HomeMy WebLinkAboutM2012-0028tiNT OF
G4 <; e •
SFO STATES OF r�wQ • •
Regulatory Division
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
LOS ANGELES DISTRICT CORPS OF ENGINEERS -
P.O. BOX 532711
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90053-2325
September 19, 2012
Jacquelyn Chung
Swift Slip Dock and Pier Builders, Inc.
2027 Placentia Avenue
Costa Mesa, California 92627
Dear Ms. Chung:
Reference is made to your request dated May 14, 2012 (File No. SPL-2012-00299-BLR).
Under the provisions of Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of March 3, 1899 (33 U.S.C.
403), you are hereby authorized to conduct the work described below in project SPL-2012-00299-
BLR, 601 Lido Dr. within the city of Newport Beach, Orange County, California (Figure 1).
Specifically, you are authorized to conduct the following regulated activities:
1. Remove an existing boat dock, consisting of a 4 -foot by 24 -foot gangway and 65 -foot by
82 -foot U -dock configuration that covers approximately 0.0319 acres (1,392 square feet)
(Figure 2).
2. Installa like -for -like boat dock replacement, consisting of a 4 -foot by 24 -foot gangway
and 65 -foot by 82 -foot U -dock configuration that covers approximately 0.0319 acres
(1,392 square feet) (Figure 2).
The owner or authorized responsible official must sign and date all copies of this Letter of
Permission (LOP) indicating that he/she agrees to the work as described and will comply with all
conditions. One of the signed copies of this Letter of Permission must be returned to the Corps of
Engineers Regulatory Division. In addition, please use the two attached postcards to notify this
office as to the dates of commencement (within 10 days prior to the start of construction) and
completion of the activity (within 10 days following the end of construction).
Furthermore, you are hereby advised that the Corps of Engineers has established an
Administrative Appeal Process which is fully described in 33 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)
Part 331. The complete appeal process is diagrammed in the enclosed Appendix A.
Please be advised that you can now comment on your experience with Regulatory
Division by accessing the Corps web -based customer survey form at:
http://per2.EM.usace.anny.mil/survey.html.
Thank you for participating in our regulatory program. If you have any questions, please
contact Bonnie Rogers at 213-452-3372 or via e-mail at Bonnie.L.Rogers@usace.army.mil.
-2 -
Sincerely,
SWENSON.DANIEL.PA Digitally signed by
S W ENSON. DAN I EL.PATTE RSON.1081348363
TTERSON.108134836DN: c=US,o=U.S.Government, ou=DoD,ou=PKI,
ou=USA,
3 cn=SWENSON.DANIEL.PATTERSON.1081348363
Date: 2012.09.1915:30:25 -07'00'
Daniel P. Swenson, D. Env
Chief, L.A. & San Bernardino Section
North Coast Branch
Regulatory Division
Enclosure(s)
PERMITTEE DATE
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 LOP will continue to be binding on the new
owner(s) of the property. To validate the transfer of this permit and the liabilities associated with
compliance with its terms and conditions, have the transferee sign and date below.
TRANSFEREE DATE
PERMIT CONDITIONS
General Conditions:
1. The time limit for completing the authorized activity ends on September 19, 2014. 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 party 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 of this permit from this office,. which may require restoration of the area.
-3-
3. 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. 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.
Furthermore, you must comply with the following non -discretionary Special Conditions:
Special Conditions:
1. 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 CFR part 329.
2. No earthwork is authorized by this LOP.
3. 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.
4. No other modifications or work shall occur to the structure permitted herein.
5. A pre -construction survey of the project area for eelgrass shall be conducted in accordance
with the Southern California Eelgrass Mitigation Policy (SCEMP) (see
http://swr.nmfs.noaa.gov/hcd/Tolicies/EELPOLrevll final.pdf) not earlier than 90 calendar
days prior to construction and not later than 30 calendar days prior to construction. The
results of that survey shall be furnished to the Corps Regulatory Division, National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS), and the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) at least
-4-
15 calendar days prior to initiation of work in navigable waters. If the Corps Regulatory
Division determines eelgrass may be impacted by project -related activities, further eelgrass
monitoring and compensatory mitigation may be required, as described in the SCEMP.
6. 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 ov/hcd/caulerpa/ccp pdf) not earlier than 90 calendar days prior to
construction and not later than 30 calendar days prior to construction. The results of that
survey shall be furnished to the Corps Regulatory Division, NMFS, and 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 NMFS and CDFG
7. 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 be placed where it may be washed by rainfall or runoff into waters of the
iJnit%d States. Upon i ompieiioii of the project t author iZed herein, any and all excess iiiaLeriai
or debris shall be completely removed from the work area and disposed of in an appropriate
upland site.
8. 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)
Telephone: 510-437-2980
E-mail: d11LNM@uscg.mil
Website: http://www.uscg.mil/dp/Inmrequest.asp
U.S. Coast Guard, Sector LA -LB. (COTP)
Telephone: 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 15 calendar days prior to commencing work and as project
information changes. The notification shall be provided by e-mail with at least the
following information, transmitted as an attached Word or PDF file: -
i. Project description including the type of operation (i.e. dredging, diving,
construction, etc);
ii. Location of operation, including Latitude/Longitude (NAD 83);
iii. Work start and completion dates and the expected duration of operations. The Coast
Guard needs to be notified if these dates change;
-5 -
iv. Vessels involved in the operation (name, size and type);
v. VHF -FM radio frequencies monitored by vessels on scene;
vi. Point of contact and 24-hour phone number;
vii. Potential hazards to navigation;
viii. Chart number for the area of operation; and
ix. The Corps Regulatory Division recommends 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 CFR 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 United States, 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 United
States 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.
9. 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 Administration for chart updating:
Gerald E. Wheaton, NOAA, Regional Manager, West Coast and Pacific Ocean, DOD Center
Monterey Bay, Room 5082, Seaside, California 93955-6711
10. 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
I on
permittee will be required, upon due notice from the Corps 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.
Further Information:
1. Congressional Authorities: You have been authorized to undertake the activity described above
pursuant to Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1599 (33 U.S.C. 403).
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
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.
0
LOSANGELES DISTRICT
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
NOTIFICATION OF COMMENCEMENT OF WORK
FOR
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PERMIT
Permit Number:
SPL-2012-00299-BLR
Name of Permittee:
Gary Craigmile
Date of Issuance:
September 19, 2012
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:
• '
X'
(1) E-MAIL a statement including all the above information to:
B_qnnie.L.Rogers@usace.army.mil
(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-2012-00299-BLR
Los Angeles District
PO Box 532711
Los Angeles, California 90053-2325
0
LOS ANGELES DISTRICT
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
Permit Dumber:
SPL-2012-00299-BLR
Dame of Permittee:
601 Lido Homeowners Association; Gary Craigmile
Date of Issuance:
September 19, 2012
Date work in waters of the U.S. completed:
Construction period (in weeks):
Dame & 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:
Bonnie,IJ.Ro, ers�usace.ar y.miI
(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-2012-00299-BLR
Los Angeles District
PO Box 532711
Los Angeles, California 90053-2325
-10—
'I I A` ° AIS I IST TI E T ANSI C. . SID
. T 'I° Al l
Applicant: Cary Craigmile File Number: SPL -2012-00299
bate: 20120919
Attached is:
See Section below
X
INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission)
A
PROFFERED PERMIT Standard Per°mit or Letter of omission
B
PERMIT DENIAL
C
APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
D
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
E
SECTION I - The following identifies your rights and options regardingan administrative appeal of the above
decision. Additional information may be found at h/ wwN sac any mit/ceew`/p g 5. /Irgg, ials„ a x
or Corps regulations at 33 CFR fart 331,
A. INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit.
* ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the
district engineer for final authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the
LOP and your work is authorized. Your signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means
that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and
conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit,
OBJECT: If you object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein,
you may request that the permit be modified accordingly. You must complete Section II of this form and
return the form to the district engineer. Your objections must be received by the district engineer within 60
days of the date of this notice, or you will forfeit your right to appeal the permit in the future. Upon receipt
of your letter, the district engineer will evaluate your objections and may: (a) modify the permit to address
all of your concerns, (b) modify the permit to address some of your objections, or (c) not modify the permit
having determined that the permit should be issued as previously written. Amer evaluating your
objections, the district engineer will send you a proffered permit for your reconsideration, as indicated in
Section B below.
B. PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or appeal the permit.
ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the
district engineer for final authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the
LOP and your work is authorized. Your signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means
that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and
conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit.
APPEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and
conditions therein, you may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers administrative
Appeal Process by completing Section 11 of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This
farm must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice. _
C° PERMIT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial of a permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative
Appeal Process by completing Section II of this -form and sending the form to the division engineer.
This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice,
-11-
D. APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You may accept or appeal the approved JD or
provide new information.
® ACCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD. Failure to notify the Corps
within 60 days of the date of this notice means that you accept the approved JD in its entirety, and waive
all rights to appeal the approved JD.
® APPEAL: If you disagree with the approved JD, you may appeal the approved JD under the Corps of
Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to
the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of
this notice.
E. PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You do not need to respond to the Corps
regarding the preliminary JD. The Preliminary JD is not appealable. If you wish, you may request an
approved JD (which may be appealed), by contacting the Corps district for further instruction. Also you
may provide new information for further consideration by the Corps to reevaluate the JD.
REASONS FOR APPEAL OR OBJECTIONS: (Describe your reasons for appealing the decision or your
objections to an initial proffered permit in clear concise statements. You may attach additional information to
this form to clarify where your reasons or objections are addressed in the administrative record.)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The appeal is limited to a review of the administrative record, the Corps
memorandum for the record of the appeal conference or meeting, and any supplemental information that the
review officer has determined is needed to clarify the administrative record. Neither the appellant nor the
Corps may add new information or analyses to the record. However, you may provide additional information
to clarifv the location of information that is alreadv in the administrative record.
M
If you have questions regarding this decision and/or
If you only have questions regarding the appeal —
the appeal process you may contact:
process you may also contact:
Bonnie Rogers
Thomas J, Cavanaugh
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Division
Administrative Appeal review Officer,
ATTNi: CESPL-RG-SPL-2012-00299-BLr
South Pacific Division
Los Angeles District
1455 Market Street, 2052D
PD Box 532711
San Francisco, California 94103-1399
Los Angeles, California 900532325
Phone: (415) 503-6574 Fax: (415) 503-6646
Phone: (213) 452-3372
Email: 13onnie.L.rogers@usace.army.mil
Email: Thomas.J.Cavanaugh@usace.army.mil
RICHT OF ENTRY: Your signature below grants the right of entry to Corps of Engineers personnel, and any
government consultants, to conduct investigations of the project site during the course of the appeal process.
You will be provided a 15 day notice of any site investigation, and will have the opportunity to participate in
all site investigations.
Signature of a pellant or agent.
Dade:
t etepnone number.
SPD version revised
December] 75 2010
III 1111 6-
T1,71MVI 411 � 1! 11 I'MOTOW'"
lnit�-q,, proffpred
permit sent to
applicant.
Applicanti'Corps sgn standard L)Ces
perp .,il or ip,*cnot acr,,eptg kip P1 ica, tt acre ptZ-1�
letter of permission.
Irn
to mis Pid condition-, of the
4----
Tho project ;S a�.ithorizcd- Yes iniL-�� proff-red
pe r, r�, it?
No
A�plicat.t sends specific objert,oms to
district en-gineer. The district erygirleer
wAl either modify the pei-rrft to remove all
objectiona0le ccn.d4dons, remove
of the objectionable conditions, or not rvI
Vire parmit. A pemiA s serit to the
applk;,w-t fbe re-considefation with ar-,-- NAP
and an FIFA form.
A,,,)pIicar,,7YCorp,s , rt standard Does the
permit or applicant accepts applicant accept the
lip
letter of pormission and condiric"ns of
he proffered
permit? The project ,,,5 aithorized. Yes
m
Appjicant declines the proffered permit.
The dechnod r�,,mj' rt -L: 6p
appealed bysubrTTR.Uir1,g, a RFA to the
division engineer witiin 60 da -,v' of the
date of the NAP f-aep Appendix A"
9
STATE OF CALIFORNIA—NATURAL RESOURCES AGENCY EDMUND G. BROWN, JR., Governor
CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION
SOUTH COAST DISTRICT
200 Oceangate, 10th Floor c,EIVE®
LONG BEACH, CA 90802-4416
(562) 590-5071 FAX (562) 590-5084
www.coastal.ca.gov COMMUNITY
AUG 13 2012 Date: August 10, 2012
Mr. Gary Craigmile 5-12-136
601 Lido Park Drive DEVELOPMENT Z
Newport Beach, CA 92663 �y ! �y
OF //EwPOR1
NOTICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE PERMIT EFFECTIVENESS
Please be advised that the Administrative Permit with the above permit number
which was sent to you on July 20, 2012 and was reported to the
Commission on Thursday, August 9, 2012 is now fully effective.
Development of your project is subject to compliance with all terms and conditions
specified in the Administrative Permit.
Should you have any questions please contact our office.
Sincerely,
CHARLES LESTER
Executive Director
By: LILIANA ROMAN
Coastal Program Analyst
cc: Local Planning Dept.
Swift Slip Dock & Pier Builders, Inc., Attn: Peter Swift / Jacquelyn Chung
1W CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION
SauthCoastRegion '
CITY OF NEWPORT BERCH
MAY 14 2012 L-
CITY OF EXHIBIT 9-���
NEWPORT BEACH �� PAGE
UPPB CALIFORNIA --LI-OF_
COASTAL COMMISSION
�Y � N
G�NG'f�V.�l y
`� dis7 t� CDic/C, /�/L//V tii.o
� ISLAM
BAY t II .. ��(\✓tiv:>� -- ��' S
C-RN PIER
JWEST
ETTY
VICINITY MRP PROFILE
NDfW BW' °°`' JETTY SOUNDINGS RRE EXPRESSED IN FEET RND DENOTE
ELEVATIONS BASED ON KERN LOWER LOW WRTER.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA — THE RESOURCES AGENCY EDMUND G. BROWN JR., Governor
CALIFORNIA COASTAL_ COMMISSION
South Coast Area Office
200 Oceangate, Suite 1000 Permit Application No. 55-12-136
Long Beach, CA 90802-4302Th C Date: July 19, 2012 tl� °
(562)590-5071 1 J
Page 1 of 9
ADMINISTRATIVE PERMIT
APPLICANT: 601 Lido Homeowner's Association
PROJECT
DESCRIPTION: Remove and replace existing 1,406 sq. ft., 3 -slip, U-shaped floating dock
and gangway with new like for like floating dock system in same size,
configuration and location, utilizing the existing 7 piles.
PROJECT
LOCATION: 601 Lido Park Drive, Newport Beach (Orange County)
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S DETERMINATION: The findings for this determination, and for any
special conditions, appear on subsequent pages.
NOTE: P.R.C. Section 30624 provides that this permit shall not become effective until it is
reported to the Commission at its next meeting. If one-third or more of the appointed
membership of the Commission so request, the application will be removed from the
administrative calendar and set for public hearing at a subsequent Commission meeting.
Our office will notify you if such removal occurs.
This permit will be reported to the Commission at the following time and place:
Thursday, August 9, 9:00 am
Santa Cruz County
Board of Supervisors Chambers
701 Ocean Street
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
IMPORTANT - Before you may proceed with development, the following must occur:
Pursuant to 14 Cal. Admin. Code Sections 13150(b) and 13158, you must sign the enclosed
duplicate copy acknowledging the permit's receipt and accepting its contents, including all
conditions, and return it to our office. Following the Commission's meeting, and once we have
received the signed acknowledgement and evidence of compliance with all special conditions, we
will send you a Notice of Administrative Permit Effectiveness.
BEFORE YOU CAN OBTAIN ANY LOCAL PERMITS AND PROCEED WITH DEVELOPMENT
YOU MUST HAVE RECEIVED BOTH YOUR ADMINISTRATIVE PERMIT AND THE NOTICE OF
PERMIT EFFECTIVENESS FROM THIS OFFICE.
CHARLES LESTER
Executive Director
By: Liliana Roman
Title: Coastal Program Analyst
5-12-136(601 Lido Homeowner's Association)
Administrative Permit
Page 2 of 8
STANDARD CONDITIONS:
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. 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 term or condition will be
resolved by the Executive Director or the Commission.
4. Assignment. The permit may be assigned to any qualified person, provided assignee files
with the Commission an affidavit accepting all terms and conditions of the permit.
5. Terms and Conditions Run with the Land. These terms and conditions shall be perpetual,
and it is the intention of the Commission and the permittee to bind all future owners and
possessors of the subject property to the terms and conditions.
SPECIAL CONDITIONS: See pages four thru eight.
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S DETERMINATION (continued):
The Executive Director hereby determines that the proposed development is a category of
development, which, pursuant to PRC Section 30624, qualifies for approval by the Executive
Director through the issuance of an Administrative Permit. Subject to Standard and Special
Conditions as attached, said development is in conformity with the provisions of Chapter 3 of the
Coastal Act of 1976 and will not have any significant impacts on the environment within the
meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act. If located between the nearest public road
and the sea, this development is in conformity with the public access and public recreation policies
of Chapter 3.
FINDINGS FOR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S DETERMINATION:
A. Project Description
The project site is located at 601 Lido Park Drive in the City of Newport Beach (Exhibits #1-2). A
mutiple-family residential structure characterizes the subject site and the surrounding area. The
proposed project is the demolition and reconstruction of a 3 -slip 1,406 sq. ft. U-shaped floating
dock system including gangway in the same size, configuration and location. The existing seven
14" diameter concrete piles currently supporting the 3 -slip U-shaped existing floating dock system
will remain in place to support the new replacement floating dock. There is no pier or pier platform
associated with the existing dock and none.is proposed. New materials will consist of pressure
treated wood frame and TREX composite decking, Superfloat floatation pontoons (polyethylene
and foam). The proposed dock system does not conform to the U.S. Pier head Line, however, is
located in an area of the harbor which the City of Newport Beach allows docks to exceed the Pier
Mead Line per a Harbor Permit.
5-12-136(601 Lido Homeowner's Association)
Administrative Permit
Page 3 of 8
The. new dock configuration is the same to that currently in place, therefore, there will not be an
increase in the dock's overall shading impacts.
The dock project will be used for boating related purposes to serve a multi -family residential
development on the landside portion of the lot. The site was surveyed for eelgrass and Caulerpa
taxilfolia on April 21, 2012. The area surveyed was greater than 75% coverage of bay floor of the
project area. No eelgrass or Caulerpa taxilfolia was found within the entire project area (Exhibit
#4). Therefore, the project would not have any direct eelgrass impacts.
These eelgrass and Caulerpa taxilfolia surveys are valid for a limited period of time (until the next
growing season for eelgrass and 90 days for Caulerpa taxilfolia). If construction does not occur
within the respective time periods, a subsequent survey will be required. If any additional eelgrass
or Caulerpa taxilfolia are found on the project site, Special Conditions No. 2 and No. 3 identify the
procedures necessary to be completed prior to beginning any construction.
The site is located at the beginning of the Balboa Peninsula, coastal public access to Newport Bay
is available approximately 70' from the project site at the coastal public access to the Rhine
Channel. The proposed project has received an approval in concept from the City of Newport
Beach Harbor Resources Division, Harbor Permit Number 124-601 and Plan Check Number 0747-
2012. The Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) has issued a "General Certification
for replacement of Sheet and Dock Piles" determining that the proposed project will not adversely
impact water quality if standard construction methods and materials are used. The applicant has
applied for a permit from the. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Staff -expects the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers' Letter of Permission (LOP) deeming the project qualifies for the General Concurrence
for impacts to essential fish habitats.
Section 30600(c) of the Coastal Act provides for the issuance of coastal development permits
directly by the Commission in regions where the local government having jurisdiction does not
have a certified Local Coastal Program. The City of Newport Beach only has a certified Land Use
Plan and has not exercised the options provided in 30600(b) or 30600.5 to issue its own permits.
Therefore, the Coastal Commission is the permit issuing entity and the standard of review is
Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act. The certified Land Use Plan may be used for guidance.
B. Marine Resources
The proposed recreational boat dock development and its associated structures are an allowable
and encouraged marine related use. The project design includes the minimum sized pilings and
the minimum number of pilings.necessary. for structural stability. As the existing piles are
proposed to be re -used, no soft bottom sediment disturbance will occur as a result of the project.
There are no feasible less environmentally damaging alternatives available. As conditioned, the
project will not significantly adversely impact eelgrass beds and will not contribute to the dispersal
of the invasive aquatic algae, Caulerpa taxifolia. Further, as proposed and conditioned, the
project, which is to be used solely for recreational boating purposes, conforms to Sections 30224
and 30233 of the Coastal Act.
C. Water Quality
The proposed work will be occurring on, within, or adjacent to coastal waters. The storage or
placement of construction material, debris, or waste in a location where it could be discharged into
coastal waters would result in an adverse effect on the marine environment. To reduce the
potential for construction related impacts on water quality, the Commission imposes special
conditions requiring, but not limited to, the appropriate storage and handling of construction
equipment and materials to minimize the potential of pollutants to enter coastal waters. To reduce
the potential for post -construction impacts to water quality the Commission requires the continued
5-12-136(601 Lido Homeowner's Association)
Administrative Permit
Page 4 of 8
use and maintenance of post construction BMPs. As conditioned, the Commission finds that the
development conforms to Sections 30230 and 30231 of the Coastal Act.
D. . Local Coastal Program
The LUP for the City of Newport Beach was effectively certified on May 19, 1982. The certified
LUP was comprehensively updated on October 13, 2005. As conditioned, the proposed
development is consistent with Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act and with the certified Land Use Plan
for the area. Approval of the project, as conditioned, will not prejudice the ability of the local
government to prepare a Local Coastal Program that is in conformity with the provisions of
Chapter 3.
E. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
As conditioned, there are no feasible alternatives or additional feasible mitigation measures
available that would substantially lessen any significant adverse effect that the activity may have
on the environment. Therefore, the Commission finds that the proposed project, as conditioned to
mitigate the identified impacts, is the least environmentally damaging feasible alternative and can
be found consistent with the requirements of the Coastal Act to conform to CEQA.
SPECIAL CONDITIONS:
1. Water Quality
A. Construction Responsibilities and Debris Removal
(1) No demolition or construction materials, equipment, debris, or waste shall be
placed or stored where it may enter sensitive habitat, receiving waters or a
storm drain, or be subject to wave, wind, rain or tidal erosion and dispersion.
(2) Any and all debris resulting from demolition or construction activities, and any
remaining construction material, .shall be removed from the project site within 24
hours of completion of the project.
(3) Demolition or construction debris and sediment shall be removed from work
areas each day that demolition or construction occurs to prevent the
accumulation of sediment and other debris that may be discharged into coastal
waters.
(4) Machinery or construction materials not essential for project improvements will
not be allowed at any time in the intertidal zone.
(5) If turbid conditions are generated during construction a silt curtain will be utilized
to control turbidity.
