that need to be addressed before he cot upport the project. :ommissioner Peotter noted this is a great project and will be an improvement it ie neighborhood. There are concerns that need to be addressed. He xpressed concerns previously expressed. He noted the Construction Plan doe: of need to come back to the Commission. The Parking Management Plan is of necessary as the applicant meets the required parking and is providing al ecessary parking on site simultaneously. It is an extra burden placed on the pplicant. The problems of this project are technical in nature and can bE forked out. He noted the Commission should not be designing the project an( ie applicant has put a lot of money into it. rperson Cole asked if that plan can be brought back to the Commission at http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mn10-05-06.htm 10/01 /2007 Planning Commission Minutes 10/05/2006 Page 31 of 36 ater date for approval, which would have to be required before the project w brward. Is there a way to get some of the issues in a report form? It might oo much to have this all completed prior to us approving this project. Is. Temple answered that the Public Works Department has asked for these ,pes of plans and information if they deemed it was necessary in the context c suing a building permit. They are required as a plan check correction in thl Ian check process by projects of size that don't need to come to the Plannirn commission. The Planning Department has added the reference to needirn iese things when the Public Works would want one and we use it to put th, pplicant on notice that they need to be prepared to produce them when they ar aeking more detailed permits. It has been a recent experience that th Tanning Commission wishes to review things that have traditionally been th urview of the City's Traffic Engineer. If it is critical to make a finding that roject is compatible for the neighborhood for the construction period, you ar ,ithin your rights and authority to ask for it. It is the Commission's call. Give ie issues raised with this project, for the short term construction it may lead t cnditions that help identify issues that are atypical, things we might ask roject to do. In terms of the day to day operation for the long term we hav eard issues that may lead you to go into more detail specifics such as tras ick ups, deliveries, etc. In this case, I don't think it is out of order to ask fc lose things if you deem it necessary. She would ask for a full plan. Or. Edmonston added that there were projects that had these kinds of condition: and the projects were in critical areas of the City such as Mariners Mile and or he peninsula and most commonly when they involve significant amounts o :xcavation. Public Works focus has primarily been on public safety and the mpact of projects with ten dump trucks show up and they have to be here befor( he construction starts and that creates a parking problem. We focus on thos( ssues, where contractor employees park so as not to create problems wit[ adjoining properties. The areas that the Council and Commission have weigher n are more environmental impacts where they have limited the amount of trucl :rips during the summer months. Certainly you can have a plan that has some o .hose key limitations or concerns in it and staff can flush it out from there. )ifferent contractors approach this differently and may not be the contractor the) actually work with so it will change, but you have a starting point. irperson Cole noted that we can review the reports up front. 1r. Edmonston noted it would be good to have some level of report for th :ommission to review recognizing that staff can take it as guidance for th irection you want to see the project goes to. ommissioner Henn noted that the parking will have to solve itself because o e zoning regulations. He does not feel it needs to be seen in totality up front. owever, the Construction Management Plan needs to be laid out in detail w e construction will be over a period of three years. Once you get into it with mtractor you may have to come back for some revisions but that initial effor ill ferret out key issues. Temple asked about short term parking as it relates to construction and the nstruction vehicles, both of contract workers and heavy equipment delivery. at is what I call a construction parking plan. The second is the obvious irking Management plan which is the long term thing. I just heard that there is http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mn10-05-06.htm 10/01/2007 Planning Commission Minutes 10/05/2006 Page 32 of 36 nterest in how the project is going to be constructed with demolition e ;onstruction at that time of the year when there is more capacity on the road ess adverse affect on traffic congestion and that certain other types ;onstruction may not create so many demands on the roadway and might pore appropriately placed in the summertime as opposed to winter time. Is t imissioner Henn noted that the construction parking issue is subsumec in the construction management plan and is not a separate issue. I think construction phasing as well as the construction management plan arE iral issues. irperson Cole asked for a consensus on having a construction ma for the next hearing: mmissioner Eaton agreed to at least a conceptual construction and parkinc nagement plan. He noted the Errata sheet still has a lot of items that say wil provided. They need to be provided before we can approve the EIR. Dommissioner Hawkins noted the plans need to be as concrete as possible eve can see what the needs are, what is on the ground today, and imitations. commissioner McDaniel noted this project is at ground zero and will have najor impact on what happens on the peninsula. The more we know as oppos, o guessing, the better. If we know and stipulate as many issues as possible tl• s the goal. He asked for comprehensive plans. nmissioner Toerge noted it is the responsibility of the Commission to discu >e matters especially in these areas of redevelopment in establish dential and commercial areas. We need the comprehensive plans. brnmissioner Peotter noted it is a complicated plan that is being asked for an( go beyond conceptual is unreasonable. The applicant doesn't even know if N as a project or not and now you are asking him to spend several thousands o ollars in putting together a plan in order to get that approval. Conceptually N iay find property at Hoag to stage those trucks and park construction workers o may be in Costa Mesa somewhere. Where that's at is going to depend or fhich plan it is. irperson Cole then asked about a full or conceptual parking plan. immissioner Henn noted he had not realized the engineering had not been ne on this project. Until that is done, it would be difficult to come up with a tailed parking management plan. He is okay with conceptual. iairperson Cole agreed. immissioner Toerge noted he would like a detailed plan. 1. Edmonston noted this is the first that he heard about the project having endant parking. You need a place for a booth, a cashiering system or some ier way. We haven't looked at this and there is concerns of backing in, http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mn10-05-06.htm 10/01/2007 Planning Commission Minutes 10/05/2006 Page 33 of 36 )cking and movement out. These are things we would have typically have the ffic engineer analyze that we didn't do because it was never pointed out tha s would be part of the project. The applicant should provide a complete plar d present it to staff with enough lead time so that we can analyze it as therE ay be space lost. There are considerable repercussions from this aspect. :arol McDermott asked if once the parking garage is constructed first and ther II the construction traffic is in the parking structure, is that the way to handle it? )bviously once we have a parking structure we want to be able to use it. r. Edmonston stated that would be a reasonable phase of the project andling the construction parking on site is the best place. mmissioner Toerge agreed. s. Temple noted this is true as it applies to the onsite construction workers. ie Public Works will still be concerned about construction deliveries an( aging in the rights of ways and all of those things. Those stay constan roughout the whole of the construction of the project. hairperson Cole then continued his wrap up of public and Comm )mments: . A condition that residents or boat owners are not allowed city passes. am not sure that is something we can enforce. Staff will address. . Some type of buffer from Woody's, sound attenuation or some re -design setback that addresses the nature of a bar that is opened late w entertainment and being adjacent to residential. . The changes in conditions 36 and 51. . The reduction in the size of the project because of the traffic concerns. . Providing a new loading/delivery area in Building A. . Don't allow the deck level to be defined as the second level, therefo there will be no residential allowed on this level. :ommissioner Eaton noted the Commission can not set the precedent Ilowing the deck level, which is really the ground level, to be the second floor. missioner Toerge agreed. missioner Henn agreed. irperson Cole continued with the list: . Addressing the need for more parking or at least a clear understanding where parking will be located. http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mnl0-05-06.htm 10/01/2007 Planning Commission Minutes 10/05/2006 Page 34 of 36 . Requiring a 5 foot setback in front was brought up. mmissioner Toerge noted these findings were changed about a year ago. first finding you have to make is, the granting of the application is necessary to the practical difficulties associated with the property and that the strict )lication of the Zoning Code results in physical hardships that are inconsistent h the purpose and intent of the Zoning Code. I can't make that finding. issioner Henn noted he feels less strongly about that issue. rperson Cole suggested the applicant come back with more information :)mmissioner Hawkins noted there are four people concerned about the Aback and believe there is room to accommodate the 5 foot setback with some ndscaping treatment that will soften the front edge on Newport Boulevard. irperson Cole continued with the list: Building height - the need for 35 feet. Have a staggered affect. missioner Eaton noted he is okay with the height. missioner Hawkins agreed with the height and the view corridor. irperson Cole agreed. )mmissioner Toerge noted finding 4 is mandatory finding, the increased ilding height would not result in an undesirable or abrupt scale relationship ing created between the structure and existing developments or public aces. You have a parking lot on one side and a one story building on the ier side. There are no other three story buildings other than the one mixed e project that was developed at 28th Street. Further it says, particular `ention shall be given to the total bulk of the structure including both horizontal d vertical dimensions. When you build square buildings you are giving no ention to bulk, it is a bulk square building. At the very least, the height above standard height restriction, should be staggered in some way to reduce the Ik and to minimize the abrupt scale relationships being created between the ucture and a one story building and a parking lot on the other side of the ilding. It is very clear to me. irperson Cole continued: . Notice verification and CCR's. Temple noted staff can propose a condition regarding the CCR's. She will nfer with the City Attorney's office. )mmissioner Hawkins noted there are avenues to accommodate the concerns Woody Wharfs. immissioner McDaniel noted he is not comfortable with the 35 foot high ilding. He is not in favor of a three story building. http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mnl0-05-06.htm 10/01/2007 Planning Commission Minutes 10/05/2006 Page 35 of 36 ommissioner Toerge asked for a study of the building heights in the immed cinity. . Temple cautioned that two story does not mean compliance with a 26 ght limit. There are a lot of 35 foot high buildings that are two story but not on this side of Newport Boulevard though. They are mostly in Fadden Square area. We will gather the requested information. McDermott noted that the metal buildings on the project site are currently 3 high. imissioner Toerge noted he had mentioned that but they are not on N levard and are setback and do not appear abrupt. ommissioner Henn noted there is a mix of issues for which there should be )lution. This project is one of compromise because it is an infill. We have tc :e some flexibility for the final solution. The fact that it does go higher provide: ,r the fact that it does provide open space for the project. On the other hand, i e gave up some setback and we are able to stagger the buildings away fron ewport Boulevard and still make it work, maybe that is okay too. I don't know e applicant needs to take these concerns that have been expressed and see i ev can craft a solution that will work. hairperson Cole agreed and noted a more detailed landscape plan is needed. is perspective is that this is an overall project that has a great potential bu sere are a lot of moving parts and is going to look at it in totality with all thf fferent areas in the next presentation. You have heard our concerns an( )pefully you can come up with something that works for all parties. mmissioner Toerge asked about the bridge width. He asked if there icern about pedestrians using it or should there be a walkway provided II. Edmonston noted that his staff will look at it. Motion was made by Commissioner Toerge to continue this item to Novembe 2, 2006. Ayes: Eaton, Hawkins, Cole, McDaniel and Toerge Noes: Peotter Absent: Henn ADDITIONAL BUSINESS: ADDITIONAL BUSINESS a. City Council Follow-up - Ms. Temple stated that a study on our interna review processes, particularly plan check, development review anc interdepartmental coordination report was presented to the Council. WE will be assessing the highest priorities and will be putting forth a plan tc implement. In association with that there was a discussion on staffinc needs in Planning. Sober Living by the Sea has been in process and havE now agreed and found a location in Costa Mesa to hold their large meetinc activities which takes them out of the Villa Way location. That large roon will be divided and used for small conference rooms and office space. Discussion continued. The appeal for Vista Tramonto was denied. http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mn10-05-06.htm 10/01/2007 Planning Commission Minutes 10/05/2006 Page 36 of 36 b. Report from Planning Commission's representative to the Economic Development Committee - Commissioner Henn noted they hav( completed the first draft of the Strategic Plan for Economic Sustainability. It will be discussed and proposed at a study session for the City Council. c. Report from the Planning Commission's representative to the Coastal Committee - no meeting. d. Matters which a Planning Commissioner would like staff to report on at subsequent meeting - Commissioner Hawkins asked about the Zonin< Committee. Ms. Temple noted this project will be part of the implementation of the General Plan. Discussion continued. Commissioner McDaniel noted he would like matters come before the Planning Commission that they can vote on. Referring to the Marim project, he noted the Errata sheet was not ready, they ended up re designing the project, this project was and has a long way to go, and h( would like to see total projects so that we can vote. Discussion continued. e. Matters which a Planning Commissioner may wish to place on a agenda for action and staff report - none. f. Project status - none. g. Requests for excused absences - Commissioner Henn asked to excused from the next meeting. ADJOURNMENT: 11:30 p.m. JADJOURNMENT ROBERT HAWKINS, SECRETARY CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION http://www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/2006/mnl0-05-06.htm 10/01/2007 �W CITY OF `c; FO _ �; September 8, 2006 Jay BYREGISTERED MAIL.; Ei-bridgeport LLC 9952 Santa Monica Boulevard #2 Beverly Hills, CA 90212 SUBJECT: Second Notice of Code Violation at 2312 Newport Boulevard (dock) Dear Property Owner: You were previously informed of certain conditions at the above property under your control, which were in violation of the Uniform Administrative Code. The Building Department does not have any record of you correcting all of those conditions: partial re -deck of dock (approximately 384 sq. ft.) We are counting on your cooperation to make the corrections you were informed of no later than September 29, 2006. If the corrections are not completed within the time specified, I will have no other alternative but to refer the matter to the City Attorney. It is worth noting that violations of the Municipal Code are misdemeanors. Once the violation(s) have been corrected, please call the undersigned between the hours listed below to schedule an inspection of the property. If you have any questions about this matter, please contact the undersigned Senior Building Inspector directly at (949) 644-3268 between the hours of 7:00 to 8:00 A.M. and 3:30 to 4:30 P.M. or by writing to the above address. Very truly yours, BUILDING DEPARTMENT , Jay Elbettar, P.E., C.B.O., Director By: ��. Paul Sobek, Senior Building Inspector 3300 Newport Boulevard • Post Office Box 1768 • Newport Beach, California 92658-8915 Telephone: (949) 644-3275 • Fax: (949) 644-3250 •Website: www.newport-beach.ca.us/building e-mail: cnb_blg@city.newport-beach.ca.us April 5, 2005 Donna Larson, Property Manager ETCO Investment, LLC 3400 Via Oporto, Suite 104 Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: 2122 Newport Blvd. - Multiple Berthing Action Plan Permit Number HC2004-056 Dear Ms. Larson: I am in receipt of your letter dated March 30, 2005, regarding the issue of multiple berthing occurring at the above subject property with two of your tenants. Due to the nature of their businesses, your correspondence states that South Coast Shipyard and Petros Marine Services need to continue multiple berthing. It is our understanding that vessels will be multiple berthed only during the business hours of 7.00 AM to 6:00 PM. In the event of a vessel fire in the harbor, it is imperative to remove exposed vessels immediately. Employees shall be trained to respond without delay and take appropriate measures. After business hours, all vessels shall be moored in a manner such that they are readily removed in an emergency without the necessity of moving other boats. This action plan is approved and required to be implemented immediately. Please contact Nadine Morris at (949) 644-3105 if you have any questions. Thank you for your cooperation. We look forward to maintaining a fire safe harbor in Newport Beach. Sincerely, Timothy Riley Fire Chief ETCO INVESTMENT, LLC 3400 Via Oporto #104 Newport Beach, C'.92663 (949) 633 2676 March 30, 2005 Nadine Norris Newport Beach Fire Department CtTYOF NEWPORT BEACH 3300 Newport Btvd. Newport Beach. CA 92658 vvuuI vvaaa v�a}�ya�u File CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 829 Harbor island Drive, Newport Beach, CA 92659 949-644-3034/Fax 949-723-0589 Fidelity National Title Co. Fax # 949-477-3600 Re: Escrow #623834-W Commercial Pier Permit #120-2122 2300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Dear Sirs: During inspection of the pier for the Harbor Permit transfer, we found that it does not meet City Standards. The buyer's, Etco Investments, LLC, have submitted a letter of intention stating that they will be reconstructing the pier within the next year. We will transfer the pier permit at this time and the buyer will keep us informed of when the work is complete. Sincerely, P Lorrie Arcese Harbor Resources Division NEWPORT BEACH FIRE DEPARTMENT November0- Donna Larson ETCO Investment, LLC 3400 Via Oporto, Suite 104 Newport Beach, CA 92663-6302 Subject: 2122 Newport Blvd. - Multiple Berthing Action Plan Permit Number HC2004-056 Dear Ms. Larson: I am in receipt of your letter dated October 27, 2004, regarding the issue of multiple berthing occurring at the above subject location. Your correspondence states that multiple berthing will be discontinued at the 2122 Newport Blvd. docks. We appreciate your concern for the safety of the harbor and the decision to change your business practice to comply with the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA 303). This action plan submitted is approved and required to be implemented by January 30, 2005. The remaining violation noted on our notice dated September 22,2004, will be reinspected this week for compliance. Please contact Nadine Morris at (949) 644-3105 if you have any questions. Thank you for your cooperation. We look forward to achieving a fire safe harbor in Newport Beach. Sincerely, :4 ITI-rAnot y Riley Fire Chief ETCO INVESTMENT, LLC 3400 Via Oporto Newport Beach, CA. 92663 (949) 663 2675 2- CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 11/08/2004 FINAL LETTER - COMPLETE QJ ZG�jzz HARBOR RESOURCES - 829 Harbor Island Dr., Newport Beach, CA 92660 Tom Rossmiller - 949-644-3041 / Chris Miller - 949-644-3043 FIRE DEPARTMENT - P.O. Box 1768, Newport Beach, CA 92658-8915 Nadine Morris - 949-644-3105 ETCO INVESTMENT, LLC ATTN: DONNA LARSON 3400 VIA OPORTO, STE 104 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 Dear Commercial Pier Permittee, Permit number: HC2004-056 Location : 2122 NEWPORT BLVD Status: CLOSED This is an acknowledgement letter stating that you have successfully corrected the violations previously noted in the City report that was sent to you earlier this year. Your docks have met the minimum standards as set by The City of Newport Beach Municipal Code. Your actions will help reduce the potential for fire related injury and property damage in Newport Harbor. Please remember that it will be your responsibility to ensure that your docks maintain this level of safety in the years to come. The Harbor Resources and Fire Departments will be conducting routine inspections of your property in the future. Thank you for your compliance. Please feel free to give us a call if you should have any additional questions. CHRIS MILLER - HARBOR RESOURCES SUPERVISOR NADINE MORRIS - FIRE DEPARTMENT INSPECTOR Pagel of 2 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 11/08/2004 FINAL LETTER -COMPLETE HARBOR RESOURCES - 829 Harbor Island Dr., Newport Beach, CA 92660 Tom Rossmiller - 949-644-3041 / Chris Miller - 949-644-3043 FIRE DEPARTMENT - P.O. Box 1768, Newport Beach, CA 92658-8915 Nadine Morris - 949-644-3105 ETCO INVESTMENT, LLC Permit number: HC2004-056 ATTN: DONNA LARSON Location : 2122 NEWPORT BLVD 3400 VIA OPORTO, STE 104 Status: CLOSED NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 rION DATE COMMENTS Berthing 09/08/2004 All boats shall be readily removed in an emergency without the necessity of moving other boats. At the time of the inspection, several multiple berthing and rafting violations noted. NFPA 303 Chapter 5 Section 5.1.1 11/01/2004 Action Plan Approved. Implementation by January 30, 2005. CHRIS MILLER - HARBOR RESOURCES SUPERVISOR NADINE MORRIS - FIRE DEPARTMENT INSPECTOR Page 2 of 2 02/24/2004 17:21 FAX 714 379 9223 ETCO 2 001/001 ............ 