HomeMy WebLinkAbout10 - General Plan Land Use Element Amendment - CorrespondenceRecieved After Agenda Printed
Item No. 10
July 22, 2014
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
July 18, 2014
To the Honorable Newport Beach Mayor and City Council;
Attached please find additional responses to the General Plan Update, reflecting
the same issues I noted in my original message.
Sincerely,
Steve Rosansky, President
Newport Beach Chamber of Commerce
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
A Project of the Newport Beach Chamber of Commerce
20351 Irvine Avenue, Ste. C -5 1 Newport Beach, CA 92660
www.GeneralPlanAccountability.com
CGPA
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
GtJI 7W 1i7 G/' (--5e i /%2
'�- Bdi`"i SCR � /y/J`Gc� /�Ii/4+i �J !� /tt� ✓i Gi'd
r
�yCov ✓� St. � �rSi'�o�s .,.fie `�
G�SI9e, iCC a
A
CGPA
-/-rte
`'7 T
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
,v ,
i� YES, I would like to stay inforned of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in mp neighborhood is:
%3/401 riY t] r-PF/
CGPA
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
9YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
C
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
61—C 0/r i vo— vl<4z
7P_�- +a^� -ea, �<a a.y �16PSII. t.a /N ✓/0,14. /CC'Sfi,� �r+r(/
lwe -?C-�-rG GSf "f- 'b r ";e
Coalition €or'ienerat Plan Ac cauntabdiity
YES, € would lilu- lo staq infant wd ui ilte prore�c to upilaw tlm general plait.
('ile flan[ intportnr,n issur, in my eui�hfamirra +gat is:
Am
aad�,-,
CAV
a
Coalition tnr General Platt Accountability
FifYFS. t would like to star u;fi,Cnte< ? t`Yhe hrraress to update the general plan.
71e most important issue in my ne,1011*0od is:
l Pw i-k.tc. mom
—
Ii-NFz 1. ,e_.. AttA+At�_t!yI T`
'> -- CGPA
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
2(YES, I would fake to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in any neighborhood is:
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
Vie most important issue in nay neighborhood is:
Ciry State: —B °
lilt \ °� (ge 3
L_" :i t,
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
YES, I would lake to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
Tine most important issue in my neighborhood is:
U�Co -rte C0 r-Va, .,DN
al
Cily lvraT(P4 tleoON State: /�C "lip: `�e7�
1'ma11: Phon
Cl
.16a ii*n.jeT General Plan Accountability
F�l =t 3 L
YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
RZPA
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
I 5f YES, t would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in Any neighborhood is:
/iLA -<J1a� — 2C.EJZe -r
12.. ✓<ex��!'� /F� JJL°�e+�-'.I�''_J ns� /e tt.i, f�. t1J�
/
✓/:7-1 Le. ll:- �J. �- �*[ Ri- �GGt+ i! Y_GJ.- ELlL_X/��N�- $!af!_�e?.,[J � ? -.£ x,�
l
Name:
Add,ess.
Citv'
1?tnA '—
/Y
,State (_ >� �/ fl lip'
Phone: R irftw� ki i ✓�
L
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
5dYES, l would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
,/
Coalition for General Plan Accountability, n j}p )VS God �L
S��1tcf6 1 i 6M Wt,
X£S, I would like to star informed of the process to update the general plan.
f®f JEXA&rPLr�
them st important issue�it, my neiRltborhood is: Wµo f: aPw is
SPPt� :d55a�s en&nc0Ve4e&- a PC$ T� i G2fAt�4A%! si
TRIM} �1�
.UI�tiJ 0$STR•JG�ia,.l T SoJ'f!•t
Ow Co Stair
A �
3'.
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
RfYES, I would like to stay infomted of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
47✓11 C /-I 4V, IV I? S171�J 13 Q'C
I&,-/P_/77 P N C
C P
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
YFS, f would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my vteighborhooel is:
CGPA
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
YES, I would like to stay infomied of the process to update the general plan.
17te most important issue in my neighborhood is:
57
CGPA
Coalition ?or Cenerat f=lan Accountability
YES, t would like to stag informed of the process io update the general plan.
The 11....f iin Ortant ' sm, in my twi hborhord is:
12.t�J v ✓' � �
N.,,,,..
Vid"'
Coalition for General Man Accountability
�5
YES, t would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
77ie innst imporiant issue in awry nei -,hlyorhood is: I
Slivz1b /IV
/!XM 4,4— fi&.11 - stl7/- -JUV
City
rn„n-
C
d
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
-4 would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The roost important issue in my neighborhood is:
Name:
J
Address: _ >4
Nt,o-rot213r:nt • n CA ) (if;3
Ci(v
Email. Phone
CGPA
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
iN,*would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
ThyAlSt V important issue in my neighborhood is:
n e, ei � .
nd
OVel
�
i ,
I
a care _ to
City -- C -. 2 "W/0
.,
CGPA
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
[RfyuS, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in in), neighborhood is:
tVCD tG,n_P V--,C-7�5k -,e
CGPA
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
CGPA
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
A
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
[if YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
77te most important issue in my neighborhood is:
Address:
Corona Dl Mar. CA Y'10 T+ -101?
a.
cim: State'. Zip.
_.° CGPA
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
.4
2fYES, I would life to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
YES, I would like to stay informer{ of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
NQ w
Lin^ Cl) ���e7` Ael P(X Y irate: C� Lip: �oZ S
73-77 * S:
+e� d) I _z"idi., -.haw ',a.?i;> _ W.."c
CGPA
C`fiion for General Plan Accountability
YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
c1
CA
Zip:C1Z �Zs
Ismail:' ~..*
GP
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
YES, I would like to stav informAd`of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
0 -D cll Is ne) 1
.. .. sc�.i'SI�v llrutC cn�l1 /7G c n c _
_�, A
c��y: n A i.UYJ� 1 ci
k-A-TI, Lkl
CoalitiA for Gernra; Plan Accourilahility
I nflfw process to update T!w general plan.
485, I Ivollid likk, m
nfore(
'Me most inawl-I'mr is5t1, ill lilt, is:
'sll
I-
Email
s-� r�
k--A-jp-I-A
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
[RriT,S, I wouid like to stay informed o'dw proct ,ss to uPdaw Ill- 'general plan.
The mo't importallf issue ill my nei(-jlbm-Ijf)od is-
1- LI
Fit
ciw
A
zip.
£ 3
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
Name:
Address:
a(V
eI», is
Corona Dl Mar, CA 92635
CGPA
— Zio
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
r'
L/JYES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
;ss1
Cif rip„
N e
Addre
ci y
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
Like to stav informed of the process to update the general plan,
er'tant issue in my neighborhood is:
P �
3
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
4YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
most importan ' ue in my neighborhood is:
IWW
Name:
Address:
City:
Email:
.State: Zip: &/
MIS
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
2(YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in in), neighborhood is:
Litt^ _ $Wte: Zip:
Ir
CU
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
zip!. 4f
,.