(6) Floating booms will be used to contain debris discharged into coastal waters
and any debris discharged will be removed as soon as possible but no later
than the end of each day.
(7) Non -buoyant debris discharged into coastal waters will be recovered by divers
as soon as possible after loss.
(8) All trash and debris shall be disposed in the proper trash and recycling
receptacles at the end of every construction day.
(9) The applicant shall provide adequate disposal facilities for solid waste, including
excess concrete, produced during demolition or construction.
5-12-136(601 Lido Homeowner's Association)
Administrative Permit
Page 5 of 8
(10)Debris shall be disposed of at a legal disposal site or recycled at a recycling
facility. 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 unless the Executive Director determines that no amendment or new
permit is legally required.
(11)AII stock piles and construction materials shall be covered, enclosed on all
sides, shall be located as far away as possible from drain inlets and any
waterway, and shall not be stored in contact with the soil.
(12)Machinery and equipment shall be maintained and washed in confined areas
specifically designed to control runoff. Thinners or solvents shall not be
discharged into sanitary or storm sewer systems.
(13)The discharge of any hazardous materials into any receiving waters shall be
prohibited.
(14)Spill prevention and control measures shall be implemented to ensure the
proper handling and storage of petroleum products and other construction
materials. Measures shall include a designated fueling and vehicle
maintenance area with appropriate berms and protection to prevent any spillage
of gasoline or related petroleum products or contact with.runoff. The area shall
be located as far away from the receiving waters and storm drain inlets as
possible.
(15)Best Management Practices (BMPs) and Good Housekeeping Practices
(GNPs) designed to prevent spillage and/or runoff of demolition or construction -
related materials, and to contain sediment or contaminants associated with
demolition or construction activity, shall be implemented prior to the on -set of
such activity
(16)AII BMPs shall be maintained in a functional condition throughout the duration
of construction activity.
B. Best Management Practices Program
By acceptance of this permit the applicant agrees that the long-term water -borne berthing
of boat(s) in the approved dock and/or boat slip will be managed in a manner that protects
water quality pursuant to the implementation of the following BMPs.
(1) Boat Cleaning and Maintenance Measures:
a. In -water top -side and bottom -side boat cleaning shall minimize the
discharge of soaps, paints, and debris.
b. In -the -water 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.
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:
5-12-136(601 Lido Homeowner's Association)
Administrative Permit
Page 6 of 8
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 nther line Kiri materials) the bnaterg ill wine a hilnc ru imm_
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.
2. 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 until the next period of
active growth. The survey shall be prepared in full compliance with the "Southern
California Eelgrass Mitigation Policy" Revision 8 (except as modified by this special
condition) adopted by the National Marine Fisheries Service and shall be prepared
in consultation with the California Department of Fish and Game. The applicant
shall submit the eelgrass survey for the review and approval of the Executive
Director within five (5) business days of completion of each eelgrass survey and in
any event no later than fifteen (15) business days prior to commencement of any
development. If the eelgrass survey identifies any eelgrass within the project area
which would be impacted by the proposed project, the. development shall require an
amendment to this permit from the Coastal Commission or a new coastal
development permit.
B. Post Construction Eelgrass Survey. If any eelgrass is identified in the project
area by the survey required in subsection A of this condition above, within one
month after the conclusion of construction, the applicant shall survey the project site
to determine if any eelgrass was adversely impacted. The survey shall be prepared
in full compliance with the "Southern California Eelgrass Mitigation Policy" Revision
5-12-136(601 Lido Homeowner's Association)
Administrative Permit
Page 7 of 8
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. All 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 required.
3. 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 taxifolia. The survey shall include a visual
examination of the substrate.
B. The survey protocol shall be prepared in consultation with the Regional Water
Quality Control Board, the California Department of Fish and Game, and the
National Marine Fisheries Service.
C. Within five (5) business days of completion of the survey, the applicant shall submit
the survey:
(1) for the review and approval of the Executive Director; and
(2) to the Surveillance Subcommittee of the Southern California Caulerpa Action
Team (SCCAT). The SCCAT Surveillance Subcommittee may be contacted
through William Paznokas; California Department of Fish & Game
(858/467-4218) or Robert Hoffman, National Marine Fisheries Service
(562/980-4043), 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 evidence to the
Executive Director that all C. taxifolia discovered within the project and buffer area
has been eliminated in a manner that complies with all applicable governmental
approval requirements, including but not limited to those of the California Coastal
Act, or 2) the applicant has revised the project to avoid any contact with C. taxifolia.
No revisions_ to the project shall occur without a Coastal Commission approved
amendment to this coastal development permit unless the Executive Director
determines that no amendment is legally required.
5-12-136(601 Lido Homeowner's Association)
Administrative Permit
Page 8 of 8
4. Public Rights
The Coastal Commission's approval of this permit shall not constitute a waiver of any public
rights that exist or may exist on the property. The permittee shall not use this permit as
evidence of a waiver of any public rights that may exist on the property.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF PERMIT RECEIPT/ACCEPTANCE OF CONTENTS:
I/We acknowledge that I/we have received a copy of this permit and have accepted its contents
including all conditions.
Applicant's Signature Date of Signing
COASTAL ppIIS,
Map Output Page I Of
COASTAL JJSSION
EXH I BIT
PAGE --A: OF2-
_ -�
httpo//www6.city.newport-beach,ca.us/servlet/com.esri,esrimap.Esrimap?ServiceName=n... 4/16/201;
DOCK & PIER BUILDERS, INC.
2027 PLACENTIA AVENUE COSTA MESA, CA 92627
(949) 631-3121 PHONE (949) 631-3122 FAX
EMAIL: lacgLialymchungCa�sbc9lchal net
WWW sWiftsll�docks.10M
19 April 2012
Marc Brown
California Regional Water Quality Control Board
3737 Main Street
Suite 500
Riverside, CA 92501
Re: Boat Floating Dock Replacement
Dear Mr. Brown:
We are acting as agents for the applicant listed below_ This is notification that we intend to replace the
boat dock at the address referenced belowi. It is our intention to comply with all Regional Water
Quality Control Board requirements. We will not discharge vessel waste of any kind or adversely
impact water quality at this location.
1. Applicant Name:
Gary Craigmile — 601 Lido Homeowner's Association
2. Project Address:
601 Lido Park Drive
Newport Beach, California 92663
3, Applicant Phone:
949.675.6101
4. Parcel Number:
932'550 01 — 932 550 56
Remove and replace existing floating dock system. Reuse
5. Scope of Work:
existing pile.
6. Latitude/Longitude:
N33.365722, W117.553408
7. Applicable Fees:
Enclosed is a check for the application fee.
This notice is being submitted according to Regional
8. Statement:
Board General Certification for sheet and dock pile
replacement, issued on September 29, 2005.
9. Statement:
The information in this notice is complete and accurate.
Please contact our office if you should have any questions.
Very truly yours,
SWIFT SLIP DOCK & PIER BUILDERS, INC.
Jacquelyn Chung
Permit Division
HARBOR RESOURCES DIVISION
829 Harbor Island Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
(949)644-3044 / Fax (949) 723-0589
HARBOR PERMIT/APPROVAL IN CONCEPT
HARBOR PERMIT/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
floating dock. Use existing pile.
Address number must be stenciled.on at least 1 bayward facing pile.
Pier conditions must be signed by applicant prior to final approval.
Property Address: 601 Lido. Park Drive
Legal Description:
Harbor Permit Number: 124-601
Plan Check Number: 0747-2012
Applicant: 601 Lido Homeowner's Association
Applicant's Mailing Address: 601 Lido Park Drive, Newport Beach CA 92663
Phone Number: 949-631-3121
I have reviewed the plans for the foregoing development including:
1. The general site plan, including any roads and public access to the shoreline.
2. The grading plan, if any.
3. The general uses and intensity of use proposed for each part of the area covered
in the application.
Page 1 of 2
And find
'�( 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).
❑ 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.
Lisa Walters, Harbor Resources
May 3, 2012
Attachments:
Worksheet for Building Permit Application
Drawing
Pier Conditions
Page 2 of 2
l I Worksheet for Building Combo Permit Applicationo�? �P0 m
Pnnt Forrr3
City of Newport Beach -Building Department s
Please Print 3 copies HARBOR I"
9
jt3uilciing uraaing I :uraenage I : tiec I _ iviecn
1. Project Address (Not mailing address)o Site No
X0.1 L n MW Dfl,
Tenant Name(if Applicable)1.
#Units (if Residential) WD �bff
Check
3. Owner's Name Last
nffMrs "f Owner's E-mail Address
........................................... ..... ...... ....
city State Zip Tele hon
OFFICE USE ONLY ENERGY P/C FEE $
GRADING P/C FEE $
Rev 4116109 ELEC/MECH/PLUM P/C; FEE $
' RERMIT NO.
FIRE P/C FEE $ T 1 PL., CHECKNa(a y e
/� *� ' 4
{ P�N CHECK FEE $
CITY 0�� PJCI- PORT :EACH
CITY OF
NEWPORT BERM
E3WPER A
NP�T OO i
r r'
1:::'IL/NGKK
BOFl - ---_ - _ ---
ISLAND
BAY
P s
IC OCERIV BpILEEMRRWEST
VICINITY MRPJETTY
PROFILE
EAST
NDPW CRY, JElT1' SOUNDINGS ARE EXPRESSED IN FEET AND DENOTE
�+ ELEVRTIONS'BASED ON MEAN LOWER LOW WATER.
_ICANT'S NRME WA Oril vv ®(�j. [JOB ADDRESS b01 u Q - fiy- I'DATE4. H • ID17-,
Rpr 18 2012 1:42PM HP LASERJET FAX
-849-675-5276 p,l
04113/2612 28; e9 9496313122
SWIFTSLIPDOCKPIER PAGE 03/07
I
I
i
AUTHA Ii
i
I, Gary Craigmile, hereby designate and authorize Peter Swift and his
representative Jacquelyn Chung, to a6t on my behalf as my agent in
the processing of this permit application and to furnish, upon
requesting, supplemental information-ih' support of application.
signed: r
Dated: t
Apr 17 2012 3;02PM HP LASERJET FAX -949-675-5276 p.1
N
State of California
Secretary of State
Statement of Information
(Domestic Nonprofit, Credit Union and Consumer Cooperative Corporations)
Filing Fees $20,00. If this Is an amendment, see Instructions.
j
IMPORTANT— READ INSTRUCTIONS BEFORE COMPLETING THIS FORM
1. CORPORATE NAME
601 Lido Homeowners Association
2. CALIFORNIA CORPORATE NUMBER
00716257
This 8 >tce for Fling Use
p
OnIV
Complete Principal Office Addreve (Do not abbreviate the name of the city, Item 3 cannot be a P.O. Boxy
3. STREET ADDRES6 OF PRINCIPAL OFFICE IN CALIFORNIA, IF ANY CITY STATE ZIP CODE
B01 Lido Park Drive Newport Beach CA g
63
1. MAILING ADDRESS OF7HECORPORATION CITY STATE ZIP CO
E
601 Lido Park Drive Newport Beach CA 9
863
Names and Complate Addresses of the Following Officers (The corporation must list these three officers. A comparable title or the speclfle
officer may be added; however, the preprinted titles on this farm must not be altered.)
6. CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER/ ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP C
E
Drlan Hoyle 801 Lido Park Drive 1 F Newport Beach CA 9:1.663
S. SECRETARY ADDRES6 CITY STATE ZIP
E
Conrad Tlmpe 601 Lido Park Drive 7A Newport Beach CA 8 663
7, CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER/ ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP CODE
Sue Tumor 601 Lido Park Drive 8.0 Newport Beach CA 92663
Agent for Service of Process If the agent Is an individual, the agent must reside In California and Item 8 must be completed with a C
alifamle street
address, a PA, Box address Is not acceptable. If the agent Is another corporation, the agent must have on file with the California Secre
ry of State a
certificate pursuant to California Corporations Code section 1505 end Item 9 must be left blank.
6. NAME OF AGENT FOR SERVICE OF PROCESS
Gary Cmlgmlie
9, STREET ADDRESS OF AGENT FOR SERVICE OF PROCESS IN CALIFORNIA. IF AN INDIVIDUAL CITY STATE 71P CC DE
601 lido Park Drive Apt 1 Newport Beach CA 926W
Davis4tiriing Common Interest Development' Act (California Civil Code eectlon 1350, st seq)
tic. 0 Check hero If the corporation is An Aaaodatlon formed to manage a common interest development under the Davis-Stlrting Common
Interest
Development Act.
NOTE: Corporations formed to manage a common. Interest development must oleo fie a Statement by Common Interest Development
Association
(Form 81 -CID) as required by California Civil Code section 1353,6. Pleaee see Instructions an the reverse aide of this form.
11, THE, INFO RMATION_C.ONTAINED. HEREIN. IS.TRU.E-AND_CORREC.T.._
March 14 201d Kim Curtls Accountant
DATE TYPEIPRINT NAME OF PERSON COMPLETING FORM TITLE SIGNATURE
SI.100lREVa1120i21 APPROVE DBYSECR
ARYOFSTAT[_
Dock and Pier Builders, Inc.
Contractor's License 797052 A
www.swiftslipdocks.com
2027 Placentia Avenue - Costa Mesa, CA 92627
Telephone (949) 631-3121- Fax (949) 631-3122
19 April 2012
Re: Gary Craigmile
601 Lido Homeowners Association
601 Lido Park Drive
Newport Beach, California 92663
Remove and replace existing floating dock system. Reuse existing pile
Document #1 —Assessors Map
Document#2 — Aerial View of Project Site
Document #3 — Project Site
Document #4 — Project Site
Document #5 — Drawing of Proposed Floating Dock
Floating Dock:
Superfloat floatation pontoons
4 x 8 framing with 5 x7 angle clips and 1/2" bolting throughout
21/2" diameter steel torsion tubes built into fingers for long term stability
3 x 12 facing (upgrade) with white rubstrip and corners
6 cleats per finger
8 cleats on back walk
Steel pile guides with 4 polyurethane rollers
Install decking with stainless steels screws
Gangway:
Install 4 x 24 gangway with decking to match dock
1lee a feet' 1000
-r th
(:5 meters
1 500
MUP UUTPUT Page I of I
Aerial lma(
st
http://www6.c1ty.newport-beach.ca.us/serviet/com.esri.esrimap.Esrimap?ServiceName=n... 4/16/2012
2027 Placentia Avenue, Costa Mesa, California
A (949) 631-3121 ® Fax (949) 631-3122
m
DIVE WORKS 601 LIDO PARK DR
x 429-0 Shoreline Village Drive NEWORT BEACH, CA
Long Beach, CA 98802 April 21, 2012
Subject: Pre -Construction Survey — Eelgrass Survey and Caulerpa Taxifolia Survey
601 Dr., Newport
Mr. Pete Swift,
Attached is the Pre -Construction eelgrass (Zostera marina) survey report and Caulerpa Toxifolia survey report for the
above-mentioned address.
Eelgrass was not observed in project area.
No Caulerpa Taxifolia was observed in subject area noted above.
This is a Pre -Construction — Eelgrass Survey report as required in accordance with California Coastal Commission (CCC),
City of Newport Beach and Army Corp of Engineers (USACOE) to determine if the project impacted eelgrass. The
Southern California Eelgrass Mitigation Policy (SCEMP) pertains to eelgrass that is widely distributed throughout
Southern California Coastal and Harbor Regions. SCEMP has been set in place to protect marine habitats and sea grass
beds that play a role in the life cycle chain for marine life to reproduce. This Pre -Construction survey will assist
development projects by contractors like ycu to conduct activities in conjunction with BMP's concerning impact and
management for promoting Eelgrass and controlling the spread of Caulerpa. Responsible developments by contractors
like you help protect these sensitive marine ecosystems, which in turn, protects our ocean resources.
Thank you. If you have any questions please feel free to contact us.
Respectfully,
L
DiveWork@gmail.com
(949) 759-0773
15t ANNUAL EELGRASS & CAULERPA SURVEY REPORT Page 1 of 8
DIVE
429-0 Shoreline Village Drive
Long Beach, CA 90302
Swift Slips
Dock & Pier Builders, Inc.
Costa Mesa, California
Report Prepared
April 21, 2012
m
Dive Works
Robert Wiegand
Survey assistance by
Sean
Donovan
ls' ANNUAL EELGRASS & CAULERPA SURVEY REPORT Page 2 of 8
Property located at 601 Lido Park Dr., Newport Beach, Ca (see Figure 1) has proposed to replace current dock
system that is 3 "U" shaped slips integrated into an interconnected dock system, see Figure 3. No
construction has been conducted to date at time of this survey.
Eelgrass was not observed.
Coulerpa was not observed.
The survey was conducted April 21, 2012 1350 hr, N 33.615885° , W 117.9261930. It was cloudy with overcast
skies, air temperature was 65f and water temperature was 63f. Depth measurements were done with transect
tape, depth gauge.
Divers entered the water from dock covering 70ft parallel with sea wall and 90ft out from sea wall. Visibility was
7ft. Divers swam parallel with sea wall and spanned an area of 5ft on either side, through the entire survey area to
ensure >75% coverage of bay floor, see Figure 1. Depth ranged from 2ft at sea wall to 10ft at end of dock.
1St ANNUAL EELGRASS & CAULERPA SURVEY REPORT Page 3 of 8
6.000
5.000
J_ 4.000
0
a, 3.000
d
2.000
m 1.000
0.000
-1.000 '-
04/21
00:00
04/21
04:00
Predicted Tide
NOWNOS/CO-OPS
Preliminary Water Level (A1:1) 'vs. Predicted Plot.
9410170 San Diego, CA
from 2012/04/21 - 2012/04/21
04/21 04/21
06:00 12:00
Date/Tine (GMT)
Observed WL
04/21 04/21 04/22
16:00 20:00 00:00
(ubs-Pred) - — -
Survey Findings
No Caulerpa was observed within project site (see attached Caulerpa Survey Reporting Form).
No Eelgrass was observed within project site.
Various marine life was found in survey area that include muscles on floats and piles, skates on bottom,
small fish and mackerel, and sea snails. Bottom is sand and sediment/silt.
1St ANNUAL EELGRASS & CAULERPA SURVEY REPORT Page 4 of 8
DIVE WORKS (949) 759-0773
601 LIDO PARK DR
429-0 Shoreline Village Drive NEWORT BEACH, CA
Long Beach, CA 90802 April 21, 2012.
Caulerpa Survey Reporting Form
This form is required to be. submitted for any surveys conducted for the invasive exotic algae, (Caulerpa)
which is required.to be conducted under federal and/or state permits and authorizations issued by the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers, Coastal Commission, and/or Regional Water Quality Boards (Regions 8 & 9). The
form has, been designed to assist to identify and control any potential impacts of the authorized actions on
the spread of Calupera. Surveys required to be conducted ,for this species are subject to modification through
publication of revisions to the Calupera survey policy. It is incumbent upon the authorized permittee to
ensure that survey work is following the latest protocols. For further information on these protocols, contact:
Robert Hoffman, National Marine Fisheries Service, 562-980-4043, or William Paznokas, California
Department of Fish & Game, 858-467-4218. This survey was conducted on March 1, 2012 and is valid for (90)
ninety days from date of survey. For information regarding this survey please contact Robert Wiegand, Dive
Works Diving Service at 949-759-0773.
Required Information
Site Name:
601 Lido Park Dr.
Newport Beach CA
Survey Contact:
Robert Wiegand
(949) 759-0773
DiveWork@Gmail.com
Permit Reference:
(ACOE Permit No., CCC Permit No.)
HyRd.ographic System:
Newport Harbor
(bay, estuary, lagoon, or harbor)
Specific Location:
N 33.6158850
(UTM, Lat./Long., datum, accuracy level, attach
W 117.926193°
electronic survey area map if possible)
Was EelgrassDetected:
No, not within 10' of project site
Description of Permitted Work:
(describe briefly the work to be conducted at the site
under the permits identified above)
1s1 ANNUAL EELGRASS & CAULERPA SURVEY REPORT Page 5 of 8
f
DIVE WORKS (949) 759-0773
429-0 Shoreline Village Drive
Long Beach, CA 90802
601 LIDO PARK DR
NEWORT BEACH, CA
April 21, 2012
Caulerpa Survey Reporting Form (Cont.)
Description of Site: (describe the
Depth range: 2'— 10'
Bottom is sediment and sand.
physical and biological conditions
within the survey area at the time of
the survey and provide insight into
variability, if known. Please provide
units for all numerical information).
Substrate type:
Sediment, sand
Temperature:
63'
Salinity:
Dominant flora:
Dominant fauna:
Small fish, skates, muscles, Mackeral,
sea snails
Exotic species encountered -
None
Caulerpa
Other site description notes:
Description of. Survey Effort:
Survey date and time period:
Survey conducted using SCUBA.
(please describe the surveys .
conducted including type of survey
DATE: April 21, 2012
(SCUBA, remote video, etc.) and
TIME : 1350 PM
survey methods employed, date of
work, and survey density (estimated
percentage of the bottom actually
viewed). Describe any limitations
encountered during the survey
efforts.
Horizontal visibility in water:
7'
Survey type.and methods:
SCUBA
Survey Personnel:
Robert Wie and, Sean Donovan
Survey density: .
Survey limitations:
None
Other Information: (use this space
to provide any additional information
or references to attached materials
such as maps, reports, etc.
Caulerpa Survey Reporting Form (version 1.2, 10/31/04)
1St ANNUAL EELGRASS & CAULERPA SURVEY REPORT
Page 6 of 8
DIVE WORKS (949) 759-0773
429-0 Shoreline Village Drive
Long Beach, CA 90802
Eelgrass Survey Reporting Form
601 LIDO PARK DR
NEWORT BEACH, CA
April 21, 2012
This form is required to be submitted for any surveys conducted for Eelgrass which is required to be conducted
under federal and/or state permits and. authorizations issued by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the
Coastal Commission and required for review by Marine Bureau and Planning Department. The form has been
designed to assist in identifying eelgrass while ensuring that the required information is consistently
documented. Surveys required to be conducted for this species are subject to modification through
publication of revisions to the Eelgrass survey policy. It is incumbent upon the authorized permittee to ensure
that survey work is following the latest protocols. For further information on these protocols, contact: Robert
Hoffman, National Marine Fisheries Service, 562-980-4043, or William Paznokas, California Department of Fish
& Game, 858-467-4218. This survey was conducted on March 1, 2012 and is valid for (90) ninety days from
date of survey. For information regarding this survey please contact Robert Wiegand, Dive Works Diving,
Service at 949-759-0773.
Required Information.
Site Name:
601 Lido Park Dr.
Newport Beach CA
Survey Contact:
Robert Wiegand
(949) 759-0773
DiveWork Gmail.com
Permit Reference:
(ACOS Permit No.; CCC Permit No.)