540 Westminster Mall Westminster, CA 92683 714-379-3279 714-379-9223 (Fax) To: City of Newport Beach Harbor Resource Division Fax: 949-723-0589 Phone: Attn: Chris Miller FORWARDING VIA: © FAX From: Steve Schapel, Director of Land Development Pages: 1 Date: 2/24/2004 Ref: South Coast Shipyard & Design Center © MAIL. © EMAIL. As you may know we are attempting to close escrow and transfer the pier permit at 2300 Newport Blvd., known as South Coast Shipyard & Design Center. I understand that your office has completed your inspection and have found numerous deficiencies. Please be aware that we are in the process of obtaining approvals from the City Planning Department to redevelop the site, including repair/replacing the seawalls, slips, guide piles and limited dredging. We anticipate that this enti#Iement/permit process will require about 12 months. Please consider the transfer of the pier permit at this time in lieu of the required repairs. Please call if you have any questions or require any additional information. MSWord/Fax TransmittaWinal Doc HARBOR PERMIT TRANSFER APPLICATION Date of Applicaton: 2 lZ/p¢ Permit Number: Property Address: ZNew, e. *ryr a L-j Buyer's Names: T L4V.-iy T5 L Billing Address: Telephone No.: Buyer's Signatures: ;_;,q - CSC 495 r-M i s ST4=, C A Q.Z a S 3 Seller's Names: S©u-tH Seller's Signatures: , a n 1)j Joint Owner Signature: CAsr 5 N% Cli� u-tV, Escrow Company: eL. oN Address 1 c�© © �. 'STleE-twT" #` 3/coNew atzr 9,E7Jc /-' Escrow Number: - y V Fax #: ¢q.- Closing Date (Estimate): fnM©c�-- Inspection Date: Reinspection Date: Fee Amount: 043 S- Date Paid: Ch ck Number: Application Complete: - j,2- a Harbor Resources SignaturefDate Special Conditions: This permit is revocable by the City Council in accordance with Title 17 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. INSPECTION FORM Harbor Resources Department Date: �' ` 7/0 Inspection Requested By: Inspector: Don Duffy Pier Address: Pier Transfer GFI Present Yes Need None Needed Anti -Siphon / Backflow Present Other Comments Eelgrass Yes No Present Pump Out Pier Location Yes No Operational Recommended Action Encroachmenet Address of Complaining Party Boat Description CIF Number Location on Dock Comments / Observations Other Request Reinspection Yes Need n C1 MEMORANDUM ETCO HOMES 2300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA C&A Project No. 6190.00 May 5, 2003 A. Purpose of the Report Nz¢iA fw 'eo waN 4M wh 1. The purpose is to evaluate the existing seawall for use in the development of the property. B. Procedures utilized to prepare this Report. 1. A visual inspection of the existing seawall was conducted on March 17, 2004 while the tide was between —0.3 ft and —1.0 ft. Photos were taken of some of the features of the seawall and selected prints are included in this Report. We found a Plaque on the site indicating that the "South Coast Boat Yard" was established in 1933. 2. The elevation of the bottom of the concrete sheet pile wall was investigated on April 13, 2004. A water jet probe was utilized to locate the bottom of the. sheet piles. This test was conducted to confirm seawall penetration into the bay mud. 3. The Boat Launch dock area was probed to determine if the bottom of the dock area is composed of bay mud or a base concrete slab. 4. A recent Topographic Plan Map (dated 10/23/03 and augmented 11/17/03) was reviewed which indicates that the elevation of the top of the concrete seawall varies from +6.90 to +7.36 (MLLW datum). 5. A recent Dredging Plan (dated 3/1.6/04) was reviewed which includes elevations of the mudline from the seawall to a.pierhead line 50 feet from the seawall. 6. Land side tie backs and dead men were not unearthed or examined. The decision to exclude the tie backs and dead men investigation was based on the age of the wall and the belief that new supplemental tie backs would be required regardless of the results of any tie back investigation. 7. The "Geotechnical and Seismic Input for Environmental Impact Report, South Coast Shipyard and Design Center, 2300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California" dated August 19, 2002, J.N. 174-00 by PETRA Geotechnical, Inc., was reviewed. C. Observations The conditions of the concrete panels and cap are generally good. Although the age of the wall is unknown, it is very much like other seawalls in the Newport Harbor. The plaque indicating the 1933 date for establishing the South Coast Boat Yard may be relevant to the date the seawall was originally constructed. 2. The conditions of the Marine Launching Ramp are poor and we established that there is no concrete slab supporting the rails, which are visible under low tide conditions and submerged under higher tide conditions. 3. The conditions of the steel sheet pile seawall each side of the 30 ft by 145 ft basin extension of Newport Bay southwest from the concrete seawall is very corroded and the concrete cap is cracked and spalled. This wall is in an extremely deteriorated condition. 4. The elevation of the bottom of the existing concrete seawall is very shallow (approximately —9.0 MLLW). The elevation of the mudline at the seawall varies between —0.04 and —4.43, leaving an embedment of the seawall varying from 8.96 ft to 4.57 ft. with an average of 6.51 ft. and an exposed height of 9.49 ft. Generally, the upper few feet of mudline provides poor resistance to movement and support of the seawall. 5. The Topographic Survey indicates that the existing seawall is outside the Property Line for approximately 40 ft and inside the Property Line for the remainder (approximately 437 ft). 6. The Dredging Plan indicates that the mudline slopes downward from the existing seawall at approximately 2 inches per foot to the Pierhead Line 50 feet from the seawall (slope is approximately 9.5 degrees) D. Assessment: 1. Based on the existing wall embedment, it is obvious that the wall was designed prior to the existence of seismic design standards. Preliminary calculations indicate that two elements of design were not included when the seawall was designed. (a) Seismic Loads (b) Sloping mudline in front of the wall indicates a Safety Factor for toe failure of less than 1.0. As currently designed, the wall is not stable for both service load and seismic load. 2. There are possible solutions to provide a seawall which will serve the purpose and meet the current code. (a) Retrofit the existing seawall by providing additional construction to resist the seismic load and to provide support for the embedded part of the existing concrete sheet piles. (b) Construct a new concrete sheet pile seawall on the landside of the existing seawall and abandon the existing wall in -place. (c) Construct a new concrete sheet pile seawall on the waterside of the existing seawall and abandon the existing wall in -place. A concept sketches representing items (a) and (b) above, are attached. 3. All solutions will require additional Geotechnical work to confirm the strength of the soil on the water side of the seawall. The stability of any seawall is very sensitive to the waterside soil conditions. 4. The appearance of a new or retrofitted seawall is also a consideration for both the design and cost of a seawall. Some of the options include abandoning the existing wall on the outside of a potential new wall. Although there may be benefits to this approach, aesthetics may dictate this wall to be removed, thus impacting the cost. E. Conclusions and Recommendations • Based on our evaluation, the seawall must be either retrofitted, or replaced. Based on the retrofit options assessed, we believe the retrofit approach will be extremely expensive, and still have a design life limited by the life of the concrete seawall sheets, which could have no more than a 25 year remaining useful life. 2. We recommend a full replacement of the seawall which reflects the current technology for seawall construction and seismic design restraint; including high strength prestressed concrete sheet piling, a poured -in -place reinforced concrete cap, and steel tie backs encased in plastic pipe and then grouted. The tie backs would be anchored to concrete dead men approximately 30ft behind the wall. New seawalls can range in cost from $2,500 to $3,500 per foot, turn -key, depending on site conditions and project complexity. __. - --- _-__..._ - 3. Replacement of the existing walls will be a challenge, since both environmental and structural logistic concerns are involved. We are available to discuss the various options for this work at a later date. F: Further Action, if desired 1. If desired, we could transmit the various repair and replacement options to several waterfront contractors, and obtain their opinions of construction cost. This could provide further comparison of the repair vs. replacement options. If this is desired, please inform us and we would proceed accordingly. If you have any questions about this assessment of the seawalls, please do not hesitate to call. Thank you. Sincerely, A�-- - Randy H. Mason, PE President Arc/rhm E- d �� a` Y .1 r 9 1 4 —y 'ir' .J"r-C.. ,y 11 — I 11 I . . - - .. - ., - " .1 g s r fir. rs n.., ` S r '`*.;iC-i._o-r, Y.k.„ 'a �•4._ °j'z is -a , 3 ' +' x f �'S '+z a f ; ` �_ - i R,% ` t. Q :.+ :� t T j t d q* 2> Y a..,.Y Q ` z j` r.�11 St i c" ; �i Lx r •f.�zr a 0 y ; w,z,-- ,% y^ .r!}r,,,,,,. -. a"! 4�. � e,T, - i r a *.rz a y i t 'S" i 'T s :�'• aasw- Y" r a T i .. 1 r ,�'�t 4 art s , ro a r m y E• r ! Y -fir r'� 'a h" '+Rt § I ` or x e ay c s i{yyy x k I� d is ` a Y s iI. p s ri zi+ fix ° a .s r+ a IF .v' 'c x Tom•A x �„ t i d k ..Y • . • 'c �� i,w .y. ,re ?' ,yes X 'f'i`•4 ^� ,+ ; , ,� .,a-,i f ;,i,' - kf 6 . 1.' ¢ A � � i � {$_'� r A rig . �� s 'p f�. a r a -y"`y _ _ s¢, ,,,. E �t� '�`', k.t,r 7 t- Ya i 5 r= d pfy`:f- AF I wf d; .. ; x Jt f `�= e -,i ra +t iy; ,l # �'� a si b n` '`_``',,t'•t- ++y iR9"r„•i i �'t.}p .� .. it nysf s> R ,r,. r 6 ,- & & � ,I A 3 4 �i Y ��R R d Ail tji 3 se � 'ri 4i Tx '1 9 - A r, „!y t F x .ae.✓"'= --`� '�'� <, b u a�,. .,e `?' t�♦i ij e^ a l ,� r �' 77 t A ii k :. w - x. ? #t /,t: ', ¢r ,'�. t I ' y f Ar 1$ ' i qy'���. 'g x : r'y.. i'k + 'r "+ y xs ::f s ... s z -.' ¢ k.: a y r .� w+ } �.! I +d ; - s ¢ ,'s'.#�¢g`�"' k --V� VA sib . i i a9 ip {r, it f �¢f } . s • .:.. a• °Lv �vi�,1.,R6 r,.--• — -s sr �i i � 3.- .i-' .d� �� a;;C''t �r f: � s ; T�`C ��F .te,, - s- `--'� •�x,.a q. ^i,. o i R 4 '$ ; h,++a 'kit' i A �s, i .. j- x w , i a R " i # F: —,, ; i �' s s � rsi $ r s+ , �'r{ , � 'o . 'i'•• h:,xf.e� z9 �q.x � �' £ $ Aa rr » $�' � y'� . N " 4 �.g i� #" :.$. '' � . xa , �L a; 3 �x7 e y+i? -�tj5•y' E-.R �{7,, a " ► A i F l , •'i,- ,� I-- i� v r� � d Y - W i * '�- _� i-. c c r'2 .� ' .`' 3` x 4,1 '^ � -+ - •A'( '� ift'k. � r X t ,..a Ya a x #8 S f y .f r •T 5: q,I e.. .4 ,,. i i4 "3 cj {-� --,, ¢ y ,' 4 n`f ` 5 ?;S rM gfk aL p : 4 y�l r. g f.. •eLirlvr- , \�k s r= 3 # .s v}i a` s e.:,• t�fit:'ipJ s x N . !! f x t ts5g�' w' • ayi-. 3R� Y �+�.+ S 7 d l 13.Y' i R✓ .fi ; Z$„�0! 3 Yf ac, i F� ,i gy i - f i . Ar .r.I---< Tf t " ur '.� cs J. •', 0 NNa 3 - F :f� SYaix'. ai} �-e j; k'r "'. ' $ Sy } 4 S* {t r A ° �'� 3 ey pl x -t'^ i Rt �{"• p Ty '1 k 5 .. 3'-y 15 R f #` L �' � alit �.. r s 1 �� fl ti jf'l 'R�b i �� b �i: I I'll-5,� h? ' ,, Y �.y d LL ff a i' i gg� �jriqg, m . s , i F Yjjj�iiT' .,4 d N�Tjf-fy $ & 'tC 3 f A Fj Rvk.4i% `yr �,y g� yr wags' �� °r a11 nx �_ ) d r y4t'�f a - 4 -- 7 %,��r""�,+,l� .-tf� ' S r 3 p§� _ip-z "'fig{ s�n.£Y�- , d ' ` ,gyp . s " "- d — , 7 y .E`4 T, - , X, ; , r ' s a ;r r rnisx 3 `' ':.t z" k ' r rz € q7' iT r $ Nn'' tT} .'` y .l F , }- ' r f 1.Xzu ? LV - L.t ;r y �' `�Ar ,ryr ° � t 't's > � , fi_5 �� �, f : q 3 �t t a ;, - ,3d 7A , p i tab ti ra t °z R 1. . t r . i �a ' ' si • r t er tl, ' 1 i" ac a � t {a 9 - $ i3 , k^ fi e r r '�, ti `ate r s+rvP 4y'K,`� ¢ y g. Y A 3 ' ,zap, b,� wa� d �E �. 4 e� '' ,11 r ' j . �i s'i Efil i x i 3 r i s'E 1 Y t y sty s �` .. k 4 as - - I v -, --,� '` c 11, Y �e ;rr d i 't $t g4 k X k f` ,fir. R 3 ,y q a { , a I ¢ G >x �5 V¢ 3 $f�. e ki . 4 i Y..+b3. �5" , .' q\ F � ; y)� < z ry s 3 A a 3 ,, Is x .. 4 �,� RAT ���` �;li f •_., •f �H ti J- P e� a M' Y Is 1og £ a 1zo rP T r t''t-Y .: i Iry ,-i ,��'"�'�'.�U $�.v`. y'L• i, � Zia'"iv r d _ f t Jos ,� jWas\ Y-1 - ��«���\� - !� - � ~� d \ ƒ CLIENT— f-TCo 140mes, JOB NO. 9 0, 0 0' PROJECT 2 300 A,1611 e 11 4 f?1 vd SHEET - f - OF CALCULATIONSFOR — 5e., A. MADE By A � c DATE -ff—'O' CASH &ASSOCIATES AleL. 7,-e 64a;, (2 lola, /9" t 9.0 692F 7 A I L- I -.'T Y P I C AL SEC T/6 N/ / if = )0"o, CHECKED BY DATE - A&w CO 'A c avt 4. e2.rek (R' 12,4.c- F - CLIENT E�Lo f-ir%Mi=s CA JOB NO. PROJECT 61 vd . SHEET — i OF CALCULATIONS FOR Sea 4.11 a. l i MADE BY t2 DATE ¢ l:l' CASH & ASSOCIATES CHECKED BY DATE_ A&w lva11 ex�en,��" .Mew �r� tk� � Err,�e� r•r �%.�, l2'a.c, �7.0 (1j I: I �V CsKGrC�! C.c4�J j A&.W v� GrG S -e r--- t 4.0 t ?Y P I C A L 58C T I N/ /"= Jac NGw cl,nC.—I-e (iUAhv, awti. I -CAI CASH E ASSOCIATES CLIENT E T C Lj l-I Ott r. s JOB NO. Cv 1 9 0, o v PROJECT__ 2 300 tlGwell ✓d SHEET_ rf� OF CALCULATIONS FOR JGa !.t, a 1 MADE BY l� t C GATElf-4 CHECKED BY DATE_„ 1gew Sri 6wa.4evE Z}r. &L", (2'P,c. 7,a AL r t 9.o U I I 1 i Owe AIL ` J - 34, 0 7Y PICAL 56C T14 t+.t a, m Ndw Co A -c rea-e t ua. Mud 1;tkf no t,\lt¢3f3 CLIENT �D ,i/'� 4' i JOB NO. PROJECT Gn2D 6 �/Gt�(le✓� t�jly�i. SHEET .SrZ OF CALCULATIONS FOR SeaGva r' MADE BY DATE CASH & ASSOCIATES CHECKED BY DATE_.__ C6r,e, Pole 9, 7 i L JK4c l& Sle-cl Wc1olfKe t7 AT -11aGk (;e !a4k 1 7 t I I I' TA I v A4LLUc . a 4- 0G eaGrr. � "JE - 7, o #4 r; CASH & ASSOCIATES CLIENT— Z T(o N Otis r t JOB NO. PROJECT- 'L D G Alf w o * 6IV41 SHEET 514 3 OF CALCULATIONS FOR Sc`4 G,G J1 MADE BY Aa4 DATE4'k CHECKED BY DATE A _ � _ 1 c V-e.d-r c er- (" , S u 4 ;• v At T�bw� �� _ fa o, C- ke —e �e L a-(7 CLIENT TKO f-� AA JOB NO.Ca! 9 0 - rs 6 PROJECT 2 7C a %4,�� �� �✓ �v d. SHEET S 14 r 4' OF CALCULATIONS FOR Spa` �"a 1 MADE BY A %ZC DATE 4/'O CASH & ASSOCIATES lCHECKED BY DATE— _ l�ew ,�'a. wall ¢- -�S sack. -r 'J ,4 1 L— K Z/ n _ ! .. ¢ -v I' l (o - Dper pdze i J 1 3 lryl C 16 v•c. i� e) February 8, 2002 William E. Blurock South Coast Shipyard and Design Center 2300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Re: City of Newport Beach Planning Application for South Coast Shipyard and Design Center Dear Mr. Blurock, This letter is in response to the letter sent to you by Todd Weber from the City of Newport Beach on December 14, 2001 regarding the above referenced project. More specifically this letter addresses the paragraph about the marina. As of this date the marina portion of the project is in the planning stages. The configuration proposed has not yet been engineered therefore we are unable to determine at this point the exact number, location and size of the piling. To give you a little history on the project, the majority of the existing piling are "home-made" and were cast in the installation contractor's yard. Many are cracked and not prestressed. It is improbable that any of the existing piling can be reused or moved to other locations; they just would not calc out. There are now codes requiring engineering calculations for marina guide piles. The codes require prestressed piles designed by a registered engineer and cast in a yard that has a certified quality control program. A registered engineer using standards set by the State of California Department of Boating and Waterways and the City of Newport Beach must calculate the size, number, embedment, and placement of the piles. The calculations are based on the number and size of the boats to be berthed, water depth, and wind load. We have found that in general when we go to replace piling based on today's standards, there are more of them required and they are bigger in diameter. For example, on Lido Peninsula long fingers which had only 2 -12" steel piles for many years' required 6 to 8 -18" octagonal concrete piles to meet current codes. This is an extreme example but you can see the point. The final configuration of the marina will depend on amongst other things the market conditions and the codes in existence at the time the marina is built. Our guess is that there will probably be around 60 new piling replacing all of the existing piles and that they will probably be larger in diameter. Again, the engineering will be done so as to comply with current code at the time of construction. As an aside, the old piling will be disposed of by taking then to a recycler to be crushed into road base. If you have any questions, please fell free to have Mr. Weber contact us directly. Sincerely, Lisa E. Miller President PO CITY OF NEWPORT ��. P.O. Box 1768, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658-8915 April 20, 2001. South Coast Shipyard and Designer Center 2300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Re: Revision to Existing Floating Docks and Bulkheads 2300 Newport Blvd., Newport Beach Dear Sirs: The City of Newport Beach has issued an Approval.in Concept for a revision to the existing docks and bulkhead, at the above location on March 30, 2001. The purpose of this letter is to advise the applicant that the City strongly supports the work that is proposed. This marina is very old and renovation to the docks, particularly in sections adjacent to the shipyard, has been long overdue. The proposed changes in the bulkhead configuration we perceive will do a number of things. It will eliminate debris traps that have existed for a number of years because of the outdated inlets that were designed in the bulkhead years ago. It will create a more even tidal flow through the docks that will assist in removing trapped debris in and around the docks. All this should assist the City in improving the aesthetics of the bay water and water quality where there is little tidal exchange. Should you have any questions please do not hesitate to call me at 949-644-3041. Sincerely, Tony Melum, Director Division of Harbor Resources 3300 Newport- Boulevard, e�yport Beach - b�e#iitSf7 APPROVAL 1N CONCEPT CITY OF NE4VFORT BEAD k=URBOR RESOURCES DIViSIL 70 Newport Fier APPROVAL IN CONCEPT BY THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH as recuired for pe,=u application to the South Coast Rea onal Commission pursuant to Corm- a Ad=Li i s u a uve Code, Sections 13210 and 13211. General Description of Proposed Development- Property Address: Legal Description: C Y Harbor Pe-=-iit Number: /Z O — Z/ :71 Applicant A-oplicant's Mailing Address: Applicant's Telephone Number: i have reviewed, the plans for the foregoing developme_,it incluc.ing: 1. The general site plan, including any reads and public access to the shcreli-ie_ 2. T;ne grading plan, if any. 3. The general uses and intensity of use proposed .for each part of the area covered in the application. And arid T ev cc mply with `fie 1-1ent adopted Newport Beach General Pram, Zone Ord -�ar_ce. Subdivision OrciLmance aid any applicable specific or precise plans or Ti at 3 Var'_Ce Of e:cer✓t clri as been ad and _mil. A copy of any variance, e xcepnon, -condi-tional use permit or other issued pe---riit is Ltwched together witit all conditions of approval and all approved plans irclading approved tentative tract maps. On the basis of this Ending, these plans are approved ir. concept and said approval has been written upon said'plans, signed and dated. Should Newport Beach adopt an ordinance deleting, amending or adding to t'ne Zor,.ing Ordinance or other regulations in any manner that would affect the use of t-e prope_Tty or the design of a project located thereon, this approval in concept shall become nut. and void as of the effe--tive daze of this said ordinance. In accordance with the California Environmental. Quality Act or 1970, and state and kcal guidelines adopted thereunder, this development: Has been determined to be ministerial or categorically exempt. X Has received a final Exemption Declaration or final Negative Declaration (copy 1 attached). Has received a Final Environmental Impact Report (copy attached). All discretionary approvals leg illy required of Newport Beach prior to issuance of a building permit have been given and are final. The development is not subject to rejection in principal by Newport Beach unless a substantial change in it is proposed. This concept approval in no way ex —cases the applicant from complying with all applicable policies, ordinances, codes and reguia ions of Newport Beach. Ton? ylelum, Division Director By: Sign' re ... Printed name and. title of signer Dates: c3' D Attacl-=ents: /z0-Z/"E�z Cx1SNA6 ms /'ROPos� D PiG-"� U u� ��isriNc a o row �20POSED 4NC�/O� P/L /1 r J Ff O I LE i` = 40' i i ca t SOIWDINGS ARE EXPRESSZ=D IN FEET AND DENOTE ELEVATIONS BASED ON MER1J LOWER LOW WATER. NE WROR T HARBOR C I TY OF NEWPORT BEACH CITY OF i NEWPORT HEROi � r�T o I�.F�1D ju\ ` BRr Pp OCEAN PIER ` 1 uEST � VICINITY MRF �mt EFSi' >ofazT DRY, ci-lra;�'CR JFM r21i11 CINC :)fR LIK PRQ.CC1 uk PIER LK SLUa(A➢ 11K ++➢ AkChCY STStCx — lxIS11+L IUIX}{Rp i� SC RCKIYCO i 1➢16C GIPEACL➢AD 1'.• Will 1r BIA DEAD IU AC ACE • r / l}tali}.`-u O.a�IL _ •l�=ram - ` 1 �� !4!59s5��V r ii1�7C4 U1 Drc i EElPrASS_IN_SPECTION NO EEL GRASS WITH1NtF-GF- RNgCT EEL GRASS IN THE PROJE�'��%`--_ ElCTA South Coast iBoatyard Design Center a % r 4 13/24/05 SIG TURE HARBOR RESOURCES DIV.. ' �� zy PE MIT # CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH /DATd No C-elOjraSS- ne,-i,-4c ied sh8ki 12:0S �G U� p''^ _5 ,hRM� So n Cna h,: � a �l — lk-S,Uri •�+t OS -1 U-r-s_ � �!�rc�..,z �3cd hi ..e,_; �'iv� . y j t INSPECTION FORM Harbor Resources Department Date: 3 L -2 �� 3 Inspection Requested By: Ghr l Inspector: Don Duffy Pier Address: j ry Mect C-Yeb (� kch��� a CA i ctbck-'NmcDr. Pier Transfer Yes- No GFI Present Anti -Siphon / Backflow Present Other Comments Eelgrass Yes No Present P40 Pump Out Pier Location Yes No Operational Recommended Action Encroachmenet Address of Complaining Party Boat Description CIF Number Location on Dock Comments / Observations Other Request j20/z� v�/ 073o-ZOOI CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH FIRE MARINE DEPARTMENT Ih Zppt ..00Z-r,1 HARBOR PERMIT APPLICATION (Please print all information) South Coast Shipyard & Design Center= (949) 673-0300 1. Applicant (Property Owner) Address Telephone 2300 Newport Blvd., Newport Beach, CA 92663 /-7-1n.-;-7/Z7-- 2. Project Address (street Address) Harbor Permit Number 3. New Construction ______ Revision X Maintenance Dredging 4. Fee $ 7 9.0 0 Check No. 3336 Date 3/ 2 7/ 01 Remove and replace floating docks in a modified configuration. 5. Brief Description of Proposed Work: Remove and replace severe!y failing ortion of bulkhead in a modified configuration. Repair balance of seawall. 