CGPA
" Coalition for General Plan Accountability
YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
��—j -IL
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
YES. I would like to stay informed rmed of the process to update the general plan.
The mos /t important issue ill my neighborhood is.
,Ad _ -A-
Name:
3 °, s
W
9>
PI
S'i AC {oL i:,,' �;'t: -J
woidd like to stay' of :11er process to, npctiw the general plan.
Me rgjt, Gri,ar, issue n
tfn q ,-zqf lrtant r
f`""� #r1���'��.+ C.'f/d, (; ✓�a �(1t� �..� /.,.�4�fsCY�.'l%dll..�'.. °�_s'Y.!'N- r�-:.��`�`�y
t L��i?�'L i�`/')`� '. ° „ ✓rte 'i`i9:. L� // � .11i��5 <'i{y!1���'�'�/
Nam,
I
CGIIA
Coalition. f+at Cenerai Plan Accountability
YTS. i would like to stag infasrrn d of _lie process to update the �general plan.
The most important issue in my ixighborhood is:
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most i npgfltant issue in my neighborhood is:
C
Coalition for Gene al Plan Accountability
u
YES, I would like to stay Informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
Name:
Addres.
City: NCW ?oat 3C/-i C_ \-1 state: CPI zip:
.- lition for General Plan Accountability
;Ai
YES, I would like tWAy informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue. in my neighborhood is:
city` ` . `, State: � `� Z4p:
CGPA
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
Name:
Addm,
City: _
rmail:
Coalition fdr General Plan Accountability
ER(YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my tgftborhood is:
Mr
i ..
Aaaress: QQ� r7�yN'f'V'q•y;�`p ��Q��
Lip.
City:
Sul,:
s-^ �--
f
i
Name: s
f � o
'
•.mod ` r
Address:' -� -
:.�
rs ,
Al �G'r.✓ F�C'iG�
cry: Scare 7:F,_
�r
Email: Ph
CGPA
for General Flan Accountability
Coalition
process to update the general plan•
informed of the p
t
`,
YES, I would like to stay
"`J
The most important issue in nil, neighborhood is:
Mr
i ..
Aaaress: QQ� r7�yN'f'V'q•y;�`p ��Q��
Lip.
City:
Sul,:
s-^ �--
Coalition for General Plan Accountabil=ity
5dYES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my nri,hbarkood is:
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
YES, I won] ;ike to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
Email:
�'➢ CGPA
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
4YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is: r301
Name:
Address:
ti ° 4°
Coalition for General -Plan Aca
'YES, I would like A41 I onn bees
Tho mnct ic-
nttabyy
ilit
-�?-}
to update the general al a �G
"
J v
L"l�
State: lip:
Phone:
Co*idon for �enerm! Plan AzcountabiUty
[R(?C5'iw�-):(j�i1-r|os(syiel'onn,jofth./pnocrsstoop,(xxt,\h,g,nrr:}y|-n.
The .x*qimpn/tuot isxo'`m/n7 //:
C
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
(jfYES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
s t�
CGPA
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
YES, I would like to stay infomied of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
nor L n_ _ t% - — _ ✓ ...,-, 1,:. ). /.. _ __ J & _ _ f _ r i_ . -- _ C
U
rf-z V,' �SctMrss.z$cr irr+ c�n.,.cr �R"1'OPI%t is �lCiGP L'
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
4 like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
t
important issue in my�ighborhood
It 7 G iCt —1
/-)/7
l/e i Z,1 7
Name: I
Address:
Email:
CGPA
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
ES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
lie most important issue in my neighborhood is:
-�
CGPA
Coalition for General Plan McdIinI�Wi''Y " -"
YES, I would- lik6io stay informed of the prb'cess:.yd!tupste the general plan.
The most important issue it, my neighborhood is:
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
Starr. ( /f— Zip: / 2— � k3
CGPA
Coalition for General Plan` Accountability
IffYFS, i would like to stay infoatned of the process to update the general plan.
•.
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
FS, x $aouId like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my, neighborhood is:
l
� y
Yt ��
.State: /I+ /.ip:
azition rot general Plan Accountability
SES;,I would like to sta
Y i+tfo rmed of the process to update the general plan.
The most imPor -taut issue in my neighborhood is:
MM
Name.
Address:
C G PA
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
l
State: Zip:
v
Name:
v
Address: _
r�r
s
..
City.
l
State: Zip:
fffyFS, I NVOU'd like do staS'2nfor {Zgeii t£) nrtd:�r( the g'eneral plan.
The most £,.t fl(7.ri2 ?�t ;3511@ In )'I, Et.k t'i +'r }Hut¢i ,c•
Lb
V
Coalition for Genera! Plan Accowabi:ity
(EfITS, I would like tai stay infortneld ti.f.hc prasess In -update the genera! p) -,in.
The )nest im; ortunt issue ill ml! nck!_ tTKrho:)d is: h ,
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
5- AYES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan
nemost important issue in nil, nezghborhood is:
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
m - _.,,...r ;«,,...., m„ raioh hnrhnnd it
Name:
Addres
City: Suite;
Email:
ay
CGPA
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
[RfYES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
CAP
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
i`YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
;ccija ir my neighborhood is:
G
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
YES1 would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
Vie most important issue in my neei- S "-tO }1ood is: d
��,
4
Email:
.. CoalitlomfP4eneral Plan Accountability
YES, I rwould like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
State: L =A_ Zip: �� ZS
-,CGjPA
Coalition for%encral Plan Accountability
YES; I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
Tha:mnst important issue in my neighborhood is:
C-U Pik
y ,« Coalition for.General Plan Accountability
EYES, I would like to stay informed dithe process to update the general plan.
s�
�? t
CGPA
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
^' YES, I would Iike to stav informed of the process to update the general plan.
t The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
`�k 4tc.e4"t" V- JO �. b tt 1'?"L %QA)) r, cCiC�e h
CGPA
tY
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
.r-' .0 /fly%* /S C17�/
yYES,
I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
N 0 %� .lt C /S"Ld'YC4E- C4> 05,4
c f b
tY
124YES, I wotfl,! Hke !o 5-av inn ormwi, lu;. prof�,,Ss;, 10 UMhlt.- flw gem-al plan.
The mos, important issue ill lin, ;Si
C,
Coalition forCwera. Pin Acco-untabili'q
[Rf'm, I would like to stay altos -od u `hv nrocess . tb gA,!Ivra! plan.