HyRd.ographic System:
Newport Harbor
(bay, estuary, lagoon, or harbor)
Specific Location:
N 33.6158850
(UTM, Lat./Long.., datum, accuracy level, attach electronic
W 117.9261930
survey area map if possible)
Was Eelgrass Detected:
No, not within 10' of project site
Description of Permitted Work:
Replace existing "U" dock with new "L: dock
(describe briefly the work to be conducted at the site under the
configuration and 3 new piles.
permits identified above)
EELGRASS & CAULERPA SURVEY REPORT Page 7 of 8
DIVE WORKS (949) 75-0773
429.-0 Shoreline Village Drive
Long Beach, CA 90802
601 LIDO PARK DR
NEWORT BEACH, CA
April 21, 2012
Eelgrass Survey Reporting Form (Cont.)
Description of Site: (describe the
Depth range: 2' to 10`
Bottom is sediment and sand
physical and biological conditions
within the survey area at the time of
the survey and provide insight into
variability, if known. Please provide
units for all numerical information).
Substrate type:
Sediment, sand
Temperature:
630
Salinity:
Dominant flora:
Eel grass
Dominant fauna:
Small fish, muscles, Mackeral, skates,
sea snails
Exotic species encountered
none
Other site description notes:
Description of Survey Effort:
Survey date and time period:
Survey conducted using SCUBA
(please describe the surveys
conducted including type of survey
DATE: April 21, 2012
(SCUBA, remote video, etc.) and
TIME : 1350 PM
survey methods employed, date of
work, and survey density (estimated
percentage of the bottom actually
viewed). Describe any limitations
encountered during the survey
efforts.
Horizontal visibility in water:
7'
Survey a and methods:
SCUBA
Survey Personnel:
Robert Wie and, Sean Donovan
Survey density:
Survey limitations:
None
Other Information: (use this space
to provide any additional information
or references to attached materials
such as maps, reports, etc.
Eelgrass Survey Reporting Form (April 2009)
EELGRASS & CAULERPA SURVEY REPORT Page 8 of 8
HARBOR RESOURCES DIVISION
829 Harbor Island Drive
Newport Beach, CA .92660
(949) 644-3034 / Fax (949) 723-0589
Special Conditions
May 3, 2012
Property Address: 601 Lido Park Drive
With reference to the plans currently under consideration at the above referenced address to
reconfigure or modify the dock system or bulkhead, 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 structure(s) is under the purview of these Policies and Codes.
2. Any future work on the above mentioned structure(s) 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 dock system and/or
bulkhead under consideration. Any future modifications or alterations to the dock system
and/or bulkhead may require new conditions which may override or change these conditions.
These conditions supersede all past conditions associated with this property.
4: Only marine oriented uses are allowed on the pier, pier platform, gangway and float. Patio
furniture, plants etc ... are not permitted.
5. 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."
6. The project shall be implemented in conformance with the Local Coastal Program - Coastal
Land Use Plan.
Page 1 of 2
7. 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."
8. Your side property lines extend in the water along their same bearing. Vessels shall
not encroach upon the neighbor's property on either side.
9. Vessels may not extend beyond the end of the fingers by more than the width of its
beam.
Lisa Walters, Harbor Resources
Applicant Signature
Print Name
Joint Pier Applicant Signature (if applicable) Print Name
Page 2 of 2
Date
Date
Date
Sep 14 2012 12:46PM RDA ASERJET FAX
d9/ie/2812 21,49 9496313122
8487580728
SWIFTSUPDOCKPIER
p.2
PAGE 02!03
i
HARBOR Ri:SOURCBS DIVISION.
829 Harbor Island Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
(949) 644-30341 Fax (949) 723-4589
Speciai Conditions
May 3, 2012
Property Address: 601 Lido Park Drive
With reference to the plans currently under curavitierraLiun of thv,bbuve referenced address to
reconfigure or modify the dock system or bulkhead, the follovAng conditions will now be in
effect,
1. The pro)act proponent is aware of the Harbor Permit Pollcles (Council Policy H-1) and Title
17 of the City of Newport Beach Municipal Cods. The project proponent understands that the
abov4 referenced structure(s) is under tho purviow of these PoliciQs and Codes.
2. Any future work on the above mentioned structures) requires permits with the City of
Newport Beach and any other applicable agenoies. Painting land work considered to be
cosmetic In nature does not require a permit.
3. The conditions set forth In this document pertain to the proposed dock system endlor
bulkhead under consideration. Any future modifications or alterations to the dock system
and/or bulkhead may require now conditions which may ovsrride or change these conditions.
These conditions supersede all past conditions associated with tW property.
4. Only marina Oriented uses are allowed on tlho plar, pier platform, gangway and float, Patio
furniture, plants etc,,,are nut permitted.
5. In accordance with Municipal Code 10.08.030 A. the proye�t proponent shall obtain the
proper permits for equipment and materials storage. "Except is 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 straits, sldpwalkst, alley s, or parkways may be used
for the purpose of selling, storing, or displaying any equipment, pateriai, merchandise or for
other commercial purposes In the following cases; ...for the ternoorary storage of construction
squlpment 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 project shall be implemented In conformance with the Lodal Coastal Program -Coastal
Land Use Plan,
Page 1 of 2
Sep 14 2012 12:4GPM RDA ASERJET FAX 9497590728 p.3
09/10/2912 21,49 9495313122 SWIFT5LIPD=PIER PAGE 03/03
7. in aceordanco with Municipal Code 10.28,040 -the foilowiri noise regulatlone apply, "A.
Waakdays and Saturdays. No person shall, while engaged In construction, remodeling, digging,
grading, demolition, painting, plastering or any other releted building activlty, oporcto any tool,
equipment or machine In a manner which produces loud noise th6t disturbs, or could disturb, a
person of normM "nsitivity who works or resides in the vicinity, on any weekday except
between the hours of seven a.m, and six thlrty p.m.,, nor on any Saturday except betwoen the
hours of aight'a.m. and six n.rn. B. Sundays And Holidays. filo p4son shall, while engaged in
construction, remodeling, digging, grading, demolltlon, painting,lasterinp or any other related
building activity, operate any tool, equipment or machine in a manner which produces loud
noise than df5turbs, or could disturb, a person of normal sensitivity who works or resides in the
vicinity, on any Sunday or any federal holiday."
8. Your side property lines extend, In the ester along their Sarno bearing. Vassals shall
not oncmach upon the n*lghbor's property on alther side.
9. Vessels may not extend beyond the end of the fingers by snore than the width of its
beam.
Joint Fier Applicant Signature (if applicable) Print Name Date
i
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
n
V = PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
P.O. BOX 1768, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92659-1768
cq��FoaN�P (714) 644-3311
August 19, 1994
601 Lido Homeowners Association
601 Lido Park Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92663
Attn: Rita Writer, Chairman
Board of Governors
Subject: Groundwater Leakage into 601 Lido's Underground Garage
Dear Ms. Writer,
This letter is written in response to your letters of July 20 and
August 14, 1994. Those letters concerned groundwater leakage into
your underground garage at a construction joint approximately i5 the
way down the entrance ramp toward the garage gate.
As the result of your first letter, I met with you onsite and
arranged for City forces to grout the lifting holes in each of the
bulkhead panels below the boardwalk at the end of The Rhine.
Although I felt that this simple procedure would probably not have
an effect upon the flow of water into your garage during high
tides, we did this nominal amount of work as an act of good faith
in an affort to mitigate the problem.
Unfortunately, as you point out in your 2nd letter, the work did
not reduce the flow of groundwater into your basement. This was
verified by me during the high tide on the evening of August 17th.
At this point, the City must defer from investing further staff
time and money to resolve the leakage problem. We must do so for
the following reasons:
1) Your garage was intended to be built as a watertight
structure, as evidenced by the lack of leakage below the
location of the leaking joint in the entrance ramp.
Watertight structures are required any time they are to be
built below groundwater elevation. Obviously, the waterstop
device at the leaking joint is not performing as intended.
2) Although we agree that the source of groundwater is probably
from the Bay, there is no indication from which direction
(from Lido Channel or The Rhine) it originates. However, even
if the water originated from The Rhine, the City does not
assume the responsibility for controlling groundwater within
3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach
your site, nor does it grant that the presence of a public
seawall will preclude the effect of tidal fluctuations upon
groundwater or structures within your site.
3 ) We presume that the native soil under Lido Park Drive is quite
sandy, therefore pervious to groundwater movement. However,
there is no evidence that the street is being undermined, nor
that the presence of groundwater or tidal fluctuation is
causing any deleterious effect upon any other City -owned
facility.
For these reasons, we cannot pursue the groundwater leakage issue
further at City expense. However, please feel free to contact me
if you need further information from City records.
Very truly yours,
Llyd Dalton, P.E.
Design Engineer
CC: General Services Department
Building Department
Marine Department
City Attorney
RICHARD K. SHOGREN G ASSOCIATES
+ Consulting Civil Engineers
t
(714) 636-1620
16 November 1993
Mr. Ray Schuller
Building Director
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
Building Department
. 00 Newport Blvd.
Newport Beach, CA 92663
Re: PLAN CHECK NO. 2061-92: BULKHEAD REPAIR
at 601 Lido Park Drive, Newport Beach
Dear Mr. Schuler:
The repair work on the bulkhead at 601 Lido Park Drive is now complete. We
are sending you a copy of all field notes, material certifications and test
reports. The work was monitored by members of our office on a nearly daily
basis.
The reinforcing steel was tied together and inspected before placing into
the forms by Samuel F. Kniss (RCE 17377).
All concrete was tested by Twining Labs and found to have compressive
strength exceeding that required by approved plans (lab reports enclosed).
Inspection of the concrete placement from the upper and lower coping was
monitored by Hans R. Sifrig (SE 2683). Excavation, backfill, compaction,
.] L 11___�__ L=d Lam- �1
aiiu steel i"spection for '-'Cie new Concrete walkway was inspect Ctu 1- $saTiu.-L
F. Kniss, as was the concrete placement for the walkway.
The steel sheet pile installation was monitored by Samuel F. Kniss.
The installation of the soil anchors was monitored.by Samuel F. Kniss, Hans
R. Sifrig, and myself.
Grading inspections and testings of the subgrade for the new sidewalk
behind the bulkhead was conducted by E. Douglas Schwantes, Jr. (RCE 25493 &
GE 757).
12755 BROOKHURST ST. • SUITE 203 • GARDEN GROVE, CA 92640
File No: L111693H.641
Re: PLAN CHECK NO. 2061-92: BULKHEAD REPAIR
at 601 Lido Park Drive, Newport Beach
Dear Mr. Schuler:
The repair work on the bulkhead at 601 Lido Park Drive is now complete. We
are sending you a copy of all field notes, material certifications and test
reports. The work was monitored by members of our office on a nearly daily
basis.
The reinforcing steel was tied together and inspected before placing into
the forms by Samuel F. Kniss (RCE 17377).
All concrete was tested by Twining Labs and found to have compressive
strength exceeding that required by approved plans (lab reports enclosed).
Inspection of the concrete placement from the upper and lower coping was
monitored by Hans R. Sifrig (SE 2683). Excavation, backfill, compaction,
.] L 11___�__ L=d Lam- �1
aiiu steel i"spection for '-'Cie new Concrete walkway was inspect Ctu 1- $saTiu.-L
F. Kniss, as was the concrete placement for the walkway.
The steel sheet pile installation was monitored by Samuel F. Kniss.
The installation of the soil anchors was monitored.by Samuel F. Kniss, Hans
R. Sifrig, and myself.
Grading inspections and testings of the subgrade for the new sidewalk
behind the bulkhead was conducted by E. Douglas Schwantes, Jr. (RCE 25493 &
GE 757).
12755 BROOKHURST ST. • SUITE 203 • GARDEN GROVE, CA 92640
File No: L111693H.641
Page 2
This completes the work on the bulkhead and to the best of our knowledge
and belief, all work was done in accordance with the design drawings.
If you have any questions please contact the writer or Mr. Kniss.
Yours very truly,
RICHARD K. SHOGREN & ASSOCIATE
Richard K. Shogren, P.E. •��
Principal
RKS:SFK:mfh
enc
cc: R. Reed - 601 Lido HOA
T. Melum - NB Marine
B. Henderson - ACOE
S. Kniss
K.
No. 25045 Z
)"'
czp. 22-31-93
RICHARD K. SHOGREN & ASSOCIATES Consulting Civil Engineers
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH c'ONDI-fac"s".
SPECIAL /?
HARBOR PERMIT c
PERMISSION IS HEREBY GRANTED TO CONSTRUCT AfW
MAINTAIN THC FAACMITY ZSH0,7�`U-N G��j -X�j perMit/- p
HEREOF,
'AT YHE SITE aNDWAVED,
THE
ANY Sl`t'X,`3AL
PER.M49",
Is
TH!.
THE
L
AND Trips PLIMUNT MAY 7,
CIDUNCIL
IN ACCORDANCEVVI TH r6TLt 17 Or.: THE
c E.
IT ARIO ROINATOR
feERM No. DATE
JamesF Jilk
Proj(
lnager
JOHN L. MEEK
Since
1954
CONSTRUCTION CO., INC.
1032 West "C Street
Wilmington, CA 90744 -
(310) 830-6323
FAX: 835-2163
General • Marine • Pile Driving
Foundations • Shoring • HazMat
(213) 775-7297
License #163997
' .
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
INDEX
FOR
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
LIDO PARK BULKHEAD REPLACEMENT
CONTRACT NO. 2889
I.
SCOPE OF WORK. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. 1
II.
CONTRACTOR'S LICENSES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. 1
III.
TIME OF COMPLETION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. 1
IV.
LIQUIDATED DAMAGES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. 1
V.
PAYMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. 2
VI.
TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN . . . . . . . . . . . .
. 2
VII.
"NO PARKING, TOW -AWAY" SIGNS . . . . . . . . . . .
. 3
VIII.
BOAT RELOCATION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. 4
IX.
PROTECTION OF PRIVATE PROPERTY AND LIDO PARK . . .
. 4
X.
WATER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. 4
Xi.
CONSTRUCTION SURVEY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. 4
XII.
LIDO PARK RESTORATION. . . . . . . . . . . . .
. 4
XIII.
STORAGE AND WORK AREA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. 5
XIV.
DREDGING AND FINISH GRADING IN FRONT OF BULKHEAD
5
XV.
BACKFILLING AND FINISH GRADING
IN BACK OF BULKHEAD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. 5
XVI.
COLLATERAL WORK AT PRIVATE BULKHEAD OR
WITHIN LIDO PARK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. 6
I.
II.
SP 1 of 6
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
SPECIAL PROVISIONS .._
LIDO PARK BULKHEAD
CONTRACT NO.
SCOPE OF WORK
The work to be done under this contract consists of
removing existing bulkheads, planters, walls, walkways,
etc. and constructing new items as shown on the plans;
regrading in front of and behind the new bulkhead;
restoring park site improvements; and performing other
incidental items of work as necessary to complete the
work in place.
All work necessary for the completion of this contract
shall be done in accordance with (1) these Special
Provisions; (2) the Plans (Drawing Nos. H -5135 -Sand P-
5148 -S); (3) the City's Standard Special Provisions and
Standard Drawings for Public Works Construction, {1991
Edition); and (4) the Standard Specifications for Public
Works Construction, (1991 Edition, including
Supplements). Copies of the Standard Special Provisions
and Standard Drawings may be purchased at the Public
Works Department for Ten Dollars ($10.00). Copies of the
Standard Specifications may be purchased from Building
News, Inc., 3055 Overland Avenue, Los Angeles, California
90034, telephone (213) 202-7775.
CONTRACTOR'S LICENSES
At the time of bid opening and until completion of work,
the Contractor shall possess a General Engineering
Contractor "A" license.
At the start of work and until completion, the Contractor
shall possess a Business License issued by the City of
Newport Beach.
TIME OF COMPLETION
The Contractor shall complete all onsite work, including
cleanup, within 68 consecutive calendar days, but no
later than May 28, 1993.
IV. LIQUIDATED DAMAGES
Commencing on the 69th consecutive calendar day of onsite
work or on May 29, 1993, whichever occurs first, the
Contractor shall pay to the City, or have withheld from
monies due the Contractor, the daily sum of $500.00
SP 2 of 6
liquidated damages rather than the $250 specified in
Section 6-9 of the Standard Specifications.
The Contractor's inability to obtain materials or labor
in a timely manner to complete the specified work within
these time limits shall not deter assessment of damages.'
The intent of this Section is to emphasize to the
Contractor the importance of prosecuting his work in an
orderly, preplanned, continuous sequence to minimize the
length of time that Lido Park and adjoining boat slips
are closed to use, and to minimize the duration of
exposure of the public to the Contractor's work.
V. PAYMENT
The unit or lump sum price bid for each item of work
shown on the proposal shall be considered as full
compensation for labor, equipment, materials and all
other things necessary to complete the work in place, and
no additional allowance will be made therefor.
Payment for incidental items of work not separately
provided for in the proposal shall be included in the
unit prices bid for items of work.
Partial payments for "Mobilization" shall be made in
accordance with Section 10264 of the California Public
Contract Code.
VI. TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN
The Contractor shall submit traffic control plans to the
Engineer which conform with provisions of the WORK AREA
TRAFFIC CONTROL HANDBOOK (WATCH), 1990 Edition.
These traffic control plans shall be prepared following
the same sequence as the actual construction and shall
include the following:
1. The location and wording of all signs,
barricades, delineators, lights, warning
devices, temporary parking restrictions, and
any other details required to assure that all
boating, pedestrian and vehicular traffic will
be handled in a safe and efficient manner with
a minimum of inconvenience.
2. A complete and separate plan for each stage of
construction proposed by the Contractor
showing all items listed under 1. above.
3. Two 12 -foot wide vehicular lanes shall remain
open to traffic across the Lido Isle bridge at
all times unless otherwise approved by the
Engineer.
SP 3 of 6
4. Pedestrians may be detoured from Lido Park and
from the southerly to the northerly walkway
along Via Lido. Detours shall be field
approved by the Engineer before construction
may begin across the southerly walkway at Via
Lido or within Lido Park.
Traffic control plans shall be submitted to the Engineer
for review and approval a minimum of ten (10) working
days prior to commencing work.
VII. "NO PARKING, TOW -AWAY" SIGNS
If the work necessitates temporary prohibition of on -
street parking during construction, the Contractor shall
furnish, install, and maintain in place "NO PARKING, TOW -
AWAY" signs (even if streets have posted "NO PARKING"
signs) which he shall post at least forty (40) hours in
advance of the need for enforcement.
In addition, it shall be the Contractor's responsibility
to notify the City's Police Department, Traffic Division,
at (714) 644-3740, for verification of posting at least
40 hours in advance of the need of enforcement.
The signs shall (1) be made of white card stock; (2) have
minimum dimensions of 12 inches wide and 18 inches high;
and (3) be similar in design and color to Sign No. R-38
of the Caltrans Uniform Sign Chart.
The Contractor shall print the hours, days and date of
closure in 2 -inch -high letters and numbers. A sample of
the completed sign shall be approved by the Engineer
prior to posting. The Contractor shall only post streets
with the time and dates that disrupts parking and access.
Errors in posting "NO PARKING, TOW -AWAY" signs, false
starts, acts of God, strikes, or other alterations of the
schedule will require that the Contractor re -post the "NO
PARKING, TOW -AWAY" signs.
If the work necessitates closure of on -street parking
zones, the Contractor shall bag or cover street sweeping
signs in the vicinity of the parking zone closures in a
manner approved by the Engineer prior to posting "NO
PARKING" signs. Upon removal of the "NO PARKING" signs,
all street sweeping signs which the Contractor had
covered shall be immediately uncovered.
If it becomes necessary, the Contractor shall provided
uniformed flagmen with radio communications to slow down
and route traffic through the construction area.
SP 4 of 6
All costs for provided traffic control and access,
including all requirements as detailed in this Section
and as required for this construction project, shall be
included in the lump sum price bid for "Traffic Control
and Access."
VIII. BOAT RELOCATION
With 30 calendar days prior notice, the Contractor may
request the City to inform harbor permittees adjacent to
the work site to remove and relocate the existing boat
dock and boats. If they are removed, it is imperative
that the boats be allowed to return no later than May 1,
1993, since the boat owners' temporary mooring
commitments may expire on or before that date.
IX. PROTECTION OF PRIVATE PROPERTY AND LIDO PARK
Property lines abutting the proposed improvements are
indicated on the plans. Prior to construction, the
Contractor shall verify the location of existing
buildings, structures, planters, plant materials,
irrigation service, walkways, lighting, etc. and shall
protect them in place and be responsible for, at his own
expense, any damage to them resulting from construction
of the improvements.
X. WATER
If the Contractor elects to use City's water, he shall
arrange for a meter and tender a $500 meter deposit with
the City. Upon return of the meter in good condition to
the City, the deposit will be returned to Contractor,
less a quantity charge for water usage.
XI. CONSTRUCTION SURVEY
Field survey for control of construction shall be
provided by the Engineer. Staking shall be performed on
all items ordinarily requiring grade and alignment at
intervals normally required for such construction.
All known property corners are shown on the plans. The
Contractor shall make every effort not to disturb the
corners; however, it a corner is inadvertently disturbed
or must be removed in order to accomplish the work, the
Engineer will replace said corner at no expense to the
Contractor.
XII. LIDO PARK RESTORATION
Upon completion of bulkhead work the Contractor shall
restore irrigation service, landscape plant materials,
turf and hardscape in Lido Park as shown on the plans.
The date palm shown in the plans on "Grading Plan" shall
be removed, stored and cared for during construction, and
XIII.
XIV.
SP 5 of 6
replaced in its previous location by the Contractor as a
component of the park site restoration. Compensation for
this work shall be included in the lump sum bid item for
"Lido Park Restoration."
STORAGE AND WORK AREA
The Contractor may fence off and use whatever portion of
Lido Park that he deems necessary for his storage and
work area; however, it shall be the Contractor's sole
responsibility to maintain irrigation service and to
protect landscape plant materials, turf, hardscape and
lighting in the unused portion of the park.
The Contractor shall secure the entire storage and work
area with chain link fencing installed to 6 -foot minimum
height.
Site use and restoration shall conform with provisions of
the plans and Section 7-9 of the Standard Specifications,
"Protection and Restoration of Existing Improvements."
Compensation for this work shall be included in the lump
sum bid item for "Mobilization."
DREDGING AND FINISH GRADING IN FRONT OF BULKHEAD
Dredging and finish grading material must be imported to
the site to accomplish the finish sand line contours
shown on the plans in "Contour Map." The Contractor may
import said material from 1) the beach at Lido Isle
Sailing Club across West Lido Channel from the work site,
2) the navigational lane of West Lido Channel, or 3) the
Contractor's own source.
Dredging and finish grading material shall consist of
clean beach sand free of clay size particles and organic
material.
The Engineer estimates that approximately 150 cubic yards
of sand must be imported, placed and finished graded;
however, this quantity is only an estimate based upon
bottom elevations existing at the time of plan
preparation. Accordingly, the Contractor shall be fully
responsible for determining by his own field measurement
the volume of sand to be imported, placed and finish
graded, and shall include all costs to accomplish the
finish sand line contours shown on the plans within the
lunp sum bid item for "Dredge and Finish Grade in front
of Bulkhead."