8. Submit 8 1/2" x 11" Drawings (3), Include: 1). Location and dimension of proposed structure including piles and location of existing structures. on adjacent properties. 2). Location of bulkhead, pierhead and project lines. 3). Location of property lines. 4). Location of channel markers within 200 feet. 5). Lot sixes and lot numbers, if available. 6). Existing ground profile beneath proposed structure. 7). Elevation of top and bottom of bulkheads and piles with respect to M.L.L.W, 8). Area and profile of any proposed dredging with elevations showing depths with respect of M.L.L.W. 9). Any special conditions affecting the construction or affecting boating operations. 10).Complete all information required in information block, bottom of sheet. Note that the OWNER. of the property Is the applicant. 11).Drawing size shall be 8 - 1/2" x 11 ". 12).Scals shall be adequate to clearly show the above information. 13).Existing structures shall be shown in light dashes. New work shall be shown in heavy solid lines. 7. Owner-$ulider Declaration must be completed (on reverse*e of this sheet) 8. Applicant's/Agent's Signature: d Date: 3 / 2 8 / 01 Joint Ponnittee Signature (if appiicabi : Date: 9. Work can begin once the City has received evidence of the following additional approvals and you have been notified to proceed. It you begin prior to the notice you will be in violation of the !Newport Beach Municipal Code and subject to penalties, 10. Your permit will not be final until we have conducted an on site inspection once construction is completed as per Municipal Code, Section 17.24, if we have not been contacted for a final inspection. OFFiC,E USE ONLY Approval In Concept. Date' Approval of the City of Newport Beach Council_ Date Approval of the Army Corps of Engineen3 Date I✓ Approval of the California Coastal Commission_ Date Approval of the City's Public Works Department. Date Approval of the City's Building, Department. Date Approval of County of Orange. pate ectrical and/or plumbing permit (Building Department) Date Issued. (Permit In stanaaped drawing) Date Site Inspection. (call 644-3W for appointment) Date .site Re -Inspection Date Conditions: I hereby affirm that I am exempt from the contractor's license law for the following reasons: (Sec. 7031d.5, Business and Professions Code), Any City or County which requires a permit to construct, alter, improve, demolish, or repair any structure, prior to its issuance, also requires the applicant for such permit to file a signed statement that he is licensed pursuant to the provision of the Contractors License Law (Chapter 9, commencing with Section 7000) of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code)'orthat he is exempt therefrom and the basis for the alleged exemption. Any violation of Section 7031.5 by any applicant for a permit subjects the applicant to a civil penalty for not more than five hundred dollars ($500). I, as owner of the property, or my employees with wages as their sole.compensation, will do the work, and the structure is not intended or offered for sale (Sec. 7044, Business and Professions* Code: The Contractor's License Law does not apply to an owner of property who builds or improves thereon, and who does such work himself or through his own employees, provided that such improvements are not intended or offered for sale. If, however, the building or improvement is sold within one year of completion, the owner -builder will have the burden of proving that he did not build or improve for the purpose of sale.) I, as owner of the property, am exclusively contracting with licensed contractors to construct the project (Sec. 7044, Business and Professions Code: The Contractor's License Law does not apply to an owner of property who builds or improves thereon, and who contracts for such projects who builds or improves thereon, and who contracts for such projects with a Contractor'(s) License pursuant to the Contractor's License Law). I am exempt under Sec. of Business and Professional Code for this reason: Owner's Signature:, XXXXXXXX Date: XXXXXXXX Contractor: Shellmaker Inc. Telephone: (949) 548-5359 Address: 875 B West 15th Street, Newport Beach, CA 92663-2701 License class A&B State Board No. 561484 City License No. 96002210 LICENSED CONTRACTOR'S DECLARATION I hereby affirm that I am licensed under provisions of Chapter 9 (commencing with Section 7000) of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code, and my license is in full force and effect. Contractor's Signature = Dater 3/28/01 Blurock Project., Site: The existing site located at 2300 Newport Blvd. in Newport Beach consists of approximately 485' of waterfront. There is a small marina located in front of the site and several office buildings, a shipyard, and two main parking areas on the landside. The shipyard (South Coast Shipyard) has recently secured space adjacent to the site and will be moving as this becomes resolved. Existing One possible alternative is to do nothing and leave the site as is. The problem with this alternative is that some of the bulkhead system is in imminent danger of failure. The major part destined for failure the part of the bulkhead that is steel. The steel sheets have corroded away and have moved outward. The other problem is that the part of the bulkhead that is concrete does not meet the City of Newport Beach's bulkhead height requirement of +9' MLLW and the coping shows signs of stress. There is no way of knowing the condition of the tieback system without digging them up but given their relative age is assumed that they do not have full integrity. Replace as is (with minor configuration change to alleviate encroachment) Given that there are structural problems with the bulkhead system at the site, the owner secured the services of a structural engineer, a geotechnical engineer, a coastal engineer, a biologist, and a marine contractor to explore options for the site. The majority of the concrete bulkhead panels appear to be in fairly good condition, the components in question are the coping and the anchor system. The tiebacks could be excavated and replaced with a new tieback and deadman system and the coping could be removed and replaced bringing it to the required +9' MLLW height. There is currently a potion of the existing concrete bulkhead, which encroaches bayward of the bulkhead line The plan is to remove that portion of the bulkhead and replace it behind the bulkhead line. With the absence of the shipyard, most of this work could be accomplished from land. The major problem lies where the bulkhead system jogs inland (the old marine railway areas). This part of the system consists of a failing steel bulkhead and a concrete system that does not penetrate adequately into the bay floor. These two narrow areas currently restrict tidal flow and create junk traps. Replacing these two bulkheads along the current alignment makes it nearly impossible to protect the existing buildings during constrution. Alternative #1 This alternative involves repairing the concrete part of the wall as outlined in the "Replace as is" option and modifying the configuration of the "old marine railway" areas. An alternative put forth by our experts calls for string lining the bulkhead across and thereby eliminating the junk traps. This construction would be a conventional concrete bulkhead tied back to a proper deadman system. This alternative allows us to best protect the buildings in place as well as cap any pollution caused by the shipyard which dates back to World War II. Alternative #3 This alternative again calls for repairing the concrete bulkhead as outlined in #1 but for a different modification for the configuration of the "old marine railway" areas. Rather than string line across the waterfront, this alternative would open up the waterway as shown in the attached drawing and thereby create more usable water area and better tidal flow. The areas in question now were designed for a marine ways (shipyard) type of activity and given that the shipyard will be moving are not the best use of the property. Across the large "old marine railway" area there is currently a timber bridge that connects one side of the property to the other. A safer and better alternative would be to bulkhead across the area to allow better ease of access as well as protect the buildings that now sit on the edges of this basically poorly supported area. Docks: All of these alternatives call for the removal and replacement of the marina. The current docks are quite old and are in questionable condition. Replacing them would allow us to bring them up to current Boating and Waterways standards. There is a slight configuration change proposed to allow for more efficient access to the marina. / � / / � �« � � . 2 + LA ? _kn c-, �/ ■ eD / CL / . � S ! �g � c "Ti &&& A,-k 7$ 77§ § Z 7 — % dr- f § < , — e O �f w - � 2� b\ PROJECT LINE PIER LINE — U,S, BULKHEAD LINE o' o' GRAPHIC SCALE F lI-'TIPJi; rini , NEWP❑RT 9 W \ EXIST. j TIMBER BRID13E South Coast Boatyard Design Center EEL GRASS INSPECTION Cl NO EEL GRASS WITHIN 15' OF PROJECT 0 EEL GRASS IN THE PROJECT AREA SIGNATUREPER—� MIT #""'''"_"�" 5d' ALTERNATIVE 2 TBLE CONSULTANTS, INC. PROJECT LINE PIER LINE U,S, BULKHEAD LINE Figure PROJECT LINE ----- \ PIER UNE —� U.S. BULKHEAD LINE — I I I i I • '� .` 395.00' HEAD LINE r South Coast Boatyard io I$ `y i2 Design Center 1 Newport Beach, California ALTERNATE GRAPHIC SCALE Thu, Feb 17,2000 U.S, BULKH GRAPHIC SCALE nnn irrr LINE Existing Conditions FBLE LTANTS, INC. AD LINE Figure PROJECT LINE PIER LINE — U.S, BULKHEAD LINE o01 GRAPHIC SCALE C.'T-'TIP,h: rini L - NEWP❑RT 39500, 42 30, � M2 i=1 I \ EXIST, TIHBER BRIDGE South Coast. Boatyard Design Center N 1 go 4? Nr46° 5d ALTERNATIVE 2 FOBLE SULTANTS, INC. PROJECT LINE PIER LINE U.S, BULKHEAD LINE Figure PROJECT LINE PROJECT LINE PIER LINE U.S. BULKHEAD LINE U.S. BULKHEAD LINE .,,^,.._ -. .`• __ 07 - _ INSTALL NEW COPING ANDANC NOR SYSTEM 10, PUBLIC ACCESS EASEMEN -_--.-.___ •�••� •"►.\_ �; r /' -..-. 10' PUBLIC ACCESS EASEMENT / EXISTING BULKHEAD INSTALL NEW COPING ANDANCHOR SYSTEM PROPOSED NEW BULKHEAD PROPOSED NEW BULKHEAD 1 EXISTING BULKHEAD TO BE REMOVED t (' EXISTING BULKHEAD TO BE REMOVEDAND NEW CONCRETE - bi i BULKHEAD CONSTRUCTED w i 1� / EXISTING BULKHEAD z ---`— ' INSTALL NEW COPING + AND ANCHOR SYSTEM EXISTING BUILDING II %A 41, / IV I i io South Coast o �$ & If 30"H 1' Boatyard i= Design Center Newport Beach, California GRAPHIC SCALE Thu, Feb 17, 2000 U,S. BULKH 01 �o GRAPHIC SCALE nnn irrr LINE Existing Conditions FBLE CONSULTANTS, INC. U LINE Figure Armand, Wes From: Armand, Wes Sent: Friday, October 06, 2000 1:33 PM To: Baltera, Ray Subject: 2300 Newport Blvd. Blerock Talked to Blurock today. Claims he has Williams electric signed to do work. He said he will turn in Building Department Permit Application ttoday... "wants to get things started" My concern is that he has started long before submitting application. I told him it would be best to have Willaims Electric and him meet with you so they are aware of all that needs to be done. Therefore, they will meet with you (us) Wednesday at 10:00. Armand, Wes From: Armand, Wes Iv Y Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2000 5:12 PM JJ To: Baltera, Ray Subject: RE: Blurock property 2300 Newport Blvd k I will contact him and set up a meet. I'll let you know the day. I am off Monday so I will try for Tuesday or Wednesday. Thanks -----Original Message ----- From: Baltera, Ray Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2000 4:23 PM To: Armand, Wes Subject: RE: Blurock property 2300 Newport Blvd WES I AM OUT UNTIL MONDAY I WOULD LIKE TO MEET WITH HIM ASAP TO DISCUSS THIS IN THE FIELD IF YOU SET IT UP ON MONDAY TUES OR WED I CAN MAKE IT From: Armand, Wes Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2000 10:11 AM To: Baltera, Ray Subject: Blurock property 2300 Newport Blvd Ray, Mr. Blurock called me last Friday. He claims he is moving on this issue as fast as he can. He also, said he went into the Building Department to inquire about getting a permit to do the work. Didn't get one yet. He's looking for a contractor, so he says. My feeling is he will try to get as much done by his own people without pulling a permit. He stated that some of his people have started on it. Also, he attempting to get Pete Stewart (South Coast Shipyard) to do a lot of this since he is Blurock's tenant. All this matters nothing to us. He was instructed to get a permit, which he hasn't done yet. He is doing some work there without a permit. And most important the safety) of those using the docks might still very well be in jeopady. So what should be our next move? He said that you and him have a history, and he has worked with you in the past. Do you want to give this guy a longer lease or should we start pulling tight on the choker now? Call me when you have a chance. Armand, Wes From: Armand, Wes Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2000 2:33 PM To: Baltera, Ray Subject: 2300 Newport Blvd Ray any thought what our next course of action should be regarding this issue? Armand, Wes From: Armand, Wes Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2000 10:11 AM To: Baltera, Ray Subject: Blurock property 2300 Newport Blvd Ray, Mr. Blurock called me last Friday. He claims he is moving on this issue as fast as he can. He also, said he went into the Building Department to inquire about getting a permit to do the work. Didn't get one yet. He's looking for a contractor, so he says. My feeling is he will try to get as much done by his own people without pulling a permit. He stated that some of his people have started on it. Also, he attempting to get Pete Stewart (South Coast Shipyard) to do a lot of this since he is Blurock's tenant. All this matters nothing to us. He was instructed to get a permit, which he hasn't done yet. He is doing some work there without a permit. And most important the safety of those using the docks might still very well be in jeopady. So what should be our next move? He said that you and him have a history, and he has worked with you in the past. Do you want to give this guy a longer lease or should we start pulling tight on the choker now? Call me when you have a chance. Armand, Wes From: Armand, Wes Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2000 9:58 AM To: Lockard, Dennis Subject: commercial docks at 2300 Newport Blvd. Dennis, the Harbor Resources Division is working on annually inspecting all commercial harbor facilities. As you know commercial docks, such as the one at 2300 Newport Blvd have fire suppression requirements. A team from one of the stations came out with me a few weeks ago and inspected the facility. A letter was sent out to the property owner notifying him of deficiency. Can you Fire Marshals Office insure compliance in this situation? We will direct all inquiries relating to meeting the Fire Code to you division. Thanks for your cooperation in this endeavor. lie P.O. PDX 1768, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658-8915 September 21, 2000 William. Blurock 2300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, Ca 92663 Dear Mr. Blurock: LN IED W -, The City of Newport Beach has conducted an inspection of the commercial docks bayward of your property along Newport Boulevard. The City's Harbor Resources Division, Building Department, and the Fire Department did the inspection. Also, the County Sheriff Harbor Department assisted. The condition of the docks violates the City Harbor Permit Policy H-1 section 4.H. Section 4.H "Repairs:The Permittee shall keep the structures in good repair at all times. Failure to repair, when written notice has been given by the Fire and Marine Department (Harbor Resources), shall be cause for the revocation of the permit." Section 17.24.090.A. City of Newport Beach Municipal Code, Revocation of Permit "Grounds for Revocation. Any Permit heretofore or hereafter granted for any structure or work in the waters of Newport Harbor or the Pacific Ocean may be revoked by the City Council upon any of the following grounds: #5 The work or structure has fallen into a state of disrepair." The condition of the electrical wiring, receptacles, and electrical boxes are in a condition of total disrepair and constitute an immediate danger to those who use these structures and have reached a point of a possible electrocution. The dock structurally has similar problems and many sections are extremely dangerous. The main problem is the poor condition of the decking and floatation. In addition, there are violations of the Fire Protection. Standard for Marinas and Boatyards. One section of the docks needs a fire hose cabinet. Any portions of a float more than 150- feet from fire apparatus access shall be provided with an approved wet standpipe system and a hose station (dock hose cabinet). Also there are many berthing violations of the Fire Code. Each boat shall be berthed so that a boat occupying the berth can be readily removed in an emergency without the necessity of moving other boats. The City of Newport Beach Harbor Resources Division is responsible for the enforcement of both the City Council Harbor Permit policies and Chapter 17 of the Municipal Code regarding harbor regulations. 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Bead Due to these imminent public safety issue, this letter will sere ence repairs at once. It is required to secure a Building De a e as notice to co for the necessaryg p rtment Maintenance Permit. repairs ep6'even (7) days from the date on this letter. electrical and structural rep must be completed within An from the date on this letter. this 15 with the Fire Code will be dete time frame to complete the work required ) working days with the applicable s rmined`by the City Fire Marshall's Office in to comply specified time f standards m the Uniform Buildin ffice con -for ame may result in the issuance of A g Code. Failure to meet the above revocation of the permit, and toProtect strative Citations, ultimate instructed to cut the power to the docks public safety, Southern California Edison will will be For fiu-therinformation in this matter, lease repairs to Ray Baltera, Senior Building ' p direct all questions re compliance to the Fire Code call theReChee(k or Ron ' gdmg electrical an For information regarding the PPlictoll for a maintenance permit to repair the structures, at 644-3106. To obtain Building Department. one goes to the counter at If you require additional information from the Harbor. . Resources Division, ca11644-3043. Sincerely, j 11WWK Wes Armand Harbor Inspector Cc: Tony Melum, Harbor Resources Marty Kasules, Harbor Master Pat Douglas, Orange Coup ty Ray Baltera, Building Sheriff Harbor patrol Department Steve Hook, BuildingDepartment Dennis Lockhard, Fire Marshall Russ Cheek, Deputy Fire Marshall Dan Ohl, Deputy City Attorney Pete Stewart, South Coast Shipyard PORA O �� C94- FO RN�JP P.O. BOX 1768, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658-8915 September 21, 2000 William. Blurock 2300 Newport. Blvd. Newport Beach, Ca 92663 Dear Mr. Blurock: [FAA MR[D Yi';'- ye 27 The City of Newport Beach has conducted an inspection of the commercial docks bayward of your property along Newport Boulevard. The City's Harbor Resources Division, Building Department, and the Fire Department did the inspection. Also, the County Sheriff Harbor Department assisted. The condition of the docks violates the City Harbor Permit Policy H-1 section 4.H. Section 4.H "Repairs:The Permittee shall keep the structures in good repair at all times. Failure to repair, when written notice has been given by the Fire and Marine Department (Harbor Resources), shall be cause for the revocation of the permit." Section 17.24.090.A. City of Newport Beach Municipal Code, Revocation of Permit "Grounds for Revocation. Any Permit heretofore or hereafter granted for any structure or work in the waters of Newport Harbor or the Pacific Ocean may be revoked by the City Council upon any of the following grounds: #5 The work or structure has fallen into a state of disrepair." The condition of the electrical wiring, receptacles, and electrical boxes are in a condition of total disrepair and constitute an immediate danger to those who use these structures and have reached a point of a possible electrocution. The dock structurally has similar problems and many sections are extremely dangerous. The main problem is the poor condition of the decking and floatation. In addition, there are violations of the Fire Protection. Standard for Marinas and Boatyards. One section of the docks needs a fire hose cabinet. Any portions of a float more than 150- feet from fire apparatus access shall be provided with an approved wet standpipe system and a hose station (dock hose cabinet). Also there are many berthing violations of the Fire Code. Each boat shall be berthed so that a boat occupying the berth can be readily removed in an emergency without the necessity of moving other boats. The City of Newport Beach Harbor Resources Division is responsible for the enforcement of both the City Council Harbor Permit policies and Chapter 17 of the Municipal Code regarding harbor regulations. 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach Due to these imminent public safety issues this letter will serve as notice to commence repairs at once. It is required to secure a Building Department Maintenance Permit for the necessary repairs witoeven (7) days from the date on this letter. All electrical and structural repairs must be completed within fifteen (15) working days from the date on this letter. The time frame to complete the work required to comply with the Fire Code will be determined by the City Fire Marshall's Office in conformity, with the applicable standards in the Uniform Building Code. Failure to meet the above specified time frame may result in the issuance of Administrative Citations, ultimate revocation of the permit, and to protect public safety, Southern California Edison will be instructed to cut the power to the docks. For further information in this matter, please direct all questions regarding electrical repairs to Ray Baltera, Senior Building Inspector (644-3261). For information regarding compliance to the Fire Code call either Russ Cheek or Ron Bryg at 644-3106. To obtain an application for a maintenance permit to repair the structures, one goes to the counter at the Building Department. If you require additional information from the Harbor Resources Division, call 644-3043. Sincerely, ji, , , 1. � 2 Wes Armand Harbor Inspector Cc: Tony Melum, Harbor Resources Marty Kasules, Harbor Master Pat Douglas, Orange County Sheriff Harbor Patrol Ray Baltera, Building Department Steve Hook, Building Department Dennis Lockhard, Fire Marshall Russ Cheek, Deputy Fire Marshall Dan Ohl, Deputy City Attorney Pete Stewart, South Coast Shipyard CITY' ' NEWPORT BEACH H-444RBOR APPLICATIOps�o T La.r 3eoch /Il�a'3.' `-o ram. - scP for .X 40 t 20 t 1! c+ aPic'- t7 PEI > CORoNR VICINITY S j<,E TC °t-� wssT JE7, r bra �cwRaa3T'. SA^i;, CAL iFOGLN/A a . Jtrry 1,►, , �? ' SoUr�df»gs 'ore e.