The mosr impol-tant ;Sslle ill m'),
1
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
YES; 1 would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The MOAt imporsant issue in nay neighborhood is:
i
C GA j ,
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
YES,. ld° like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The mompo rn
st irtant issue nr
}neighborhood is:
6
�,j
��i
•6 J}.�
h7l—.
Name _
Addresa:
City.
State:
ll
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
[RfYES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
Name:
Coalition for eneral Plan A countability
ti
YES., -i would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in any neighborhood is:
7 vOt'� � /��vl
ro... !` —..._ State: Zip:
s,
,Y
PA
Coalition for 3engxi Plan Accountability
would like to stay inforr>ckM 4the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
... P ! G
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
T would Ike to stay informed of she process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
YES, I would Tike to stay inforu),_ed of the process to update the general plan.
71re most important issue in nq, neighborhood is:
rn�rd € zx2E gyp, <as_± t=i�rer4 L
s�f•+�a � fro ��.4..�.� S _
Name _
Address: J
��// a
• {EwP�O - e7 C 8d stake: C74` ipi
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
URN ES, I would like to stag informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
Email:
l/
Coalition for Generai' P€an Accountability
YES; I would like to stay informed "of tth2`process to update the general plan
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
CGPA
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The —mom most important issue in my neighborhood is:
i5uY�. ::il) {:.. C.�: - 2. l/2Af( -1 Le % ?.Y .—V✓L r1.2eai
City! J6" State. Zip:
sa� u
a
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
FifluS, I would like to stity'informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in nay :neighborhood is
i
�. 11 //rl rNlS( -� Grri1 ��E.JOf,sJb
5 , C.
Nam,
CGPA
Coalition ar General Plan Accountability
k M
YES, I would like to stay inf _ ,. d of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my'neighborhood is:
City: iM'I.oe L S.': � 14 zip z�'7
' .. Coalition for General Plan Accountability
5dYE-5, 1 would like to stay informed o;`the process to update She general plan.
The most important issue in my nei,ghborhoori is:
-- CO 0S-(--P-vC.,Pt--� Cl r.-j CO L/uj!
\ame:
t.Urr -I a i 2F � .1 out U c H Cie,
LD I J ,. O -.I k- :57 -a
Address:
£'7 k
- - rP
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
YES; I would like to stay informed of the process to ttpdate the general plan.
T{re nmst itttportnatf issue in ;firg ruziliborlaood is:
L2G_l_ -J l L=
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most importrairt issT in my neighborhood is:
C G P
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
HOW IS IT THAT BALBOA ISLAND CAN BUILD THREE STORY BUILDINGS.?
Name:
Addmss:
City': _
Emil:
G PA
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
YF.S, I would tike to .stay informed of the Process tee update: the general Plan.
The »cost important issue it, nry aaei;hllf?r{.00ri is:
Name:
Add,,,,
s lY 4Y68�J{d L!
%ip.
...one_
CGPA
Coalition for Gen& Plan Accountability
[if YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general Plan.
0
U
The most important issue in tit), neighborhood is:
�W
Address:
CA- Zip: qu 60
U-TA
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
YES, I wot VI'jiike to stay informed of the Process to update the general plan,
most The ost i nlartant issue in Ply neigilbol-1700d is:
2
Name;
PLA
Coalition for General Nan Accountabi!ity
RrYES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
1 0
The most importantissue in my neighborhood is:
FA S . I ; I : � , 10 , '. I o 1 , . � : I
� -71, r ' � : �� -1 , 1 � 1 , i - � I - - ! I t ; � � ! • � . r i r I ; I ?i i , " t ' h c ,•(' 1 , . ,
7
/-
lo_�
71
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
Vie most imporyait issue in my neighborhood is:
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
K- si at'oc'4 FaShImA10"L rllucfh��
eX bCA;l Id ft4 o F 6 06,c02 (� 5es .k lsk �C
Toy OAl�r ulcQut , al ( aat-f 101
CGPA
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
YES, 1 would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood
Address:
City:
r
Email:
Phone:
CGPA
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
State: IC R zip: ` 1
CGPA
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
YES, I would tike to stay infornned of the process to update the general plan.
Tire most important issue in my neighborhood is:
Name:
t t�
P,�IO r2�r� -� r 5ra�e:— �.�,,:
_C
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
YES, I would like to stay igformed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in J,n eighborhood is:
#f� Ct %� COg4ecrL A, O eDadz- FO2
a
4 4l>£
5a &,�Z)
ij 095
CGPA
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
Name:
Addree.
CGPA-
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
I'
YF.S, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
77ro ennet imnnrtnnf irevn sr „ »r s,nrnAhnrt�nn�l ie
Email:
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
[RfYES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The inost immortant issue in nn, neigliborlmod is_
— CoilhIdb'foCGeneral Plan Accountability
4YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The -ant st important issue in my ppneighborhood is: }
CP
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
2(YES, I would like to stay informmed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
Name:
Address:
City:
Email:
State: 7.ipt
� _ J•1
Coalition for Geqzrai Plan Accountability
YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
SNP, N Z ..
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
PA
Coalition for Plan 4ccountability
I I the proce,�s lo update the gmeral plan.
(RfYl,',S, I would like to st.xv, infornwil �q
Me mast h7q)(17-Itult issule in no, twighbol-hood is:
/3-
12 i 7_6 j
CGPA
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
YES, I would lflkv to stay inforirwki o! the process to update the general plan.
The m(pq iint?ortallf issue ill 111.11 lwi, "Wlorljooll is:
Na.",
Add""
IN
Uff
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
YES, 1 would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The nyst important issue in my ne'g. barhood is: _
0
Name
v
v
City:
Email: v a c
Phone:_ _
CGPIk
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
YES, S would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
Name:
Address:
City: ftv &nndL Store C Zip:
Email:
4
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
YES, ► would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
FRA
CGfPA
r.= Coalition for General Plan Accountability
f_ a
YEs, I wiul_d like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
Die most important issue in my neighborhood is:
Address:
Cav:
0
�y •% � In ��^
Zip:
C PA
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
URfYF,S, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in nip neighborhood is:
CGPA
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
IZYES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is: iy.e
,r2oee4L
Zip
Received After Agenda Printed
Item No. 10
July 22, 2014
Dear City Council,
Will this be your legacy?
By Ben, age 11
For our kids' sake, please do not approve General
Plan Amendments that will add massive new
developments, density, and traffic to our already
congested city.
Respectfully, Andrea Lingle and her grandson Ben
Brown, Leilani
From: Rieff, Kim
Sent: Monday, July 21, 2014 7:58 AM
To: Brown, Leilani
Subject: FW: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment for July 22nd.Attachment \\
In the City Clerk's inbox.