XV. BACKFILLING AND FINISH GRADING IN BACK OF BULKHEAD
Backfilling and finish grading material must be imported
to the site to accomplish the finish ground line
elevations shown in the plans in "Grading Plan." The
Contractor may import backfill material from a source of
SP 6 of 6
his choice, except that said backfill shall conform with
provisions of the plans and Section 300-4 of the Standard
Specifications, "Unclassified Fill".
The Contractor shall be responsible for determining by
his own field measurement the volume of fill to be
imported, placed, compacted and finish graded, and shall
include all costs to accomplish the finish ground line
elevations shown on the plans within the lump sum bid
item for "Backfill and Finish Grade in back of Bulkhead."
XVI. COLLATERAL WORK AT PRIVATE BULKHEAD OR WITHIN LIDO PARK
The Contractor is advised that work will likely be
performed simultaneously along the private bulkhead
behind the 601 Lido Park Drive Building. The Contractor
is also advised that City forces will remove a fan palm
from the site during demolition and clearing, and that
they may elect to modify irrigation and electrical points
of connection concurrent with the Contractor's
restoration of Lido Park . Accordingly, the Contractor's
proposal shall include costs and considerations to
perform work collaterally in the appropriate bid items,
and such work shall be performed in accordance with the
provisions of Section 7-7 of the Standard Specifications,
"Cooperation and Collateral Work."
STATE OF CALIFORNIA—THE RESOURCES AGENCY PETE WILSON, Governor
CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION
SOUTH COAST AREA d+
245 W. BROADWAY, STE. 380 Page 1 of 2
P.O. sox 1450 Date: February 23 1
LONG BEACH, CA 90802-4416 Permit No. 5-92-424
(310) 590.507E
COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
On February 18, 1993 the California Coastal Commission granted to
601 LIDO HOMEOWNERS ASSOC.
this permit subject to the attached Standard and Special conditions, for
development consisting of
Repair of an existing bulkhead.
more specifically described in the application file in the Commission offices.
The development is within the coastal zone in ---Los-.Angeles County at
601 Lido Park Drive, Newport Beach
Issued on behalf of the California Coastal Commission by
RECEIViEI?.BY
PLANNING DEPARTIVlENT
CITY OF NFWPORT BEACH
PETER DOUGLAS
AIS FEB 2 1993 PN Executive Director
_ By.
Title: Staff Analyst
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The undersigned permittee acknowledges receipt of this permit and agrees to abide
by all terms and conditions thereof.
The undersigned 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 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT HAS BEEN RETURNED TO THE COMMISSION OFFICE. 14 Cal.
Admin. Code Section 13158(a).
Date Signature of Permittee
COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
STANDARD CONDITIONS:
Page 2 of 2
Dnrmi+ \In c n� w1w
�c�m�y nV. J-7L—YLy
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. 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. Compliance. -All-development must occur in strict compliance with the
proposal as set forth in the application for permit, subject to any special
conditions set forth below. Any deviation from the approved plans must be
reviewed and approved by the staff and may require Commission approval.
4. Interpretation. Any questions of intent or interpretation of any condition
will be resolved by the Executive Director or the Commission.
5. Inspections. The Commission staff shall be allowed to ins pect..the_site and
the project during its development, subject to 24—hour advance`' notice.
6. Assignment. The permit may be assigned to any qualified person, provided
assignee files with the Commission an affidavit accepting all terms a,nd
conditions of the permit.
7. 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:
None.
MV:tn
7786E
STATE OF CALIFORNIA—THE RESOURCES AGtNCY
CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION
SOUTH COAST AREA
245 W. BROADWAY, STE. 380
P.O. BOX 1430
LONG BEACH, CA 908024416
(310) 590.5071
riles: 11/4/92
49th Day: 12/23/92
180th Day: 5/3/93►
Staff:
Staff Report: 2/2/93
Hearing Date: 2/18/93
Commission Action:
STAFF REPORT: REGULAR CALENDAR
APPLICATION NO.: 5-92-424
PETE WILSON,-Go»nar
APPLICANT: 601 Lido Homeowners Association AGENT: Schongren & Associates
PROJECT LOCATION: 601 Lido Park Drive, Newport Beach, Orange -Count1►F(;FIu p BY
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Repair of an existing bulkhead. PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CITY OF NEWPORT .BEACH
Lot area:
Building coverage:
Pavement coverage:
Landscape coverage:
Parking spaces:
Zoning:
Plan designation:
Project density:
Ht abv fin grade:
N/A FEB 1.0 1993
N/AN Pill
N/A
N/A 718A1001041121MA6
N/A
N/A
Single Family Attached Residential
N/A
N/A
LOCAL APPROVALS RECEIVED: Approval in Concept, Newport Beach Marine Department
SUBSTANTIVE FILE DOCUMENTS: City of Newport Beach certified Land Use Plan
SUMMARY OF STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the Commission approve the proposed development witK no
special conditions.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The staff recommends that the Commission adopt the following resolution:
I. Approval with Conditions.
The Commission hereby grants a permit for the proposed development on the
grounds that the development will be in conformity with the provisions of
Chapter 3 of the California Coastal Act of 1976, will not prejudice the
ability of the local government having jurisdiction over the area to prepare a
Local Coastal Program conforming to the provisions of Chapter 3 of the Coastal
Act, and will not have any significant adverse impacts on the environment
within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act.
5-92-424
l Page 2
II. Standard Conditions.
1. Notice of Receipt and Acknowledgment. The permit is not valid and
develonment shall nn+ i•nin.a..nce .._i_, _
- - -••.. • commence until 1 a copy of the permit, signed by the
permittee or authorized agent, acknowledging receipt of the permit and
acceptance of the terms and conditions, is returned to the Commission
office.
2. Expiration. If development has not commenced, the permit will expire two
years from the date this permit is reported to the Commission.
Development shall be pursued in a diligent manner and completed in a
reasonable period of time. Application for extension of the permit must
be made prior to the expiration date.
3. ComD1Jance. All development must occur in strict compliance with the
`proposal as set forth in the application for permit, subject to any
ecfal conditions set forth below. Any deviation from the approved plans
&s`UA tie reviewed and approved by the staff and ma
approval. Y re
quire Commission
4. ,Interp.re`tation. Any questions of intent or interpretation of any
•conditron will be resolved by the Executive Director or the Commission.
5. Inspections. The Commission staff shall be allowed to inspect the site
and the project during its development, subject to 24-hour advance notice.
6. 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.
7. 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.
III. special Conditions: None.
IV. Findings and Declarations
The Commission hereby finds and declares:
A. Project Description
The applicant proposes to repair an existing 78 foot long bulkhead. The
proposed repair includes placing new toe pile coping bayward of the bulkhead
line. The proposed toe pile coping will be placed adjacent to the existing
bulkhead and will encroach two feet bayward of the bulkhead line. The
bulkhead provides stabilization at the site. The existing concrete patio is
proposed to be replaced. New soil anchors are proposed on the landward side
of the bulkhead.
5-92-424
Page 3
The height of the existing bulkhead is elevation 9. The proposed toe pile
coping bayward of the bulkhead line, at its highest point will be at elevation
1.75. The existing sand line is at elevation - 4.
A ten story condominium complex exists at the site. It is believed the
condominium was constructed in approximately 1972. Commission files do not
indicate any previous permit at the site, so it is assumed the existing
structure pre -dates the Coastal Act. The bulkhead at the site was built in
1959. Portions of the bulkhead were improved with site development in 1972.
Parking for the condominium structure is provided in a two level underground
garage.
The site is located in Newport Harbor, adjacent. to the Lido Island Bridge.
All harbor front sites in this area are bulkheaded. Bayward of the bulkheads
in this area are private boat docks and ramps, as is thecase at the subject
site. No work is proposed for the docks at the subject site.
The site is currently experiencing visible structural distress in the form of
cracking of the coping, bulkhead panels, walks and other concrete flatwork.
Additionally, there is a slight bow in the existing bulkhead.
B. Shoreline Protective Structures
Regarding shoreline protection devices, Section 30235 of the Coastal Act
states
Revetments, breakwaters, groins, harbor channels, seawalls, cliff
retaining walls, and other such construction that alters natural shoreline
processes shall be permitted when required to serve coastal -dependent uses
or to protect existing structures or public beaches in danger from
erosion, and when designed to eliminate or mitigate adverse impacts on
local shoreline sand supply. Existing marine structures causing water
stagnation contributing to pollution problems and fish kills should be
phased out or upgraded where feasible.
The Engineer's Study submitted with the application discusses the necessity of
the bulkhead:
The bulkhead retains and confines local soil upon which portions of the
property are supported, and the failure of this bulkhead would result in
significant loss of resident soils which, in turn, would cause failure of
walks, walls, and a reduction in structural capability of the buildings
foundations.
Supplemental information submitted by the project engineering consultant
further states
The building is built just landward from the existing bulkhead: six (6)
feet at the northwesterly corner and varies to eleven (11) feet at the
southeasterly corner.
5-92-424
Page 4
Since the bulkhead is so close to the structure, its complete removal and
replacement would put the building at substantial risk, particularly since
the building has a shallow mat foundation which is totally supported by
the retained soils. Driving toe pile seaward of the existing wall
rr..- I..V.4 -he necessary structural support, and its added depth will
prevent any further loss of soils.
The Engineer's Study indicates that repair of the existing bulkhead is
necessary for theprotectionof the existing structure. The study further
finds that repair methods that do not result in the bulkhead exceeding the
bulkhead line are not feasible at the site at this time.
The proposed project constitutes repair of an existing structure and is not
new construction. The channelward encroachment by two feet of the proposed
toe pile coping could result in negative cumulative impacts. However, in this
case the Commission finds the proposed method of repair is necessary to
protect the existing structure at the site. Additional development already
exists seaward of the proposed_ encroachment in the form of docks and ramps.
No work is currently proposed to the existing docks and ramps. The docks and
ramps will not be allowed to be placed any further channelward as a result of
the proposed encroachment. Therefore, channel width and navigation will not
be negatively impacted. However, when the site is recycled, and new
construction occurs at the site, that would provide an appropriate time to
evaluate placement of the bulkhead.
Therefore, because the proposed project is necessary to protect an existing
structure, and alternate methods are not feasible, the Commission finds the
proposed project is consistent with Section 30235 of the Coastal Act regarding
shoreline protection devices.
C. Public Access
Section 30211 of the Coastal Act requires that new development not interfere
with the public's right of access to the sea. Section 30212 of the Coastal
Act requires that new development shall provide public access. Public
vertical access exists adjacent to the site at a small public park adjacent to
Lido Park bridge and includes a short walkway above the bulkhead. Public
lateral access in this area does not exist due to the numerous private boat
docks and ramps and the lack of sandy beach area.
In Nollan vs. the California Coastal Commission, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled
that a beachfront property owner cannot be required to dedicate a lateral
public access easement unless a clear nexus is shown between the condition
imposed and the direct or cumulative impacts caused by the development.
Therefore, a public access dedication can be required pursuant to section
30212 only if it can be shown that the development, either individually or
cumulatively, directly impacts physical public access. Because no public
access currently exists at the subject site, no clear nexus can be
demonstrated. Therefore, the Commission finds the proposed development
development consistent with Sections 30211 and 30212 of the Coastal Act
regarding public access.
5-92-424
Page 5
D. Local Coastal Program
Section 30604(a) of the Coastal Act provides that the Commission shall issue a
Coastal Development Permit only if the project will not prejudice the ability
of the local government having jurisdiction to prepare a Local Coastal Program
which conforms with the Chapter 3 policies of the Coastal Act.
The Newport Beach Land Use Plan was certified on May 19, 1982. The proposed
development will not prejudice the City's ability to prepare a Local Coastal
Program Implementation Plan for Newport Beach that isconsistentwith the
Chapter 3 policies of the Coastal Act As required by section 30604(a).
E. California Environmental Quality Act
Section 13096(a) of the Commission's administrative regulations requires
Commission approval of a Coastal Development Permit application to be
supported by a finding showing the application to be consistent with any
applicable requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
The proposed project will not cause significant adverse impacts on the
environment. Therefore, the Commission finds that the.project is consistent
with the requirements of the Coastal Act to conform to CEQA.
7608E
a -r .► 110 4L m arL ILUA V. ffo
_ $AKIN ST.
eU f 0
W W O
N t AOAM'S AVE J
AORANGE X00 R'
COAST 0
�~ CITY OF
collece O• :o • S % ti N
Z oN
rn-q TAMESA AMC[ CO `%✓ CITY
� N --...�---------- •,`�,�� Orr J c ; a o OFi i J IRVINE
' VICTORIA"IVI 111
ST. ' �'• �% A, Oa
A E
U t •�►� 6 N1wrpNi
Ir TM sT.
!�► !' 4r O a+
.._• �o CIT U c I
•
a z y Q Its = s
49
JBEA'� H c
/ 1 IL J O ` u
r `ti
SA
1w 0
�� r� �� l ` �Y• to NrAclrl Vol
C La •Q I \��Ql � ANA Fs Rb.
�0q w\
Q ``\ F ` `� O `•t
C07
VICINITY MAP
1/4 0 1/4 1/2 3/4 1
GRAPHIC SCAI1 IN MIIES
THOMAS GUIDE D
1992 EDITION
PAGE 888 L01Y
04��a 5 -92 424,E
CQASTg41jeoq,
�llTy �
CORS '-S TION
EXHIBIT NO.
APPLICATION N
5- -2-4
i 6(miLd
cit Cailomia Coastal Commission
TA 270/641
RICHARD K. SHOGREN Z ASSOCIATES
CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS
GARDEN GROVE, CA MQ SMIG20
SCALE: " SHOWN VED by; A—
DATE:
VICINITY MAP
603 LIDO HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION DwAwwG.wr�E�
NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 M_2
.�..... V . 7!.I
v - 5-92-42B , 4'_
—I-/$. BV6Ki/�db/�E
NOV 0 4
$r,
2 Uv
A
CommlI SlWN
DIS[RICT 1
-- � �MAA P��
ve 1A).
EXHIBIT NO. P-3
APPLICATION NO.
vr►
Cablomla COaatal Commlaalon
270/641
RICHARD K. SHOGREN & ASSOCIATES
CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS
GARDEN GROVE, CA (714) 025 -IM
WALE: rota A nmovLo my: -
nnAwM OF er
io ze s2
pcvKro
STRINGLINE MAP
601 LIDO HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION oAAw..aAn,.,�w
NEWRORT BEACH, CA 92663 M -I
4
N
Grist BGt,Y,. L9
!i
. . .........
"C%P
v ecely
eD
NOV 0 41992
OAS c� 1 94NIA
S
OVn, l F ISS oh,
Asr�/sTR/c
kIBIT NO.
CTION N
alifornia Coeshl CanNssion
SECTION V. #7
AW1,0 Q W
j•"' � A.'iPlDq�S
�' � ' w faEncE�mPi�, Cera.*lf5 �
AW taut. rte. rc f e-77 O►W
Ar"&VRN! r4ca-#a. 4w
\1-lrir� !4/c�ei/F.ID
�n �—!1. S CVJ�Ea/EAv GINE _
5-92-424'
l
1 270/641
RICHARD K. SHOGREN & ASSOCIATES
CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS
GARDEN GROVE, CA (714)638. 620
SCALS: � unwvco o.: com" n
BT
O.7t: 78192
SPT& PLAN
603 LIDO HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION °A"` maftu't"
NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 1 M-3
Grist BGt,Y,. L9
!i
. . .........
"C%P
v ecely
eD
NOV 0 41992
OAS c� 1 94NIA
S
OVn, l F ISS oh,
Asr�/sTR/c
kIBIT NO.
CTION N
alifornia Coeshl CanNssion
SECTION V. #7
AW1,0 Q W
j•"' � A.'iPlDq�S
�' � ' w faEncE�mPi�, Cera.*lf5 �
AW taut. rte. rc f e-77 O►W
Ar"&VRN! r4ca-#a. 4w
\1-lrir� !4/c�ei/F.ID
�n �—!1. S CVJ�Ea/EAv GINE _
5-92-424'
l
1 270/641
RICHARD K. SHOGREN & ASSOCIATES
CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS
GARDEN GROVE, CA (714)638. 620
SCALS: � unwvco o.: com" n
BT
O.7t: 78192
SPT& PLAN
603 LIDO HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION °A"` maftu't"
NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 1 M-3
EXHIBIT NO.
APPLICATION NO
24
VLI AA
Callon" Coftst81 ConwWssW
R
fir,
y
�
Ali
I
EXHIBIT NO.
APPLICATION NO
24
VLI AA
Callon" Coftst81 ConwWssW
1IMP P4 PO DCC 4' Ova X'frf (Gri: f,J
i
D !(,rvrf;4C70Q lfj MED'{�'�'CNEr'/s1s!
/ yll
`'.
:f i ,� %yfLoP� r/6iJ.sY.4l3 �"//Et%S%S<AB_ f I', f.
SEE OET.9/L�/ Z 1 ' � �. �•'�� `• �'�LY/E/IN®E�PEX/S7.S'Gl7B
,. _
U
-/Q
NEW SL,I'HVP
SEE DETA/L %3
Nt W TOE RZA"
CL�Pia/!
TO_C. EL_ t /. 7S-
tL. �A 9
fOP DGSN66 t
t xiST. go�✓p Link -•
e07 Tdrl Of
w
1
al7.11cw, B4Q
Aa4P1E4 C/!a-QC9
—�Ex/ST/h/, COM--.
CNE'E% �/LE
NEW S7EEG S we.Fr P/GE
BY SvPE�'/O.P/U9A O.P SAIME
e114-0/DO A!•n! ATMIlQ
f L1,5 - 55D0 Cf. LES.
Min( Mede LOAD c,743,440
XHIBIT NO.
r,f AVATION NO.
CI-lifomh Coa=taf Commusbn
RICHARD K. SHOGREN & ASS. ,IATES
Consulting Civil Engineers
12755 Brookhurst St. Suite 203
Garden Grove, California 92640
(714) 636-1620
TO CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
70 Newport Pier
Newport Beach, CA
WE ARE SENDING YOU ❑ Attached ❑ Under separate cover via_
❑ Shop drawings ❑ Prints ❑ Plans
❑ Copy of letter ❑ Change order ❑
LIETTIELcl VF UMUSEDUML
DATE
1/27/93
JOB NO.
270/641
ATTENTION
Tony Melum/Marine Dept.
RE:
601 Lido Park Drive, N.B.
1
For approval
❑
"Notice of Application for LOP"
❑ Resubmit
the following items:
❑ Samples ❑ Specifications
COPIES
DATE
NO.
DESCRIPTION
1
For approval
❑
"Notice of Application for LOP"
❑ Resubmit
copies for approval
❑
For your use
❑
Approved as noted
❑ Submit
copies for distribution
> ❑
As requested
❑
Returned for corrections
❑ Return
corrected prints
❑
For review and comment
❑
❑
FOR BIDS DUE
19 ❑
PRINTS RETURNED
AFTER LOAN TO US
THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked
below:
❑
For approval
❑
Approved as submitted
❑ Resubmit
copies for approval
❑
For your use
❑
Approved as noted
❑ Submit
copies for distribution
> ❑
As requested
❑
Returned for corrections
❑ Return
corrected prints
❑
For review and comment
❑
❑
FOR BIDS DUE
19 ❑
PRINTS RETURNED
AFTER LOAN TO US
REMARKS Tony: Trying to contact
Bruce Henderson, Corps
of Engineers for the LOP.
When I receive
a
copy, I'll mail you one Thanks,
Sam Kniss.
COPY
PRODUCT 2402 � Inc., Groton, Mass. 01471.
mfh
SIGNED:
If enclosures are not as noted, kindly notal y us at on(
TIDE 12 :4=5
LOS ANGELES DISTRICT
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
NOTICE OF APPLICATION FOR LOP
Public Notice/Application No. 92 -039 -Bpi
Comment Period: October 28, 1992 through November y 1 , 1992
App 1 i cant.ssj
601 Lich Park Homaownc=
601 Lido Park Drive
NwwpO,rt Beach, Gal i f ot'ilid
1,ocati,ozi
Coil L do t
Aa4oc' Richard K. Sha{ren & Associates
12755 Brookhurst Street, Su i t -p 203
926aj Garden Grove, California 92640
Attn : Margaret Young
(714) 636-1620
In XQwport Say at 601 Lido hark Drive, Newport Beach, california.
Activity
Remove and replace damaged portion of existing coping and concrete slab
atop existing sheetpile, and add new toe pile and coping seaward of
existing sheetpile (see attached drawings). For more information :ane page
3 of this notice.
Interested partial arc hereby nwtirled tnat an application has been
received for a Department of the Army permit for the activity described
herein and shown on the attached drawing(s). Interested parties are
invited to provide their views on the proposed work, which will becoma a
part of t u record anal will be considered in the 4Iec:isi cin. This permit
will be issued or denied under Section 10, River andHarbor Act of 1899 (33
U.S.C. 403). Comments should be mailed to:
U.B. Army Corps of Engineers
Al 14; CESPL--G4-R-92-439-BIi
P-0- Hos 2711.
Los A7ng'eles# California 90053-2325
OCT -27-92 TUE 12_4b
Evaluation Factors
P. O
The decision whether to issue a permit will No hasod on an evaluation
or Lice probable impact including cumulative impacts 6f the propuued
¢lctivi.ty Oil {rhe public interest. That dOci.siutt wi 1 i reflect, Lhe national
canuvt-n for both J)rut:ection and utilization of important resournnn. The
benef l L winch reasottdbly may bo Aupectod tcs .4Goz-ud :From the proposal must
to balanced against its reasonably fnr¢,ecable dot•riments. All factors
whivti may be relevant to the rropoca 1 will be uunn i der ed including the
Cumulative affects thexuu , amonq those arp conservation, econoltliv,
aesLhetics, general envi rnnmontal c:rsnro� xl;�, watlalla:i, cultural values, fish
and wildlife values, flood hazards, flood plain vni lies, land use,
navigation, uhufelina era!iivn, and accretion, recreation, water supply and
consexvati.on, water quality, energy needs, safety, food production and, in
general, the needs and welfare of the p"ople. In addition, if thc» proposal
would diac:harge dredged or till material , the evaluation of the activity
will inc.11.16e application of the BPA Guidclli1es (40 CFR ?.'ilk) as required by
Scction 404 (b) (1) of the CInan Water Act.