<r�r�sssd !n f�efXond +.��nofe' . dep "A s b efo w ale-orr La rver Low L�Jo ¢ter. �srFoxr rscrnnr q i rouge of fld� cPPrvxrrrr�1�ly fc7 �C� Hord�or /rn�s (�4V qre cs-ob/r'shcd Div �h�s . s�cr�iorr or�'Ne��,orf 6cr�! NE wPo QT 6nY / r ail 1 -= TRACT °+ N4 e14 � 2 CU lu 7�Y Kw � 1 � 111111 � !� STe911k'i[mc�y ' P¢ BLOCK .223 o i Z I` I ' TRACT o Q N4 614 ? CUI�ST SHIPYARD ��::. SUU � p Q IS G 'I -- «�.�:,s - -- 2212 il`wport 9ouievard N E W Qo R T <y L v P. Newport Beach 8 223 1-9 CA., 6,?3 - b3od 77) Tv 'A 14:4 AIZ4,W, CD 5 CIO CS are sec'Apo" R _J7 71 14 -2D ,�71 f11� '242 1;;67-574�FO > 2 21Z -01-5 Z�61 IFIN 4 ERREDS :Z: NOTICE OF VIOLATION CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH No.,ij�.t� h - FIRE AND MARINE DEPARTMENT MARINE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT WARNING ONLY i CODE ENFORCEMENT PREVIOUSLY ADVISED 3300 NEWPORT BLVD. FINAL WARNING NEWPORT BEACH, CA. 92663 (949) 644-3043 Date -• Time An inspe tion of the premises located at7(f`� f �/j,l `' j i{�f ' in . the City of Newport Beach, revealed a violation(s) of the Newport BeachNfufiIicipal Code. Name of owner or business: Address if different: f/�J/J� NEWPORT BEACH MUNI. DESCRIPTION OF VIOLATION(S): CODE SEC. %f W ,p S' Jam: � �--'i �' 4'�� � �=--f�' L� •$I l'�" TO CORRECT THIS VIOLATION: i' THIS VIOLATION MUST BE CORRECTED BY . If the violation is not E- corrected b the date specified, an ADMINISTRATIVE CITATION will be issued and penalties will {. Y P F begin to accrue ($100.00, $200.00 AND $500.00) each day. Additional enforcement actions such as administrative abatement, civil penalties, revocation of permits, recordation of notice of violation, withholding of future municipal permits, criminal prosecution and/or civil injunction may be utilized to t correct this violation(s). In addition, a 10% late fee will be charged on any reinspectio_ n invoice not paid by _ the due date. A REINSPECTION WILL BE MADE ON OR AFTER THE CORRECTION DATE. IF THE CORRECTION(S) IS NOT COMPLETED AN ADMINISTRATIVE CITATION WILL BE ISSUED AND FEES WILL BEGIN TO ACCRUE. r I declare under penalty of perjury, under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and Correct. Executed on the fdate shown above. SIGNATURE OF ISSUI G'OO,FACER PRINT NAME OF ISSUING OFFICER ID# 41OLATIOPNCLEEARED DATE WHITE (Violation Copy) CANARY (Last Notice Copy) PINK (Hearing Copy) GOLDENROD (Officer Copy) NOTICE OF VIOLATION CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH NO.l FIRE AND MARINE DEPARTMENT' 4 t MARINE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT WARNING ONLY ] ' CODE ENFORCEMENT PREVIOUSLY ADVISED 3300 NEWPORT BLVD. �,- "` FINAL WARNING {' ] NEWPORT BEACH, CA. 92663 (949) 644-3043 Date 2 Time C 41, =i An inspection of t e premises located at £ �t xin the City of Newport Beach, revealed a'violation(s) of the'NeWport Beach Nfinicipal Code. Name of owner or business: . Address if different: NEWPORT BEACH MUNI. DESCRIPTION OF VIOLATION(S): CODE SEC. Jil t - TO CORRECT THIS VIOLATION: p- THIS VIOLATION MUST BE CORRECTED BY ' If the violation is not corrected by the date specified, an ADMINISTRATIVE CITATION will be issued and penalties will begin to accrue ($100.00, $200.00 AND $50000) each day. Additional enforcement actions such as administrative abatement, civil penalties, revocation of, permits; recordation of notice of violation, withholding of future municipal permits, criminal prosecution and/or civil.injunction may be utilized to correct this violation(s). In addition, a,10% late fee will be charged: on any reinspection invoice not paid by the due date. A'REINSPECTION WILL BE MADE ON OR AFTER THE CORRECTION DATE. IF THE CORRECTIONS) IS NOT COMPLETED AN ADMINISTRATIVE CITATION WILL BE ISSUED AND FEES WILL BEGIN TO ACCRUE. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on the.date shown above. F` SIGNA UBE OF ISS�Uf,IrrNG��,'/OgFICER PRINT NAME OF ISSUI/N�G OFFICER ID# VIOLATIOr4'CLEARED DATE WHITE (Violation Copy) CANARY (Last Copy) PINK (Hearing Copy) GOLDENROD (Officer Copy) NOTICE OF VIOLATION CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH No.; tit - FIRE AND MARINE DEPARTMENT MARINE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT WARNING ONLY ] CODE ENFORCEMENT PREVIOUSLY ADVISED 3300 NEWPORT BLVD. FINAL WARNING ] NEWPORT BEACH, CA. 92663 (949)644-3043 f' Date .s Time `,�`•;: An inspe tion of tire premises located at P F"; ' w i' ` =g= in -- the City of Newport Beach, revealed a violation(s) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Name of owner or business: Address if different: - s` NEWPORT BEACH MUNI. DESCRIPTION OF VIOLATION(S): CODE SEC. TO CORRECT THIS VIOLATION... " THIS VIOLATION MUST BE CORRECTED BYIf the violation is not K corrected by the date specified, an ADMINISTRATIVE C TATION will be issued and penalties will begin to accrue ($100.00, $200.00 AND $500.00) each day. Additional enforcement actions such as administrative abatement, civil penalties, revocation of permits, recordation of notice of violation, withholding of future municipal permits, criminal prosecution and/or civil injunction may be utilized to correct this violation(s). In addition, a 10% late fee will be charged on any reinspection invoice not paid by the due date. A REINSPECTION WILL BE MADE ON OR AFTER THE CORRECTION DATE. IF THE CORRECTIONS) IS NOT COMPLETED AN ADMINISTRATIVE CITATION WILL BE ISSUED AND FEES WILL BEGIN TO ACCRUE. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on the date shown above. ;IGNATURE OF ISSUING OFFICER PRINT NAME OF ISSUING OFFICER IDN JIOLATION CLEARED DATE WHITE (Violation Copy) CANARY (Last Notice Copy) PINK (Hearing Copy) GOLDENROD (Officer Copy) P.,77.1, J,.,-w,,-07MA 1. COPIES TO: L2CASE NO. Od /1 __)l® aL SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT s. INT1AL NON -CRIMINAL ORANGE COUNTY PRIORITY: ❑ YES SANTAANA, CALIFORNIA 4. INITIAL -CRIMINAL NO 5. FOLLOW-UP CRIMINAL 6. I CONTINUATION PAGE NO. MICHAELCARONA SHERIFF —CORONER LAST NAME FIRST- SPELL OUTWHEN DICTATING FOLLOW-UP REPOR 7. OFFENSE B. LOCATION OF OCCURRENCE SO • fOoN,1 T $E� {��A�6 Ao � - crr� o� —aL�s- -- 9. VICTIM/INFORMANT 10. DATE AND TIME OF OCCURRENCE 11. GRID DF_-?0-r Y 7P. -7-10 - oo / l L+ 1.5 a 12. DETAILS OF INCIDENT: mrllliw�dsik — � i 1 DA•y I?ATF -n rA R #- E`er Sal iv., �� 143 O �i O O 11 L O WEb ( D Tgoas . G/:) a C o L S cl F�zt SAT. (*/a(4 l t o su ry , V25 ra S mc�M f. ► 1 0 l Tuns. /a7 O �'tc) ! wF�./fig [�oa 10 vo 13. INVESTIGATING OFFICERS REPORT BY 14. DATE OF REPORT 15. PPROVE FO680-104.4 (01/99) 5 7 t o9 [O -7 � T � S. j cam. `7 / (3t 7/& 1000 � 3 -7/ 5v n.1, 7/ oq� 0, 7 to 140S l� Armand, Wes From: Armand, Wes Sent: Monday, July 10, 2000 10:25 AM To: Macey, Mike; Cheek, Russell Subject: So Coast Shipyard I send an e-mail to both of you last Friday requesting some assistance with an inspection of South Coast Shipyard. Hopefully one of you will be available tomorrow, Tuesday, in the afternoon. The Harbor Patrolman, Pat Douglas, is available after 12:30 pm. We can meet him at 19th & Bay and get aboard his patrolboat or if you prefer, you can meet us at the boatyard. It would be simpler to meet us at 19th since it is a large place and the patrolman can take us to the areas in question. Please let me know today if possible so I can notify the Harbor Patolman. Thanks Armand, Wes From: Armand, Wes Sent: Friday, July 07, 2000 4:44 PM To: Macey, Mike; Cheek, Russell Subject: South Coast Shipyard The O.C. Sheriff Harbor Department has found some violations at this shipyard relative to the Municipal Code. I will address these violations very soon, but during the inspection with the Harbor Department, there were some possible violations of the Fire Code aside from berthing issues. Would either or both of you be willing to meet me, and the Harbor Patrolmen, on site early next week to walk this facility and identify any violations of the Fire Code. This is a large facility so you should plan on about a half hour to do this. Thanks for any help you can provide in this matter. e 1. COPIES TO l 2 SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT ORANGE COUNTY SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA MICHAEL S. CARONA, SHERIFF -CORONER MOORING REPOR? TYPE OF REPORT 3 1 i_A e. C A(- L1 U la- A NAa O DATE -TIME REPORTED 4 (,::, - t ( - 01�$ A t ozrf) INFORMANT i7 � 5 , L e D000 6§ ADDRESS CITY 6 O CS D PHONE 7 OWNER 8 S L i 1'� ADDRESS cj o CITY 9 7 � J i��'�EV o 6A PHONE PHONE q� 10 EAST BUOY WEST BUOY NUMBERS 11 PAINT 12 NUMBERS 13 PAINT Q 14 j CLEANING 15 PENDANTS 16 CLEANING 17 PENDANTS s 18 ALIGNMENT 19 SUNKEN 20 ALIGNMENT 21 SUNKEN r 22 OTHER 23 SPREADER 24 SHORE MOORING NUMBERS 25 SHORE LINE 26 POST 27 CLEANING 28 SUNKEN 29 ALIGNMENT 30 OTHER 31 BOAT NUMBER 32;U.1�-j NAME 33 &ILLIE LENGTH 34 �(0 MAKE 35 tj TYPE 36 u COLOR 37 (�E - OTHER 38 39 —L---FP—i2- 0?f--)�' C A1_. -2' r--S5f--L-- b N h - - AT mi I (ice bt � , U R 6N_ hS -' 613 (o- S- CIO (o -�3 -07D a- -1 a -070 '' or- O1 ub Obvrzt oetm t Li bcJ� S VN)G-� WAS cwy--w '�. -GO ( c(�I\j-1 W--TIEFO a - G 3m -AB () Mol (Li fv G---- APPROVED-SGT 40 GRID 41 1 OTHER REPORT NO- 42 OFFICER RECEIVING CALL 43 OFFICER ASSIGNED 44 OVX� t UNIT 45 4� TIME 46 1 1 . c H-P. REPORT NO. 147 1. COPIES TO: MN L t 12. CASE NO. �atj „Nei TIC `-,..'1 , SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT 3. &NMAL NON -CRIMINAL ORANGE COUNTY PRIORITY: YES SANTAANA, CALIFORNIA 4. INITIAL -CRIMINAL NO 5. FOLLOW-UP CRIMINAL 6. Fj CONTINUATION PAGE NO. MICHAELCARONA SHERIFF -CORONER LAST NAME FIRST- SPELL OUTWHEN DICTATING FOLLOW-UPREPOR 7. OFFENSE 8. LOCATION OF OCCURRENCE i L Lie� c., a..3 M p 3 9. VICTIMANFORMANT 10. DATE AND TIME OF OCCURRENCE 11. GRID bT`f P - --k:A,7�6 Neop_s , Iic� lo a 12. DETAILS OF INCIDENT: oN c.0-A - oc, , A-T- P1(,: kdc i i (coo SOS i WOE; T1 911_► N r ) N 714 = ^2.r—A of 5WT H C ST , SAi PYA9 I) �a3oe N�t�b 2T' 3) wwa ? o V 1 Ass QP12.o�C I n8tS ! �I�}OTt L � C-� +=� 5a-V cr� Fae I RAL_ 1 l\JTo at.� C 4ANJ V02 . , QPci 1 Lc5E2- I -T::!-c-jo i D -7 V eSSZ-A S DE \/A P_ n S 1 2- -S. (S I TQ Lf-71 Tl ED 'TLC A z+S' Tb car T NL l o` _10e 0,NL`,> UFSSEL P120P P L`r SEC u=2�7-2 A DCGk. . C4Al,31 V--L. j , .rV1'.S WA+t Cy-� 4AU 'G �caJt�i Lb Lr-(f c" t WE_, NdT AAC .I F3 7F::�6 1OtLAR�- t TO i LC_-'T !.a c i L..1 TD -TI4 I Inc LE, - Z , ALSa tai�- cir-� a z) T4e_; L.Lj�� . A--r A�J \ , ON E,_ -r-I Vv\ f7- I 13. INVESTIGATING OFFIC 04-2, 14. Li 4C IA 4r T l fbz F0660-104.4 (01199) 4 I (",-�- da 1777e-.-� dolof "S. 3 ( 2— — February26, 1985 William Blurock 2300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Re: Harbor Permit 120-2122 Dear Mr. Blurock: It has been brought to the attention of the Marine Department that work has been performed on your commercial docks bayward of 2312 Newport Boulevard. Section 17.24.010 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code requires that work on structures in the harbor can be done only after a permit has been issued. In that regard, you must make application to the City Marine Department as outlined in the attached forms. If you have any questions, please call 644-3044. Very truly yours, Tony Melum Tidelands Administrator TM:db 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach TRA Tw��N 6R4TEIERS A WONT NS. 2410 tiwport Btvd. Newport h, CA FROM THE DESK OF.... SAM KNISS f 6 OUOTATpON` The following quotation is for: All labor, to perform the following Remove and destroy the existing 5IX105' dock along the Westerly side of the ways channel. equipment and materials necessary Install a new 41X105' dock. Dock to be constructed using treated wood without paint and to be given an oil coat when finished. Dock to have thirteen (13) cleats three (3) on Westerly bayward end and ten (10) on the Easterly side. Flotation to be polyethylene covered foam. The new dock to be connected to the existing dock on the East end by opening up the existing dock and allowing the stringers from the new dock to extend into the old. `dock. A 41X4 knee brace to be added at the. Southerly end. Pull and destroy the existing bayward pile in this dock section. Install a new reinforced concrete pile in approximately the same location as the existing pile except approximately two (2) feet to the West. Reuse .the existing pi 7 r` x"o1 leis assembly_ Permit and Drawings. TOTAL $ 10,871.00 Terms Payment upon completion. Quote good for acceptance within 60 days. TRAM BROTHERS WAT ONT, CQ�IF L'�( 1 DIREDIINC APPLICATION Project Location-. 2270 Newport Blvd. Cubic Yards to be Dredged: 335 Method of Dredging: Hydraulic Suction Nature of Dredged Material: Sand/Silt Disposition of Dredged Material: Haul to sea and dump at Latitude 33*31'42"N, Longitude 117*54'48"W Method of Material Disposition: Barge to sea Turbidity Control Method: Material to be contained in dump barge at dredge site. Effect of dredging on contiguous bulkheading and beaches Nine LaVerne Harris hereby state that I have read the 'u'. S. Ariplv (,print --name-) Corps of Engineers permit for maintenance dredging in Newport 11srbor, City of Newport Beach and orange County Harbor:, Beaches and Parks Distri.',_---, (if applicable) permit for :maintenance dredging and that I accept all the provisions therein. Additionally I guarantee that the proposed d1redging will not occur because of any altering of exist-Lng use of the-afl-r",ctec'I zone. South Coast BoatYard Newport Dredging Co. _(App_l_icarvt-mt�yjpe name) (60- n�r a c t o r - t _yp_e�,­, i_m�e­)_­--- 10/1/84 (Date)- SiQned. ContractoTr_�,­_­ Representat.-Liv,­ ------------- --- - --- -z- IV To Lo�eocA my 4, o O t-- too `64 `��: `Jlu.oO O a Cat.•vw C' ass M,4 V ICI 0'V i 8 Y S k E 8. 9r H wlll .JETTY s. �ws� NawvoRr 8AY.CAL saotaNIA 11 s Jsr>r 33�r, TIflIS /'/0 ln0t .. is / ~ Sounp'in95 ore +s.rPeessed in Few{ cased d�nodmt daP�g,s below yacoe7 Loewer Low 4oftrr. ron9e of �:o'e Qp���sXi avro�f�/y /O l�� Horbo, 4r7e5 are csiab/r'5hr /:o a°h:z .sccy"O., OscAlew,,~1'aar. R � _ or 8 L� jv, ezv ��� .���''�.�� 2'z icy �,%'.ran®rr� �/vc� �.'�,rr•��,�G'�"� ./�l�:�°.n %PITY OF NEWPORI 'RTAC" HARBOR PERMIT PERM;SS;0f,j IS HERE3Y GFNIU,42TED TO CONSTPUCT AW MAINTAIN THE FACIUTY SHOT flil OM THE M-;VRSE Vaazop AT THE SITE INDICATED, SURK7­7 To Tm' -� IN ;-5zo S 0 T;KRE HARBOR AIN' ANY SPMAL IS NOT TRANS*;�-RAIR 'ITY "IE CfTy HJARF-olml colon."a �AT- C,:l 1, � ,, !iW,HTS GWEN Uj�tllr3ER PEIR4HT ARE PEIMIK.uss-_ _ w4L T1413 PERMIT 51AY Ba PVVnV_=D Esy J-VjE c,2Ty CqL?NC�� ACCORD.A.110E VVITH YETUE I THE MUNICIPAL CODE. 012ft COORDINATOR /22 ;11115-12�,v SPECAL COMMONS: Corrns Coll Engineers Permit orangge Ga4z it Other lice PERMIT ISSUED SUBJECT TO DREDGE' MATERIAL BEING HAULS DIMSBA -.. Kkri:D 0[4 BEACH N3 /'-2oara� a December 21, 1977 CITY F NlEWPORT BEACH South Coast Shipyard 2212 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 REFERENCE: 2212 Newport Blvd. Dear Sirs: On November 2, 1977, the Marine Department corresponded with you in regard to a permit problem involving the above listed property. Specifically, the pier and float at the listed address does not conform to the Harbor Permit on file. We have not heard from you as of this date; and this situation must be corrected immediately. If it is not, it will require a new permit be applied for resulting in substantial expense to the property owner. At your earliest convenience, contact the marine Department at 640-2156 so that we can assist you in resolving this problem. Sincerely, GLEN E. WELDEN TIDELANDS ADMINISTRATOR Tony e m Harbor Inspector Marine Department TM: II City Hall - 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California 92663 04.E "ITT OF NEWPORT BEACH �. CALIFORNIA City Hail 3300 W. Newport Blvd. Area Code 714 640-2156 November 2, 1977 South Coast Shipyard Re: Harbor Permit #: L120-2212 2300 Newport Blvd. 2212 Newport Blv Newport Beach,, CA 92663 Dear Sir: The Marine Department is currently conducting inspections of all structures on the waters of Newport Harbor for conformance with City Council Harbor Permit Policies. During the course of this inspection, it was noted that the structure at the above listed address did not conform to the Harbor Permit on file. A'copy of the drawing for that permit is attached for your reference. Pursuant to Harbor Permit Policies and the Newport Beach Municipal Code, a drawing accurately reflecting the dimensions and location of the structure at the permit site must be on file with the Marine Department. Would you please contact Tony Melum at the Marine Department, 640-2156 between the hours of 8-10 a.m. and 4-5 p.m. at your earliest conven- ience so'.we can assist you in correcting this problem. Sincerely, GLEN E. WELDEN TIDELANDS ADMINISTRATOR Tony Mel m Harbor Inspector Marine Department TM:ll r2-0 22-r-�2 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CALIFORNIA City Hall 3300 W. Newport Blvd. Area Code 714 February 4, 1980 640-2156 U. S. Coast Guard Captain of Port 165 N. Pico Avenue Long•Beach, CA 90802' Gentlemen: The enclosed permit drawing application(s) is being sent for your information in accordance with conditions of approval under the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers "blanket" permit for maintenance dredging.' This "blanket" permit was issued to the City of Newport Beach on February 12, 1974, and subsequently amended on May 10, 1977 to allow beach restoration. As required by this permit, the Marine Department has inspected the dredging site and found no eel grass within or near the project. The City Council of Newport Beach will hear the application at its February 11, 1980 meeting. If you have any questions regarding this application, please contact the City, of Newport Beach Marine Department at (71.4) 640-2156. Sincerely, D. HARSHBARGER, DIRECTOR MARINE DEPARTMENT Glen E. el en Tidelan s Administrator , GEW:1l - _ 20 2 0 z� CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH -_ CALIFORNIA CgC�FOVFt P City Hall 3300 W. Newport Blvd. Area February 4, 1980 Are , Code 714 640-2156 Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board 6833 Indiana, Suite 1 Riverside, CA 92606 Gentlemen: The enclosed permit drawing application(s) is being sent for your information;,in accordance with conditions of approval under the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers "blanket" permit for maintenance dredging. This "blanket" permit was issued to the City of Newport Beach on February 12, 1974, and subsequently amended on May 10, 1977 to allow beach restoration. As required by this permit, the Marine Department has inspected the dredging site and found no eel grass within or near the project. The City Council of Newport Beach will hear the application at its February 11, 1980 meeting. If you have any questions regarding this application, please contact the City of Newport Beach Marine Department at (71.4) 640-2156. Sincerely, D. HARSHBARGER, DIRECTOR MARINE DEPARTMENT Glen E. be den Tidelands Administrator GEW:ll February 4, 1980 State of California Department of Fish and Game 350 Golden Shore Long Beach, CA 90802 Attention: Dick Nitsos, Water Projects Coordinator City Hall 3300 W. Newport Blvd. Area Code 714 640-2156 Gentlemen: The enclosed permit drawing application(s) is being sent for your information in accordance with conditions of approval under the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers "blanket" permit for maintenance dredging. This "blanket" permit was issued to the City of Newport Beach on February 12, 1974, and subsequently amended on May 10, 1977 to allow beach restoration. As required by this permit, the Marine Department has inspected the dredging site and found no eel grass within or near the project. The City Council of Newport Beach will hear the application at its February 11, 1980 meeting. If you have any questions regarding this application, please contact the City of Newport Beach Marine Department at (71.4) 640-2156. Sincerely, D. HARSHBARGER, DIRECTOR MARINE DEPARTMENT Glen E./ We den Tidelands Administrator GEW:ll o CITY OF NEWPORTEACH CALIFORNIA C`q</F0wkCity Hall 3300 W. Newport Blvd. February 4, 1980 Area Code 714 640-2156 U. S. Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service 300 S. Ferry Street, Room 2016 Terminal Island, CA 90731 Gentlemen: The enclosed permit drawing application(s) is being sent for your information in accordance with conditions of approval under the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers "blanket" permit for maintenance dredging.' This "blanket" permit was issued to the City of Newport Beach on February 12, 1974, and subsequently amended on May 10, 1977 to allow beach restoration. As required by this permit, the Marine Department has inspected the dredging site and found no eel grass within or near the project. The City Council of Newport Beach will hear the application at its February 11, 1980 meeting. If you have any questions regarding this application, please contact the City of Newport Beach Marine Department at (71.4) 640-2156. Sincerely, D. HARSHBARGER, DIRECTOR MARINE DEPARTMENT Glen E.. Wkld Tidelands Administrator GEW:ll CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CALIFORNIA C�C�FOCt@a��' City Hall 3300 W. Newport Blvd. Area Code 71.4 February 4, 1980 640-2156 U.S. Environmental. Protection Agency Region IX 215 Freemont San Francisco, CA 94111 Attention: Permits Branch Gentlemen: The enclosed permit drawing application(s) is being sent for your information in accordance with conditions of approval under the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers "blanket" permit for maintenance dredging. This "blanket" permit was issued to the City of Newport Beach on February 12, 1974, and subsequently amended on May 10, 1977 to allow, beach restoration. As required by this permit, the Marine Department has inspected the dredging site and found no eel grass within or near the project. The City Council of Newport Beach will hear the application at its February 11, 1980 meeting: If you have any questions regarding this application, please contact the City of Newport Beach Marine Department at (714)'640-2156. Sincerely, D. HARSHBARGER, DIRECTOR MARINE DEPARTMENT Glen E. Welden Tidelands Administrator GEW:ll P() CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CALIFORNIA 9C/Foil � City Hall 3300 W. Newport Blvd. Area Code 714 February 4, 1980 640-2156 U. S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife` 24000 Avila Road Laguna Niguel, CA 92677 Gentlemen: The enclosed permit drawing application(s) is being sent for your information in accordance with conditions of approval under the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers "blanket" permit for maintenance dredging.