Kim
- - - -- Original Message---- -
From: City Clerk's Office
Sent: Friday, July 18, 2014 2:13 PM
To: McDonald, Cristal; Mulvey, Jennifer; Rieff, Kim
Subject: FW: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment for July 22nd.Attachment \\
From: Petros, Tony
Sent: Friday, July 18, 2014 2:13:01 PM (UTC- 08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada)
To: Andy Lingle
Cc: Dept - City Council; City Clerk's Office; Henn, Michael; Hill, Rush; Daigle, Leslie; Selich, Edward;
Curry, Keith; Nancy Gardner
Subject: Re: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment for July 22nd.Attachment \\
Andy,
Thank you for the note. I want to make sure you realize that the proposed action would reduce, yes
reduce the total volume of traffic generated in Newport Bech by about 2,500 daily trips. This on top of
the 28,000 daily trips eliminated in the 2006 General Plan. This means a cumulative reduction in
more than 30,000 daily trips or the volume of a four lane arterial -no longer happening in Newport
Beach. My support of the General Plan Amendment does mean I support a reduction in traffic. I want
less future traffic in Newport Beach.
Tony Petros
City Council, Newport Beach
(949) 254 -1591
tpetrosCcD newportbeachca. gov
> On Jul 18, 2014, at 2:01 PM, "Andy Lingle" <andylingleogmail.com> wrote:
> Sorry - Forgot to add the attachment,
> Andrea
> andvlinaleCa) amail. com <mailto:andvlinaleCcDamail.com>
> Begin forwarded message:
"Received After Agenda Printed"
Written Comments Item 10
July 22, 2014
July 22, 2014, City Council Agenda Item 10 Comments
The following comments on items on the Newport Beach City Council agenda are submitted by: Jim Mosher
( iimmosher(o).vahoo.com ), 2210 Private Road, Newport Beach 92660 (949- 548 -6229)
Note: please see my previous comments to the Council on the Land Use Element Amendment
proposal on May 28. 2013, and July 8. 2014, as well as to the Planning Commission on May 22.
2014, and June 5, 2014.
Item 10. General Plan Land Use Element Amendment (PA2013 -098)
Overview
I sincerely believe the Newport Beach City Council and City staff are good people doing the best
they can considering the workloads and time constraints within which they operate, however the
present "project" has not played out in a way that properly serves the people the government it is
supposed to serve -- in this case largely because of an arbitrary and unfortunate decision to rush
major revisions to the General Plan through in time to get a measure on the November 2014 ballot,
apparently largely for the private benefit of The Irvine Company, which needs a "Greenlight" vote to
raise existing development caps at Newport Center /Fashion Island .
Legally, an improperly noticed and inadequately constructed and reviewed EIR needs to be
recirculated, and the modified revisions to the General Plan proposed by the City Council on July 8
need to be remanded to the Planning Commission for their recommendation. Adequately
performing either of those obligations will delay the Council decision to where it will be too late for
the November 2014 ballot deadline, suggesting a wiser approach would be for the Council to step
back and rethink what it is trying to achieve, and how best to achieve it.
Assuming the Council's objective is to thoughtfully reassess, after eight years, the adequacy of the
2006 General Plan, and not simply rush through the entitlement of an unexplained Irvine Company
expansion project, it should start with a public evaluation of the City's policies and vision, and
possible reasons that changes to them might be needed, before, not after, considering any
changes in land use allocations. The impact of any such policy and allocation changes should also
be thoroughly vetted by a// the City's departments and advisory committees, and not just by a small
and select amendment committee listening to the pleas of developers: since the General Plan is
the residents' vision of the future of their City, it should be a resident - driven process rather than a
staff - driven one.
Here are a few of the major stumbling blocks that should give the Council pause as to whether they
want to vote for approval of this matter and leave an ill- conceived and contentious ballot measure
as their legacy:
Deeply Flawed and Improperly Noticed EIR
The Council must be aware of the many complaints that have been received about using a
"baseline" that compares the impacts of the present proposal to those of some other hypothetical
outcome ( "2006 build out "), rather than to the actual conditions that exist today, and how this fails
to give decision makers, including voters, the information they need to make an intelligent decision.
July 22, 2014, Council Item 10 comments - Jim Mosher Page 2 of 3
The multipage explanation supplied by an Assistant City Attorney to the Planning Commission on
June 5, 2014, attempting to explain why the use of a theoretical baseline is acceptable and why a
Supplemental EIR was appropriate, is inadequately supported by legal citations. The great
majority of case law, including some of the cases cited, appears to argue the opposite, and logic
would suggest that an SEIR almost as lengthy as the original EIR is not a minor supplement.
As has been previously noted, the public review of that SEIR started badly with the Notice of
Availability failing to provide the legally required notice of planned public meetings on the matter,
which in itself is enough to require recirculation.
Perhaps the largest flaw in the SEIR is its assumption that the removal of potential hotel rooms at
Newport Coast can be used to offset newly permitted development elsewhere. Those potential
hotel rooms are embedded in the County of Orange's certified Local Coastal Program for Newport
Coast, which it is beyond the power of the City to modify. The SEIR completely fails to consider
the highly foreseeable possibility that the California Coastal Commission will require those visitor
serving amenities, if removed from Newport Coast, to be re- allocated elsewhere in the City's
Coastal Zone. The SEIR does not address where the hotel rooms might go, or what impacts their
re- location to another part of the City's Coastal Zone might cause. Such a relocation would also
completely obliterate the projected reduction of potential trips in the City as a whole, on which
many of the SEIR's findings of "insignificance" hinge. Alternatively, if the CCC is told those rooms
would never realistically be built at Newport Coast, and so nothing is being lost, then the baseline
used in the SEIR, which assumes they would be built, is patently wrong.
Beyond that, the consultant's last minute memo suggesting the Council's last minute changes to
the project, including an unreviewed traffic by -pass plan, would generate no new impacts and
require no new analysis seems conclusory and inadequate.
Inadequate Public Process
Anyone who attended the 12 meetings of the Land Use Element Amendment Advisory Committee
will know that the opportunity for resident input was extremely limited and the possibility of that
input influencing the results even more limited. At a typical meeting, staff would lead the
Committee through an hour of more of changes and options, some passing by in seconds, and
only after the Committee had made their decisions was the public invited to speak, as a sort of
afterthought to all that had transpired (and been finalized) before.
Following in that tradition, the primary public outreach regarding the LUEAAC effort occurred with
the mailing of a flyer to residents in early April after the Committee had completed its work and
disbanded, with a lightly- attended "workshop" on April 10, 2014. Although the Council has
received testimony from the Newport Beach Chamber of Commerce that residents' three major
concerns are "traffic, traffic, and traffic," the flyer carefully expunged all the traffic impact
information (ADT's) in that the Committee had seen as early as October, 2013.