Preliminary Review of Selccted__Fact.ors
E=s Determination- A preliminary determination has been made that an
environmental impact statement is not rnrpti.rad for the propop—i-i 1 wur,k.
coastal one Management- The applicant must certify that his proposed
aotivity nnmplies with and will be vuriduct;Ad in a mAnner thAi- i, cvxjuictc2lt
with the aPPrrved, state coastal 7011- Management Program.
cultural_Resaurces•- The 1 r,t03t, vers.', catj of the National Regi sLA�• of
llistnri ¢: Places hao been cot�sul tPd and i-hir, site io nut. 1 i steal. This
rcvi Aw uonsti t,tttess the extent of cu 1 t Ltra! resources investigations by the
District Engineer, and he is otherwise: unaware of the preccaic;e of such
resources,
Endangered, Species_ Preliminary determinations indicate that the
proposed activity w.i l .l not. attars{: two eaxadIlgored 5pAr:i�:�:, the Californialeast tern (SLernA antil.larum browni) and the California brown pplican
(Pulunantis Oc uidc:"t-alfs aallEornlcus) , yr their critical habitat.
Therefore, formal consultation Under Section 7(c) of Lhn Fndangerad Species
Act in not recju iruct .
Public Reariaa- Any person may request, in writing, within the comment
period Sf►ooified in this not -:ice, that a puh t ir. hearinq be held to consider
this application. Requests for public: hearinq shall state with
Particularity the Y•ed*0113 for 1101 d ing a Ptah l i r hearing.
OCT -27-92 TUE la: -47
B,ra osed Activit
R. 04
The applicant proposes to install a new steel toe pile and concreto
coping seaward of an existing c:oncretp 811(-etp i l A ,bu khand in Newport . Bay at
G01 Lido Park Drive.
Additional Proieat Information
The new toe pile and coping will extend 18 inches and 24 inches,
resgectivAly, boyond the eximting Coric:retc sheetpiLQ.
The pilcc will be driven by hydraulic ram.
Propose$ speoial Con 'tions
The applicant shall "Otify the Commander
( 11th Coast Guard
Di.ctriot, sol West Or:N,tn Boulevard, Lozig Beach, Cal lfc�t•nia 00002, (310)
9504300, extension X01, at ieast 15 days prior to the start of
construction operations. The notification shall include the following
information:
a. The Location of the work site.
b. The size and type of egUipment that.. wtil.l ba umrd to perfv-Lm thn
work,
c. onsite telephone number for the permittee's project manager.
d. The schedule r0r Compl e -t ing the project..
Commenting agencies (California Department of Fish and oama, U.S. Fish
and Wildlife service, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National. Marina
Fisheries, California. coastal Commission, and the U.S.
requested to reply by November 11, 1992. The Coast G►Aard) are
reviewed for a Letter of Permission (LD?). Agencies proposed
orespondi g yby
November 11, 1992 will be assumed to have no objeoti on to Issuance of an
LOP for tbo proposed project.
For additional information please call Bruce Henderson of my staff at
(213) 894-0351. This public notic:a is issued by the Chief, 12egulatoLy
Branch.
3
OCT -2 r -9? TUE 12 :45
LOS ANGELES DISTRICT
C
U» $ ARMY CORPS OF ENGINCER5
tACSIMILE TRANSMIT fAL HEADER SHEET
REGULATORY BRANCH!
P,0- BOX 2' -'Il
LOS A1VGELFS, CALIFOnNIA 90053-23?5
(213) 394-56106 FAX: (273) 894-531P
TO: �I V" 3w-cv $00 31 :t
OFFICE:
FAX NUMBER: (714), (0?,4r I A 51"
PHONE NUMBER:
n
rROM: BRUCE HENDERSON
REMARKS: �� �� � TU TQC
C,C-
Pages to f-o/l;:;w
STAIJi.�OF CALIFORNIA—THE RESbbRCES AGENCY PETE WILSON, Goramor
CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION
SOUTH COAST AREA
245 W. BROADWAY, STE. 380 Date:
P.O. BOX 1450
LONG BEACH, CA 90802-4416
(310) 590.5071
STATUS LETTER
Re: Application/Appeal No. E - q — q rQ-(A
The status of this matter is noted below.
Your application was filed on �An« ] . LA 1 q
The public hearing is tentatively scheduled n J � h, 1h- lam. I q
in C -,-,V,- -T) �—e Z> > . This tentative scheduling information
is being provided for your convenience and is subject to change.
Written notification of final scheduling of the hearing, along with a
copy of the staff report, will be mailed approximately 10 days prior to
the hearing.
IMPORTANT: The enclosed Notice of Pending Permit must be posted on the
site, in a conspicuous place, within 3 days of its receipt.
This application is incomplete and cannot be filed or processed until
the items listed on the attached sheet have been completed and submitted
to the District Office. If these items have not been received by the
date indicated, the entire package will be returned to you.
Please be advised that the items needed to complete your application
must be submitted to this office by
This file is being returned as the application submitted is deemed
incomplete. Ths required substantive documents are missing. Please
see the attached sheet.
This appeal was received and has been determined
to be a valid appeal. You will be notified of the place and date of the
public hearing.
This appeal was received after the expiration
of the appeal period, hence it is not a valid appeal.
This appeal was received but has been determined
invalid for the following reason:
If you have any questions, please contact this office at (310) 590-5071.
0 r --L O -A A Q
Staff Analys
10-92/6351E
NOTICE OF
PENDING PERMIT
A PERMIT APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT ON THIS SITE IS PENDING
BEFORE THE CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION,
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: repair of an existing bulkhead
LOCATION: 601 Lido Park Drive, Newport Beach, Orange County
APPLICANT: 601 Lido Homeowners Assoc.
APPLICATION NUMBER:
DATE NOTICE POSTED:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PLEASE PHONE OR WRITE THE OFFICE LISTED
BELOW BETWEEN 8 AM AND � PM, WEEKDAYS.
CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION
SOUTH COAST AREA OFFICE
PO BOX 1450
245 WEST BROADWAY, STE 380
LONG BEACH, CA, 9.0802
(21.3) 590-5071
RICHARD K. SHOGREN & ASSOCIATES
Consulting Civil Engineers
(714) 636-1620
20 January 1993
Mr. Tony Melum, Deputy Director
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
Marine Department
P. 0. Box 1768
Newport Beach, CA 92659-1768
File No: L012093H.641
Re: CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION PERMIT FOR BULKHEAD REPAIR
AT 601 LIDO PARK DRIVE, NEWPORT BEACH
Dear Tony:
Enclosed please find copies of the "Status Letter" and "Notice of Pending
Permit" for the above referenced.
Please call me if you have any questions or further comments.
Yours very truly,
RICHARD K. SHOGREN & ASSOCIATES
Sam F. Kniss, P.E.
Project Engineer
SFK:mfh
enc
12755 BROOKHURST ST. • SUITE 203 • GARDEN GROVE, CA 92640
December 14, 1992
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
ITEM NO. 21
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Public Works Department
SUBJECT: LIDO PARK BULKHEAD REPLACEMENT (C-2889)
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. Affirm the Categorical Exemption of Environmental Impact.
2. Approve the plans and specifications.
3. Authorize the City Clerk to advertise for bids to be
opened at 11:00 A.M. on January 12, 1993.
DISCUSSION:
This contract provides for the replacement of a partially
failed bulkhead which supports the southerly edge of Lido Park and
extends from the 601 Lido Park Drive condominiums to the
southwesterly wing wall of the Lido Isle bridge (see attached
Exhibit "A").
Staff and the City's consultant, Richard K. Shogren and
Associates, determined that the collapsed bulkhead cannot be
salvaged for reuse since it is so severely damaged and aged (built
ca. 1944); accordingly, Shogren has prepared detailed plans and
specifications for the complete removal of the collapsed bulkhead
and replacement with a new bulkhead which is engineered to meet
current design standards.
The contract includes the removal and reconstruction of
Lido Park site improvements adjacent to the collapsed bulkhead to
1) permit reconstruction of the bulkhead, and 2) replace the
damaged park site improvements. Two large palm trees must be
temporarily relocated during construction, then reinstalled along.
with a new retaining wall, backfill, walkway, planter, irrigation
system and plant materials. Except for plant materials, the
replacement park improvements will match the existing improvements.
Plans and specifications for the new plant materials, irrigation
system and palm tree relocation have been prepared by Fennell and
Associates.
The work will also include importing sand to be placed in
the adjacent 'boat slip area to buttress the new bulkhead. This
imported sand will be graded to approximate sand line contours that
were provided in the design of the previous bulkhead, and will
decrease water depth in the slips adjacent to the bulkhead as
compared to that of recent years.
The permittee for the adjacent boat slips, the 601 Lido
Park Drive Homeowners Association, has been notified that it will
Subject: Lido Park Bulkhead Replacement (C-2889)
December 14, 1992
Page 2
be required to temporarily relocate a portion or all of their docks
so that the City can reconstruct the bulkhead and regrade sand line
contours to the face of the new bulkhead (see attached copy of
letter dated November 18, 1992). The Association has also been
notified that the cost of said relocation is the responsibility of
the Association, and that water depths in their boat slips will be
decreased.
The bulkhead failure occurred when the 601 Association
had hired a contractor to perform dredging work for the slips near
the bulkhead. City staff felt that the dredging work could have
contributed to the failure. The Association disagreed, contending
that the corroded condition of the tieback rods was primarily
responsible. Because of the nearly 50 year old age of the
bulkhead, and the obvious severe corrosion which existed.in the
tieback rods, it is felt that there would be little useful purpose
served by attempting to secure compensation from the 601
Association.
Shogren's construction estimate totals approximately
$250,000, which could easily vary by as much as ±20% because of the
specialized nature of the work and the very limited number of
harbor construction contractors that are available,to perform the
work Approximately $249,000 remains in budget appropriations for
the project
A categorical exemption has been prepared by Staff and
approved by the Environmental Affairs Committee. Upon affirmation,
the exemption will be filed with the County Clerk.
The contract specifies that all work be completed within
61 calendar days after the commencement of work at the site, or by
April 30, 1993, whichever occurs 'first.
f
Benjamin B. Nolan
Public Works Director
LD: so
Attachments (2)
CITY OF NEWPORT •ERC H
PUBLIC WORKS DEPRRTMENT
LIDO PARK
BULKHEAD REPLACEMENT
C-2889
TYP. SECTION -0
LIDO ISLE
l
le -BRIDGE
EXHIBIT "All
DATE 12/2/92 NO SCALE
DRAWN 7W
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
U ? P.O. BOX 1768, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92659-1768
C'9C1 FC)Fl�\P
November 18, 1992
Robert Reed
Lido Park Drive Homeowner's Association
601 Lido Park Drive
Unit 8C
Newport Beach, CA 92663
Re: City of Newport Beach repair.at Lido Island Bridge
Dear Mr. Reed:
In October, 1992 I corresponded with you regarding the fact that
the City is going forward with its bulkhead repair at the Lido
Island Bridge. Lloyd Dalton of the City Public Works Department
has informed me that approval of this project will be requested at
the city Council meeting of. December 14, 1992. Bids will be opened
January 12, 1993, and we hope the contract will be awarded January
25. It is anticipated that construction could begin about the
first of February and the project should take about 60 days from
start of construction until finish.
I want to again emphasize that the contract will give the
contractor the option of doing the construction work either from
the land side or from the water side. If water side work is
necessary it is quite possible that all portions of the dock at 601
Lido Park Drive will need to be removed. The cost of this removal
and the following re -installation will be the responsibility of the
Harbor Permittee,' -Lido Park Homeowner's Association.
As I pointed out to you in my letter of September 15, 1992, because
of the nature of the bulkhead repair, it will be necessary for
additional sand to be brought up to the toe of the bulkhead,
thereby reducing the available water depths in and around your
harbor permit. Please refer to that letter for details.
I hope this information will be helpful to you. If I can be of
further help please call me at 644-3044.
Sincerely,
Tony Melum
Deputy Director
cc: Richard Shogren & Associates
Lloyd Dalton
3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach
NAME
ADDRESS OF PROPOSED FACILITY,
PERMIT k
601 LIDO PARK HOA
601 LIDO PARK DRIVE, . B .
/'�
MAILING ADDRESS C o RKS &A
TELEPHONE NO.
FEE
CHECK NO.
DATE
12755 Brookhurst #203 G.G
9
640 636-162
$60.
1149,X
9/3/92
APPROVED BY: DATE
APPq;yTI� Y ADE FOR A HARBOR PERMIT TO
OCHD ❑
y
CUKIYOXT/REVISE AIZ 2X l jjg Ulllk112c1d
AT THE ABOVE LOCATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY OF
ENGR
NEWPORT BEACH PERMIT POLICIES AND THE ATTACHED DRAWING
COUNCIL ❑
BY RICHARD K — SHOGREN & ASSOCIATES
COMPANY
O
DATED 8/92
DEPT. ❑
DATE 9/3/92
ESCROW
❑'
INSPECTION
SIGNATURE
SPECIAL CONDITIONS:
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIF. —�
WX FORM 68-1010
NN► -'001, cn
W CONCT
A o - W N �-'' CO IV Z
�m OWC9 0
A m
s+NcG
oNimNci+-4 m
m
v
ZILI—
� v
EA)
oo� N
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
P.O. BOX 1768, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92659-1768
October 6, 1992
Robert Reed
President Lido Park Drive Homeowner's Association
601 Lido Park Drive
Unit 8C
Newport Beach, CA 92663
Re: City Bulkhead Repair at Lido Island Bridge
Dear Mr. Reed:
As I indicated to you in my letter of September 15, 1992, the City
is preparing to go forward with plans to repair its bulkhead
adjacent to your bulkhead at.the Lido Island bridge and 601 Lido
Park Drive.
To facilitate these repairs it maybe necessary to remove a portion
of the docks and pilings bayward of your buildings. The cost of
this removal and the following reinstallation will be the
responsibility of the Harbor Permittee, the Lido Park Homeowner's
Association.
It is anticipated that construction will begin in Januay 1993 and
should take no longer than 120 days to be completed. The City of
Newport Beach Marine Department has had initial discussions with
the Orange County Sheriff's Harbor Patrol regarding the possibility
of making offshore moorings available to the boat owners during
construction at no expense to them. We will follow this up in the
coming weeks.
Please contact me at your earliest convenience to discuss the above
and to set a meeting, if necessary, between the Homeowner's
Association and the City. I can be reached at 644-3044.
Sincerely
Tony Melum
Deputy Director
3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach
RICHARD K. SHOGREN & ASSOCIATES
Consulting Civil Engineers
(714) 636-1620
M E M O R A N D U M
To: Tony Melum
From: Margaret Young l
Re: BULKHEAD ELEVATIONS AT 601 LIDO PARK DRIVE'
File No: M092892Y.641
Date: 9/28/92
This memorandum confirms our understanding of the telephone conversations
that took place Friday, 25 September 1992, regarding the City -approved
elevations of the top of the bulkhead at 601 Lido Park Drive in Newport
Beach.
Approximately 18 ft. of the existing coping and slab atop the existing
sheetpile are to be removed and replaced to match existing elevations. The
top of the slab/coping at 601 Lido Park Drive currently matches the
bulkheads on either side, the northwesterly one (adjacent to the Lido
Bridge) belonging to the City and the southeasterly one at 611 Lido Park
Drive. From a copy of a survey done by the City and provided to us during
our work on the Lido Bridge bulkhead, we have assumed the top of the walls
to be at E1. 8..75. A change to the current City minimum of E1. 9.0 would
impact all three properties, causing several changes in elevation along the
length of the existing bulkheads and adversely affecting current drainage
of the developed areas.
After your review of this situation with Lloyd Dalton in Public Works, you
informed us that is was mutually agreed that the existing elevation is
acceptable.
cc: L. Dalton - NB -PWD
12755 BROOKHURST ST. • SUITE 203 • GARDEN GROVE, CA 92640
a
°` .T CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
P.O. BOX 1768, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92659-1768
qi Fob
September 15, 1992
Robert Reed,
President Lido Park Drive Homeowner's Association
601 Lido Park Drive, Unit 8C
Newport Beach, CA 92663
Re: City bulkhead at right angles to bulkhead adjacent to 601
Lido Park Drive
Dear Mr. Reed:
The City of Newport Beach Public Works Department has prepared
plans to rebuild the City bulkhead adjacent to your property at 601
Lido Park Drive. Essentially the bulkhead repair will consist of
replacing the failed bulkhead panels, replacing tie rods and
deadmen and then backfilling the property.
I have provided for your information a copy of a contour map
showing the finished bottom contours necessary to support the
rebuilt wall in this location.
The reason we are providing you with these contours is to advise
you that once the wall is rebuilt the depths in this area will
change. Current recent soundings suggest that in the area of the
slip closest to the wall you have approximately 4 feet to 6 feet in
depth at zero tide. As the attached contours indicate, the depths
will go to 1 foot at the portion closest to the wall to 2 feet at
the end of the slip closest to the channel. There will be an
approximate water depth loss of 3 to 5 feet. This water depth loss
will occur across the.face of the property, impacting the side tie
adjacent to the wall and also the slip adjacent to that.
If you need additional information or wish to discuss the attached
exhibit, please call me at 644-3044.
Sincerely,
Tony Melum
Deputy Marine Director
tony. lid
3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach
RICHARD K. SHOGREN & ASS( ATES
Consulting Civil Engineers
12755 Brookhurst. St. Suite 203
Garden Grove, California 92640
(714) 636-1620
TO CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH - MARINE DEPT
70 NEWPORT PIER
NEWPORT REACH, CA 92661
L[EU EL`_ (OF
DATE
9/3/92
JOB NO.
270/641
ATTENTION
TONY MELUM
RE:
APPLICATION FOR HARBOR MAINTENANCE
PERMIT & APPROVAL IN CONCEPT
FOR
REPAIR OF EXISTING BULKHEAD
601 LIDO PARK DRIVE,.NEWPORT BEACH
1
WE ARE SENDING YOU ® Attached ❑ Under separate cover via the following items:
❑ Shop drawings ❑ Prints ❑ Plans ❑ Samples ❑ Specifications
❑ Copy of letter ❑ Change order IN SEE BELOW
COPIES
DATE
NO.
DESCRIPTION
5
8/92
"APPROVAL IN CONCEPT" SKETCH - 81,2, x 11
1
9/3/92
APPLICATION FOR HARBOR MAINTENANCE PERMIT
RKS&A CHECK N0. -7099 - $60.00 -Permit Fee
THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below:
E. For approval ❑ Approved as submitted
❑ For your use ❑ Approved as noted
❑ As requested ❑ Returned for corrections
❑ For review and comment ❑
❑ FOR BIDS DUE 19
❑ Resubmit_ copies for approval
❑ Submit copies for distribution
❑ Return corrected prints
❑ PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US
REMARKS
TONY: PLEASE CALL ME IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR NEED ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION, SINCE WE MUST GET CCC APPROVAL ON THIS, PLEASE
PROCESS IT ASAP.
THANKS,
MARGARET YOUNG
(714) 636-1620
COPY TO
SIGNED:
r
PRODUCT 240-2n e Inc., Groton, mass. 01471. if enclosures are not as noted, kindly notify us at once.
Cl Te- oP- NEwPo,Pr BE.acH
�,Po��cT s1 TF
NEW Cl: Vile SSL,4B
AM 7C11 EX IS 711V4
fB,4 �4
r Zom vac* ,,,-„
EL,
U
NEW CDS/Nle a so��
C- INEW
a
t� tiAf -oto /O/
ti
I
N.�✓IOII *t •� � R � O Iw[QOA
/SLw�vp
xE�7-/LF
i S
REIN.
E7Z,
SF41147 I/ F/
O acc w..t
�_ N,T'$• —
EGr/ TpE7LcL
V I C 1 N I TY SKETCH "'a`r "Tr
Nrwooar B.�Y ��rrr
,
CAL IF'OQN/A yr /
So Undn95 ore eXpicssed ,n �ee� and dinofe
dopths be/pw /`Karr Lower LOW Wooer. rt?oxr...ci-„
ron9e of fracOpprox/�no�e/y /O �e•ef Horaor /ine5
eaiob/r'shed /n phis . secyiorl o>t'Newporf Bor.
Zore
7U ,}l
U, 5' Ezzo-/0, L111115
A�PROX I-/M/75
OF MEW COF/MG�
Ex/ST, �aP/NC?
1
_
/A/ TDE /��L ,5- 'IC7 CIL
Aiv'D �aPi�G 7>'/ ) '
PG A!n/
n/, T, s,
L / CA.vT 5 6O/ L/RIO PAE,- /OX5, akIMEIE5 103 •Cor
B c,r, -AZ Acr
6G/ Z- /oa IK,E11k, o,e
JaB ADDZSSS N�w/�aeT AgEAey1 CfJ,
CoA.rwcroe QA TE 8 �Z
-' ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COSTS
LIDO PARK SEAWALL
FOR
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
Bid
Estimated
Unit
Item
Quantity
Item
Price
Total
1
Lump sum
Mobilization
$ 6,000.
$ 6,000.
2
Lump sum
Shoring
$22,000.
$22,000.
3
Lump sum
Demolition
$19,000.
$19,000.
4
12 each
Bulkhead Panels, 23 feet
$ 1,953.
$23,436.
5
7 each
Bulkhead Panels, 27 feet
$ 2,293.
$16,051.
6
7 each.
Bulkhead Panels, 29 feet
$ 2462.
$17,234.
7
Lump sum
End closure
$ 4,000.
$ 4,000.
8
108 l.f.
Coping
$ 130.
$14,040.
9
10 each
Deadmen and Tie -rods
$ 1,416.
$1.4,160.
10
Lump sum
Backfill
$17,400.
$17,400.
11
108 l.f.
Handrail
$ 80.
$ 8,640.
12
Lump sum
Restoration of Park
$26,000.
$26,000.
TOTAL ESTIMATED BID
$187,961.00
,,,gip x
RICHARD K. SHOCRhN &r ASSOCIATES Consulting Civil Engineers
--OF
N'EWPOR`T°' R
\ I. we � «'gt � a"�! ,•."�
%s
.. .. _.__.,... _..-•__ __ --- �'� - as�aw,+wm/ 9�'x, � a.., Ca d$ � y, Sm as �E)� � �'�
a
ov
Iry rda.w.�*�rr�, �.sme; C's¢smsosavoamrm � _ ��y} .� w
.A E ` ..- 3C SQUvmq+i.>?s Qo! {pv�A% S below tsCa/ �n Fc c % cxna� casnaai�
� ) R t+.f�prp Loa"t mdv ZOW W*oer• �t9crarwrcfrwm
¢�°/r.crSCc.A°.f
A10
,jfi�d�'
p-. - -- -
CY
•
t:
7� /
L
ri
ft 7W
1 pp
�� x C;'. -- ,' _ ` p s7- °' � � _ . �,�w• •'"may-"-' aM.-r+n .ten' n
-�L`G ... .� /di. _ _ 4 �• w. _-.-.. ...:..::.� +� /q_. .. .��. .. ..ws..w ��..ww.. ....._.,+au�,�w�Fs. m'n'� .
e t r~
�WOOAA.r r
ON
� a
0
Z
0
a
e
p�� '®
i _ \!'1 l 1. .