` This "blanket" permit was issued to the City of Newport Beach on February 12, 1974, and subsequently amended on May 10, 1977 to allow beach restoration. As required by this permit, the Marine Department has inspected the dredging site and found no eel grass within or near the project. The City Council of Newport Beach will hear the application at its February 11, 1980 meeting. If you have any questions regarding this application, please contact the City of Newport Beach Marine Department at (71.4) 640-2156. Sincerely, D. HARSHBARGER, DIRECTOR MARINE DEPARTMENT lei Glen E. lei en Tidelands Administrator z GEW:ll C � PERMIT NO. ' DREDGING APPLICATION Project Location: 2270 Newport Blvd. Cubic Yards to be Dredged: 83 Method of Dredging: Hydraulic Suction Nature of Dredged Material: Sand/Silt Disposition of Dredged Material: Haul to sea and dump at Latitude 33"31142"N, Longitude 117°54'48"W _Method of Material Disposition: Barge to sea Turbidity Control Method: Material to be contained in dump barge at dredge site Effect of dredging on contiguous bulkheading and beaches None I, Wm. L. Harris , 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. South Coast Boat Yard (Applicant -type name 11/27/79 (Date) Shellmaker, Inc. Contractor -type name) Signed: Contractor's Representative \` 1 PERMISSION IS 84ERWR 'WI?ANTS-.'TO 410K«ZTe'F+ C A D AT THE 61rul VAtova or TME HAA8fVR aR`,l y y WAIWI : ARV SPSCI l Is NOT rm'tu RiiTa'1 i :tmil $ow- v i, 4 s r , ez r AND i`:3u�"sp3ry��,�s,: a2.�niT,w�� MAY+M�`^.: e�i�o�t� "r�.s�P�'.�-4. .'���.�i�a.`ii€�i�eC a,'tf�*^-n,? Cat IN wraw 12-0-22-12. PERMIT NO. DATE W=lgm aaw, awps of Na` I U ar"as cc:-i- CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MARINE DEPARTMENT February 6 1980 TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL ITEM NO.: H-11 FROM: Marine Department SUBJECT: HARBOR PERMIT APPLICATION NUMBERS 174-103, 120-2212, 108-2130, 175-128, AND 171-929 Recommendation If desired,; approve the maintenance dredging applications. Discussion The applications require City Council approval under the conditions of approval placed on the City of Newport Beach general permit for maintenance dredging issued by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers on February 12, 1974, and subsequently amended on May 10, 1977 to allow beach restoration. The locations and applicants for the proposed dredging and beach restorations are: 174-103 Donald R. McAnlis 103 Via Lido Soud 120-2212 South Coast Boat Yard 2270 Newport Blvd. 108-2130 Wilfred L. Vander Ahe 2130 E. Balboa -Blvd. 1-75-128 L. C. Smull 128 Via Lido Nord 171-929 William Lyon 929 Via Lido Soud The staff has reviewed the projects and has determined that the work will be done within the parameters of the Corps of Engineers permit. The dredging contractor will place a filter screen around the discharge site to control turbidity. There is no known_eel grass .in the vicinity of the projects. At 929 Via Lido Soud, 128 Via Lido Nord, and 2130 E. Balboa Blvd., the dredged material will be placed on adjacent beaches. This will aid in the restoration of these beaches bayward of private residences. At 2270 Newport Blvd. and 103 Via Lido Soud, the dredged material will be hauled to sea and dumped. D. HARSHBARGER, DIRECTOR MARINE DEPARTMENT !. Tony Melu Tidelands.Administrator TM:nn i =CIT'Y OF NEWPORT--BEACH HARBOR APPLIC. AON NO. O QtC ►VAC. 4PPLMAM O. 12"tiJ c :3 a r co,. 51� •t , �,.0 MIN Q o nr 7 C` I� JI ,,.�. o �, • ��Pff W N TY SKETCH ., NOwio,Ir SAY, CAt Iso4NIA y1 i g Sound�n9S o�� �,tpiCssed in 1t�f and o��o�� doPii.s be/ow Mc �e� Lo.d Woten J'r1or:...<_T iOn9� of /ide C /'v�In► �/y /O Biel. NoiCo.' '.n are ealoblishar in 7o'A•s °'�L._.._...�,o✓'� �" /R a L-- . r.,, r. E �c ; �---� � 4 i i i Tc C.cr.�—� 8 sii►.1 i�ncKs Ava Pit.1 ►��� k�►.. , _ = t . � � r • � �tw poa ♦ �,., � � a y � TRACT Y NO Btn 1 N , Y f 1 V , 0 � 8 BLOCK m 4 223 TRACT r Z. , 3 G roo 9ts Y r . r � SOUTH COAST ' SHIPYARD & DESI GI 23®ONew`FDPort Boulevard 14 ,0.xy Newport Beach 814 223 1-9 u n 7"AWC7' B[OC.0 GG'r- 1 `40 wildiam blurock b, partne'rs -- i Or c ? G.4TB , i WPORT RtAtM HARBOR PERIL' EZZWSSION IS HEREBY GrZANTED TO 1,W,,STRLCT AND tAtYT193t# it i r,`2 ;"f i7'd `s' 3k3: i 0: 'i S"'5-V,:RF: E HEREOF, THE SlTzEfir".wSE µ' .is 3 F;.s:....s4MQSji5:t7Ns or- NZ—W�.10Y:4-7 BEACH AMC ri.. ":,+i SPECILeL T$cdi PCI{mj'. ONLN .-' i'WS FEU —. i t :i" a' . ._ ? ._ y1T.• COUNCIL 4. XI CITY HAR)SORVC00RDINATOR 'EMIT Min ' IV ............._.............. r STATUS SHEET HARBOR PERMITS LOCATION fi� New PERMIT NO. /_,2 Revision APPLICANT NAME Dredging CONTRACTOR Date Rec'v Fee Amt. ,2 70 C Fee Processed^ Date Reviewed by Marine Dept. Approved Denied Corection Required - Description City Council: Approved Denied Remarks DATE MATERIAL SENT/APPROVED - C.O.E. SCRZCC SARWQCB J.H.C. OR. CTY. T.I.C. 1. Application 2. Consent Ltr. F-X-7Y / 3. "Waste" Ltr: 4. Drawings 5. Staff Report 6. 7. 8. REMARKS DATE FINAL INSPECTION MARINE DEPARTMENT August 28, 1978 ITEM NO.; D-10 TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: Marine Department SUBJECT: HARBOR PERMIT APPLICATION NO, 120-2212 BT SOUTH COAST SHIPYARD & DESIGN TO REVISE AN EXISTING FACILITY AT 2212 NEWPORT BOULEVARD Recommendation If desired, approve the harbor permit application subject to the approval of the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers. Discussion - The subject application is to revise the existing facility by the extension of seven (7) fingers 20 feet bayward to the U. S. Project Line. Existing facilities. on both sides of this location currently extend to the U. S. Project Line. City Council approval is required under Section 5 paragraph C 3 of the Council's Harbor Permit Policies which states: "Prior approval of the City Council will also be required before issuing a permit for shore connected structures when: the abutting upland property is zoned commercial." Parking spaces and restroom facilities are being provided in accordance with Harbor Permit Policies. D. HARSHBARGER, DIRECTOR Marine Department Glen E. Welden Tidelands Administrator Marine Department GEW:ll CITY OF NEWPORT )EACH HARBOR APPL1C� __,ION NO. g�-��' 0 210ILIAL ApPLicATirx) p ►2Jl 8/"t3 AO -,- -- a a o, �►...� .•tom \ /0 Z Cam•..♦ .. V I C I N I T Y SKETCH SOUndln95 o,e e.toitssed in !Asti and O'e-0ee dsp�Fs below •Mep-7 Lovlsr Lo•✓ Wof/r, Afor:� _ /onyx o% lidc OP s/i sef HOIOOi n-� Ore ea9®b/P'Shed in 7"h.g f.on t � V r � 2 i � i � j i T.o C�.t-�?►T� �� AVV ZO B'AstiN �, Doc" a TRACT NO 814 BLOCK 223 �� C rcpTb* d yf. TRACT NO 814 --J SOUTH COAST SHIPYARD & DESI G'l A.oPL/C.dhT.S _ 23oo y ewP o rt Boulevard Ay.QEd 9 Newport Beach 814 223 1-9 7-,04C7- ®GOC.r /-C r william blurock &_partners ti 1: G-o re CI TV OF NEV.FPORT BEACH HARIBOR PERMIT PER-11"ISS101% 1-5 pllrR��-� E R E. C WAtNTAIN THE aD Al TM E S s T, m32 RU` 10, D lih, e-N ST T _p u -P T flo SPECIAL CU373 0f Enginacrc, repmt C, ron" P-ty P. L7,&tz�� a , C-C . I - CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CUUNCIG_PnEN MINUTES HOL i CALL' August 28, 1978 INDEX (j) Claim of Mariner Motel for property damage Mariner i on July 28, 1978 at 3026 W. Coast Highway, Motel Newport Beach when the Manager informed the (3038) police that someone who was renting .one of their rooms was allegedly using a stolen credit card, and the police had to break the lock and the door to the room to make the arrest. (k) Claim of Farmers Insurance Group of Companies Farmers for property damage on June 7, 1978 at 620 Ins/Hirmer Newport Center Drive for damage to Mr. (3039) Hirmer's parked vehicle when E. E. Gadia, a City employee, left a note allegedly stating that he had hit his. car.. - (1) Claim of Ursula M. and Ray R. Varilek for Varilek alleged personal injuries received when {3040) Mrs. Varilek stepped backwards into a hole in the dock when she was guiding her boat along a boat slip in the boat launching area at 300 E. Coast Highway (DeAnza Bayside Village). 6.. There were no Summons and Complaints. 7. The following request to fill personnelvacancies was approved: (A report from the City Manager) (1203F) (a) One Police Sergeant position in the.Police Department to fill a position now vacant. (b) - One Police Officer position in the Police Department to fill a position now vacant. I, (c) One Refuse Crewman position in the General Services Department to fill a position now vacant. (d) Three Firemen positions in the Fire Depart-, ment to fill positions now vacant. (e) One Utilities Leadman in the Public Works Department to fill a position now vacant. (f) One Audit Clerk position in the Finance Department to fill a position to be vacant. (g) One Engineering Aide II.position in the Public Works Department to fill a position to be vacant. (h) One Utilities Serviceworker position in the Water Division to fill a position to be vacant. I (i) One Utilities Specialist position in the Water Division to fill a position now vacant. (j) Two Utilities Construction Specialist Positions in the Water Division'to -fill positions to be vacant. I' Volume 32 - Page 216 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH COUNCILMEN ROLL CALL August 28, 1978 MINUTES INDEX (k). One Utilities Serviceworker position in the Sewer Division to fill a position to be vacant. (1) One Storekeeper II position in the Finance Department, Purchasing and Warehousing Division, to fill a position to be vacant. 8. There were no staff reports. 9. A request from Orange Coast Yellow Cab, Inc. for. Yellow Cab: an increase in rates was set for public hearing on (666) September 11, 1978. -- 10. Harbor Permit; Application No. 120-2212 by South 'Harbor Coast Shipyard to revise existing floats at 2300 (Permits Newport Boulevard,, subject to the approval of the (304F) / U. S. Army Corps of Engineers was approved. (A_�` report from the Marine Department) 11. The application of Wayne Matteson to use sound Sound amplifying equipment at an alley party in the Amp Permit alley from 1500 to 1600-off East Balboa Boulevard (1564F), from 6:00 to 10:00 p.m. on September 3, 1978 was denied. (Attached) .12. Removed from the Consent Calendar. HEARINGS: .1. Mayor.Ryckoff opened the continued public hearing UP 1730 regarding Use Permit No, 1730 (Amended), a request (2155) of Holstein Industries to permit the construction of seven attached single-family dwellings with related parking and landscape area, and the acceptance of an environmental document on property located at 2122 Vista Entrada, westerly of Vista del Oro and easterly of Vista Entrada in "The Bluffs"; zoned R-4-B-2 P.R.D.: AND Tentative Map of Tract No. 8682 (Amended), a Tract 8682 request of Holstein Industries, Costa Mesa, to subdivide 1.65 acres into seven numbered lots for attached single-family residential development and one numbered lot to be developed as a land- scape area,_private driveways and guest parking spaces on property located at 2122 Vista Entrada, westerly of Vista del Oro and easterly of Vista Entrada in "The Bluffs"; zoned R-4-B-2 P.R.D. A.report was presented from the Community Development De ATtment. The following people addressed the Council in favor of the development: Jim Dooley, represent- ing Holstein Industries, who presented a geotechnical evaluation report from Evans, Goffman and McCormick; Douglas Wood, representing. Raub, Bein Frost & Associates; and George Holstein subdivider. L Volume 32 - Page 21.7 Nf *!i' s'. vet r c!Q - - AF �e23 J•�r�,'So,—.E- J'�� +a .:5 Seca as °c,,40 gap At c �p<6•00 CK.�ra O Aia Mot Ce. � S � VICIPQIT kET H wwa� trr �� W s wroar SAY CAL isoafufq SoonaknVs are a CRrtssad in Arai once donotrr dvpOA.5 .below Moon Loeevdpr Lo«r Wooltr. 490.r/ .n r4zr79-- cf aide Q,0prvK/mQio/y /0 Vewlo Narbar /.fifes are es�oblf'ShQ�/ � s�h:� s�cfos afN�wporf. Bvr: OP Al -t i � j G i ✓oe> P—, 22 7e 'CO Arr c'3'Q�e'� � •�� ��a� ' 91-1 STATE OF CALIFORNIA--RESOURCES AGENCY EDMUND G. BROWN JR., Governor CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD SANTA ANA REGION 6833 INDIANA AVENUE; SUITE } RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92506 PHONE: (714) 6849330 March 22 1976 Environmental Protection Agency Permits Branch. State Water Resources Control Board - Legal Division State Department of Water Resources State Department of Fish and Game Marine Resources Region State Department of Health - L.A. U.S. Army CorpsofEngineers State Coastal Zone Conservation Commission, South Coast 'Region Orange County Health Department Orange County Harbors, Beaches, and Parks Department Orange County Water Pollution Department fy of Newport Beach Gentlemen: Enclosed is tentative Order No, 76-69, NPDES No. CA 0106135, which contains requirements for the discharge of wastes by South Coast Boat Yard. Also enclosed is tentative Order No. 76-70 which rescinds requirements for Beard's Aircraft -Marine Industries, the previous owner of this operation. These requirements are scheduled for consideration at the Board's May 14, 1976, meeting. Your comments are requested to be available prior to April 23, 1976. If there are any questions regarding these proposed requirements, please contact David Deckman of this office. Sincerely, Or►ginal Signed By JAMES W. ANDERSON Executive Officer Enclosure: Tentative Order Nos. 76-69 and 76-70 cc: Board Vice Chairman -- Dr.. Willis DJD/ps t Order No. 76-69 (NPDES No. CA 0106135) - continued South Coast Boat Yard The discharger shall submit to the Board on or before each compliance report date, a_report detailing his compliance or noncompliance with the specific date and task. If noncompliance is being reported, the reasons for such noncompliance shall be stated, plus an estimate of the date when: the discharge will be in compliance. The discharger shall notify the Board by letter when he has returned to, compliance with the time schedule. 4. This order includes items 1, 3, 5t, and 7 of the attached "Reporting Requirements." 5. This order includes items 1, 27 47 5, 67 7, 87 97 and 10 of the attached "Standard Provisions." 6. This order includes; the attached "General Monitoring and Reporting Provisions." 7. This order expires on May 1, 1981 and South Coast Boat Yard must file a Report of 'Waste Discharge in accordance with Title 23, California Administrative Code, not dater than 180 days in advance of such date as application for issuance of new waste discharge requirements 8. In the event of any change in control or ownership of ;land or waste discharge facilities presently ovmed or controlled by the discharger, the discharger shall notify the succeeding owner or operator of the I existence of this order by letter, a copy of which shall be forwarded to this Board. i I I, James W. Anderson., Executive Officer, do hereby certify the foregoing is j a full, true, and correct copy of an order adopted by the California Regional' Water Quality Control Board,. Santa Ana Region, on May 14, 1976. I JAMES W. ANDERSON Executive Officer I i I -3- into such works at the time the waste discharge requirements were° adopted. Notice shall include a description of the quantity and quality of pollutants and the impact of such, change on the quantity and quality of effluent from such publicly o-�med treatment works. A substantial change in volume is considered an increase of 10 per— cent in the mean dry —weather flow rate. The discharger shall forward a copy of such notice directly_ to the Regional Administrator. 5. The discharger shall file with the board a report on waste discharge at leash 120 days before making any material change or proposed change in the character, location, or volume of the discharge:. 6 This board req_ui.res the discharger to file with the board, within. 90 days after the effective date of this order, a technical report of his preventive (fail-safe) and contingency- (cleanup) plans. for .con— trolling accidental discharges, and for minimizing the effect of such events. The technical report should: Identify the possible sources of accidental loss, untreated waste bypass, and contaminated drainage. Loading and storage. areas, power outage, waste treatment unit. outage, and failure of process. equipment, tanks, and pipes should be considered; Evaluate the effectiveness of present facilities and procedures and state when they became operational. Describe facilities and procedures needed for effecti-ve preven— tive and contingency plans. Predict the effectiveness of the proposed facilities and pro— cedures and provide an implementation schedule containing interim and finial dates when they will be constructed, implemented, or operational. (Reference: Sections.13267 (b) and 13268, Califor— nia Water Code) This board, after review of the technical report, may establish con ditions which it deems: necessary to control accidental.: discharges and to minimize the effects of such e-rents. Such conditions may be incorporated as part of this order, upon notice to the discharger. 7. The discharger shall submit to the board, by January 30 of.each year, an annual summary of the quantities of all chemicals, listed by both trade and chemical names, which:are used for cooling and/or boiling water treatment and which are discharged ,is defined as one for which waste discharge requirements have been prescribed by a regional water quality control board andwhi.,ch is in full compliance therewith 8. After notice and opportunity for a hearing, this order may be terry. nated or, modified for cause, including, but not limited to: (a) Violation of any term or condition contained in this order; (b) Obtaining., this order by misrepresentat-1 on, or failure to dis— close fully all relevant_ facts; (c) A change in any condition that regT-Ures either atemporary or permanent reduction or elimination of the authorized discharge. 9.. If a toxic effluent standard or prohibition (including any schedule of compliance specified in such effluent standard or prohibition) is established under Section 307 (a) of the Federal Water Pollution Con— trol Act, or amendments thereto, for a toxic pollutant which is present in the discharge authorized herein and such standard or prohibition is morestringent than any limitation upon such pollutant in this order, the board will revise or modify this order in accordance with such toxic effluent standard or prohibition and so notify the discharger. 10. There shall be no discharge of harmful quantities of oil or hazardous substances, as specified by regulations adopted pursuant to Section 311 of the Federal Water' Pollution Control Act, or amendments thereto. 11. In the event the discharger is unable to co -ply with any of. the con— ditions of this order due to: (a) breakdown of waste treatment equipment; (b) accidents caused by human error or zegl Bence, or (c) other causes such as acts of nature. The discharger shall notify- the Executive Officer by telephone as soon as he or his agents have knowledge of the-ncident and confirm this notification in writing within two weeks o f the telephone notification. The written notification shall include pertinent information explain_-- _ ing reasons for the non—compliance and shall indicate what steps were taken to correctthe problem and the dates thereof, and what steps are j being taken to prevent the problem from recur -ring. _7_ California Regional Water Quality Control Board Santa Ana Region DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY LOS ANGELES DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS P. O. BOX 2711 LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90053 VyV,Da.w.f^X, SPLCO-N Mr. William Blurock South Coast Design and Shipyard P.O. BOX 577 Corona del Mar, California 92625 Dear Mr. Blurock: 23 January 1976 In response to your request of 19 December 1973 (74-21) there are inclosed two copies of a draft permit authori.zing,the revisions to your existing facilities at Newport Beach, California. THIS PERMIT IS NOT VALID UNTIL SIGNED BY THE DISTRICT ENGINEER. Your attention is particularly invited to the Special Conditions on Page 3. Both copies shall be signed and dated by an owner or authorized responsible official, with his title shown thereon, and returned to this office. The permit will then be validated and one copy will be returned to you. If the draft copies are not signed and returned within 30 days from the -date of this letter, your request for the proposed work will be withdrawn. Sincerely yours, L 1 Incl (dupej. r JOHN V. FOLEY As stated COL, CE District Engineer Application No. 74-21 Name of Applicant William Blurock Effective Date Expiration Date (If applicable) DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PERMIT Referring to written request dated 19 December 1973. for a permit to: ( X) in or a acting naviga a waters of the United States, upon the recommendation of the Chief of Engineers, pursuant to Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of March 3, 1899 (33 U.S.C. 403); ( ) Discharge dredged or fill material into navigable waters upon the issuance of a permit from the Secretary of the Army acting through the Chief of Engineers pursuant to Section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (86 Stat. 816, P.L. 92-500); ( ) Transport dredged material for the purpose of dumping it into ocean waters upon the issuance of a permit from the Secretary of the Army acting through the Chief of Engineers pursuant to Section 103 of the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (86 Stat. 1052; P.L. 92-532); William Blurock -.4 (Here insert the full name and address of the permittee) South Coast Design and Shipyard P.O. Box 577 Corona del Mar, California 9 is ereby authorized by the Secretary of the Army: to make revisions to existing facilities (Here describe the proposed structure or activity, and its intended use. In the case of an application for a fill permit, describe the structures, if any, proposed to be erected on the fill. In the case of an application for the discharge of dredged or fill material into navigable waters or the transportation for discharge in ocean waters of dredged material, describe the type and quantity of material to be discharged.) iii-Newport Harbor, Pacific Ocean -t (Here to be named the ocean, river, harbor, or waterway concerned.) s (Here to be named the nearest well-known locality — at Newport Beach, Orange County, California preferably a town or city —and the distance in miles and tenths from some definite point in the same, stating whether above or below or giving direction by points of compass.) i accordance with the plans and drawings attached hereto which are incorporated in and made a part of this permit (on drawings: give file number or other definite identification marks); South Coast Shipyard and Design Tract 814, Block 223, Lot 1-9 William Blurock and Partners 11-8-73 saTITEET-i;o the tol)owing conditions: 1. General Conditions: aThnt all activities identified and authorized herein shall be consistent with the terms and conditions of this permit; and that any nctivilias nit siv- illcally lrlitntlliCld and authorized heroin shall cormitllla a violn0foll of llie rartns nnll cundililms (,l IhN laerrriii whir,h 1lrriv Infinll III lilt rn�nliftvnrlVli, nUollellbliln to InVnGilll(ul ill Ihib Imuuil, In whldn ,11 ill poll, u5 bal f111III lllrnb blWdlliq-ally ill Oo„alol (,un(iltlilwe I OF I. Iiblulo wid ill this litblhilliUll of ti4sch laual po'lcubtlillub all Ilia Oillit'd iiialub tiilViYYiiiY7 bill lYlby Ci�Y16k IHY" 8plirrll>Y'Iuf6, whether Ill 1101 ihis lrarrnii fills been previously modified, suspended or revoked in whole or in part, Et G FOITION OF JUNE 1968 IS OBSOLETE. (ER 1145-•2-303) 1 As R 7A %m i\ ���� u DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY / ` �I LOS ANGELES DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS P. O. BOX 2711 LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90OS3 SPLCO-N; - 7 January 1975 Mr. William Blurock South Coast Design and Shipyard P.O. Box 577 Corona Del Mar, California 92625 -- Dear Mr. Blurock: In response to our Public Notice Number 74-21, concerning your permit application to modify existing mooring facilities in Newport Bay, the inclosed comment was received from Resources Agency .of California. Regulations provide that "The applicant must be given the opportunity to furnish the District Engineer his proposed resolution or rebuttal to all objections from Government agencies and other substantive adverse comments before final decision will be made on the application." We suggest that you contact the above parties and try to resolve your differences. Sincerely yours, / Y 1 Incl R. P. YOUNG As stated Chief, Construction - Operations Division I CALIFLt(tIIA `J 1416 NINTH STREET 95814 Department of Conservation Air u ead DepartmentColorraa of Fish and Game I}1 , ° Board River r Board Department 6. N.