Unexplained Discrepancies
As the Council may or may not recall, when voters were asked to consider the 2006 General Plan,
they were told a "yes" vote would result in a reduction of 28,920 Average Daily Trips at build -out
compared to build -out of the 1988 General Plan, yet at the July 8, 2014, City Council meeting
Mayor Pro Tern Selich showed a PowerPoint slide indicating the reduction from "1988 (adopted)"
to "2006 (adopted)" was only 11,193 ADT. Since voter approval is needed for major increases to
the General Plan, what happened to the other 17,727 ADT of the promised reduction? The only
voter - approved change I am aware of is the new City Hall and Library Expansion project, which
purportedly added 115,000 square feet of development and 3,070 new ADT to the Newport Center
July 22, 2014, Council Item 10 comments - Jim Mosher Page 3 of 3
statistical area, above what was allowed by the 2006 General Plan. That is inadequate to explain
the disappearance over eight years of 17,727 of the reduction in potential ADT promised in 2006.
Perhaps even more significantly for the average resident, the Mayor Pro Tem's slide shows
154,591 of ADT that is not present today, but could be added between now and 2025 (that is, in
the next 11 years) under the already- approved 2006 General Plan. Shouldn't the Council (and
public) be asking where that growth would come and if the effort should be to scale that back
rather than add still more?
Inadequately Reviewed Last - minute Changes
At the July 8, 2014, hearing, a majority of the Council approved substantial changes to the LUEA,
of such magnitude that Community Development Director Kimberly Brandt is quoted on page 627
of the draft minutes as saying "the amended motion reflects a project that is not what Planning
Commission recommended, is not the proposed project in the EIR, or the no project alternative or
no airport area alternative." Both City Charter Section 707(a) and California Government Code
Section 65356 require each potential change to the General Plan to be given a full public review
process, including a recommendation from the Planning Commission, before action can be taken
on it.
Among the proposed changes, the Corona del Mar By -pass Plan would seem the most significant,
and also the most peculiar since it would seem like it belongs in the General Plan's Circulation
Element rather than the Land Use Element, but there are other changes that seem equally poorly
thought out.
As an example the proposed changes to Policy LU 7.14.5 appear to allow additive ( "infill ")
residential units in airport areas, other than the "Saunders" property, where they are not allowed by
the current General Plan. This may, without review, disrupt a scheme carefully considered by an
earlier GPAC and Planning Commission.
Likewise, I am not sure I understand the Congregate Care proposal. I have yet to understand why
adding enough square footage to trigger the need for a Greenlight vote is necessary to achieve trip
neutrality (which seems to be declared more than demonstrated), and the entirely new Policy LU
7.14.14.1 could be taken as precedent for imposing a financial penalty on those wishing to build
independent living units for seniors in Newport Beach.
Finally, in the limited time I have available to prepare these comments, the "Charter Section 423
Analysis" provided in Table 1 of the present staff report is simply inconsistent with the information
voters need, based on the Charter. The table lumps together changes throughout the City as a
whole. Section 423 requires separate and distinct consideration of the changes affecting each of
the City's statistical areas. In other words to achieve its purpose, the Section 423 impacts on the
Newport Center statistical area and the Airport Area statistical area should be separately disclosed.
Conversely, small changes to all of the City's statistical areas which cumulatively exceeded the
stated Greenlight thresholds would not trigger the need for a vote, unless they exceeded them in at
least one statistical area taken in isolation. Hence, the analysis provided is erroneous.
"Received After Agenda Printed"
Item 10
July 22, 2014
Rieff, Kim
From:
Bud Rasner <av8rbud @adelphia.net>
Sent:
Monday, July 21, 2014 3:23 PM
To:
Dept - City Council
Cc:
City Clerk's Office, info @SPON- NewportBeach.org
Subject:
Land Use Element Amendment
Categories: Leilani
Monday July 21, 2014
City of Newport Beach representatives.
Please note that my wife Linda and I are not against any and all change. We do however feel strongly that this
particular item would be a move in the wrong direction. I am a 40 year resident in Corona del Mar and believe
in our great city and feel generally the City Council members have done a good job in the stewardship of our
great city. We are taking this mean of writing a personal appeal as this particular item has flaws and should be
defeated.
Please vote NO on Land Use Element Amendment.
Thank you in advance for your consideration of our genuine concern.
Respectfully,
Bud and Linda Rasner
2500 Ocean Blvd
Corona del Mar, CA 92625
"Received After Agenda Printed"
Item No. 10
July 22, 2014
Rieff, Kim
From: City Clerk's Office
Sent: Monday, July 21, 2014 4:36 PM
To: McDonald, Cristal; Mulvey, Jennifer; Rieff, Kim
Subject: FW: Letter to City Council re: LUE Amendment - 7/22/14 Public Hearing
Attachments: Letter to Council from SPON re LUE Amendment 7- 21- 14.pdf
From: Mark Wolfe
Sent: Monday, July 21, 2014 4:36:03 PM (UTC- 08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada)
To: City Clerk's Office
Cc: Brown, Leilani
Subject: Letter to City Council re: LUE Amendment - 7/22/14 Public Hearing
To the City Clerk:
Attached in PDF format is a letter addressed to the City Council regarding the proposed amendment to the
General Plan's Land Use Element, currently set for public hearing as Item No. 10 on the Council's agenda for
the July 22, 2014 regular meeting. Please distribute copies of the letter to Councilmembers in advance of the
hearing. The letter is also being sent to your office via fax.
I would be grateful if you could acknowledge receipt of this email and the attachment via reply email to me at
your convenience.
Thank you very much, and please let me now if there are questions or concerns.
h V/ol-e i M. R. Wolfe & Associates, P.C.
vrww.mrwolfeassociates.com
I
m I r I w o I f e
s associates, p.c.
attorneys -at -law
July 21, 2014
By Fax & E -Mail
Acknowledgement of Receipt Requested
Mayor Rush N. Hill, II
Members of the City Council
City of Newport Beach
coo City Clerk
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Fax: (949) 644 -3039
Email: cityclerk @newportbeachca.gov
Re: General Plan Land Use Element Amendment (PA2013 -098) —
Agenda Item No. 10, July 22, 2014 Regular Meeting.
Dear Mayor Hill and Members of the City Council:
On behalf of Stop Polluting Our Newport ( "SPON "), please accept the
following points, comments, and concerns regarding the proposed General Plan
Land Use Element Amendment ( "LUE.Amendment "), as modified and
supplemented at your July 8, 2014 meeting. Our firm has specialized in the areas of
land use, general plan, environmental law, and the California Environmental Quality
Act ( "CEQA ") since 2002.