-QO
a
June 13, 1959
Board of Directors
601 Lido Park Drive
Neport Beach, CA 92663
Re: Sea wall failure adjacent to your property at 601 Lido Park
Drive
Dear Sirs:
As you are aware it has been some time since the failure of the
bulkhead wall adjacent to your property. It has been the City's
position that the failure was caused by a contractor in the employ
of the 601 Lido Homeowner's Association.
To resolve this problem as quickly as possible the City has been
willing to assume 50% of the cost to repair the wall to get the
repair work done as soon as possible. Our Public Works Department
has estimated the cost of repairs to the wall will amount to
$130,000. Therefore, the amount owed by your association will be
$65,000. This is an estimate and the final costs may come in
lower or higher than this.
The purpose of this lettyer is to ask for a committment from your
association to assume 50% of the cost of repairs.
Please let me know as soon as possible the steps you intend to
take to participate in the cost of repairs of the bulkhead wall.
This work should go forward a quickly as possible. If we are
unable to get your cooperation in effecting the repairs it will be
necessary for the City to repair the wall and then turn the matter
over to the City Attorney's office.
If you have questions please call me at 644-3044.
Sincerely,
Tony Melum, Tidelands Administrator
j w -Xl
CD m
F- U N
cn
oc
0
w
O
4
1
4
w
F-
W
Q
N
N '
W
c.7
Q.
N
N
LLJ
i
Z
W
r
3
c.7
z
F-
3
Z
a
{
z
w
Y
Q
a
C]
CL
W
N
DC
O
U
J
d
I C::,W
zf
U
Q
W
�
[0
F -
w
O
a
3
i aJ
LL-
O
V i
r
U
j
j w -Xl
CD m
F- U N
cn
oc
0
w
O
4
1
4
w
F-
W
Q
N
N '
W
c.7
Q.
N
N
LLJ
i
Z
W
r
3
c.7
z
F-
3
Z
a
STATTE�E FFARM
lam)
INSURANCE
State Farm Fire and Casualty Company ®tate Farm Insurance
Crown Valley Service Center
1— 27882 Forbes Road
April 20 1988 Laguna Niguel, California 92677
Phone: (714) 364-4500
Cityof Newport Beach
P.0 . Box 1768
Newport Beach, CA 92658-8915
Attention: Mr. David Harshbarger
Marine Director
Re: Our Claim No.: 55-BO61-603
Our Insured: 601 Lido Homeowners Association
Date of Loss: 1/7/87
Dear Mr. Harshbarger:
State Farm Fire and Casualty Company has completed its
investigation on the above referenced claim. We have been
unable to obtain any information which would indicate
negligence on the part of our insured for the damages
sustained by the City of Newport Beach.
Our investigation indicates two factors which contributed to
the failure of the sea wall:
* increased lateral load on the wall due to rains,
* removal of lateral support at the toe of th@ wall
due to dredging.
As you are aware, t'he dredging was done by Newport Beach
Dredging Company who is not an insured under the 601 Lido
policy of insurance.
For the reasons stated above, we are unable to offer compensa-
tion on behalf of our insured.
zov
HOME OFFICE: BLOOMINGTON, ILLINOIS 61710-0001
April 20, 1988
Page 2
City of Newport Beach
In accordance with the Statute of Limitations in the State
of California as it relates to property damage claims, you
have three years from the date of loss or damage in which to
effect settlement or seek other means to keep your claim
from expiring.
Yours very truly,
RZZ
yyy-
Jody Bongiva
Claim Representative
(714) 364-4572
J B : m s
cc: 601 Lido Homeowners Association
601 Lido
Newport Beach, California 92663-4453
NORMAN S. NARWITZ
LAWRIN S. LEWIN
WALTER KLEIN
SAMUEL WILNER
DONALD J. SANDS
LEONARD SIEGEL
ROBERT L. KEHR
GEORGE D. CROOK
WENDY A. GOLDBERG
MATTHEW I. BERGER
PETER S. FORGIE
JACK A. KLAUSCHIE, JR.
LAURA J. SNOKE
JODI ZUCKER TAKSAR
JANE S. PREECE
MARK V. ASDOURIAN
MICHELLE E. MATTI
WILNER, NARWITZ, LEWIN & KLEIN
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION.
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
9601 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD, SUITE 700
BEVERLY HILLS, CALIFORNIA 90210
(213) 272-8631 • 550-4595,
December 7, 1987
601 Lido
601 Lido Park Drive
Newport Beach, California 92663
Attention: Mr. R. B. Whitehead
Re: Alleged damage to seawall at
601 Lido Homeowners
Our Client: Newport Dredging
Our File: 12656-1
Dear Mr. Whitehead:
CABLE "SEALAW"
TELEX 664977
ANSWER BACK: "SEALAW BVHL"
'TELECOPIER (213) 273-5097
We are in receipt of your communication to Mr.
Sutherland regarding the damage to the seawall referred to
in the above caption. When the damage was first reported
to us, as counsel for Newport Dredging, we undertook an investigation
and no information was developed which shows that there was
any fault on the part of Newport Dredging in connection with
the failure of the wall. To the contrary, the information
developed shows that the failure was the result of corrosion
of the tie -rods since the wall was built in 1944. Furthermore,
there have been substantial rains prior to this incident
and there has been substantial accumulation of water on
the earth side of the wall.
Under the circumstances, and no specific evidence
having been provided which shows any improper action on the
part of Newport Dredging, the claim being submitted in your
behalf is denied.
Should you wish to discuss this matter, please
do not hesitate to contact the undersigned.
NSN:dw
G'�
Yours very truly,
WILNER, NARWITZ, LEWIN & KLEIN
Norman S Narwitz
6011
601 Lido Park Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92663
(714) 675-6101
December 9, 1987
City Of Newport Beach
3300 Newport Blvd.
Newport Beach, California 92663
Atten: Mr. David Harshbarger,
Marine Director
Dear Sir;
Attached please find a copy of letter as received from
the law firm representing Newport Dredging Co.
Reference:
Newport Dredging Co.
Policy# MHC60104
Seawall @ 601 Lido
Homeowners
/cerely;
R.B.Wh`i:e. ead anager
For The Board Of Governors
c.c. Ben Nolan,Public Works Director
601
601" Lido, Park Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92663
(714) 675-6101
October 27, 1987
Commercial Claims Service
111 Queen Anne Avenue North
Seattle, WA 98109
Attention: Mi. Duff Sutherland
RE: Newport Dredging Co. vs
Seawall C 601 Lido Home-
owners
City Property: Policy
MHC 60104
Dear Sir:
Confirming our telephone conversation this date, you are
investigating and reviewing your claims file and will advise
action taken by your company on the subject matter.
I have been in contact with the City of Newport Beach
and their Marine Director, Mr. David Harshbarger, and they
state they have received no correspondence from your firm
on this matter.
If you correspond via letter, it would be appreciated if
you would send copies to the City of Newport Beach as
follows:
City of Newport Beach
P.O. Box 1768
Newport Beach, CA 92658-8915
Attention Mr. David Harshbarger, Marine Director
It would be in the best interest of all parties to review
information, evaluate the problem, and work towards a
solution.
Very truly urs,
Whitehead, Manager
For the Board of Governors
\ cc: David Harshbarger, Marine Director
Ben Nolan, Public works Director
Bill Harris, Newport Dredging.
October 22, 1987
LIDO PARKPDMEOWNER' S ASSOC.
Buck Whitehead
601 Lido Park Dr.
Newport Beach, CA 92663 RE: Newport Dredging Co.
Policy No.: NHC 60104
Claim No.
Wi gwall/Bulkhead Damage
D/L: 1/5/87
Dear Mr. Whitehead,
Per your telepnone conversation today with: our office, this is to
advise you that Pacific Marine Ins. Co. has retained:
COMMERCIAL CLAIM'S SERVICE
111 Queen Arnie Ave North
Seattle, WA_ 98109
Duff Sutherland (206) 282-3116
to handle the claim.
Tha<,k you,
it
Lisa Untalan
LU:as
cc: Bill Harris, Newport Dredging Co.
Pacific Marine Ins. Co.
Comm'1 Claims Service, ATiN: Duff Sutherland
50 California Street • San Francisco, CA 94111 • (415) 421-9260
CITY OF ,PORT BEACH - PUBLIC WORKS QEPA,-iENT
ESTIMATING FORM
IT 144.r
t, tar
HUDSON ENTERPRISES
EXECUTIVE OFFICES
601 LIDO PARK DR., SUITE 3C
POST OFFICE BOX 2714
NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92663
TELEPHONE (714) 675-2402
DAVID A. KLEIN
PRESIDENT
July 29, 1987
Mr. David Harshbarger, Marine Director
City JQf _-:NewPort;,Bea�h
P.O. Box 1768
Newport. Beach, Ca. 92658-6915
Dear Mr. Harshbarger:
This letter is being written, pursuant to our telephone
conversation of yesterday concerning the damage to the
sea walladjacent to the Lido Island: Bridge.
I am writing, not only as a condominium owner of the
"601 Building", but as a resident of Newport Beach as
well.
As setforth in your letter dated January 15th addressed
to the "601 Building", a dredging permit wgs issued to
the Newport Dredging Company on Nevember 13, 1986. This
work was commenced `around .January lst and was completed.
on or around. January 6th.
As I understand it, it is the position of the City of
Newport Beach that the damage to the bulkhead was the
result of more material being removed than was permitted.
However, in speaking to Mr. Bill Harris of the Newport
Dredging Company, it is his position that the dredging
was done inconformity with the permit. He further states
that the city corroborates.this contention! In addition,
I have been told by the investigators for the insurance
company representing Newport Dredging Company that the
tie rods holding the bulkhead in place had separated from
the sea wall and were the direct cause of the bulkhead
giving way. This was further aggravated by the heavy
rainfall that occured preceeding the event.
Irrespective of who is ultimately responsible, the bulk-
head is property belonging to the City of Newport Beach.
Accordingly, the primary responsibility for the repair
and/or replacement of the bulkhead rests with you.
This damaged sea wall represents a serious and present
dangerto life and property and the failure of the city
to act in a prompt and responsible manner is, in my.view,
FOUNDED IN 1907
-Page 2 -
David Harshba. �r
a very serious breach of of your obligation and could
conceivably expose the city to unnecessary liabilty
in the event of damage to property and/or injury to
someone as a result of the sea wall giving way. I am
enclosing some pictures that were recently taken of
this area.
In addition, as a resident of the "601 Building" we
overlook the bulkhead and it is an "eyesore" and we
must insist that it be repaired promptly.
I would appreciate an immediate response indicating your
intention in this matter.
Sincerely yours,
DAK/gs David A. KLein
encl.
c.c.Ben Nolan
Bill Harris
POST '
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
V = P.O. BOX 1768, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658-8915
August 3, 1987
Mr. David A. Klein
601 Lido .Park Drive, Suite 3-C
P.O. Box 2714
Newport Beach, CA 92663 .
Dear Mr. Klein:
On April 13, 1987 the City of Newport Beach. staff, including myself and
the Public Works Director Ben Nolan, met with Mr. George Hoag and
another gentleman of your.homeowner's association to discuss the bulk-
head failure adjacent to 601 Lido Park Drive.
The City Council Harbor Permit Policies, Section 4.F. state in part:
"The permittee is responsible and liable for all property damage
which may arise out of work herein'premitted....".
The Harbor Permit for the slips issued on August 21, 1972 by the
City Council, required.as a condition of -the permit, that "no dredging
be permitted within 20 feet of the bulkhead.bordering the adjoining
City park property..". Subsequent to the bulkhead failure, the City
took soundings next .to the bulkhead. These soundings indicated that
more material was removed from the toe of the bulkhead, and closer to
the bulkhead than was permitted. It is the City's position that this
over -dredging resulted in the failure of the bulkhead. .
This information was discussed with Mr.George Hoag, representing the
homeowner's association, and he indicated that he would.discuss this
information with your Board of Directors and contact Trautwein Brothers
or another.'mari,ne contracting/engineering firm to.discuss alternate
methods and costs of repair. In that we have not heard back from the
homeowner's association, I will contact Mr. Hoag or the association
directly and ascertain what thet current status or repair plans might be.
Sincerely,
David Harshbarger
Marine Director
cc: Ben Nolan, Public Works Director
3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
Marine Department
April 13, 1987
TO: FILE
FROM: I Marine Director
SUBJECT: MEETING WITH 601 LIDO PARK ASSOCIATION, BEN NOLAN, AND
MYSELF
The following information was relayed to the 601 Association:
1. The Harbor Permit Policies, Section 4.F. states in part: "The
permittee is responsible and liable for all property damage which
may arise out of work herein permitted".
2. The Harbor Permit for the slips issued on, August 21, 1972 by
• the City Council required, as a condition of the permit, that "No
dredging be permitted within 20 feet of the bulkhead bordering
the adjoining City park property.".
3. This condition was known by Newport Dredging when they, dredged
a maintenance dredging project, per.mi't issued and dated January 23, 1976.
4. Mr. George Hoag,.of the association, indicated they would discuss
this information with their board of directors and contact Trautwein
Brothers or another marine contracting/engineering firm to discuss
alternate methods and.costs of repair. With this information they
indicated they would approach Newport Dredging Company.
David Harshbarger
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
P.O. BOX 1768, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658-8915
January 15, 1987
11601 ' Lido"
601 Liuo, Park Drive
Newport beach, CA 92663
Dear President, Homeowner's Association:
The City q§ Newport Beach Marine Department approved.a'Maintenance
Dredging Permit #124''3102,on November 13, 1986 for the "601 Lido"
Homeowner's Association. A copy of the permit is attached.
Mr. Bill Harris of Newport Dredging Company,'acting as agent.for your
association, signed the permit.
The dredging work, to the best of our knowledge, commenced on January.
5th or 6th of this year. On January 7th a bulkhead failure immediately
adjacent to the dredged area was reported to the City. Subsequently,
soundings were taken next to the bulkhead'. They °indicated that more
material was removed from thetoe of the bulkhead than.was°permitted.
This overdredging resulted in the failure of the bulkhead.
The dredging contractor has been in.contact.with the City's Public
Works Department engineering staff for the-purpose�of evaluating the
damage and the best methods and alternatives for repair.
In the near future a representative of the City's Public Works and,
Marine bepartment would1'ike to meet with you, and the contractor.
to discuss in rnore de.tail your underlying responsibility for repairing
the damaged bulkhead and, the best repair design _to_meet your_.v_essel __.-_.__
berthing needs.
Sincerely,
David Harshbarger, Marine Director
H,
1*1
I -M
cc: ben Nolan, Public Works Director _ 97r--12!1
Bill Harris, Newport Dredging Co. �.
4
3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach
Cl r Y aw Armoagr 6,e,4cH
-5 17-e
r
� h
�n•ss•
y
�
� I
I
E
+•?r 4
wewKl ewcieA
t T
Ilei w�M 0VAL
VICINITY .SKETCH «•AW arr
++
NIF ar 6AY, Mu ssoaNtIA .1srrr
.S'O&A'701A099s are axoressed in f.er and o(inoofe
eP!!rs b Jaw "con lower Cow Woftr. M&ZAW--A"
�ro� F
idc Praxin+a%/y /O 444.. Hcwbor /.i/es
�h Ne 60�
1 y
�o e �
s/�e ,ms a , secfiorr of w•po.f
�h
�!
I•E D �� d� , �9
RriTl n
7.5"
Ii
.
b
�U�
A
G
C'
c
9 g
S e
-� PtrfG
i
c
Do
3 D
Xc ii
L / CAAa1T 5 -16/ a�Ao /a rAt /7Dr�1rG�++�✓�rS i1
o T Se-W, S27 T�tAcr %P3
7-
Jae Ageesss O a/
iv
Ca reAcro�s �e �•� OA OATE
O'NEWFORT IWEACM
HARBOR PERN.1-41T
RERM-S-2-530W tr'S HMPEDY COM STMUCT ;U&l
HEREO'
AT 7pc SUF TO TL,4:..'
THE cl,,lWTY
AIN N r an,vl'�! .,., ..„ "D`d
Z7
-3
SPECIAL COND17M IS:
COMS Of Engineers Permit
Orenge Courdy Peirmit
Other c- 1 -2 -
PERMIT ISSUED SUBJECT TO
DREDGE MATERIAL BEING
HAULED TO SEA
PLACED ON BEACH ---2,n Z_ &ur-
PER.._.. _ NO. �f D
DREDGING APPLICATION
Project Location: 601 Lido Park Drive
Cubic Yards to be Dredged: 207
Method of Dredging Hydraulic Suction
Nature of Dredged Material: Sand/Silt
Disposition of D^red�ged,'Material: Place ':inaterial `.on adjacelA,beach..
Method of Material Disposition: ,:Pump through discharge pipe to dis2osal
.fill area
Turbidity Control Method: Filter screen around d.ischarae site, if needed.
Effect of dredging on contiguous bulkheading and beaches Will restore
depleted beach and reinforce bulkhead.
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 narks 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.
6Q1 L4do Homeowners ss Newport Dredging Co.
(,Applicant -type name Contractor -type name)
a
10/18/86 Signed:
(Date) ontractor s
Representative a
h
r
® � '�; CISTN"r OF NEWPORT BEACH
February 20, 1980
Tower Community Association
3121 W. Coast Highway
Newport Beach, CA 92663
Dear Sirs:
On August 7,1979, the Newport Beach City
Council approved the application number 127-3017 by
Harrison Sea Ray Boats to rebuild their boat docks
at 3107 West Coast Highway. When this facility is .
rebuilt (see attached drawing) it will limit the.
access to the slips on the easterly side of your
permit zone. In order to maximize the use of the
available water area in front of your property, a
revision of the harbor permit would be necessary,
and the revision must comply with the Newport Beach
Harbor Permit Policies.
If you have questions in this regard,
please contact me at 640-2156.
Sincerely,
d
Tony Melum
Tidelands Administrator
TM: raw
Attachment
City Hall a 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California 92663
July 11, 1979
Mr. William Cote
180 Newport Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
CITY OF NEWPORT BEAC11-17
Re: 601 Lido Pier Administration Fee
Dear Mr. Cote;
You will recall that on July 5, 1979, a meeting was held between
three board members of the "601 Lido Association", and Tony Melum and
myself of the City staff. The purpose of that meeting was to discuss
the reasons for the City's determination that your Association should
be assessed the City's recently revised Commercial Pier Administration
Fee. At the conclusion of that meeting, you requested, based on in-
formation provided by your Association, the City to review its
position.
Subsequently, this matter was discussed with the City, Manager
and the State Lands Commission staff. Based on your statements that
the use of the marina is restricted to condominium owners, and a separate
fee is not charged for the use of the facility, it has been determined
that the City.staff can make the finding that your facility is residential
in use.
Therefore, the revised commerical rate will not be assessed
to your Association, and the previous rate willcontinue to be assessed
to your Association. Should the conditions regarding the use of your
facility change, the City will again reevaluate its position.
If you have any questions, please contact me at 640-2156.
Sincerely,
44 ZY4&
len E. Welden
Tidelands Administrator
GEW:mw
City Hall . 3800 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach,; California 92663
ti
601 Lido Park Drive
Newport Beach, Ca 92660
(714) 675-6101
June 28, 1979
Mr. David Harshberger
Marine Director
City Hall
3300 West Newport Blvd.
Newport Beach, Cal. 92663
Dear Sir;
The boat dock area at 601 Lido Park Drive is not a
commercial pier. It is owned and used by Homeowners of
the 601 Lido Homeowners Association. It is part fxf the
tax base paid by each condominium owner and was part of
purchase deed of each.
No part of the docks are available or offered to out-
siders.
I called Mr. Weldon who referred me to you for cony
sideration of our protest. We question also the calculation
of area which is less than half of those supplied.
The Association requests reconsideration of this
"pier fee" levie ag nst us.
Glenn Rickard, Treasurer
601 Lido Homeowners Association
601 Lido Park Drive
Newport Beach, Cal. 92663 �.
IS7g'
NE„���r��BEACH
.I
C/ TY NEij'F�O�Pr 8e, 4CN
®F
p
,.
T o. ti u�•�1'
s
c 0
AD 0
ILA
AD��...1
9
Y
s wvaKsO'T
C. •
-
7OT
\. c'•std ru 1(
.�
3 :
,v1
VICINITY JkETC'H WLVICINITY ar Jjrrr
Sc a3e : I `:r
^i/WIOA► �C iLr w
A Y AL oioaNlA
i
Sound�n s ors sw r ssed � fish on dwno/e
�t P C U
Ds-dq'n deRIOAS Mco17 LOWer Low Wo¢tr.
be/ow
ron9e of !.'4e Op�/GA/•770�I/y' /O rte" • Norbo✓ 4,7e5'
qre eafob/"'Sh,Qd ir', 71hrg secA'orr ofNe+aIao.f Sod: 33
19
O,vy App
of
..,1.,r?
i
-7—
65
Q
inID'S.
•``�^ . `J
F;
Scai
t 10/no n r
O B L �2• Gp Gcy;
DO.edsS • iii 0 PQ Y h. �v a 1'e
Co*144Ac-ral* f �t , k r^
_.—
CITY OF NEIL PO" 'ACH
HARBOR PERMIT
PERMISSION iS c,12r,.Esy TO Cor UCT ANO
MAINTAIN THE FA0;2LlTY 51", 7k,U 0THE 'REVER- HEREOF,
Z,
AT THE SaTLO UQDWAT"',"MI ,°,Sz4ivs al.
AND
THE 4d15 Bolz
ANY
I'S NOT
Till
ot,
AND FWAV COUNCaL
V 7 1 CODE.
IN ACCO'RDAN-C�Z VTOTH Tt-1
I Y HARBO OR
PIERMIT NO DATE
ol 7Lrgh�c-,,ea-9 Forrait
OTEnge county pemi. it
G - I e,,- � 1,1,2 -
thera,
MARINE DEPARTMENT
January 12, 1976 ITEM NO H-12
TO: MAYOR AND, CITY COUNCIL
FROM: Marine Department
SUBJECT HARBOR PERMIT APPLICATION #124-601 BY 601 LIDO
HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION TO MAINTENANCE DREDGE
Recommendation
If desired, approve the permit application subject to the approval
of the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers..
Discussion
This application is for maintenance dredging of 237 cubic yardsfrom
beneath slips at 601 Lido Park .Drive
The blanket maintenance dredging permit obtained by the City from
the Corps of Engineers placed 1) an`annual maximum of the amount of
yardage that could be removed from specified zones and 2) limited
maintenance dredging to ± l00 cubic yards bayward of a single parcel.
Because this project exceeds the 100 cubic yardparcellimit, a
separate permit from the Corps of Engineers is required. City Council
approval is required prior to submittal of the application to the Corps
of Engineers.
There is no anticipated adverse affect on contiguous bulkheads.
Shellmaker, Inc., the dredging contractor, will minimize turbidity
as much as is possible and will barge the dredged material to the
Environmental Protection Agency's designated disposal site, four
miles at sea.
r�-W�
D. Harshbarger, Acting Director
Marine Department
DH:GEW:lf
STATUS SHEET
HARBOR PERMITS
LOCATION 6" Z e4 L2 New
Revision
Dredgingel—
L--.--,
Date Rec'v //)- /(,".._7-S Fee Amt. ..:
Fee Processed
Date Reviewed by M.S.D.