• igation and t�'r,Or 1'i `, Son Francisco Boy .Conservation a Ocean Development - W> Development Commission Deportment of Parks and Recreation Solid Waste Management Board ' Department of. Water Resource State Lands Commission State Reclamation Board State Water Resources Control Boa THE RESOURCES' AGENCY OF CALIFORNIA Rsgi°"°' Water Quality `°"" Bo SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA DEC 2 4 1974 Colonel John V. Foley District Engineer Los Angeles District U. S. Army Corps of Engineers P. 0. Box 2711 Los Angeles, California 90053 State Review and Comment Public Notice No. 74-21 (William Blurock) Proposed construction and installation of revisions to existing facilities located in Newport Bay, Orange County Dear Colonel Foley: This is to advise you that the subject public notice has been coordinated with state agencies, as shown below, for the purpose of review and comment. *' The State Water Resources Control Board advises that theapplicant should provide assurances to the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality "4f Control Board that there will be no discharge of waste from any vessel utilizing the permit area into the waters of Newport Bay. i� i In addition, the Board states that the applicant should provide pQ sewage pump out facilities with a sewage receiving system located ,aonshore to serve all boatsusing the facilities. We do not have any comments to offer on the subject permit from the other reviewing agencies. _. r Colonel John V. Foley Public Notice No. 74-21 Page 2 Assuming that the foregoing requirements will be met, the State of California has no objection to your issuance of the requested permit.' Sincerely yours, N. B. LIVERMORE, JR. Secretary for Resources Q By cc: Department of Navigation and Ocean Development Department of Parks and Recreation State Water Resources Control Board Department of Fish and Game Wildlife Conservation Board Department of Water Resources Department ,of Health Department of Conservation Division of Highways State Lands Division California Coastal Zone Conservation Commission Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife Mr. Gerald V. Howard Applicant William Blurock C� of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92660 714/673-2110 May 10, 1974 South Coast Design & Shipyard 2300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, Calif. Subject: Harbor Permit #120-2212 Gentlemen: Per your request, this department has inspected the harbor facilities at 2212-2300 Newport Boule- vard for compliance with the conditions of approval for transfer of the subject permit. The repairs necessary to bring the easterly portion .of the above facilities into compliance have been accomplished and are satisfactory. Sincerely, Glen E. Welden Marine Affairs Aide GEW:lf 7. The public improvements constructed in Tracts 7052 and 6905, located at Vista del Oro, Vista Nobleza and Vista Umbrosa in the North Bluff Planned Resi- dential Development were accepted; and the City Clerk was authorized to release the Faithful Performance Bonds and to release the Labor and Materials Bonds in, six months provided that no claims have been filed. (A report from the Public Works Director was pre- sented.) 8. The following Harbor Permit Application was ap- proved, subject to the prior approval of the U. S. Corps of Engineers and the South CoastRegional- Zone Conservation Commission: Harbor Permit Application No. 120-2212 of South Tracts 7052 & 6905 Harbor Permit South Coast Shipyard and Design to construct major repairs Coast to bring the present structure into compliance with Shipyard the. City's plumbing, electrical and structural require ments and to revise a small section of the existing- facilities by the addition of two finger floats. (A report from the Marine Safety Depart ment was pre - sented.) - 9. Council Policy E-1, City Council Meeting. Agenda Agenda Mailings, to provide for service to all who furnish Mailings stamped, self-addressed envelopes, was adopted. 10. The expense account of Councilman Dostal for atten- dance at the National Congress of Cities in San Juan, Puerto Rico, December 1-8, 1973, was approved. 11. The following Budget Amendment was approved: BA-23, $8, 500 increase in Budget Appropriations and decrease in Unappropriated Surplus for engineering and soil sampling in conjunction with plans and speci- fications for San Joaquin Hills Park, Phase 2, Building Excise Tax Fund. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR: I. At the request of Councilman Ryckoff, it was agreed Density to defer the letter from Newport Residents United Referendi r-egarding -a referendum on a zoning and growth policy for the City and the report from the City Attorney regarding voluntary referendum on zoning and density until the matter could be taken up under Additional Business. Volume 27 - Page 332 1� FA t_ December 17, 1973 MARINE SAFETY DEPARTMENT 70 Newport Pier ITEM NO.: H-10' TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: Marine Safety Department SUBJECT HARBOR PERMIT APPLICATION NO. 120-2212 BY SOUTH COAST SHIPYARD & DESIGN TO REVISE AN EXISTING FACILITY AT 2212 NEWPORT BOULEVARD Recommendation If desired, approve the harbor permit application subject to (1) approval of the U.'S. Army Corps of Engineers and (2) the approval of the South Coast Regional Zone Conservation Commis- sion. Discussion The subject application is to revise a small portion of the exist- ing facility by the addition of two finger floats, one 82' x 4' and one 48' x 41. City Council approval is required under Section 5 paragraph C 3 of the Council's Harbor Permit Policies which states: "Prior approval of the City Council will also be required before issuing a permit for shore connected structures when: the abutting upland property is zoned commercial". Parking spaces and restroom facilities are being provided in accordance with Harbor Permit Policies. In addition to this revision, the applicant will be undertaking major repairs to bring the structures into compliance with City plumbing, electrical and structural requirements. These repairs are being accomplished as part of the requirements of the Harbor Permit transfer procedure. MARINE SAFETY DEPARTMENT R. E. REED, DIRECTOR D. Harshbarger, Captain GEW:l f «\Ilr DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY LOS ANGELES DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS I fi I P. O. BOX 2711 '1 LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 9OO53 Public Notice No. 74-21 25 November 1974 YOU ARE INVITED TO COMMENT ON THIS APPLICATION FOR A PERMIT A?PLICANT: William Blurock South Coast Design & Shipyard P.O. Box 577 Corona del Mar, California 92625 ACTIVITY: Construction and installation of revisions to existing facilities and appurtenances thereto, located in Newport Bay, bayward of Lot No. 1-9-, Block No. 223, Tract 814, Newport Beach, California, as shown on the attached drawing. PURPOSE AND USE: Upgrading and repair of existing facilities. FEDERAL, STATE AND LOCAL AUTHORIZATIONS: City of Newport Beach, Coastal Zone Conservation Commission. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT: This office does not intend to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement on this activity unless significant detrimental effects are brought to our attention. CRITERIA: Your written comments or objections should include the number and date of this notice and must reach this office within thirty (30) calendar days. The decision whether to issue a permit will be based on an evaluation of the probable impact of the activity on the public interest. That decision will reflect the national concern for both protection and utilization of important resources. The benefit which reasonably may be expected to accrue from the activity must be balanced against its reasonably foreseeable detriments. All factors which may be relevant to the activity will be considered; among those are cons rva.tion, economics, aesthetics, general environmental concerns, historic values, fish and wildlife values, flood damage prevention, land use classification, navigation, recreation, water supply, water quality, and, in general, the needs and welfare of the people. Details of changed conditions on the final permit action will be provided upon request, FOR THE DISTRICT ENGINEER: cop ROBERT H. REINEN LTC, CE Deputy District Engineer _ � a MARINE SAFETY DEPARTMENT 70 Newport Pier December 10, 1973 TO: CITY CLERK FROM: Marine Safety Department SUBJECT: COUNCIL AGENDA Please include the following harbor permit application on the agenda for the City Council meeting of December 17, 1973. 1. A report from the Marine Safety Department regarding harbor permit application #120-2212 by South Coast,, -Shipyard and Design. The appli- cation is to:"undertake major repairs to bring the structure into compliance with the City's plumbing, electrical and structural requirement and, 2) revise a small section of the existing facilities by the addition of two finger floats. Action: If desire, approve harbor permit application #120-2212, subject to the approval of the U. S. Corps of Engineers and the South Coast Regional Zone Conservation Commission. i D. Harshbarger, Captain Marine Safety Department DH:lf STATUS SHEET HARBOR PERMITS LOCATION 9220 G �-% New Revision--'� Dredging Daze Rec I v �,%/- (� 7 Fee Amt. Fee Processed Date Reviewed by M.S.D. Approved d-/22-73 Denied Correction Req'd. - Desc. City Council: Approved Denied Remarks 7�� DATE MATERIAL SENT/APPROVED C.O.E. SCRZCC SARWQCD J.H.C. Or.Co. T.I.C. 1. Application 2. Consent Letter �? 2 i 2 3. "Waste" Letter 4. Drawings 5. Staff Report 6. 7. 8. REMARKS 87 STATUS SHEET HARBOR PERMITS TRANSFER Location;?Q®ilsL Permit # Date Application Received - 3i, -/_ Fee Rec ° d Oral Request for Inspection Escrow Co. / Date Date Inspection Made Date Deficiency Letter Sent (if applicable) Date Defi.ciency Corrected (if applicable) Date Orange County Notified (if applicable) 112 6- Date Transfer Completed CITY Y. OF NEWPORT BEACH HARBOR APPLICATION NA. o 2- 1t�0 �7( T Low Beoeh Vi 4 N E yv Ntwrewr opC3 R T � B.tcQOA D of cx M /SGANp t 13w1o'Swc6oq a'y C' �16.t 4 0 � 2 0 ; Coo. ya O A aec �..\ ViCI MITY SKETCH �� I Ewsr pJ CT%y Nf WPO RT VAY CAC iFORPi(q 171 = '011r,11-1Cw SoUnoin95 ore e.[/oiessed /n %ef ono 01&nOl�E dep rh s below tiieo.7 Lo rver Low Wo fir.. !7ilox/.�cr n tuGEeS ro N-W LAY&3-T N EW POR T 6A`( _ trot I II I '1 I I11 I T+vr i I 'I I j 1 1 I , II I ron9e of f:de opprox/•»oeiy /o "pef Horbor /.tees CJra esiob//'Shed �n �h:s ecfion of Newworf 6or ii TRACT No e14 j N It yam I (U II II lI�`rf� N1 1 I III N19',2'•So't06 I I P I m BLOCK 222 m LL 1. II I II I ! TRACT Q 111 N4 B94 i g. 1 SOUTH COAST SHIPYARD & DESIGN N >,' �• N o0 AAALld4NTS -VAMdr CENTER Soo $M �•Newport Boulevard N E W PO R T Yl I-v p. J0 ' A400/P.,gS. . Newport Beach 814 223 1-9 TRACT BLOCK r, I-OT Iwil l i am blurock & partne DRAWN 49' 11-8-73 July,r �1970 TO: Building Director FROM: Harbor & Tidelands Aide SUBJECT<aRBOR PERMIT NO. 120- thonv Pools Propert On 29 July, I participated in a joint inspection of the above property conducted by members of the Building Department, Fire Department,,, Orange County Health Department, and this Division. Although theinsp ection included the entire facility, my concern was primarily with the piers and floats. The general condition of the floats was satisfactory, although many of the floats are old and do not look attractive. The specific recommendations for repairs are: 1) The work float west of the ways is sagging and needs additional floatation or structural repair. 2) The southerly end of the ways near Newport Boulevard is without safety railing and this should be replaced. 3) There are two old floats half sunk in the ways which should be removed. 4) One large boat half sunk and in extremely deteriorated condition in the ways should be removed. (Mr. Del Beard,stated that he has attempted to have this boat removed by the owners but so far has been unsuccessful.) DONALD S. SANFORD DSS/db FIRE PROTECTION INSTALLATIONS 9.36.010-0.36.020 Chapter 9.36 FIRE PROTECTION INSTALLATIONS Sectioils: 9.36.010 Protection of Moods and. Ducts. 9.36.020 Protection of Marine Installations. 9.36.010 Protection. of Hoods and Ducts. Hoods and ducts, where re- quired for restaurant type 'cooking equipment, must be equipped witn an approved automatic fire protection :system installed in the hood and duct, in accordance. with the provisions of the National Board of Fire Under - ters pamphlets pertaining thereto. Nonconforming equipment installed prior to the effective date of this Title shall be caused to conform with the requirements of this section within one year following such elate. (Ord. 1111 3141; January 25, 1965) . 9,36.020 Protection of Marine Installations. All commercial piers, wharves, floats, boat slips and marine service stations, and all noncommer- cial piers, wharves, floats and boat slips with facilities for mooring five (5) or more boats, shall be equipped for fire protection as follows': (1) beans shall be available for calling the Fire Department. Such means may consist of a Fire Department alarm box, a proprietary alarm system, or a non -pay telephone located on the premises and identified in a. manner satisfactory to the Fire Chief. Marine installations which do not have such means for calling the Fire Department shall be made to conform with the requirements of this subsection on or before duly 1,1968. (2) Fixed first aid hose stations (wet standpipes) shall be installed in conformity with the applicable standards set forth in Pamphlet No. 14 of the National Board of Fire Underwriters and the following requirements: a. The hose stations shall be connected to a street water main and pro- vided with a pumper connection_ with approved valving. Piping shall be not less than 2 inches and shall be adequately treated to protect the metal from corrosion or damage. A flexible connection: may be installed between a deck f or pier and any floating pier. b. Hose stations shall be equipped with a hose rack or reel, a 1inch valve, not more than 100 feet of approved 11/� inch fire hose and a 11j2 inch brass or bronze shutoff type combination straight stream and fog nozzle. The orifice for straight stream shall be Y/, inch in diameter. The hose sta- tions shall be so located that any protion of a moored craft, pier, wharf or i float may be reached immediately with the hose provided. c. There shall be located at each hose station one twenty (20.) pound dry, chemical type fire extinguisher, d. Each hose station shall be installed in a cabinet so that the hose and equipment will be protected from the elements and from unauthorized use. Each hose station shall be appropriately labeled, with letters. -not less than three (3) inches high. s a 165 (NEWPORT BEACH 7-1S-68) S ivcwYvl � yvulcvalu 1. On September 23, the Council was briefed on the condition of the docks and the action taken to date - letters to Anthony Pools, Incorporated, and Mr. A. C. Beard. 2. Council concurred in issuing Mr. Beard's business license for slip rentals, but was emphatic in wanting follow-up to insure that the docks and services are brought up to standards. G. M. DAWES 10 c A T-rp.vS ,September 16, 196 !,qr. A. C. Bezard 2312 art Boulevard Newport Bead:, California a) ect FierPe-nut No. r 1032 Dear Mr. :Beard: The enclosed letter is for year information and also for your actionbi view of the :fact that you are the person in charge of the piece and floats. cop; of HaThor Permit Policies is enclt e . Your attention is par- ticularly invited to paragraptt, and 11 $ 14, 17, JqBt 26 aid 27. You asked the question, when I was inspectbigo if M anti- i honl, valve your -m . service line to the floats ou .d -be satisfactory. It is satisfactoTy from the vicvpoint of. pmventing baywater frcm bang t into the City water system. H ever, where you have aseries; 4 faucets c than bay !Ude of t`1he valve, aid these fwticets serge series of boats, protection afforded ewe hoat XIer r sa a water backing into the line when another boat suer is drawing water. Therefore,, an anti-,silshon,valve -iconsidered ne a on each service faucet. I you have =t. r uesticns you many contact at jw C ter 1 11 r call -,:at67.1-2110. Very t:ML"y your a G. M. DAMS City Harbor Coordinator ;�aure Mthony Pools Int. Page 2 Septeober .16s 1968 June 3, 1969 Mr. James M. Burke Vice President Anthony Fools 5811 Firestone Soulevand South ate, California 90280 Dear Mr. Burke* Thank you -ery much for your prompt action in remedying the present undesirable condition of your docks and floats at 2312 Newport Boulevard. The work outline in your letter of May 28, to Mr. A. C. Beard encompasses all of the rehabilitation that I mention- ed to you, and subject to the inspection Of the completed work will bring the dock facilities up to standard. Your prompt action eliminates the necessity for going be fore the Council on June 9. 1 would, however, appreciate very much being, kept advised of your construction schedule, so that I may inspect immediately upon completion of all the work. Thank you very much for your cooperation. Very truly yours, G. M. Dave$ City Harbor Coordinator GMD/bg CC,. A. C. Beard FAJ r° 5871 FIRESTONE BOULEVARD SOUTH GATE, CALIFORNIA 90280 TELEPHONE (213) 861.0381 May 28, 1969 Mr. A. C. Beard 2312 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California Dear Mr. Beard: As a result of the meeting this morning attended by the undersigned, yourself, Mr. Ralph Maas of Croft & Neville Company, and G. M. Dawes, City Harbor Co- ordinator, the following items have been determined to require correction at the dock and pier facilities in order to comply with the Harbor Code. The bid for correcting these items is as follows: West end facilities - Install seven anti -syphon valves on existing hose bibs. Paint hydrant red; install 100 ft. fire hose. Remove old work float completely. Remove rear section of second work float. Add flotation at end of that finger. Replace piling hanger at end of that finger and next to ramp. One portable fire extinguisher required at dock facilities. East end facilities - Install two used pilings and hangers. Connect water hose at fire hydrant and paint same red. One portable fire extinguisher must be in dock area. Add second rail to first ramp. The main float assembly with six fingers to be repaired by replacing stringers, rub rail, decking, ramp platform, as required. Shim flotation units to level the fingers. Install anti -syphon valves at four locations, remove old pipe and conduit lines not being used, replace two pontoons and reposition two others. Replace two finger slips completely at west end of the facilities. The two new slips will be: one 4ftby 60 ft, and one 6 ft by 40 ft. Wooden pontoons will be used and a new ramp will be made for the last slip. A Mr. A. C. Beard - 2 - May 28, 1969. double outlet for electrical service will be provided to this slip. The one cover on the second electrical outlet will be replaced. Broken conduit at base of most easterly fixture will be repaired. One coat of finish paint will be applied to entire east facility. It is estimated that the completion time of the work is two weeks from com- mencement date. The total bid for this work by Croft & Neville Company is $4,530. Anthony agrees upon completion of the work to pay $4,000 of this total and Mr. A. C. Beard agrees to pay $530, plus the furnishing of the required fire hose and the portable fire extinguishers, and to provide any dock illumination required for the east facilities. Upon receipt of accept- ance by all parties, a purchase order will be issued for the work. Please indicate your acceptance of these corrective actions, agreement as to responsibility for payment, and acceptability of price for work by signing on the second copy in the space indicated, and return to me. Sincerely, James M. Burke Vice President JMB:dn cc. A. Albert Spar 505 30th Street Karam Building, Suite 201 Newport Beach, Calif. 92660 The corrective measures set forth above are hereby acknowledged as acceptable. Date G. M. Dawes City Harbor Coordinator, 5871 FIRESTONE BOULEVARD SOUTH GATE, CALIFORNIA 90280 • TELEPHONE 23�61.03%rti May 28, 1969 Mr. A. C. Beard 2312 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California Dear Mr. Beard: As a result of the meeting this morning attended by the undersigned, yourself, Mr. Ralph Maas of Croft & Neville Company, and G. M. Dawes, City Harbor Co- ordinator, the following items have been determined to require correction at the dock and pier facilities in order to comply with the Harbor Code. The bid for correcting these items is as follows: West end facilities - Install seven anti -syphon valves on existing hose bibs. Paint hydrant red; install 100 ft. fire hose. Remove old work float completely. Remove rear section of second work float. Add flotation at end of that finger. Replace piling hanger at end of that finger and next to ramp. One portable fire extinguisher required at dock facilities. East end facilities - Install two used pilings and hangers. Connect water hose at fire hydrant and paint same red. One portable fire extinguisher must be in dock area. Add second rail to first ramp. The main float assembly with six fingers to be repaired by replacing stringers, rub rail, decking, ramp platform, as required. Shim flotation units to level the fingers. Install anti -syphon valves at four locations, remove old pipe and conduit lines not being used, replace two pontoons and reposition two others. Replace two finger slips completely at west end of the facilities. The two new slips will be: one 4ftby 60 ft, and one 6 ft by 40 ft. Wooden pontoons will be used and a new ramp will be made for the last slip. A Mr. A. C. Beard - 2 - May 28, 1969 double outlet for electrical service will be provided to this slip. The one cover on the second electrical outlet will be replaced. Broken conduit at base of most easterly fixture will be repaired. One coat of finish paint will be applied to entire east facility. It is estimated that the completion time of the work is two weeks from com- mencement date. The total bid for this work by Croft & Neville Company is $4,530. Anthony agrees upon completion of the work to pay $4,000 of this total and. Mr. A. C. Beard agrees to pay $530, plus the furnishing of the required fire hose and the portable fire extinguishers, and to provide any dock illumination required for the east facilities. Upon receipt of accept- ance by all parties, a purchase order will be issued for the work. Please indicate your acceptance of these corrective actions, agreement as to responsibility for payment, and acceptability of price for work by signing on the second copy in the space indicated, and return to me. Sincerely, James M. Burke Vice President JMB:dn cc: A. Albert Spar 505 30th Street Karam Building, Suite 201 Newport Beach, Calif. 