As explained in more detail in the body of this letter, SPON requests that the
Council take no action on the proposed Amendment at this time for several reasons.
First, the changes to the original LUE Amendment offered orally from the dais on
July 8, 2014 and presented in writing on July 16, just four business days before the
Council's adoption action, include new substantive General Plan policies that have
not been reviewed by the Planning Commission. Under Section 707 of the Newport
Beach City Charter, new General Plan policies must be referred to the Planning
Commission for review and a recommendation to the City Council following a
noticed public hearing. Given the material nature of the new changes, and the
substantial volume of new supporting information contained in a 300+ page staff
report, additional time for review by the public, independent experts, and the
1 Sutter Street I Suite 300 1 San Francisco CA 94104 1 Tel 415.369.9400 1 Fax 415.369.9405 1 www.mrwolfeassociates.com .D-
July 21, 2014
Page 2
Planning Commissioners themselves is not only necessary but critical. The public
participation provisions of CEQA, the State Planning and Zoning Law, and the City's
own Charter dictate nothing less. The Council simply may not lawfully adopt any of
the new General Policies that were presented for the first time on July 8, 2014
without first complying with this Charter provision.
Second, if adopted in its current form, the LUE Amendment as modified
could render the General Plan's Circulation Element and Land Use Element out of
correlation with one another in violation of State Law. An amendment to a general
plan's land use element that is not correlated with its circulation element is invalid.
Here, there is no discussion or analysis in the record before you showing whether and
how these ovo General Plan elements are correlated. Such a discussion is required
under applicable case law. In addition, proposed new Policy L U 7.13.11 establishing
the Corona Del Mar By -Pass Plan would create new transportation routes through
the City which by law must be addressed in the Circulation Element in order to
preserve the required correlation between the two elements.
Third, new substantive policies and provisions modification to the LUE
Amendment plainly fall outside the scope of the SEIR, and may have significant
impacts that have not been disclosed, evaluated or mitigated. In particular, the
proposed Corona Del Mar By -Pass Plan could re- direct substantial volumes of traffic
off of Pacific Coast Highway and onto other roadway segments and intersections.
This in turn would increase traffic volumes, noise levels, and vehicle emissions in the
affected residential areas, creating potentially significant impacts that have not been
considered. CEQA requires these impacts to be addressed before the Council may
properly consider or adopt these policies.
For these reasons, SPON respectfully requests that the City take no action
on the LUE Amendment at this time, and refer the matter back to staff with direction
to: (1) prepare a consistency analysis to document the required correlation between
the General Plan's Land Use Element and Circulation Element; (2) modify the SEIR
to address the potential impacts from the new policies, recirculating a revised Draft
SEIR to the extent required under CEQA; and (3) refer the matter to the Planning
Commission for review and a recommendation before returning to the Council for
action at a later date.
More detailed discussion of these points follows below.
July 21, 2014
Page 3
I. The Changes To The Land Use Element Amendment Offered July 8,
2014 Must Be Referred To The Planning Commission Before The
Council May Act Upon Them.
The July 8, 2014 changes to the originally proposed LUE Amendment include
substantive additional policies that are entirely new, and that have never been
reviewed or considered by the Planning Commission. These include:
LU 7.13.11 Corona del Mar Traffic By -Pass Plan
LU 7.13.12 Newport Transportation Center
» LU 7.14.14.1 Congregate Care Facility in Anomaly Number 6
None of these new policies, or any of the numerous modifications to other policies
contained in the original LUE Amendment, have been reviewed by the Planning
Commission.
Under the City's Charter, av amendment to any 12art of the General Plan
must be submitted to the Planning Commission for review at a public hearing and
recommendation to the Council. Charter Section 707, titled "Planning Commission.
Powers and Duties," provides:
"There shall be a Planning Commission consisting of seven members which
shall have the power and be required to:
(a) After a public hearing thereon, recommend to the City Council the
adoption, amendment or repeal of a General Plan, or any art thereof, for the
physical development of the City." Emphasis added.
While the Council may arguably modify a policy that has first been reviewed by the
Commission, the Charter's plain language bars the Council from taking action on a
policy that is entirely new and that the Commission has never seen, let alone reviewed
and acted upon.
Note that the State Planning and Zoning Law imposes a parallel requirement
on general law cities. Gov't Code 5 65356 ( "any substantial modification [to a general
plan amendment] proposed by the legislative body not previously considered by the
commission during its hearings, shall first be referred to the planning commission for
its recommendation "). Our State Supreme Court has underscored the importance of
this policy, emphasizing the special expertise offered by planning Commissions:
"the planning law creates a unique, process - intensive structure for the
enactment and amendment of general plans. It begins with the planning
July 21, 2014
Page 4
agency, a highly specialized body of individuals charged with the responsibility
to review proposed amendments to the general plan and, when necessary, to
propose revisions of its own." De Vita P. County of Napa (1995) 9 Cal.4,h 763,
802. Emphasis added.
Although a charter city is not directly subject to Government Code section 65356, the
City of Newport Beach nevertheless saw fit to include an essentially identical
provision in its own Charter. This reflects the City's recognition of the critical
importance of input from the "highly specialized body of individuals" that comprise
its Planning Commission on proposed changes to its General Plan which, after all, is
its "constitution for all future development within the city." Napa Citi .Zens far Honest
Government v. County ofNapa (2001) 91 Cal.App.4,h 342, 355. It also reflects the
importance and necessity of informed public participation at every stage of the
general plan amendment process. Concerned Citi ,-ens of Costa Mesa v. 32nd Dist. Ag.
Assn. (1986) 42 Cal.3d 929, 935 -936 (public holds a "privileged position" in the
review process); Scboen v. Cal. Dept. of Forestry dam' Fire Prot (1997) 58 Cal.App.4th 556,
574 ( "[p]ublic review provides the dual purpose of bolstering the public's confidence
in the agency's decision and providing the agency with information from a variety of
experts and sources "); see also, e.g., Governor's Office of Planning & Research (2003)
General Plan Guidelines, p. 23 ( "Cities and counties should develop public participation
strategies that allow for early and meaningful community involvement in the general
plan process by all affected population groups ").
The City Council should therefore refer the new policies of July 8, 2014 to the
Planning Commission for review and recommendation following a public hearing
before considering or acting upon them.
II. The Land Use Element Amendment Omits Discussion Of
Correlation With The Circulation Element; As Modified, It Will In Fact
Render The Two Elements Out of Correlation.