Approved. Denied
Correction Reg'd. Desc.
City. Council: Approved- Denied
Remarks
DATE MATERIAL SENT/APPROVED
C.O.E. SCRZCC SARWQCD J.H.C. Or.Co. T.I.C.
1. Application
2. Consent Letter f1
3. "Waste" Letter
4. Drawings 1/ -
5 Staff Report
6.
7.;
8.
REMARKS
N
� d 4
mss, �.%),r�r�/'I �I �'�, i{ r � C"`! S',.. ' A.''� .. � 'ti+' f..G�J�'c.'-7 C.aP.M-G`"�4•.,`i( P I'',
YC,:Y �✓ Lt„TM�C °,. r' y.»..+ �/ +.t r } Ls ', C °, (, '�f �
PERMIT NO. J—'.iy
DREDGING APPLICATION
Project. Location: 601 Lido Park Drive
Cubic Yards to be Dredged: 237
Method of Dredging: Hydraulic Suction
Nature of Dredged Material: Sand/Silt
Disposition of Dredged Material: Haul to sea and dump at Latitude 33°3.'42"N,
Longitude 117°54148"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.
601 Lido Homeowners. Assn.
Applicant -type name
December 15, 1975
(Date)
Shellmaker, Inc
Contractor -type name)
Signed: 3, . L
Contractor's
Representative
U. S. Corps of Engineers
Post Office Box 2711
Los Angeles, California 90053
Attention: Waterways Control Section
Subject: Harbor Permit Application No.
Dear Sir:
I hereby request a U. S. Corps of Engineers' Permit for the
construction and installation of ac�eDredging
and appurtenances thereto, to be locate in ewport Bay, baywara of
Lot No. 1 , Block No. 529 Tract 7838 Newport
Beach, Ca i ornia. I am tie owner of the aforementioned property, and
I have made application for a Harbor permit to the City of Newport Beach.
The adjoining property owners are:
Lot _, dock Lot 2 Block 529
Tract Tract 7838
City Property
Respectfully submitted,
Date 12/15/75
Enc. Plans dated Mar era
3 Sepia 601 Lido Homeowners Assn.
7 copies 601 Lido Park Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH APPROVAL
The Harbor and Tidelands Administrator of the City of Newport Beach
has reviewed Harbor Permit application by
and subject to the approval of the U. S. Corps o Engineers, will .issue
Harbor Permit No.
Date
cc:
D. Harshbarger, Captain
Marine Safetv Department
Santa Ana River Basin
Regional,Water Quality Control Board
6848 Magnolia Avenue
Riverside, California 92506
Subject: Newport Harbor Permit Application No.,
Dear Sir:
I have applied to the City of Newport Beach and the,U. S.,Corps of
Engineers for permission to Maintenance Dredging
in Newport, Harbor-. The proposed project involves dredging as follows,
(Note: Attach extra pages if required for full explanation):
Cubic Yards to.be dredged 237
Method..of dredging Hydraulic Suction
Nature of dredged material Sand/Silt
Disposition of.dredged material Haul to sea and dump at
Latitude 33°31142" Longitude 117°54'48"W.
Method of controlling turbidity Material to be contained
i dump barge at dredge site.
It is requested that the dredging, as specified above, be approved..
Respectfully submitted,
Date 12/15/75
Sig ure Martin Wandera
Encl. (1) Drawing
(2),Detailed Explanation 601 Lido Homeowners Assn.
(Typed Name and Ad.ress
601 Lido Park Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
CITY.OF NEWPORT BEACH
The Harbor and Tidelands,Administrator of the City of Newport Beach
has reviewed the Harbor Permit Application by
and, subject to the approval of EHe—,
U. S.,Corps of Engineers, will issue Harbor Permit.No.
Date
cc:
G. M. DAWES
Harbor & Tidelands Administrator
✓ rro t14
":
MARINE SAFETY DEPART° VENT
74 Newport Pier
November 3p 1972
U S, Army# Corgis of Engineer
Los Angeles District
P. 0, Sox 2711
Los Angelesm California 90053
Attention: R, P., Young
Construction -- Operations Division
Dear �-2r. Young:
Please find enclosed a corrected: Harbor Penai.t drawing
fear ryeman ,y T`rautenoter.
The City Council approved th—Ls applica-tion SepteF.--`3E.r 110
sub ect to tabe approval of the. Carps of Engineers
Unfortunately, I did not catch the initial tial drawing
discrepancies.
If You have any questions, please contact n.
Sincerely,
Dr Harshbarger Captain
Marine Safety Department
DH, :1
Enclosure
MARINE DEPARTMENT
TO: FILE # 124-3102
FROM: Tidelands Administrator
SUBJECT: PIER ADMINISTRATION FEE
At 8:30 a.m., this date, Tony and I met with Bill Cote;
Mrs. Kohler, and one other member of the 60,1. Lido Park Drive Condo.
Association regarding the increased Pier Administration fee due
July 1, 1979, and assessed to all commercial 'marinas in Newport
Harbor.
The "601 Association" contends that they should not be
assessed the fee since they are a non-profit organization, they do not
permit the use of their marina by anyone other than condo owners, a
separate fee is not charged for the use of the marina to those condo
owners occupying the marina and the ordinance does not list condo-
miniums in the commercial definitions.
The history of this fee was explained to the persons present,
and the rational used in determining that their facility is commercial.
This rational being the Ordinance and its definitions, revenue received
from marina occupants, the waiting list established as in a commercial
marina, the separate fee charged for use of the marina.
The Condo representative requested a review of their status
as to whether or not they should be considered "commercial".. I advised
them that I would have to confer with the City Attorney and the City
Manager to ascertain if staff could make this determination, or if the
City Council must make the determination.
Comments
As I understand the Ordinance, the procedure for making such
a determination is not clear. Therefore, since staff made the original
determinations as to who was commercial, I assume staff could also
determine whether or not a condominium was commercial.
Glen E. Welden
Tidelands Administrator
Marine Department
GEW:mw
ZS =- o,4V A;wA-
41/
ve 4C 0% 70f
i
0
NPOR T 3 rA CH KA rA A '"v
r
.. p 0
/�7� �.
-. � � 'pQI \•. tit lJ i 1 y u
i 1 j '�^"'.'-`-'""r-r-...r �, r,•.�-7 ..,....ry-r'r.,rr.-���•r.r, � � � � � �
- 'i ���' r"5 .,- � G� aro• '-___��r=-- IP'.i.a 6o� 1 y�`""_'"� 1 � S
I�( I
v
V ICI lkJ TY S;<ET . r'i 1 ; 't�rrrr 7C
Ai6waoF7r 2,A, CAC Si o td!/n
J /
-C/-?iaw
F' / .3<: So✓n�7nc�s in =ce/ C»u' �anO>e
, e pr,;ai� L•5 ed
A10 I�Iti} Dr /t '` deving bt/ow e-or1 Lon cc Lo.✓ :.!r�lC•r, linr .,xirn �.
ron9e+ of �i"ac app,vxrinpfaly /v f�e-f Noiho. /•nom -s
Qre cs/O6/�Sh�d rn �hr5 BeCf.on of,ti+C.✓�crr 4>07'. 4
�} P
If
��.` i \ i r 1 I '�,f ` { •il I ��1' tq ,/�/'� 1. f r -TJ. �, c_ �y. h.
-._.-
1 1 A I{ _
1 Y .
„ If/'� � 1 � •mak - p
,1
71
PL
> : i r. � .. Y - _ _ , ,�- ,� ,,� Y- ; ✓ �� Vii„ �• � �
9
M
_7 10 7v
'V
OF NEW, PPORT SkI.CH
•7,%p'ti `w "�� `: i' y '� id no EAe w
iENi.Ua+:i20M sS 'ra c ;.. : ; L ae a 'i> TO (c2 :• �5,� F AND
" iNE
AT THE SiTiZ SUSA&V ,:,9
... ...0.4'Un pZ i..dfA . n..;MS.. EW .,1'Y Nj..1 01 '1 ,`r H AN �
IS NOT
THL
AND 7 H,:Z4.
N ACCORDANCE WMA'�//� a Vic.. ,�5�i�=.
�, r p k ,h r.., m*.ni
..�.Y �:'1U �� 'a� �. � u,D%gray 0
DATA
+x.J , rK,." k � 4nu � U � iY W 6f k •rJa w �f�" M �.
/!^� , �3, 7-3
,�i^rCi� yk+,a 4o'u Lel a..�, :'a E+,., ryas �"'er it �- -
a c 4 "zo cauuw t-,,%r.p1s�w�
4rdt• 4.�. W.W4.n frA3 �L 1w r; '.
Other.
ateq
Oh er.
1TKA applicant ao cbkwoo approval Of
he :6 Chips
04 «yyjeIr.
1. The slip* axdd . r'F�f4an u p waba", raA e r7j
a fox th'L''..'t '.
qn*;'J` syn 4he
tii g �,F dr' m--?M w water s?!" rvi on W a.ayetrt a l se"m:" 'i oe 0" the ^r I ip s,
be o • ]r, r nr +l m Wrf '' a n ,q p, t,p„n tho. community
! rPe `k W., ynr "1 by
t .ry 9y,
tz:�,^�a�A'w�+.w�,:�;5;�� ��'wx*�v.� �:�"�'4'��1;���3s�, ?L'��� .�,.'�5v:��,.?3..t ��;. �.�ak;,�
Wo
k ti,.�, ,q^".i v, Not � $G, �i n ii ;� • .w � 8. "`� ..t,
,,•'� o...�•�:��:� .�,�'�,�'�;" >�"?� �»..d�� s�t��..�.�,.k«a'.:
COTr RrALTT 6 In1l1:STHL, ConrAnT
William F. Cote
180 Newport Center Drive
Newport Beach, California 92660
(714) 640-5777
MARINE DEPARTMENT
TO: FILE # 124-3102
FROM: Tidelands Administrator
SUBJECT: PIER ADMINISTRATION FEE
7-5--79
At 8:30 a.m., this date, Tony and I met with Bill Cote,
Mrs. Kohler, and one other member of the 601:: Lido Park Drive Condo.
Association regarding the increased Pier Administration fee due
July 1, 1979, and assessed to all commercial marinas in Newport
Harbor.
The "601 Association" contends that they should not be
assessed the fee since they are a non-profit organization, they do not
permit the use of their marina by anyone other than condo owners, a
separate fee is not charged for the use of the marina to those condo
owners occupying the marina and the ordinance does not list condo-
miniums in the commercial definitions.
The history of this fee was explained to the persons present,
and the rational used in determining that their facility is commercial.
This rational being the Ordinance and its definitions, revenue received
from marina occupants, the waiting list established as in a commercial
marina, the separate fee charged for use of the marina.
The Condo representative requested a review of their status
as to whether or not they should be considered commercial I advised
them that I would have to confer with the City Attorney and the City
Manager to ascertain if staff could make this determination, or if the
City Council must make the determination.
Comments
As I understand the Ordinance, the procedure for making such
a determination is not clear. Therefore, since staff made the original
determinations as to who was commercial, I assume staff could also
determine whether or not a condominium was commercial.
Glen E. Welden
Tidelands Administrator
Marine. Department
GEW:mw
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
HARBOR P EM 1Y W IT 4
a�
PERMISSION is INW ;t;rY AND
TICE'
ANY
IS NOT
04 ACCORDANCE VMN -M-LE --7 i " vis COD/i.
�ol7�D�
PERMIT NO. DATE
otfher:
The Aivlioaut rooeiveo vproval, Of, the who0. corps of s
slip and, s d.,tio VOSA41 mpaoosave ror for 'tu
• , water servift and 01,0*triosl sery Loa ou the OAPs'
be . &041- � �porvndt obtoin*l frm t , �, amity
; val .'m +
`ote " my tow, and opprovad by, tho
rte Dopa` nth
So 140, M b pormitted within y' foot of the bnUho4d,
bor4orib,% the a4joinial city paek propox"ty.'
SPECIAL CON61TIONSs
Corps of Frghrer": permit
le The applicant cel` approval of the u,6. Corps of g a o
2* The slip aAd side -tie vessel spaspa4as are rad rv*4 for the exclusive
use of the coadminium owners.
3m The dovetc water service aud electrical l service on the slips be
'installed mer a permit~ obtAined from W10 co=uaity Development
Department,
4* A fire protactAou system be installed and approved` by the Fire
Se So dredging Jbe permitte4 wJtAJu twenty feet of the bulkhe&d
bordering the adjoining city park property.
State of California - Resources Agency Ronald Reagan_Gov
CALIFOPSJIA REGIOdAL WATER QUl-.LITY CONTROL BOARD - Santa Ana Region
684.8 Magnolia Avenue, Suite L., Riverside, California 92506
Telephone (714)684-9330
MY 111 1972
arsago County wast District
Orange G ty`10", Ctmtr.61 bl tr;1 t
090 coin, wator Pollutfto Deja t
orange county t' 1 h *Vottment
Orem County bot Watriet,
Cit of N+t .h
*City of !"ningtn Rear
Subject: Transmittal of Actions Taken at Regional Board Meeting
Attached for your records are copies of actions taken at the most
recent meeting of the California Regional Water Quality. Control
Board, Santa Ana Region.
Discharger or Subject Action
Trautveln 'grog Or, 72 18
*80ut'l-'em, Calffernis ZdImmCompal" 72-47
RICHARD A. BUEERMANN
Executive Officer
Attachments
I
74
2410 N Boulevard T R A U T E 1 N BROTHERS FLOATS A
Nrvvport Beach, Calif. 92660PIERS DRIVING ,F1tC:
GENERAL ENGINEERING CONTRACTORS
PboM (714) 673-1960
May 3, 1972 1'
I
Mr. Richard Bueerman
State Water Quality Control Board
6848 Magnolia Ave.
Riverside, California 92506
Dear Mr. Bueerman: -
To bring you up to .date on what we have done towards
eliminating the possible violations, we have taken out
all of the old discharge lines and put ,in one new ds -
charge line, extended it out to the pierhead line,'
installed a long rubber hose on the end which is placed
in a fashion that the water discharges upwards so it
cannot cause any disturbance of the bottom and the
discharge line, now being at the pierhead`line-out of
the area where we have been pumping for -the past six
months.
By putting in the new line we have eliminated practically
all of the odor and eliminated any stirring up of the
old 'sulfides that may have been deposited :on the bottom,
'
which I`feel will probably help the discoloration but
we will always have some natural discoloration in the
'
corners of the harbor. We are also pumping salt water
into the discharge line which, naturally, helps dilute
the sulfides at the end of the discharge.
fi
We have installed another injector so we can inject more
chlorine when we need it at low tides. The waterproofing
on the building is completed to an elevation of 715 and
the backfilling is now in process. We will be running
one pump at high tides yonly in the next few days. This
procedure will continue for approximately six weeks until
the building has enough weight to eliminate any possibility
of floating.
The Orange County Health Department has taken.tests'in-
my presence at 10:00 A.M. this morning and found us to
be meeting all requirements. They will send a written
F
report to you and to me.
y p+a
a
�
Mr. Richard Bueerman
May 3, 1972
-2-
r'•
John Zasadzinaki was on the site with me
from 11:00 to 12:00
t'
o'clock today, taking tests, and found us
meeting the
requirements and stated he would send u$
a written report.
'
mti
,
-
Yours very
truly,
QRS'
s"
TRAUTWE IN B
1
PauY Traiitwein,
PTsms
I
cc. David Anderson
John Bentley
Kenneth Sampson, Orange County Harbor Dept.'
P
George Dawes, harbor Coordinator
Oranqe County Stealth Department
Walter Mellott
Cliff Everman
Fish & Game Departipent
;a
'1
3
1
3
r
i
r�
t
California Regional Water Quality Control Board
Santa Ana Region
Monitoring and Reporting Program No.. 72-17
for
Southern California Edison Company,
Huntington Beach
Monitoring
1. Weekly monitoring reports shall be submitted to this board by
Southern California Edison Company for the preceding 7 -day period.
2. In reporting the monitoring data, the discharger shall arrange the
data in tabular form so that the date, the constituents, and the
concentrations are readily. discernible.
The following shall be included in the monitoring report:
a. A "grab" sariple shall be collected each day and analyzed.
for the following constituent' -s:
Total Sulfides
Chlorine Residual*
b, Once per week, and when a discharge is occurring, a
representative sample of flood control channel waters
within SO feet of the discharge point shall be taken and
analyzed for dissolved oxygen.
C. The total quantity of waste discharged to the flood.
control channel for the reporting period shall be reported.
d. The above reports shall be signed by a responsible officer
of the Southern California Edison Company and shall be
submitted under penalty of perjury.
3. All analyses shall be performed in a laboratory currently certified
to perform such analyses by the State Department of Public health or
a laboratory approved by the Executive. Officer. All sampling and
sample preservation shall be coordinated with the analytical
laboratory.
*Chlorine residual analyses will be required only if t'rie.
discharge is chlorinated.
Ordered by
RICHARD A. BUEERMAPIT
Executive Officer
A-Pril 27, 1972
California Regional Water Quality Control Board
Santa Ana Region
ORDER NO. 72-17
Waste Discharge Requirements
for
Southern California Edison Company,
Huntington Beach
The California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region,
finds that:
1. Southern California Edison Company submitted a report on wa6te
discharge dated January 28, 19720
2 Southern California Edison Company proposes to discharge
approximately 1.15 MGD from dewatering operations to tidally
influenced flood control channels in connection with cons'imuction
activity at the Huntington Beach Steam Station.
3. The board adopted an Interim Water Quality Control Plan on
June 9, 1971.
L% The beneficial uses of the tidally influenced flood control
channel waters are:
Aesthetic enjoyment
Recreation (non -contact with water)
Fishing
Marine habitat
Shellfish harvesting
S. The board has notified the discharger and interested agencies
and persons of its intent to prescribe waste discharge require-
ments for the proposed discharge.
6. The board, in a public meeting, heard and considered all
Comments pertaining to the discharge.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT Southern California Edison Company shall comply
with the following:
A. Waste Discharge Requirements
1. Discharges to flood control channel shall be limited to
those resulting from dewatering operations'
2. Discharges to flood control channel shall not contain any
visible solids,, debris, oil, or scum.
Order Vo. 72-17 continued
Southern California Edison Company,
Huntington Beach
Page 2
3. The dissolved oxygen of the waters of the flood control
channel shall not be depressed below 5.0 mg/l by this
waste discharge.
4. The waste discharge shall not contain total sulfides
greater than 0.1 mg/l.
5. The waste discharge shall create no nuisances at -'rhe
dewatering site or at any point in the flood control
channel.
6. The discharge of wash shall not alter the quality of the
waters of the state to a degree that unreasonably affects
said waters for beneficial. uses.
7. The discharge shall not cause any scum accumulation or
discoloration in waters of the State.
S. In the event chlorination of the discharge is required,
then the discharge must be controlled so that the chlorine
residual is less than 0.1 mg/1.
B. Provisions
I. The discharger shall comply with the Vonitoring and.
Reporting Program No. 72-17 and the General Provisions for
Monitoring and Reporting as specified by the Executive
Officer.
2. Compliance with Requirements (1) , (2) , (5) , and (6) shall
be based on each visual observation by the staff of this
board or other responsible agency. A minimum of two
inspections per month shall be performed by the staff of
this board.
3. Compliance with Requirements (3) , (4) , and (7) will be
based on each analysis specified in Monitoring Program
72-17.
I, Richard A.'Bueermann, Executive Officer,do hereby certify the fore-
going is a full, 'true, and correct copy of an Order adopted by the
California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region, on
April 27, 1972. .
RiCILMD A. BDEER,1AI'
Executive Officer
California Regional Water Quality Control Board
Santa Ana Region
ORDER 72-18
ORDER REQUIRING TRAUTWEIN BROTHERS
TO CEASE AND DESIST FROM DISCHARGING
WASTES CONTRARY TO REQUIREMENTS
PRESCRIBED BY THE CALIFORNIA REGIONAL
WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD - SANTA ANA
REGION
The California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region,
finds that
(1) On March 21, 1972 this regional board adopted Order 72-12
prescribing waste discharge requirements for the discharge
of wastes by Trautwein Brothers .into Newport Bay.
(2) The waste discharge requirements provided in part:
"4. The discharge shall not contain total sulfides
greater than 0.1 mg/l.
5. The waste discharge shall create no nuisances at
the dewatering site or at the point of discharge
to Newport Bay.
6. The discharge shall not cause any scum accumulation
or discoloration in the waters of Newport Bay.iz
(3) Inspections by the board staff and the staffs of the State
Department of Fish & Game and the Orange County Health
Department have indicated that the discharger is not comply-
ing with Requirement (4), Requirement (6) with respect to
discoloration only, and is threatening to violate Require-
ment (5) by causing a potential odor nuisance at the de-
watering site.
(4) By letter dated March 27, 1972 the regional board transmitted
the waste discharge requirements to the discharger and re-
quested compliance with the requirements forthwith.
(5) On. April 27, 1972 at 9:30 A.M. in the Board of Supervisors
Chambers, Riverside County Court House, Riverside, California,
after due notice to the discharger and all other affected
persons, the regional board conducted a public hearing at
which the discharger appeared and evidence was received con-
cerning the discharge.
(6) The discharger is violating Requirement,
Order 72-18 - continued
Trautwein Brothers Page 2
1T iS tlbrX SY ORDERED THAT:
(1) Trautwein Brothers cease.and desist from discharging wastes
contrary to requirements listed in (6) above;
( ) Compliance with the waste'discharge requirements as stated
in (6) above shall be achieved no later than April 285 1972.
If, in the opinion of the Executive Officer, Trautwein Brothers
fails to comply with the provisions of this order, the
Executive Officer is directed to request the Attorney General
to take the appropriate enforcement action against the dis-
charger, including injunction and civil monetary remedies, if
appropriate.
I, Richard A. Bueermann, Executive Officer of the California Regional
Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region, do hereby certify that
the foregoing is a full, true and correct copy of an order adopted by
the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region
at a meeting held on April 27, 1972.
RICHARD A. BUEERMA14N
Executive Officer
4
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
HARBOR AND TIDELANDS DIVISION
April 24, 1972
TO: : CITY MANAGE
FROM:,? Harbor and Tidelands Administrator
(1 Sl:BOECT: LIDO -CONDOMINIUM DOMINIUM PROJECT
i b -
I have attached a report from Mr. Paul Trautwein containing
the latest data pertaining to the Discharge at the Lido Condominium project.
I have also been advised that the South Coast Company has hired
a firm to snake a bioassay of the area in the vicinity of the discharge.
Results of the bioassay will probably be available in early .May.
a�
- GEORGE M. DAWES
GMDssh
Attachment
1!