92660 The corrective measures set forth above are hereby acknowledged as acceptable. Date G. M. Dawes City Harbor Coordinator k �i I 1� ,y f O O 11 J� 00 N O r1 U r-I4-4 C) : VI y - Nam 4 o w a O >w y 4 T--q 00 o �Lr) C/) OD °m 0�° Q� Z amp Z°u OwW;� �a _r H OD; ti � U e -4 0 i A. ALBERT SPAR 505 30th Street, Karam Building, Suite 201 Newport Beach, California 92660 Telephone (714) 675-1951 G, l� P IYI lo3z Sept -ember 16, 196 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH - PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT PIER PERMIT TRANSFER FORM DATE January 27, 1965 APPLICATION IS HEREBY MADE TO TRANSFER ALL MY RIGHT, TITLE AND INTEREST IN PERMIT A0A-1032 FOR Pier and Slip FACILITY LOCATED BAYWARD OF PROPERTY AT lNewport Beach California ADDRESS BEING LOT ls2j,3j4,5 , BLOCK, 223 , SECTION Partial 222 , OF TRACT Npt.Bch IT IS AGREED THAT ALL CONDITIONS CONTAINED IN.THE ORIGINAL PIER PERMIT AND ANY SPECIAL PROVISIONS SHOWN HEREON SHALL APPLY' AND THAT THE TRANSFEREE HAS ACQUIRED OR IS IN THE PROCESS OF ACQUIRING THE ABUTTING UPLAND PROPERTY. IN THE EVENT THAT THE ACQUISITION DOES NOT BECOME'FINAL, THIS TRANSFER IS NULL AND VOID. BEFORE FINAL ISSUANCE OF TRANSFER A LETTER FROM SELLER, BUYER OR AUTHORIZED AGENT WILL BE REQUIRED STATING THAT TRANSFER OF TITLE HAS BEEN COMPLETED. TRANSFEROR South Coast c New -Dort Blvd.' PPacln, Californip (SELLER) NAME MAILING ADDRESS TRANSFEREE AntijonV Pools Jrc Firestone n ,r , + Q1 (BUYER) NAME MAILING ADDRESS Anthorxy Pools Inc. South Coast r9h ,..Qr �r s Ine SIGNATURE OF TRANSF REE SIGNATURE OF TRANSFEROR By - SIGNATURE OF TRANSFEREE/ SIGNATURE,OF TRANSFEROR' I;F,,FA ,9L ITY IS JOINTLY OWNED, APPROVAL OF JOINT OWNER IS REQUIRE. SIGNATURE OF JOINT OdNER TRANSFER 0 APPR ED ® DE ED BY T CITY COUNCIL DATE SPECIAL PROVISIO IMPOSED BY CIT COUNCILb j PERMIT No. � / D 3 lI-- GENERAL PROVISIONS FOR PAER,0 ERMTT,S,- T. ACCEPTANCE OF PROVISIONS. IT IS UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED BY THE PERMITTEE THAT THE DOING OF ANY WORK UNDER THIS PERMIT SHALL CONSTITUTE AN ACCEPTANCE OF ALL OF THE PROVISIONS. 2• PERMIT FROM OTHER AGENCIES- THE PARTY OR PARTIES TO WHOM THIS PERMIT I`$ ISSUED SHALL, WHENEVER THE SAME IS REQUIRED BY LAW' SECURE THE WRITTEN ORDER. OR CONSENT TO ANY WORK HEREUNDER FROM THE U.S. CORPS OF ENGINEERS OR ANY OTHER PUBLIC BODY HAVING JURISD.ICTION, AND THIS PERMIT, SHALL BE SUSPENDED.IN OPERATION UNLESS AND UNTI,L,SUCH, ORDER OR CONSENT IS OBTAINED. 3. TRANSFERRING PERMIT: THIS PERMIT IS NOT TRANSFERABLE WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH. 4. INSPECTION. THE WORK SHA,LLSE SUBJECT TO, THE SUPERVISION AND APPROVAL OF THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT. THE PERMITTEE SHALL NOTIFY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT AT LEAST' 3 DAYS IN ADVANCE OF"THE'DATE WORK IS TO BEGIN AND BEFORE ITS COMPLETION. 5. PROTECTION OF TRAFFIC: ADEQUATE PROVISIONS SHALL.B'E MADE FOR THE PROTECTION OF THE TRAVELING PUBLIC- BARRICADE`S'SH'ALL BE PLACED ON STREETS' WITH LIGHTSAT NIGHT) ALSO FLAGMEN EMPLOYED, ALL AS MAYBE REQUIRED BY THE PARTICULAR WORK IN PROGRESS. THE, PERMITTEE SHALL,N07 ATTEMPT TO FORBID THE FULL AND FREE USE BY THE PUB- LIC OF ALL NAVIGABLE WATERS AT OR' ADJACENT TO THE WORK OR STRUCTURE. IF THE DISPLAY OF LIGHTS AND SIGNALS ON ANY WORK HEREBY AUTHORIZED IS NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED yY LAW, SUCH LIGHTS AND SIGNALS' AS MAY BE PRESCRIBED BY BUREAU OF LIGHT HOUSES, DEPARTMENT' OF COMMERCE, SHALL BE INSTALLED AND MAINTAINED AT THE EXPENSE OF THE PERMITTEE STRUCTURES SHALL BE SO CONSTRUCTED AS NOT TO OBSTRUCT, INTERFERE WITH OR PREVENT THE FREE USE OR PASSAGE OF ANY SIDEWALKSP STREET, ALLEY, PUBLIC WAY OR NAVIGABLE CHANNEL. 6. LIABILITY FOR DAMAGES. THE PERMITTEE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL LIABILITY FOR PERSONAL INJURY OR PROPERTY DAMAGE WHICH MAY ARISE OUT OF WORK HEREIN PERMI.TTED, OR WHICH MAY ARISE OUT'OF THE USE OR POSSESSION>OF SAID WORKS' AND IN THE EVENTANY C 1;1 CLAIM .IS MADE AGAINST THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH OR ANY DEPARTMENT' OFFICER, OR EM;-:- PLOYEE:`THEREOF.9 THROUGHg BY REASON' OFy OR IN CONNECTION WITH SUCH WORK, PERMITTEE s y , FROM SUCH CLAIM- 7- DEFEND INDEMNIFY AND HOLD THEM AND. EACH OF THEM HARMLESS 7. REVOCATION OF 'PERMIT. THE RIGHTS GIVEN UNDER THIS PERMIT ARE PERMISSIVE ONLY AND THE CITY OF NE,WPORT BEACH RESERVES FULL RIGHTI POWER AND AUTHORITY TO REVOKE THIS PERMIT AT ANY TIME. IN THE EVENT THE PERMITTEE FAILS TO REMOVE SAID WORKS WITH— IN THE TIME SPECIFIED' THEN THE CITY ENGINEER SHALL!':HAVE THE RIGHT TO IMMEDIATELY' REMOVE SAME AT THE COST AND EXPENSE OF THE PERMITTEE. H. REPAIRS. THE PERMITTEE SHALL KEEP THE STRUCTURES IN GOOD REPAIR AT ALL., TIMES. FAILURE TO REPAIR, WHEN WRITTEN NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN TO THE CITY ENGINEER, SHALL BE CAUSE FOR THE REVOCATION OF THE PERMIT. TRANSFEREE (NEW OWNER) CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH - PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ANI T t\t'l PIER TRANSFER INSPECTION REPORT FORM po 0 j N C, LOCATION: DATE OF INSPECTION a INSPECTED BY: RESULTS SATISFACTORY UNSATISFACTORY F REMARKS STRUCTRAL: DATE OF INSPECTION Z U2/(!� IN�PECTED BY: RESULTS SATISFACTORYUNSATISFACTORY F] REMARKS PLUMBING. - INSPE,CTioN REQUIRED YES F-71 No LA7J DATE OF INSPECTION 3 INSPECTED BY'. — RESULTS SATISFACTORY Zi UNSATISFACTORY REMARKS k ELECTRICAL: INSPECTION REQUIRED YES No DATE OF INSPECT ION INSPECTED BY:-<�)-, UNSATISFACTORY AFIVOilt'04F- RESULTS SATISFACTORY REMARKS r oak 0 d,ck5. nl,5f4lt4f-'0;,i aye C/ v zee PIER PERMIT No. 04- Office: 673-9300 Residence: 646-7980 Le co CIPECIP REAL ESTATE 3416-A VIA LIDO (Across from Richard's Market) NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA February 10, 1965 City of Newport Beach Newport Beach California Gentlemen: Regarding the application for the transfer of the pier and slip- Permit #A-1032'from The South Coast Company to Anthony Pools Incorporated This is to inform you that the property transfer was recorded in January 1964• Yours very truly, R.uC. Greer, Realtor RCG.ah CITY ATTORNEY WOOS 01swevou RertRemce is *Aot To A txy-tc a vvrco JwW, 2, 1965, to YOU FROM ROY V* 'SOAP R Vitt PR4810CIft AND J:O*tF COUASZU, FIRST 14 Tint issunmatt & Timsir Coe, '110 WNtt*AI -t** W9Fta t . Tur. oticavions its o FRS 3 00 An As fs; Q. Av oe, PKsEwr y t j* s TOM MY, extsTims slu.owl Av On Tug A. 4. Tta SULKWAO # $ ZOKSTRUCTE0 UANOWARO FROM T E 8$ ANY Ti r 2,* tC JA W Bu tc ALim, stow Tw, Pezv-xT Ow 0,:F aaalwAlty ottm rivet A A poaTiow oir sAio pAsttgu, is sAvWA00 of Tug E I r 1 6 auLK- litAD t T1WREF$VOWIROZO AT AM, T t . T44V EXTENT OF "TOI AREA IS UNCOT M, A .T. ; A SURVEY PRE4ZOTtly 091"a ONE u i.D wow Tuts,* mois F R YOUR 034 ARZ TWO GOP LES Of TNtAp ftICATION DRAW100FOR SUa4ZCT 7 to -Set Y%aq'L. S.23/2,. I Li C I j a I III r ... _. _. - a , I 3 V 0 vt O ' - APRIL 20, 1965 AmTmomy Poots, INc. 5871 FIRESTONE BOULEVARD SouTm GATE, CALIFORNIA SUBJECT: HARBOR PERMIT No. A-1032 GENTLEMEN' - OUR INSPECTION OF YOUR PIERS BAYWARD or LOTS 1, 2, 3, 4, AN O 51 BLOCK 222,AND 223, NEtfPORT BeAco ON Ap.RIL, 9, 1965, DiSCLOSED THE FOLLOWING DEFiCfCNCtES: (A) WE$T"ERPROOF -COVERS MfSSfN0 FROM ELECTRICAL BOXES ON PIERS# (a) PORTABLE CLECTRtCAL CORDS RUNNING FROM $UILDINGS ON THE GROOND. IT WILL NOT OE POSSIBLE TO COMPLETE TRANSFER OF SU64ECT HARBOR PERNI'T FROM SOUTH COAST C014PANY To ANtwomy POOLS"' UNTIL,THE DEF I C IE ' MCIES.LiSTED ABOVE "AVE SEEN CORRECTED- PLEASE NOTIFY THIS OFFICE WHEN THE REQUIRED WORK HAS BEEN POISE. FAILORE TO CORRECT THESE OtFICIZNCIES COULO RES04T IN REVOCATION Of' THE, HARBOR PERMIT. VERY TRULY YOUR$, KE NNE. TR L. PERRY ASSISTANT CITY E-wca INEER MARC14 24, 1965 ARTMORYP001.4, tug* 5871 FIRESTOW 50VtAVAfM SOUT04 GATE., CALIFORNIA Susac*rf* fi,%Ra 'OR PERA IT No, A- 1032 SUOJECT PIER PCPJ41T TRA*src;t rAn*oT BE APPROVED UNTIL ALL EXIST(NG PLUMINO AND IKLECTRICM� DEFICIEMGIES ARE CORRECTED* JUSKMONS OF THE PMR J"$TALLAT#O"r #JAVE StElt 14At>r, At4b T14F COR- AtMW MEASURES REQUIRED ARt'- A. No ACUM ORZAKER ON 4ATER LtW-#, S. ELZ;TRI4,At $,Y$Tt.M POORLY MAINTAINED* C* REQVIRZD $AXITAJtY FAICWTICS MUST 0E CUKARUY LASELEEP AND MADE. AVAILAS1.4 AT. A" TIMES TO USERS OF SOAT$ *00RED AT TlW AMCM"A44E* puzAst NOTIFY THIS OFFICE woem Toitst HAVE agEN MADe. FAILURE TO COMPLY WITHIN 3D DAY$ CAN RESULT IN THE REVOCATION 0,r tim. PEEMIT. BEFORE ANY C09RECTIVE MEASURES ARE UNDF-RTAKF-14 OF, ANY ADD ITiONS ARE MA 89 TO TIM PLUMINQ AND 9$-ECTRJCAL. SYSTEMS$ A PERMIT MUST St 08-- TAIMED FROM THE CITY Of NEWPORT BEACH Buitait4 DEPARTMENT. RrpAiRs Atia *0 MAL *AIWMMA-NM TO PIER STRuCTURES Do NOT REQUIRE A PFRI41T., HOWVtko TO OUMP� EXT900 OR REVISE THE EX14TING STRUCTORE RZQVIR-ES, APPROVAL OY TM CITY OF NEWPORT SEA06 APPLMATIONS FOR TT414 TYPE Or P9:RMfT MAY St 08TEKED nom iNt Punic WoRws DEPART- KZWTIM VERY TRULY Yougso lKERNETH L-, PtRity Assisumt CITY EsetweFt KLP: at CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CALIFORNIA PERMIT No. in accordance with the plans shown on the drawing attached hereto, entitled SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS General Provisionse I. Acceptance'of Provisions: It is understood and agreed by the. Permittee that the doing of any work under this permit shall constitute an acceptance of the provisions. 2. Permit from Other Ahgencies: The party or parties to whom this permit is issued shall, whenever the same is required by law, secure the written order or consent to any work hereunder from the War Department of -1 l the United States or any other public '-.body� aving juri-sdi-ction, and this permit shall be suspended in operation unless and --until such order,or consent is obtained. 3. Transferring Permit: This permit is not transferable with- out the written consent of the City Council of the City of Newport.Beach. 4. Notice Prior to Starting Mork: The Permittee shall notify the City Engineer at least three(3) days in advance of the date work is to begin and its completion. 5. Inspection: Thework shall be subject to the supervision and approval of the City Engineer. On work which requires the presence of an employee of the City of Newport Beach as inspector, the salary and other incidental expense of such inspection during the work shall be paid by the Permittee upon presentation of a bill therefore. 5. Protection of Traffic: Adequate provisions shall be made for the protection of the travelling public. Barricades shall be placed on streets, with red lights at night, also flagmen employed, all as may be required by the particular work in progress. The Permittee shall not attempt to forbid the full and free use by the public of all navigable waters at or adjacent to the work or structure. If the display of lights and signals on any work hereby auth- orized is not otherwise provided by law, such lights and signals, as may be prescribed by Bureau of Light Houses, Department of Commerce, shall be installed and maintained at the expense of the Permittee. 7. Liability for Damages: The Permittee is responsible for all liability for'personal injury or property damage which may occur through work herein permitted, and in the event any claim -is made against the City_, of Newport Beach or any department, officer or employee thereof, through, by reason of, or in connection with such work, Permittee shall defend, indemnify and hold them, and each of them, harmless from such claim. This Permit shall not be effective for any purpose unless and until the above named Permittee files with the City of Newport Beach, a surety bond in the form and amount required by the said City, unless specificallyexempted on the face hereof. 8. Expiration of Permit: If the -structure or work herein a th orized is not completed on or before the day of , 19 , this permit, if not previously revoked or specifically extended, shall cease and be null and void. -2- A --/a 3 z, COMAERCIAL BOAT SLIPS 1.. The City of Newport Beach shall never be held liable or obligated for any injury or damage resulting to either persons or property through the erection, use or possession of commercial boat slips. 2. Boat slips shall be so constructed as not to obstruct, interfere with or prevent the free use or passage of any sidewalks, street, alley, public way or navigable channel. 3. The right given for the erection and maintenance of boat slips is permissive only and the Permittee shall, upon revo- cation hereof, remove said boat slips and appurtenances thereto, within thirty (30) days after date of mailing written notice of this permit, which notice may be mailed to the las: known address of the Permittee. 4. The City of Newport Beach reserves full right, power and authority to revoke this permit and in the event the Permittee fails to remove said boat slips within the time specified, then the City Engineer shall have the right to immediately remove same at the cost and expense of the Permittee. 5. The Permittee shall keep the boat slips in good repair at all tires, Failure to repair the boat slips, when written notice has been given by the City Engineer, shall be cause for the revocation of the permit and removal of the boat slips. -3- i s Approved by City Engineer Authorized by the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, at a meeting held on the day of M City Clerk Receipt of a. copy of the within and foregoing permit is hereby acknow- ledged) and in consideration of the issuance of the same, we hereby accept all terms, conditions and covenants. Dated and signed this day of , 19 Permittae Permi.ttee APPI-ICATION FOR PEkMIT No. Applicant will not fill Dated ss�c® 19 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA Gentlemen Applic ation tion is hereby made for permission to (Applicant will describeKere fully what he wishes to do an purpose of improvement) i x. x a J Location: c! 0 Z Z / Z pplicant will state here accurately the locat on of the work he wishes to do) I -7-7Z Applicant' is Owner Lot d 2 '✓`� , BlockPp Z Tract e -r R The undersigned agrees to do the work in accordance with the rules, regulations and specifications and subject to the inspection and approval of the City of Newport Beach. 1` .Check No. 2 % Signature of Applicant Rec'd Fee Z-- Vag;(10e14 '.16111,21 �, A'A Date s �1 Cis'r From Application shall be in duplicate. Plans in quadruplicate shall accompany all applicati ons. Application Filed Referred to Permit Issued NB-702—I M-6/56 STATE Or C,.LIFORN!X \J `J ;Z0NAIla REAGAN, Gc—rnor CALIFORNIA COASTAL ZO :E CO; tSERVA 10IN COMWSSiOIN SOUTH COAST REGIONAL COMMISSION :x_ 6-66 E. OCEAN BOULEVARD, SUITE 3107 P.O- BOX 1450 LONG BEACH, CALIFORNIA 90331 (213) .4333201 (714) 84 -0643 RESOLUTION OF APPROVAL_ ANI PEPJ.IIT .application MLmber a A-9-24-73-1953 Name of Applicant: S u ,1-I Co2st Shipyard. DPSJ g-n C' : I lMP CA q Permit Type ® �� Standard Administrative Emergency Development Location.: 2220 Newport Blvd, Newport Bear.h Development Description: PenQtiTa icy , Sor-'stlt,7 en e# mark i nd 1nt�s, minor structua:l changes to upgrade existing structures in Nei ort Peach. The major expenses are for exterior treatment such as landscaping cleanu , ainting, & replacement of _doors & windows,° Commission Resolutions 1, The South Cost Conservation Commission rinds that 'theroosed development: A ; i? l " have a substantial adverse er,L,,bT ronmental or m r.���� y ecological effect in that: the project will cause minimal environmental or ecological impact, 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 Dart thereof unless otherwise specified herein. IV. Section 560 of the 'Regulations of the California Coastal Zone Conservation Co.=. -cession specifies that no structure or area of !and or water shall be used or occupied in the manner ' authorized by the permnit or in any other manner` until the Executive 'Director has issued a Certificate of Coa:pliance with the terms and con- ditions of the Per_nit. V. The grant of: this 'permit .i s further made subject to the follo�ring A. That this permit shall not become effective until: the verifi cation has been returned to the South Coast Regional Conser- vation Co_mmiss-Lon upon which copy all permittees have acknoiy ledged that they have received a copy of the. -Permit and under- stood its contents Said acknowledgement should be -returned •.,rithin ten working days following issuance of this permit. B. That upon completion of the -.activity author -=zed by this perrLait the permittee(s) shall promptly complete the "Notice of Com-oletion" and file it -w th the. Executive Director, of this - Regional Corami scion e C.. That said development to, be commenced .on or before aiT m of e ti e date of -a royal VI. Therefore, said Permit C56,t., 1�R� dry; r_istrative MM} Number A-a-l�--73_1a63 _ _ ? s hereby granted/c for the above described developrrer�t 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 'F A q, California on behalf of the South Coast Region a_ Conservation Com-iission on 4CTOBER .16 1973 0 ., YI. J. Carpenter Executive Director gm b-1 -73 CALIFORNIA C' STAL, ZONE CO�SEr''��AT ION C( �IISSIGN SOUTH COAST REGIONAL COI�DIISSION P.O. Box 1450, bong Beach, 'CA 90801 APPLICATION FOR PERMIT SECTION ` I : LPPLIC,A_%1T 1, Name, address,, and telephone number of applicant; (zip. code) '.. (area code) 2. I -lame, address and telephone number of applicant's representative, if any: gpg 1 I <are'—_ tz��s: Sf St4 Dc (zip code) (area code) SECTION? II; SUKMARY OF WORK PROPOSED AND PROJECT LOCATION 3. Brief (one "or two sentence) description of work proposed: t 4; Brief description of project location (city or county, nearest roads, etc.) TO RE .FILLED IN -BY THE. COMMISSION: Application Number Date Filed Fili_ng Fee Public Hearing Date (Not less than 21 days nor more than 90 days after filing) D. ` Describe (a) desigr_,Tions of the property sTto on any applicable city or county general ;plans, and (b) the present zoning of the property. Explain whether the proposed project is consistent with local plans and zoning. z 6. Attach to this applicationadequate illustrations (such as a. U.S. Geological Survey 7' -minute quadrangle map and a detailed project reap) to show: (a) the proposed development in relation to nearby areas and, as appropriate, to:the.line of mean high tide, the inland boundary of the permit - area, _ any nearby beaches, any nearby . public recreational areas, any nearby marshes, and any other major features of the natural "topography or any major buildings; and (b) precisely whet development is ,proposed. 7. ?woes the proposed development consist only of a repair or improve- ment to an existing structure at a cost not in excess of $25;000? If so, please explain briefly and indicate how the cost of the repair or improvement was computed Aa 8. If not a repair or improvement to an existing structure, is the cost of the proposed development less than $10, 000? If so, please explain briefly and indicate how the cost of the development was computed 9. Attach to this application sufficient documentation to show appli- cant's interest in the property (such as copies of deed, title report, parcel map, etc.), and any easements or other, restrictions affecting the property. 10. The parcel. (s) of property on which the work is proposed are Assessores Parcel (s) number or) Lot Block Tract or) Attach a copy of she legal description, . ' ""("�M P s w�^ y� q� p� y� ( �y y ./�y property � ^ry .��q �+ yam. p+� eachowner 1 y List the name and adds ess of each owner of property adjacent to the the ����g9s.��.egs��of the p,�o s,d dev{ey��ljyopm nt. ary {] �o� top e6 +s.adal. JT ]' "'1 . 0"°r' f ' i -I y L �'�ai �y W D. ZZ-3 IV M*tG CJ E:/ z-*iz---_ ss 1 Y2)3 2 J xp.,, yy { to ' '^' t S 'ION !I!: DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORK 12e Does the development involve dredging, filling, or atTherwise alter- ing any bay_, estuary, salt marsh, river mouth, slough or lagoon? If so, please explain. 13. 'Would the development reduce the size of any beach or other area usable for public recreation? if so, please explain. 14. Would the development reduce or .impose restrictions aeon public access to tidal and submerged ?ands,.beaches or the line of mean high tide Vnere there is no beach? If so, please explain. 15. Mould the development substantially interfere with or detract from the line of sight toward the sea from. the state highway nearest the coast? if so, please explain. lkb -3- t , 1. .`, Would the development have the potential for ar versely °affecting water quality, existing areas of open water free of visible struc- tures, iexisting and potential commercial and sport ,fisheries, or agricultural uses of land which are 'existing on November, 8, 1972? if so, please explain. OU 17. Would the project increase access to 'publicly -owned or publicly - used beaches to recreation areas, or to natural reserves? Please explain, 18. Would the development affect any area that could be used for public recreation or as a wildlife preserve?Would the development affect any area of historic or archeological importance? Please explain. 19. What provisions have been made in the project for treatment of solid and liquid wastes, and for their disposition and management, so that adverse effects upon coastal 'zone resources will be minimized? --�'-- 20. Describe any provisions in the pro-iect to ensure that alterations to existing land forms and vegetation, and construction of struc- tures, will cause minimum adverse effect to scenic resources and minimum, danger of floods, landsi_ides, erosion, siltation, or failure in the event of earthquake. P. -4 SECTION IV: OTHER PERMITS OR APPROVALS NEEDED 21. List all permits, permissions., or approvals required from public agencies for this project, and indicate whether these permits_, permissions, ` or approvals have been (a) applied for and (b) granted. ("Public agencies" includes cities, counties, regional agencies, redevelopment; agencies, etc., and also includes the State Lands Commission, the Army Corps of Engineers, and the appropriate Regional. Water Quality Control`Boad.) ..