The General Plan consistency doctrine contained in the State Planning and
Zoning Law requires that the City's General Plan be internally consistent. Gov't
Code, 55 65300.5, 65302; Garat v. City of Riverside (1991) 2 Cal.App.4th 259, 286
(applicable to charter. city). Importantly, it also requires that the General Plan's
Circulation Element be "correlated" with its Land Use Element. Gov't Code §
65302(b). The correlation requirement in turn requires that the Circulation Element
set forth both service standards as well as proposed improvements necessary to
address changes in roadway demand caused by changes in land use that are
envisioned in the Land Use Element. Concerned Citizens of Calaveras County, supra, 166
Cal.App.3d at 100; Twain.Harte.HomeonrnerrAssn. V. County of Tuolumne (1982) 138
Cal.App.3d, 664, 700. Thus, in amending the Land Use Element of its General Plan,
July 21, 2014
Page 5
the City must ensure that the amendment is consistent with the other elements of the
plan and that the General Plan as a whole remains internally consistent.
In Tn ain Harte, the court held that a county general plan's land use and
circulation elements were not sufficiently correlated, and hence did not substantially
comply with the consistency requirements of Government Code section 65302. The
primary basis for the holding was the fact that the circulation element did not contain
any discussion or description of the effects that certain land use changes prescribed in
the land use element might have on affected roadways. The court explained:
"In the present case it can be seen that the circulation element does not
attempt to describe or discuss the changes or increases in demands on the
various roadways or transportation facilities of the County as a result of
changes in uses of land which will or may result from implementation of the
decision system and the general plan." 138 Cal.App.3d at 701.
Absent such a discussion, the court held, "there is no way to determine whether in
fact the circulation element is correlated with the proposed land use element." Ibid.
Likewise here, no such discussion of correlation appears in the proposed LUE
Amendment or elsewhere.
Furthermore, the LUE Amendment's new Policy 7.13.11, which mandates the
development and implementation of the Corona Del Mar Bypass Plan, would redirect
traffic from Pacific Coast Highway onto various other roadway segments and
intersections. By law, a wholesale reworking of the City's traffic flow patterns of this
magnitude must be addressed, if not expressly included, in the Circulation Element.
Gov't Code § 65302(b)(1) (general plan "shall include.... [a] circulation element
consisting of the general location and extent of existing and proposed major
thoroughfares, transportation routes, terminals, any military airports and ports, and
other local public utilities and facilities, all correlated with the land use element of the
plan"). 1
Note that under the Charter, ensuring adequate correlation between the Land
Use and Circulation Elements is the primary responsibility of the Planning
Commission. The Charter's referral requirement exists l2recisel so that Council -
initiated General Plan amendments do not create problems like this. Thus, if the
proposed changes are referred back to the Commission as required by the Charter,
presumably the above correlation issues can be addressed and corrected. Regardless,
the City may not properly adopt the LUE Amendment as modified on July 8, 2014
unless and until correlation between the two elements is restored.
This provision applies to charter cities. Gov't Code 5 65700.
July 21, 2014
Page 6
III. New Policies In The July 8, 2014 Changes In The Amendment Have
Not Been Subjected To Environmental Review Under CEQA; A
Modification To The SEIR Is Necessary.
City staff and the FIR consultant go to great lengths to explain why the new
and modified polices of July 8, 2014 do not require the City to recirculate a revised
draft SEIR for additional public review and comment. This is a red herring. The
decision whether to recirculate a revised draft EIR is triggered when "new
information is added to the EIR after public notice is given of the availability of the
draft EIR for public review under Section 15087 but before certification." CEQA
Guidelines, 5 15088.5 Emphasis added. Here, the new information in question —
the new LUE policies - has obviously not been added to the SEIR itself; rather it was
presented from the dais on July 8, 2014, and then addressed in a memo to the
Council from the EIR consultant. Whether or not the consultant's conclusion that
the new policies will not cause new significant effects is correct (it almost certainly is
not), the procedural problem remains: the new policies have effectively changed the
SEIR's project description and fall outside that document's scope of analysis.
Analysis of their impacts belongs in the SEIR, not in a consultant memo. Vineyard
Area Citizens v. for Responsible Grozvtb P. City of Rancho Cordova (2007) 40 Cal.4th 412, 442
(relevant analysis must be in FIR itself, not "scattered here and there" in reports
buried in appendices).
That said, new Policy LU 7.13.11 provides that the Corona Del Mar Bypass
Plan "shall be approved by the City Council and implemented prior to issuance of the
first certificate of occupancy...." Emphasis added. This policy unequivocally
commits the City not only to developing but actually implementing the plan.
Moreover, the new policy references a new LUE Figure 21 -1 for Newport Center,
showing the locations where traffic - redirecting signage will be posted as part of the
Plan. Given the magnitude and extent of the potential impacts on traffic, noise, air
quality, and other factors in the residential areas affected by redirected traffic due to
the Plan, a meaningful and thorough review under CEQA is required. A conclusory,
two- paragraph statement in a consultant memo that impacts will be no more severe
than those disclosed in the SEIR is simply not adequate.
Finally we would observe that the SEIR's traffic analysis appears to evaluate
the significance of the LUE Amendment's impacts against a hypothetical baseline of
future buildout under the 2006 General Plan as reported in the EIR certified for that
Plan, and not against the actual baseline of existing conditions. While this may be
permissible in some circumstances, there is no showing in the record here that this is
the case. In the recent case of Neigbbors far Smart Rail v. Escpo rition Metro Line
Construction Autboriy (2013) 57 Cal.4th 439, 457, the Supreme Court underscored that:
July 21, 2014
Page 7
"while an agency preparing an EIR does have discretion to omit an analysis of
the project's significant impacts on existing environmental conditions and
substitute a baseline consisting of environmental conditions projected to exist
in the future, the agency must justify its decision by showing an existing
conditions analysis would be misleading or without informational value."
Here, there appears to be no such justification in the record before the Council.
The Council should therefore, in the course of re- referring the new policies to
the Planning Commission, direct staff to augment the SEIR to address new and
potentially significant impacts associated with implementation of the Corona Del Mar
Bypass plan, and to assess whether reliance on a hypothetical future baseline to
evaluate traffic impacts was justifiable in light of the Neigbborr for Smart Bail decision.
If this new analysis discloses new or more severe impacts than those documented in
the original SEIR, the City should therefore recirculate a revised draft SEIR in
accordance with Section 15088.5 of the CEQA Guidelines.
IV. Conclusion
For all the above reasons, SPON respectfully requests the City Council to take
no action on the LUE Amendment, and to refer the matter back to staff with
direction to: (1) prepare a consistency analysis to document the required correlation
between the General Plan's Land Use Element and Circulation Element; (2) modify
the SEIR to address the potential impacts from the new policies, recirculating a
revised Draft SEIR to the extent required under CEQA; and (3) refer the matter to
the Planning Commission for review and a recommendation following a public
hearing before returning to the Council for action at a later date.