2410 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, Calif. 92660
TRAUTWEIH BROTHERS
GENERAL ENGINEERING CONTRACTORS
Phone (714) 673-1960
. April 24, 1972
FLOATS AND BULKHEADS
PIERS, PILE DRIVING, ETC.
Mr. George Dawes
City of Newport Beach
Newport Beach, California
Dear George:
Enclosed is a copy of our weekly report and a copy
of letter to the State Water Quality Control Board
and a brief summary of the overall project, which
is Exhibit A.
Hope this answers all of your questions. If not,
please feel free to call me.
Yours very truly,
TRAUTWEIN BROTHERS
Paul Trautwein
PT: ms
.
5
3410 Newport
Boulevard rd A u "� W E 1'N O T H E R S FLOATS AND BULKHEADS
PIERS,; `PILE DRNIN
;Newport Beach. Calif. 92660 - - - - - - - - - ----- -- - - - - - - - G, ETC. ...
GENERAL ENGINEERING CONTRACTORS
Rbaw (714) 673.1%0
April 24, 1972
I
•
Mr. Richard Bueerman
Water Quality Control Board
Santa Ana Region
6848 Magnolia Ave.
r,
Riverside, California 92506
Dear Mr.'Bueerman:
Enclosed is a copy of our weekly report. As you will
notice on Saturday, the 22nd, and Sunday,.the 23rd,`
I show 200 gpm of discharge. This is an average because
the construction on the project has been completed to,,a
oint that we are only pumping 18 hours,a day. In other
P y y
words, at low tides we turn the pumps off 3 to 4 hours.
In answer to your findings which indicate we are possibly
violating Order #72-12, I assure you that.we are
zealously monitoring the discharge daily, not just once
a day but sometimes three or four times a day. We find
considerable variations in the testing at 'different times
F.•
in ..accordance with the different amounts of water we are it
pumping plus the difference in the elevation of the tide.
'
But with regulating the chlorine from 30# to 80# per day,
it is our findings that we are meeting the requirements a
of under O.lmgl. We have copies of a lot of our tests
available for your examinatiin.
r'
Where you mention that John Zasadzinski was here on
April 11th and found 0.3mgl, Mr. Zasadzinski came to my
office and he and I personally went back to the discharge
and each one of us made tests and these tests were within
the range of 0.1. But again I must state, that the tests
do vary and when we made these tests on the 11th we were
running 50# of chlorine and I increased it than day to
70#
As far as the discoloration of the water is concerned,
this varies from day to day. Actually, this morning
ki�AwirawLuwduMneavw.Ju..u.•.w.w..+Wt•
',:''-u+u.wvn.nlu.rsvumUMnTk eOnu ^:I:sa:^ MaSSW M k1SvvM NUW.wnA•YY.tl"".r.:v4L4.'ub419vviv�N'Etis.' WI.uLitL'4Sd.L°x::.urs._v.2GL:k��ipi.55v_4:u""uuwiS'i'mMu+i.�`ZCPLF"'0.id'"
Harb. Permits
CITY ®PNEWPORT BEACH
'
a
CALIFORNIArte+ 92"0
`J FO V %
,N
City Nall
3300 Newport Blvd.
(714) 673-2310
April 17, 1972
TO WHOM IT MAY COINCBRN:
The BioMe Company Is engaged in resea.re`n to determine
the biological effects of
the water discharges in the vi-cinit
Of the Lido Isle bridge.
Representatives of' the Biome Company
any
are authorized to engage in activities associated with their
research, such as placing
sampling plates, taking soil samples,
taking marine specimens and taking water quality samples as
necessary. Representatives of the Company who will be participating
are Dr. Donald Mitchell,
Mr. Gordon Anderson, and Mr. Jim Steinert.
Itis expected that their,
activities will continue until about
15 June= e
yours truly,
G. M. DAWNS
Harbor Tidelands Administrator
GM/db
May 21, 1970
TO: harbor & Tidelands Administrator
FROM: Harbor & Tidelands Aide
SUBJECT MEETING (5/2`2/70) on PROPOSED HIGH-RISE CONDOMINIUM
RESIDENTIAL BUILDING
As near as I can determine from the information available,
the property in question is Lot 1, Tract 815, adjacent to the 'Vista
del. Lido building. In researching this proposal, the following
data was discovered. I will quote from a memo to City Council by
the Public Works Director on 12 December 1966:
Description of Property
No. Encroacher and Address Rncroachee Suf:ferrincr Encroachment
1. vista Del. Lido Apt. Rouse Rom and Cola Inc. Lot 1, Tract 815
611 Lido Park Drgive (Vacant Lot)
When theoriginal ,pier permit was
issued t.o Rom and Cola, Inc., the
application: indicated . that Lots 1,
2, and 3 of Tract8l,.4 ,, were ow ned by
the applicants. The 'Vista Del Lido
apartment building was constructed on
.Lots 2. and 3 only, but the harbor
installationextended in front of
all three Lots. Lamer the building
and. Lots 2 and 3 were sold, with Rom
and Cola, Inc . , retaining Lot.. l-.,
if the existing harbor facilities for the 'lista Del Lido
building which encroach over Lot 1 were to be removed, there would
be approximately 74 feet of bayfront space available Using the pier,
limit line of 80 feat,. a total area of 5920 sq. f>tcould be. utilized.
Due to the existing adjacent bullhead and slip configurations
the access to this area is somewhat limited. Depending on slip size
and design, I would estimate that the number of slips feasible in this
area would be between 3 and 6.
I have shaded in red, the water area in question on the
attached harbor permit drawing for the Vista Del Lido.
DSS/db
Attachments
D. S. SANFORD
February 19, 1971
TO: Calvin Stewart, Director
Parks, Beaches and Recreation
George Dawes, Administrator
Harbor and Tidelands
FROM: Laurence Wilson
Acting Assistant Community Development Director
SUBJECT Dedicated public walkway along West Lido Channel
in front of proposed Lido Condiminium Apartment
Building - Use Permit No. 1482
We have received the attached letter and plans from Wayne E. Davis
of the Daniel N. Salerno Architectural Office in San Diego. This
firm is preparing plans for a condiminium apartment building on
property bounded by Lafayette Avenue, Lido Park Drive, West Lido
Channel and the 32nd Street Park. This project previously was
approved by the Planning Commission under Use Permit No.°1482.
One of the conditions of approval required that a dedicated pub-
lic walkway be provided along the full frontage of theproperty
abutting the West Lido Channel and connecting with the 32nd Street
Park at the north end. The developers also agreed to improve
this dedicated public walkway along the channel and to ,landscape
and improve the adjacent portion of the dedicated, right-of-way
of 32nd Street as an addition to the existing park. I am sending
the plans first to George Dawes with the request that he forward
them to Cal Stewart, and that Cal return them to this department.
The plans give a fair amount of detail regarding the dedicated
public walkway. Apparently the net unobstructed width in the
narrower portion would be approximately 517 However, a 3'
gate leading to boat slips would swing into this space. Perhaps
for this reason, some consideration should be given to the pos-
sibility of moving the boat slip gate to the aider souther -Ly
portion .of the walkway, if this could be done without disrupting
the arrangement of slips too much. Perhaps the same result could
be accomplished by making the gate swing the other way - toward
the water. Apparently the walkway would be separated from the
water by a row of masonry columns with light fixtures six and
one-half feet high with a wrought iron rail fence five feet high
between the columns.
We will try to get additional information on the fence and columns
as well as the gate leading to the boat slips. Also, the attached
plans do not show any information regarding park landscaping or
improvements to the north or how the walkway along the 'channel
would connect with walkways in the park.
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
PLAN REVIEW REQUEST
QPUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
❑TRAFFIC ENGINEER
[]FIRE DEPARTMENT
EIBUILDING DEPARTMENT
C1PARKS & RECREATION
V0H
OLICE DEPARTMENT
ARBOR & TIDELANDS
Date, June 1, 197+0
ljPLANS ATTACHED (PLEASE RETURN)
t1PLANS ON FILE IN
PLANNING DEPARTMENT`
APPLICATION OF SWAN CONSTRUCTORS INC.
FOR A L]VARIANCE [3USE PERMIT 1482
'l]RESUBDIVISION J]TRACT 'MAP
TO PERMIT construction of a 51, unfit condominium apartment building
( in 8 C-2 tone.
' 7
ON LOT 1
Lancasters Addn*' ,
BLOCK S29 TRACT 81S
ADDRESS .3102 Lafayette Avenue, Newport beach
REPORT REQUESTED BY dune S. 1970
COMMISSION REVIEW dune 18, 197+0
COMMENTS �, &--44 47 Cl)l�loea
?%
1
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
PLAN REVIEW REQUEST
QPUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
❑TRAFFIC ENGINEER
[]FIRE DEPARTMENT
EIBUILDING DEPARTMENT
C1PARKS & RECREATION
V0H
OLICE DEPARTMENT
ARBOR & TIDELANDS
Date, June 1, 197+0
ljPLANS ATTACHED (PLEASE RETURN)
t1PLANS ON FILE IN
PLANNING DEPARTMENT`
APPLICATION OF SWAN CONSTRUCTORS INC.
FOR A L]VARIANCE [3USE PERMIT 1482
'l]RESUBDIVISION J]TRACT 'MAP
TO PERMIT construction of a 51, unfit condominium apartment building
( in 8 C-2 tone.
' 7
ON LOT 1
Lancasters Addn*' ,
BLOCK S29 TRACT 81S
ADDRESS .3102 Lafayette Avenue, Newport beach
REPORT REQUESTED BY dune S. 1970
COMMISSION REVIEW dune 18, 197+0
COMMENTS �, &--44 47 Cl)l�loea
?%
TQ City Manager
FROM: harbor & Tidelands. Administrator
SUBJECT. LIDO CONDOMINIUM WASTE DISCHARGE_
As` of 10 April, the status of Trautwein's discharge is
_ seduced to one pump discharging 304 gpm•
Drawing from -2 feet, a 14 foot raise since
last geek.
Untreated discharges varying from .3 to .S
mg/l. in sulfides,
- Using 30-50 lbs. Cl daily to reduce sulfides
to 0 to .l mg/l in accordance with Yater
Quality, Board standards.
Daily reports being sent to the Attorney
General's office and Regional Water Quality
Control Board.
-- Expect to be fully competed within 30 days.
,
JOHN R. PH;IL,P, M.D.
}
HEALTH OFFICER
~� ,�rrte�, a -g-`'
(D �i U , ! + Y C) P
SANTA ANA OFFIC;.
645 NORTH ROSS STREET
ANA. CALIFORNIA 92702
`��
SANTA
`
TELEPHONE: 834-3131
Mailing Addr.sz:.,P. 0. sot 355
Santa Ana, California 92702
ANAHEIM OFFICE
1011 SOUTH EAST STREET
O
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA _
HEALTH DEPARTMENT
TELEPHONE: 776-5551
Marling Addr.:x,: P. 0. sax 355;
$onto Ana, California 92702
March 20, 1972
Regional Water Quality Control Board #8
O
Santa Ana Region
9 "'�
6848 Magnolia Avenue, Suite 14
Riverside, California 92506
Subject: Order 72-12 Prescribing Tentative Waste Discharge
` 115V f OF 2
Requirements for Trautwein Bros., Newport
Bay
t0
Gentlemen:
This is in reply to your request of March 10, 1972,
for our comments concerning
Order 72-12 Prescribing Tentative Waste Discharge Requirements
for Trautwein
Bros., Newport Bay. It is our understanding that the Trautwein Company is
. discharging approximately 300 - 600 gallons per minute from a dewatering opera-
tion to Newport Bay. This discharge is in connection
with the construction of
a highrise structure in the City of Newport Beach.
The Health Department has conducted an investigation
of this dewatering operation.
The investigation consisted of field testing of the
discharge for sulfides and
dissolved oxygen. The results are as follows:
Sulfides
D.O.
2/15/72 0.6 mg/1
6.5 mg/1
2/22/72 3.5 mg/1
7.4 mg/1
2/29/72 3.5 mg/1
7.3 mg/1
3/6/72 0.3 mg/1
8.5 mg/1
From the data presented above, it appears that the
discharger will have diffi-
culty meeting the sulfide requirement.
MAR 2 2 1912
Date ....................'.....-�
COMES SENT TO:,
Mayor
-
!1lanne r �
�
Aitorney
0-s P'mi'• WeAs THred"
N 1 o4u,, 14 L1 a dG
. 0
0
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
March 15, 1972
TO: City Manager
FROM: Harbor & Tidelands Administrator
SUBJECT WATER DISCHARGE, LIDO CONDOMINIUM PROJECT
This memorandum responds to your request for a report
on the water discharge at the Lido Condominium project. A resume
of the project to date is:
a. Commenced pumping in October, 1971, at the rate of
900 GPM from a depth of -26 feet. Hydrogen sulfide levels were high
and the contractor hired a chlorinating firm on the recommendation ,
of the .Health Department to inject chlorine into the pumping system.
The method of treatment was unsatisfactory to the Regional Water
Quality Board so the contractor hired the services of"a laboratory,
purchased $1,500 of chlorinating equipment and commenced the treatment
in accordance with instructions from the Water. Quality Board.
b. In early January, the pumping rate was reduced from
900 GPM to 600 GPM and the pumping depth was reduced from -26 feet
to 17 'feet. The discharge, without treatment, dropped in hydrogen
sulfide content to 1 part per million or less. At. the direction of
the Water Quality Control Board, chlorination has continued though
at a reduced rate. On 28 February, the discharge was free of hydrogen
sulfide and chlorination ceased. The discharge is monitored twice a
week now and chlorinating equipment is hooked up ready to resume treat-
ment if required.
C. It is `anticipated that rate of flow will be reduced to
300 GPM in about one week and that the depth of pumping will be reduced
to -10 feet. Tt is unlikely that there will be any hydrogen sulfide
in the discharge. It is estimated that pumping will stop altogether
in four or five weeks. In the meantime, the Regional Water Quality
Control Board is taking action on 21 March to establish specific
discharge requirements.,
During all of the foregoing, tests were run continually to
insure that there was no residual chlorine in bay waters. Tests are
now being run on a weekly basis by both the contractor and the Water
Quality Board.
While discharges have been under treatment for several
months, and current discharges are clean, there is a suspicion on
my part and on the part of the Water Quality Control Board that the
initial discharges may have left a residual hydrogen sulfide content
in the bay bottom. We are working together to determine the best
method for the contractor to clean it out upon completion of pumping
Crily or NEWPOMI, aeACH
Mph S. 1972
. , . DAA'
'ice s.afety Diiiiiiator
2410 Newport Boulevard T R A U T W E I N BROTHERS
Newport Beach, Calif. 92660
GENERAL ENGINEERING CONTRACTORS
Phone V14) 673.1960
February 29, 1972
Mr. George Dawes
Harbor Coordinator
City of Newport Beach
3300 Newport Blvd.
Newport Beach, California
Dear George:
FLOATS AND BULKHEADS
PIERS, PILE DRIVING, ETC.
In answer to your telephone request of yesterday, I
will attempt to clarify our position concerning the
dewatering at the Lido Condominium project.
When we first started the project, .about 10/7/1971,
and found it to be necessary to treat the water with
chlorine, we, at that time, hired PierceChlorine
on the,recommendation of the Orange County Health
Dept. (John Haines) and they proceeded to treat the
water in a method that was not suitable to John
Zasadzinski, California Regional Water Quality Con-
trol Board. We hired Twining Laboratories to make
tests of the water and they found that the problem
was at the lower elevation.
At that time we purchased some $1500.00 worth of
chlorine equipment and started to chlorine the water
ourselves, under John Zasadzinski's instructions and
method. We have taken many tests ourselves and many
tests have been taken by John Zasadzinski and I
together. We have found by putting 30#-40# of
chlorine a day in the lines that there is no hydrogen
sulfide going into the Bay. We felt we had solved
this problem. If not, we have wasted approximately
$10,000.00 and the testing methods we are using are
the wrong methods. But the method we are using is
that recommended by John Zasadzinski and with 30-40#
of chlorine per day it shows negative - no hydrogen
sulfide.
Mr. George Dawes
2/29/1972
-2-
At the early date, 10/7/1971, we were pumping water
at an elevation of -261 and had five pumps, three
running at all times, pumping approximately 900 gpm
24 hours a day. Approximately two months ago we took
out two pumps. We still have three pumps on the job
and are, at present, running two pumps, pumping
approximately 600 gpm but we are now pumping at an
elevation of -17" where we have water, without treatment,
of only _1 part of hydrogen sulfide and with the 30-40#
of chlorine we have no hydrogen sulfide going into the
Bayo
Tests are being made by me at least once a week. John
Zasadzinski has been down many times and is still
dropping in, looking over the project .at lease every
week or two.
It is our best estimate that we will, within the next
thirty days, be to a -point where we can raise the water
elevation approximately 10 ft. and turn one pump off,
which means we will be running one pump, pumping approxi-
mately 300 gpm.
Sorry to hear that there are still people that are
disturbed. We have done everything possible and followed
the instructions of John Zasadzinski to thebestof our
ability and knowledge.
Sincerely,
TR.AUTWEIN BROTHERS
Paul Trautwein
PT:ms
0
TRAUTWXMBROTHM
Paul Tr4utwein":
PT
At the Oakly date 10/7/1971,,, we werewester
and ad fivo
t an elevation of -26 b
A Ion
at all tjaMW- PUMPing'thar906, .91 M
. .... . ....
,14
24 hours a day. Appy y tw -jw& In I took
Mr
at pregOnt*: running tiro PUSAP8• Ing
and axe#Pomp
n
I;wjm
apprMimately 604. gpo. but. we are now p at all
TRAUTWXMBROTHM
Paul Tr4utwein":
PT
At the Oakly date 10/7/1971,,, we werewester
and ad fivo
t an elevation of -26 b
A Ion
at all tjaMW- PUMPing'thar906, .91 M
24 hours a day. Appy y tw -jw& In I took
set two P thejob
upps. We have three
at pregOnt*: running tiro PUSAP8• Ing
and axe#Pomp
n
I;wjm
apprMimately 604. gpo. but. we are now p at all
elevation of_ -171 we havo-vater. without tr
with' 01#
of only 1,part of hydrogen sulfide the 304-0
re
of chlorine we have no hydrogen sulfide
M51.
SAY
Tests: are being maft, by, at14tist Ones "a week. Jai
b,"A'AbOn imes
zaaaftinski haw many t --sw,4till
droMing looking, over, the proJect y
w"k 0C two•
La best: istl"te� that we will with this next
thirty days, be to & ppint where can ramie UM 1"t,41i
elevation approximately- 10 ft. &Z. -turn 0.. "1 pump off,
i
Mali meanie we will b6�:.running one '"'Pt pumping approx-
..mately 300 qPM4D
forry to hear that there are still:People' that are
D
disturbed. We. havi dmeeverythinq possible and followed
Inatructioas::,,of rsaji"xiAski,io'. tie best of our
ability and )MovXeft*,:
tb
TRAUTWXMBROTHM
Paul Tr4utwein":
PT
re
D
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
March 7, 1972
TO: City Manager
FROM: Harbor & Tidelands Administrator
SUBJECT: WATER DISCHARGE, LIDO CONDOMINIUM PROJECT
This memorandum responds to your request for a report
on the water discharge at the Lido Condominium project. A resume
of the project to date is:
a. Commenced pumping in October, 1971, at the rate of
900 GPM from a depth of -26 feet. Hydrogen sulfide levels were
high and the contractor hired a chlorinating firm on the recommen-
dation of the Health Department to inject chlorine into the pumping
system. The method of treatment was unsatisfactory to the Regional
Water Quality Board so the contractor hired the services of a
laboratory, purchased $1500 of chlorinating equipment and commenced
the treatment in accordance with instructions from the Water Quality
Board.
b. In early January, the pumping rate was reduced from
900 GPM to 600 GPM and the pumping depth was reduced from -26 feet
to -17 feet. The discharge, without treatment, dropped in hydrogen
sulfide content to 1 part per million or less. At the direction of
the Water Quality Control Board, chlorination has continued though
at a reduced rate. On 28 February, the discharge was free of
hydrogen sulfide and chlorination ceased. The discharge is monitored
twice a week now and chlorinating equipment is hooked up ready to
resume treatment if required.
c. It is anticipated that rate of flow will be reduced to
300 GPM in about three weeks and that the depth of pumpingwill be
reduced to -10 feet. It is unlikely that there will be any hydrogen
sulfide in the discharge. We do not yet have an estimate when pumping
will stop altogether.
During all of the foregoing, tests were run continually to
insure that there was no residual chlorine in bay waters. Tests are
now being run on a weekly basis by both the contractor and the Water
Quality Board.
While discharges have been under treatment for several
months, and current discharges are clean, there is a suspicion on
my part and on the part of the Water Quality Control Board that the
initial discharges may have left a residual hydrogen sulfide content
in the bay bottom. We are working together to determine the best
method for the contractor to clean it out upon completion of pumping
Re: Water Discharge, Lido Condominium Project
3/7/72
Pg. 2
operations. So far, treatment activities have cost the contractor,
about $10,000.
This entire incident has been a new experience for the
City. Heretofore no one was specifically anticipating and providing
for such a problem. Since then, both the Community Development.
and Public Works Departments have been briefed in this regard with
the result.that subsequent projects involving potential discharges
have been routed to this office for coordination. The dewatering
of Promontory Bay is a major example, and we have required The Irvine
Company to obtain a Water Quality Board permit for that operation.
The experience also points up a requirement for a City
ordinance governing discharges. Once a discharge has commenced!
Fish and Game Department and Water Quality Board procedures are
too complex to get immediate results. We have no governing ordinance.
I am endeavoring to complete a water quality control plan,which can
be converted to one or more ordinances, and control of such discharges
will be a specific item.
While the discharge in this specific instance has been
basically undesirable, I am convinced that possible adverse affects.
have been over -emphasized. There has been damage to boats moored
nearby which will be handled by the contractor and his insurer.
There have been noisome odors which basically ceased upon commence-
ment of the chlorine treatment. There have been no fish kills.
There are a number of dead mussels in the area but the Fish and
Game Department cannot tell me if this is a result of the original
uncontrolled discharges or current operations -- or even something
else, for that matter.
This incident, plus other unrelated incidents in the
environmental area, lead me very reluctantly to the thought that
perhaps we should emulate the City of Santa Barbara in establishing
an Environmental Quality Advisory Board, an inter -disciplinary board
of qualified personnel. In Santa Barbara, the Board has commission
status, but acts only to advise the City Council and Planning 'Commis-
sion on technical environmental questions referred to it by either
body. It consists of degreed biologists, geologists, engineers and
other disciplines who are residents of the City. The Advisory
Committee not only advises the Council and Planning Commission at
their request, but serves both bodies as a screening agent and advisor
relative to citizens' complaints, comments or questions relative to
technical environmental matters.
With rather continuing concerns in water, air and noise
quality, noxious odors and beach erosion, such a committee might be
helpful. It might also be helpful in helping to evaluate various
environmental aspects of alternate solutions in our General Planning
program.
JI 7