- --moo 9 ,oCCL SECTION V: PROJECT' S CONSISTENCY WITH THE CALIFORNIA COASTAL ZONE CONSERVATION, ACT OF 1972 22. The California Coastal Zone Conservation Pict of 1972 states, in Section 27402, that no permit shall be' .Issued unless the regional commission has first found both of the following: (a) That the development will not have any substantial adverse environmental or ecological effect, and (b) That the development is consistent with the following find- ings, declarations, and objectives: (1) "The California coastal zone is a distinct and valuable natural resource belonging to all the people and exist- ing as a delicately balanced-eco-system; ...the per- manent protection of the remaining natural and scenic resources of the coastal zone is a paramount concern to present and future residents of the state and nation; ...in order to promote the public safety, health and welfare; and to protect public and private property, wildlife, marine fisheries, and other ocean resources, and the natural environment, it is neces- sary to preserve the ecological balance of the coastal zone and prevent its further deterioration and destruc- tion; it is the policy of the state to preserve, protect, and, where possible, to restore the resources of the coastal zone for the enjoyment of the current and succeeding generations (2) (a) The maintenance, restoration, and enhancement of the overall quality of the coastal zone en- vironment, including, but not limited to, its amenities and aesthetic values. -5- 'a(b) The continued existence of optimum populations' of all species of living organisms'. "(c) The orderly, balanced utilization and preserva- tion, consistent with sound conservation principles, of all living and nonliving coastal zone resources,. Avoidance of irreversible and irretrievable com mitments of coastal zone resources." please explain whether the project is consistent with these re-- oui:ements of law. Use additional paper if ,necessary. 471 Q _Q-SAE St- , SE-CTIO-W III ; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 23. Has an environmental impact statement been prepared for the.project? if sop attach a copy to this application. If not., please so indicates SECTION' VII t ADDITIONAL I-WCP—MAATION REGARDING PROPOSED WORK If you feel you would like to provide more information in order to describe your proposed development in greater detail, please do so and attach it to this application and title it accordingly. SECTION VIII ; CERTIFICATION 24. I hereby certify that to the best of my knowledge the informationin this application and all attached exhibits is full, complete, and correct, and I understand that any misstatement or omission of the requested information or of any information subsequently requested, shall. be ,grounds for denying the permit, for suspending or revoking a permit issued on the basis of these or subsequent representations, or for the seeking of such other- and further relief as may seem proper to the Commission. Signature of .Applicant or Agent /5// o3LA O.FI IN A71 7/,7 ZI OW4. c� 43 VICIN17Y SKETCH NFEWPORT SAY, CALIFORWA asAcr'611:F'6(n:;O' in this x4ec/'/6'7 -'o' i5 MI, o-; J 4.' 4- 4 47l; 40' A) y N / N N � ( i j 7- \ ytvil '411 7c,�ses C� 'C Nj ca . a oI a GpQO.orr S l o PC, maa / N6wpORT �A( CACWcRNIA kes '� SOU�d/n95 ova �.r/orCssBd /n lare�'��ond''drnolcz dapli,5 .below Mco? Lorvei Goy+! L✓orlate. ron9e of di'de 4PPrvx/.n4�®/y !D !�+�•fl,ifr'oroo.- �.ine5 Ore es/ob/'shed ii, 7,4:� y a yl 1 \A, t ,i z P i `�, ti ':�,.._? CT •' .7 ° 'n'.i ! ifi!'') / ��.'r;. ,,, `J""2^'" ✓"' 7 .:^' /i�.: l , CIS A!7RA C I oA...Ji�� CITY OF NE PORT BEACH PERM,HARBOR IT PERMISSION IS HEREBY iM. TO CONS AWCT AT THE WIFE ;i,�wal �mtwAmas OF THE Q'i Aa"7+'2:`3'."� y g�=&TArft . -A}yam+ a s y,R6r .�, y .t }, 4�S � e4 R'^A: ,� p�'S^ �.1TB S n.��S"5w AJ HY43 J.v V�'+�N.w �� �T T.x Y � T. '�i '� Y � 53eY1� ANY �r " V k ,, iii w�+ry�,�a ➢W�3"C'�u .5.�9'r`:A..+u � R ..�;.J, � $.. . b Yh;: "sc .'-i`,.�.�mas:719�p+�K,�: THECfTv AV= `yC12R ��'�v� n.i3C, o,<�ba`*` +F+ .,l..F. �' ,�' )� f.t.�w YY'i:•. Rtai9.m Owen vxumnz v u`� sp.<a g * lz7'IiZ a P' RB 'RYC C S. RD ,,SAT IO, Grano courft , 12-b-2.2iz DATA CC ' -i - PERMNO. 'fTfimfOF NEWPOR-T COHARBOR APPLICATION �.: 7, Caaw rasa :�'� . /i3,..ss• 1 �r1 � _v i. o A,y r38w �srr & 4,Y• CAA arxs=ass & j is i*0 ! c. z�r ts1 cracsra$ below '��aay s�c.��✓��ai�7�;;y' pt Zoi7 fz:v- , TRACT rCUBLOCK 223TRACT - _r , r 1 ! ~ MQ 814 m 1 1 2 '00 '44 e-WP 0rt Boulevard Newport Bead 814 223 I-9 407 william blurocP partners i BEACH HARBOR PERMIT PER"A'SSION IS HERICSY GRAN'T"D TO CONSTRUCT AND MAINTAIN THE FACMiTY SSIOV,;rQ C-N' HEREOF, AT THE SVTZ T-- l",zMV;S440NS OF TAE HARE'OR SCACH, AND ANY SPEC,jt,-.�. r IS NOT THE 443y Of fTV ONLY RIGH7s AND THIS PEF.,,-V 'T T;,- Ci7Y C41isiFCIL S N -CiPAL CO 0 E. IN ACCORDANCE W;Ttl "i 4/- -1114 d7R IT1,11T �V ............... " �4,,F 31 T,� PORT0.1 wr BEACH Y »' CITY OF•"�; �f q ��j �^ LFFM tT + BRY ko orz eons We OIL 'v'�' ''fit . _.l• � � JR iS;M C% \ WEST VtCi lTY MAP JETTYPROFP ILE 9" _ 10` Kim M.Gimum JETTY SaMINGS ARE EXPRESSED IN FEET AND DENOTE ELEVATIONS BASED ON MEAN LOWER LOW WATER. w A f �V •� COO�IL .2 /i s � /VCwp®reT 13LV !D m PLAN VIEN V®_ 'S' ..%e-r n S-recv�-'''::. JOB RD�ESS 2Z70 ,kGWForer'8LV'D I DATE CITY OF NEVVP0,RT ; 'A('�1 HARBOR PEERMIT PERMISSION IS HEREBY GRANTED TO CONSTRUCT AND MAINTAIN THE FACILITY SHOWN ON THE REVERSE HEREOF, AT THE SITE INDICATED, SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE HARBOR PERMIT POLICIES OF NEWPORT BEACH AND ANY SPECIAL CONDITIONS LISTED HEREON. THIS PERMIT IS NOT TRANSFERABLE WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE CRY HARBOR COORDINATOR OR CITY COUNCIL THE RIGHTS GIVEN UNDER THIS PERMIT ARE PERMISSIVE ONLY AND THIS PERMIT MAY BE RWOKED BY THE CITY COUNCIL IN ACCORDANCE WITH 17 OF THE MUI*CIP, CODE. CITY HAR OR COORgIN TOR PERMIT NO. DATE a . I PROJECT LINE - PIER LINE — U,S. BULKHEAD LINE NEWPORT N Iga 30' W HARBOR PROJECT LINE PIER LINE U,S, BULKHEAD LINE i pA- 05, 'a, 30, v -N AI TI-DKIATT\ /F 1 \ \ n 'z s , 5 .,.. :: ........ .�.., ..:,. \ CITY OF NEWPORT f:};EACH HARBOR PERMIT PERMISSION IS HEREBY GRANTED TO CONSTRUCT AND MAINTAIN THE FACILITY SHOWN ON THE REVERSE HEREOF, AT THE SITE INDICATED, SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE HARBOR PERMIT POLICIES OF NEWPORT BEACH AND ANY SPECIAL CONDITIONS LISTED HEREON, THIS PERMIT IS NOT TRANSFERABLE WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF IWE Cf#Y HARBOR COORDINATOR OR CITY COUNCIL. THE RIGHTS GPVEN UNDER THIS PERMIT ARE PERMISSIVE ONLY AND THIS PERMIT MAY BE R ED BY THE CITY COUNCIL IN ACCORDANCE WITH T7 OF THE WCIP CODE. �� ern �j /�L o L CITY HAR OR, COOKO 1N PERMIT NO. - ®A E G M V 4✓ u �jT CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 86' WALL/sra-G0 Z- f 9.0 CITY OF ��� I : t 7.9 BUL1lNE--,Q4 NEWPORT BERCH i UPPER ^� •O WEST - NEWPORT " t aw I / cr EAg� 00 ..5 ; PACIFIC o� CERN PIER Ll WEST VICINITY MRP JEM EFSr PROFILE V ,Fr err, MlFa M , JETTY SOLMINGS ARE EXPRESSED IN FEET AND DENOTE ELEVATIONS BASED ON MEAN LOWER LOW WATER. D , 'LX g«o ro - CX�STIIJG �. R TO T% i LXIS7 r . LD�G CA2 /i 13 /VLF WP0A?T 13LV D m PLAN VIEW 1' = 60' APPLICANT'S NAME WILLIA44 L . 8LUIOOCK JOB ADDRESS 2Z00 , /L=WP02i &t v0 DRTE 71 /G /9S NEWPORT HARBOR PROJECT LINE PROJECT LINE [-A • 1 ING DUCT - PI ER LI NE PIER LINE = PROPOSED NEW DOCKS ' t LXI��TING DULL; � PROPOSED NEW DOCKS 1 U BE RE�9U��'ED t U.S, BULKHEAD LINE j U.S, BULKHEAD LINE U SI it - E,tI Tlhdri� llULK; .�t,L I LL NIL-- DPINGLJ a -- IO' PUBLIC�P1I I11HUR EPi , `1 M ..... . '. ACCESS EASEMENT M �_-: _ 10' PUBLIC �p _ .. - ;_:... ACCESS EASEMENT m i EX I IIG FIILKHE l / ; PR OPOSED NEW BULKHEAD ED N B H D I1117) JA ! k1L / IUPIN5 r r 1 !;NI•I. nl'1�.,�iIJP _��� T i,STIPC, bJ i.HEA-[i — i! >- L%�l INi_i IR l� LJ li i CF,; �r iE U PH"O E_ TU F RE O ; HD EXISTING BUILDIN 41 a 50,051 �E T . If30 is/ N TIII3ER 4. i' South Coast Boatyard _ Design Center _ 395,00, 300 li 0' 0' 0' ALTERNATIVE 1 GRAPHIC SCALE NOBLE— CONSULTANTS, INC: Figure October 4, 2000 Pete Stewart South Coast Shipyard 2300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, Ca 92663 Re: Municipal Code berthing regulations Dear Mr. Stewart: This division is responsible for compliance with The City of Newport Beach Municipal Code Chapter 17 "Harbor Regulations". The Orange County Sheriff Harbor Department has notified us that South Coast Shipyard has had numerous violations of Chapter 17.20.010 and 17.20.020. "Vessel Tie-up Method." Specifically, South Coast Shipyard has "rafted" out from the end of the dock several boats and these boats have remained rafted overnight. The Harbor Resources Division understands that a shipyard must move boats around during the workday and the need for rafting. However, this must be a temporary situation and should not be overnight berthing. We have requested the Harbor Department assist in the enforcement of the above stated sections of the Municipal Code. Please be advised that starting on Monday October 9, 2000, the Harbor Patrolmen will cite boats rafted out from docks at the Shipyard after your normal business hours and weekends. If you have any questions in regards to this matter, please call 949-644-3043. Sincerely, Wes Armand Cc: Tony Melum Capt Marty Kasules Deputy Pat Douglas 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beaeh i /SDI 00 'bCAL t +rtr ® C /4.040 l�z��.j�3�--- .�� N�O.I •�y`M Q s� aeMn I'� °qq � 3 :a v8a. a+ot t/fCtAj6i'i° SAC€i'°F$��� r 3 //�� ` Nawvasar SAY Cqt+ioRfKJ,4 a /s7��• � ���� So[r+�;rin9s ore a+x,�trtssart /» ist� and alsnoi� dvp�h,s 6e/ow Mcn.•! Lover Lover �.'®r��r. r?�Jox�..�.os :! ro»gam+ of 1iC� Qpprvxi.upsl�ly t0 /ae� Hcar�ar tiles are esloblo'gA,am( u, l(Alf3 SCCJ.av ®,F'N�arparf. Scp: Dre VI i; Lill it G . zad :-sue Q ^ r- F , n � � ti� � a d oam `v tl a � e �: etss� �a •'� a r �, a,.4`a « a ,� �; u '� # I '®^.. � !l i 1 ,o/ a'�t. d a' •e,ry 8 .s �� o.l ' i \ 1 i Fvo Ip40 f, 1 .,,vEuiirGi�� SoeU&'I n95 o'-rx aV', "A s b C10 kV L o fv,Cr G o W inlG Y'C,r . ra,nye vF }!dc GP�nvx/mp�a/y !O �eerE /-/aropr '.nc are Ns�Gble'sheal /v, 76d" , s&c,'son 0I'Iz ,rvoif bar N E w P o R T g A ti TRACT N9 694 1 l N g� i Ufl ,11 I �o *.' BLOCK m 223 - 0 t I TRACT �. . V a 614 0° 1 o w. ,1 i 1 1� ICI r J O i 1 i COr•1 J o J Ii 6 d'� Y A U i:.i — ...� z 'J • 'v r„� .x +c i—� S �'.-3 N''�S J CwG:I✓ f m.J ✓�! F.... ,:. ..."' _ _" ,.' .e.,.,...,. to E w vO R T P.O. BOX 1768, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658-8915 October 4, 2000 Pete Stewart South Coast Shipyard 2300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, Ca 92663 Re: Municipal Code berthing regulations Dear Mr. Stewart: This division is responsible for compliance with The City of Newport Beach Municipal Code Chapter 17 "Harbor Regulations". The Orange County Sheriff Harbor Department has notified us that South Coast Shipyard has had numerous violations of Chapter 17.20.010 and 17.20.020. "Vessel Tie-up Method." Specifically, South Coast Shipyard has "rafted" out from the end of the dock several boats and these boats have remained rafted overnight. The Harbor Resources Division understands that a shipyard must move boats around during the workday and the need for rafting. However, this must be a temporary situation and should not be overnight berthing. We have requested the Harbor Department assist in the enforcement of the above stated sections of the Municipal Code. Please be advised that starting on Monday October 9, 2000, the Harbor Patrolmen will cite boats rafted out from docks at the Shipyard after your normal business hours and weekends. If you have any questions in regards to this matter, please call 949-644-3043. Sincerely, Wes Armand Cc: Tony Melum Capt Marty Kasules Deputy Pat Douglas 3300 Newport Boulevard, Ne�wport Beach _— _ = 0►LL-0OL 16I01 9IYi 0.9LL•OO9 level 13MONd 9818•Log lasl Xvd 0099489 IOLLI W014d �^• �-�- ��— 99998 YO VDV28 1tl0dMM LLLOB YO '91YN Altl3A3B gp9L8 YO 'HOY38 1tlOdM3N OBYAiIII00 IUOdM3M LLLL OOL 31MN3 'Otl11A31Ig8 YOINON WAYS L988 SN33NpN3 NYnLOfIt1L5 ONLLln5N0O A ' a �n L'dS 'Otll `;tl9WdolGAB OMYA3INON 1HOdA3N 0 e O 0013 Oil `eu�isW Feg ;AodlAeN '3AII 'S3LdIDOSSY 7 e 1Ntlonddtl/-AMM 43.0 VNIUVW AVS I HOdM3N Np$g,�pg ty�Z�A♦ �,s�` -jr—I". a, s tl ��S N @� I s ;gy 1'r �� II m n k '*•., i ^.,r _ Lt 6 aN� � -�\ �@ i it �s I �@ I ii •y, 'h(i; ga E:_ :Lg� � __ - - g z w Ael? ss_ III w„ j a oil" il 1 b n \ ¢� •o2�/.s a aka*i a 9� tl 8 g8 `�K m sat'a �a g is a a b ar � l- § g ak @a d - s Ilis ,,\ •\ �d. Y � � uaB €w J y ••,aA wA �y \ a_zi o�`k jm Foo 1 im a a ysmn g 1= a aooe ro •3 , `y mZ N 3.0£.L LOLN a 0 . 00 -- 3 z ZI I r a •\ � �'� a�= g i I W e H Nero � . \ o•� � � � ''' j e'lll` 'a§ J Q m O n w z _ OD e eye.\ N b 4 i 2, Z z AI H 1 -, m w @ 8 ME CONC Pill DESIGNATION TYP, SEE my V'x PERMANENT BERTHING BOAT TYP AT SLIPS I THRU 7 AND 8 THRU 18 - ­\ _-0,17 �; rZ "N NEWPORT BAY "A 1b 4_' BAYWARD UMIT OF PIERS PER ITEM 25(6) 61 (H) OF HARBOR X % PERMIT POLICIES AS AMENDED AUGUST 14, 1972 v; 71 15 opa N� %kr­ Iv, PROJECT LINE PER U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERING MAP N! j '11"� vAi, 0 0 . .... . ...... PROPERTY LINE EXTENDED INTO BAY I X1, PROPOSED 15'x 8' CONC LANDING r­-EX1S'nNG SEAWALL AT THE ADJACENT PROPERTY TO REMAIN BE PROTECTED s, t EXISTING BOATYARD AT THE ADJACENT PROPERTY 0,1 ", 1� \1 I 1 11"", I.",,Ff _­ 1� <]x j -- -_ OF HA 0 LINES, NEW ORI UAT A UU 1/4-ZID-0 ------ . ........ All EYOND !w LINE OF MAXIMUM ALLOWED BOAT ENCROACHMENT B AT SLIPS 6, 7, 16 & 17­­­­11, THE BAYWARD LIMIT 'A "A A 5- A df "A' e, PROPER"IY LINE'1v 40 EDGE OF THE 20-0 5-0 20-0 5­0 20-0 5-0 20-0 5-0 20-0 5-0 5-0 --e-, � \% "� . ......... ...... -------- --- k EXISTING DOCK V 0 AT THE Ok":E 18'-10y2"* 7 ADJACENT CLR PROPERTY ------- CONC PILE TYP, SEE j ff L EEO, 4 I Lv I H V ji t" I BERTHING OF VESSELS AT SLIP 19 MAY SE PERMITTED ERHEAD LINE RTY LINE )ED INTO BAY �WALL AT THE ZOPERTY TO PROTECTED �ATING DOCK 0 PROIADED THE FOLLO"NG: \�J PROPOSED 80' LG x 5' VADE 1.1 BERTHING IS NOT PERMITTED OVERNIGHT 4- - --4- - 4 ADA COMPLIANT RAMP IT 10 1.2 VESSELS SHALL NOT BERTH FOR A PERIOD It `-7 -7 EXCEEDING TWO HOURS + i 1.3 VESSELS MAY NOT EXCEED A HEIGHT OF FOUR FEE V, 7_4\ PROPERTY LINE=BULKHEAD 44 � I ii I 11 1 ", 11 ABOVE THE ADJACENT PUBUC WALKWAY ;H 'o LINE, STA110N No.119 Z vy, 1.4 BERTHING VESSELS SHALL BE IN COMPLIANCE WTH nRE CODE ACCESS STANDARDS H 0,1 1 N46*07*43"W 279.24 o if Ij 1 % KEY PANEL 14! "1'15 1 Ill 2 11 11131 It g h x 1k \71 6 1 BASEMENT WALL OF THE CONC DECK BY OTHERS, PROPOSED BLDG WALL & i�­FF.-+11.5' M1. . Vtr s i % EDGE OF HEAD DEFERRED SUBMITTAL—, SLAB BY OTHERS, OR +11,32' NA\088 PROPOSED STRUCTURE DEFERRED SUBM1TALL_____. WALK �k GUARDRAIL BY OTHERS, C U. 0 UNE OF EXCAVAII ON DEFERRED SUBMITTAL, _4 CANT CONC DECK % EDGE Of- k I \%, i j BEHIND SEAWALL DURING (DEFERRED SUBMITTAL) TYP TOP OF CONC DECK CONSTRUC'nON, BACKFILL TO TOP OF COPING & v ELEV - +9.83' MLLW - - COMPACT AS REOD- u\ OR +9�6 -A SKEWED 1Y�-O EPDXY I ­,­­ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 'g, (01 ;w ai� COATED DYIMDAG THREADBAR -0 k I 'nE-ROD TYP ATTWO CORNERS TOP OF COPING 4Y awe ELEV - +9.0' PROPOSED PRECAST CONC 27' 4"* i 11 KEY PA EL se BULKHEAD PANEL TYP !E Al, 6 CONT CONC COPING-—- CONT Caic COPING TYP PRWOSED CAST IN PLACE: 'nE-ROD TYP, 4 0 'X( PIROPOSEL) MIN IWO EPDXY COATIEO SEE PLAN MEAN HIGH TIDE LEVEL 7' -+4.6 _MX DYWDAG THREADBAR TIE -ROD TYP LA QR_ + PROPOSED V 30' LG x 4' )MDE RAMP --PROPERTY LINE=BULKHEAD KEY PANEL 4�49* NAY088 11 'k 4) Ib :ON 0 10'x 8' CONC LANDING LINE, STATION No.120 V� 100, N1 9*11 '57"W 19 z 7.68' 5 1 0 N SKEWED EDGE OF CANT DECK BULKHEAD WALL PANEL TYP ov EDGE OF HEADWALK 21 DREDqE,/�� --4.0' M.L.LW. N18*50'00"W 49.88 PROPOSED PRECAST CONC BULKHEAD PANEL TYP, AT v� PROPOSED STRUCT M SLAB, PROTEC'nON & to �J' BASE SLABS BY OTHERS, PROPOSED CASTIN PLACE BOT OF PANELS ED SU8M1TALL-------/ > CONT CONC COPING TYP EDGE OF 4' CANT CONC DECK PROPERTY LINE TYP BULKHEAD SECTION N.T.S. A TEMPORARY TWO HOUR BERTHING ASITOR'S BOAT AT SUP 19 TYP, SEE NOTES ABOVE—- :c w KEY PANELS 00 0 uj 0) IL \s,. z o 0 IL 0 1. CONCRETE PILE SCHEDULE 01 10 039 0 TMOTAL pa p" CUT OFF QUAN'"TY OF )r# DABEDMENT 0) w 0 TYPIE CAJAN*nTY SZE ELEVA'nON PRESTWSSNO L04M KLOW LENGTH Us 44 z I u) STRANDS DREDGE UNE z z 16 24" SO +12' M11�W� 24 is 40 I uj -2 3 10 18" SO +12' M.L.L.W. 12 15 ::-314 0 w BASEMENT WALL OF THE *,q, 0 X�o w z PROPOSED STRUCTURE 3 4 18" SO 9A7' M11.W. 12 15 30 (DEFERRED SUBMITTAL) TYP z z w W 0. u� cc. KEY PANEL PILE SCHEDULE N,T.S� w 4 je 0 Z ­0 ik L wo ........ . . EEL GRASS INSPECTION 1',,,SEAW,A,LLtL)OCK'-',P-1,DWG, 10/24/200712,36 W PM, ambOt N.T.S� I c us I` OF PIERSI 1 (H) OF HARBOR PERMIT POLICIES AS AMENDED AUGUST 14, 1972 P -- .�..� PROJECT LINE PER U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERING MAP OF HARBOR LINES, NEWPORT BAY HARBOR (12-26-50) LINE OF MAXIMUMLENCROACHMENT BEYOND THE BAYWARD LIMIT SLIPS 6, `, 16 &1 ' NEWPORT THIS CONTINUOUS U E INDICATES EDGE THE OF PROPOSED CANT CONC DECK DARKENED AREA INDICATE LOC MN OF THE EXISTING BULKHEAD TYP THE HEAVY DASHED DINE INDICATE PROPOSED PRECAST CONC iL HE PANELS & CAST IN 'LA COI CONC COPING TYP �k�i✓✓ 4W � ,.r 7. ti qp :t THEC CAN DWG - THE U(;HT DASHED LIMES INDICATE THE `"L€CIE OF THE E I IING FLOATING DOCKS PROPERTY LINE=BULKHEAD LINE 1 1 197.68 9 wt r I .�� LLJ 14 I t t I I I i i PROPERTY LINE a 1 "2. `$ NEWPORT BOULEVARD CENTERUNE PROPERTY LINE EXTENDED INTO BAY PROPOSED C NC PILE TYP, EEC , PROPERTY LINE EL GRASS INSPECTION f l sass w` Cie Rhin 1 t�f 5 ro t g p • Eelgrass within 1 - 30' cif project 0. 77T��� 1 Signature I I nspedicon Date & ii I �K 11 1;3 AWALL+DOC'K'SI'-1Ai3WG' 024120071.34'44PNi,amhOl „ FOR INFO NOT SHOWN, SEE DRANNG 1. . PROPOSED BUILDINO WALLS NOT SHOWN FOR CLARITY, 21 'V TY.-OF NEWPORT BEHCH OF Jz ' - el -IC -A CITY NEUPORT 13ERCH iEST 12- B�AL" my PRCIF- OCE PIER 7 -1"C� 5 0 7- 7_01,4' RN P20P0,5&-D A1\1CA-10)e FlUkIC JEM PROF I LE 1 w 40, TtZ3 cal t VICINITY MAP EFST �EM SO(JNDINGS ARE MESSED IN FEET AND DENOTE ELURTIONSP-11 ON MERN LOWER. LOW WATER. 1>3 C> (�- - y o C3,� i t� s �e�� a� �d 2 dffl R4MMME A mmmw Sv mmw J.. Materials; US or U10 11 ABX MARINE DF PLYWOOD Stainless Steel or Galvanized Bolts Walking surfaces shall have skid resistant finish, such as unpainted timber or grit on Urnber. t EI-BRIDGEPORT: 2312 NEWPORT BLVD., NEWPORT BEACH %­1 %— '�: -�C� C_-�� :�G I I to LPrihf-Fbrm:7 Please print 3 copies HARBOR RESOURCES DIV. jI Y MOF JU WPORT BEACH Worksheet for Building/Fire Permit App1icaiion/6 City of Newport Beach Building Department 1. Project Address (Not mailing address) Floor Suite No ___ LZ312 Newport Blvd. (dock}, Newport Beach, CA_ �_92663 F Legal Description Lot Block Tract .9 Units 2. Description of Work Re -decking and float inspection for slips #14 through #22 (see attached site:, plan. Tenant Name if Commercial ort, LLC New (: Add rX Alter Demo _ Check Appropriate Box for Applicant/Notificabon Information Use Stories Valuation $ E010!!-_00 ,q Ft (new/add/extended) 17X,il 3. Owner's Name Last First Afshin Owner's Address Owners E-mail Address 9952 S. Santa Monica Blvd., #200 etcohomes.com Telephone city State ECA Zip E90212 310-691-5511 5 4.ArchitectlDeslgner's Name Last First Lic. No. Architect/Designer's Address Architect/Designer's E-mail Address City i state Zip Telephone S. Engineer's Name Last First Lic. No. Engineer's Address Engineer's E-mail Address city state Zip Telephone 6. Contractor's Name Last ETCO HOMES I First Lic. No. Class Contractor's Address Contractor's E-mail Address 9952 S. Santa Monica Blvd. Suite 200 y etcohomes.com cityState [CA Zi s P Telephone 310-691-5511 OFFICE USE ONLY PERMIT NO. TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION PLAN CHECK NO. PLAN CHECK FEE OCCUPANCY- GROUP PLAN CHECK ENG. OF NEWPORT BERTH CITY OF NERPORT BERM r� ta:ST r parr O BRY j oCERN PIER JEM WEST VICINITY MRP EFsr ZEM PROACI LINE PIER LIK U.S &k0kAD LIIt --\ r /./ // v PUBLIC'-.-t ACCESS EASEMENT EXISTING Q(14(AD INSUU KV CCPUIG AND ANCNOR SYSTEM �'/L 2Nl 40 L /NL" �. GANGW�IY ���Di�nscG Z nc, ILI 11 ;\ Al L-`X1srrNc B o no%✓! P20PO.SE"D ANC-/d,P p/L /NC J PFIOF I LE V = 40,` Ty�icat SOUNDINGS RRE EXPRESSED IN BEET FIND DENOTE ELEVATIONS &LASED ON MERN LOWER LOW WRTER. NEWPORT HARBOR PROXCI LINE EXISIX, ms PIER Utf ID BE REMQYEll ri t ExiSTING DUCXS PROPOSED N V WS r To BE REMOVED r ' PROF I AV DECKS v ' — S111U(, DLLIHAD IAII NEV calm � AND AlCU SYSTEM itli ACCESS I EASE!(NI lr PUOSED AEV RIKKAD i i KMDAD QTO, BE REPLLAACU t �! ' EX1SIiNG etRr,I{A6/ `--•- ; 1 W IQ K REPLACED 11 EXISTING BUILD — Jj EXIS,. TIKSER MIDGE , g1� EEL -GRASS. -INSPECTION South Coast 8oaiynrd /8 NO EEL GRASS V111TRKF—OF & WJCT Design Center %} ® EEL GRASS IN THE PROJEC,TA,' A SIGNATURE HARBOR RESOURCES DIV CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PIr IT # ;/DAT G' RPPLICP�NT'S NAME Sau- 'h Cras-t hi.p JOB ADDRESS a3oa Rawp-�k -8IV DOTE �(zc� l o t Rs d- -. d s Iaal7S Pull m � ix a O .v y `'"'°""�"'I''llllllllll�iiilll'illlllllllllllllll IIII��I1�1I�III�III�IIIII>hllll , mm��jjjjppp°Innnunannm� 111 Q cc 'c a W w y W U Q Z O COm U ui +, H O CL 3 OQz A Ci OF NEWPOR T BEACH ;"8 Jos J ro 4'.0 6eoch < �,OI�PN i y'ti P car' ®e,,a p R Q Bsc BaA I v G � lYopo' g'40 20 IOC 1'E' ^^ e VICiNJ1Ti Y k E T ir; wasr�crryV �eA� '� /�- Nawvot�s v.vY C,4t IGoctntla o yp i it 5'04/rnd/n95 Ora eX/0rCssed /n feed ora 0�e"O/e depths be%w /+-Icon Gower Gow Wo¢er.-Y1ox/.T. m ro.�9e of fld� oPProxr.,�o�ar/y !o �cef /Harao'- t- Ore esiob//•shed /r7 is , secfion of i1/c„rPorf BuY. NSG CA5 ro h1=w [AY60 7 N E w PC, 4 T el A Y / 1 '1 ) .cs w u!• I I: i TRACT o� I M, ovm NQ 614 u ... .� n1 '.II II •1\ d'�J e I (U I 4.� \ ,.✓ 5 1 t I N 1 � 4 I u I0 n BLOCK i m I 8 223 - - — LL e i i 0 1 TRACT �! y� Z r� 0 w 1 H 1 NQ 814 SOUTH COAST SHIPYARD aDE S:Gl� 1 ,aPPcic.4Nr; ' r✓A'%'C ^w f'3ewportBoulevard °.n°.u..a N E W PO R T J :- v Newport Beach 814 223 1-9 �x Cif'-Y "OF NEWPORT BEACH HARBOR APPLICATION MO. T Lca Beoeh 1 !HOBS• �-'� wswPo.rr o$'' %'ti a � R Ya � g.ccBOR OA4459q 40 2 0 O ; C04oNR O ® ogc t 1 t� -p- 9/ t C I iV I tTi�/ S k E! 4► H tvrsr JEtry `° '� E�asr i y NEWPgRr SAY CAL tFoRha/A Jerry o y2 � � - i /)/i� R. ! I - (mil 6 •• r T F . So[ind�nQs ore expr�ss�d i» feef o»d �enofe dep>hs be%w ILIeO7 LOWer Law 1�'afen /✓J¢x/.rstim ron9e of 000rcox/rn¢Je/Y /0 1cep Alarbor /i%Je5 clre es�ob/�•53,ed m �h�s .Je�:ficn ofNewP©r/ Bar / j .. N E w P o R T 6 A I o- ; r Joor ws r _� ___�// % ICI �� / i'�w'T'Ei `s•'s°"r'. 77 } �.`t TRACT a N4 O T�.. ' .wrvwr 694 � 4CAtWLi �pS�wy � 1 , N N , N 1 I'' �� NI ai'3o•w Q6 1 i - Y 11 L449TIN4 E3x£ ' ,�v,0 � U O ; BLOCK 223 w � Z TRACT f n i _ N4 694 Ip f a SOUTH CAST SHIPYARD & iESZG 2212 Newport Boulevard e NEWPORT V D..—__— Newport Beach 814 223 1_9 risue:vs" ,t Z0CA' w 1 i am, h1 urock & par1,rer ;, s t j J 1 D 77 � �4A +---------- - SEEAs;. COMPS 0 me err Parma