Thank you for your consideration of these concerns.
Yours sincerely,
M. R. WOLFE & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
Mark R. Wolfe
On behalf of Stop Polluting Our Newport
MRW:am
�. I n n �.
all
Since 1864
July 22, 2014
Dave Kiff
City Manager
City of Newport Beach
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915
Re: Notice of Termination of Annexation and Development Agreement Among City of Newport
Beach, Irvine Company and Irvine Community Development Company Concerning
Newport Coast and Adjacent Properties dated August 23, 2001
Dear Mr. Kiff:
Please consider this to be a notice of termination on behalf of the Irvine Company and Irvine
Community Development Company ( "Irvine Company ") to the City of Newport Beach of the
above referenced agreement (the "Agreement ") pursuant to Section 7.4 of the Agreement,
conditioned upon, and effective upon the date of, the final adoption by the City Council and
voters of the City of Newport Beach of the 2014 Land Use Element Amendments to the City's
General Plan. If the 2014 Land Use Element Amendments to the General Plan are approved by
the City Council and voters, this Notice of Termination will be irrevocable and binding on the
Irvine Company. If the 2014 Land Use Element Amendments to the General Plan are not
approved by the Council or the voters, then we do not wish to exercise our right of termination,
and the Agreement will remain in full force and effect.
Despite this termination of the Agreement upon this action, the Irvine Company wishes to
continue to pursue final development of the Newport Coast, but will only do so in compliance
with the development allowed by the 2014 Land Use Element Amendments to the City's General
Plan when they are adopted by the City Council and the City's voters. We do not believe it
appropriate to further pursue any development inconsistent with such amended General Plan, and
we believe that adoption of the 2014 Land Use Element Amendments will make such
inconsistent development infeasible from an economic and policy perspective as set forth in
Section 7.4 of the Agreement, requiring us to terminate the Agreement.
Sincerely,
�.
Dan Miller
Senior Vice President
Entitlement & Public Affairs
550 Newport Center Drive, Newport Beach, CA 92660 949.720.2000
CGP A
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
July 22, 2014
To the Honorable Newport Beach Mayor and City Council;
'3 a Se
8C a L ors Ia¢,ba 99
7 -d-94i
Attached please find additional responses to the General Plan Update, reflecting
the same issues I noted in my original message.
Sincerely,
Steve Rosansky, President
Newport Beach Chamber of Commerce
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
A Project of the Newport Beach Chamber of Commerce
20351 Irvine Avenue, Ste. C -5 I Newport Beach, CA 92660
www, General PlanAccountability.com
CGPA
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
IR(YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
City: to e: Zip:
Email:
li
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
All of us are thrilled that the OC Grand Jury has reported that
our Newport Beach economy is hurt by the John Wayne
Airport constraints. The lazy ne're -do -well grandchildren of
Pasadena grandees who settled in Newport Beach a century
ago are contemptuous of everyone else who needs to work
for a living. Let the Airport stay open later! We are the Silent
Majority who support economic growth in our home town.
Name:
.7
CGP2k
T Coalition for General Plan Accountability
2(YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
�GI , M cerla,�
Address:
City: State: Zip: c;) -6l6-- —
Email:
Phone:
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
R(YES I would like taOstay informed of tfie process ib'update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
14Le
Email:
C. q"
C6a {ion for GeP ccourttabiliTy
11YES, I wouixilise to stay informed ofAiricess to update the general plan.
'The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
Li , CJ C� �-yP C ✓Y��rtJ �aPesvc.Tirt�
1 PPPI C�
'Coalition for General Plan Accountability
M/YES, I would like to stay infonned`of�the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my WV6borhood is:
�.
Ci
State:
Email:
vlmne�
\ G RA
'Coalition for General Plan Accountability
M/YES, I would like to stay infonned`of�the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my WV6borhood is:
�.
4 G PA
CoaTition -f or GQ&al Plan Accountability
R(YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is N e %`e
n Qje,1St
Name..,..,......._.._. .�
city: t V Q� A O 11,-� Sate:
Coalition forTigneral Plan Accountability
IWYES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
City: State: Zip:
r Email: _.II Phon
. `--sue,_
RGPA
Calition fofSeneral Plan Accountability
YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
D/YES, I would like Q stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The mosi imvoriari issue in my neighborhood is: ,
Name
i'.:ca tt
AE —In+Ye�"
A9262S
city. State:
Email:
Phone,
arj
E
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
R(YES, I would like to stay infonned of the process to update the general plan.
Email:
Zip: Yz6z5
Y CGP2 k
°. Coalition for General Plan Accountability
YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
Name:
smte: �� Zip:
CGRA -.
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
(RfYES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
� ! a7._Y._ a Tl�� dyyov b.UufJ
Name
city: CQ10.wJ1r D2L P+l4TL State: 4A- zip: qlbZS
Email '-- -�yln, A P - _- -
J
CGPA
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
YES, I ZoAike to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
Address: f
A I i� ;C= r
Email: Pho
�s -
CAk
Coalition for Ge%Azl Ptah Accountability
J�
,gyp ..
I YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
°T yc- , cka& on
State: CA A Zip: G63
C `1J1 P
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
r &(YES, I woAiike to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The rlaat issue in my neighborhood is:
-I ,
ItlflfA �vwa�1- i�.c',�"
CGPA
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
2(YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in/myr neighborhood is:
U 1 6Lt I :NIX t" a- 7 9 '1, 9,1 �Cl� -w+ Colt
6)
r
Address: ��
City: State: Zip:
Email Phone:
MO Q i�� O
- £oalitior General Plan Accountability
YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The st important issue in my neighborhood is: Q �/�
2ar41it ��- &Ivlelt7�& lC/�I,�G-
Name:
ry ,
QGPA
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
YES; TwreuId like to stay informed owe process to update the general plan.
5 .j.,..;
The most important issue in my neigitbarho d is:o _ o ✓^ r
M1,111M -11
�.s
"Lip:
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
2fYES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
C G
Coation' for General Plan Accountability
Co4t
x�
F
OYES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
Email:
° GPA
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
I woNd like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
a
a
IxWition for General Plan Accountability
UlyES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
O.o ode-
��V' RIP11 III
M
Address:
City: State: I Zip:
..-CGPA
Spalition for General Plan Accountability
fiYES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
City: AQ-J-�JWd— Rdk(A State: CA zip: I 2,V(00
Email:
e
CGP2k
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my- neighborhood is:
Ma n lr r1�?Po�, —x CJ2FEt>}
Name:
Cf State: C A Zip: / Zli1J1�
Pho
C GAA
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
UdYES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
FAWN �� %i
i
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
&(YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
Name:
Address:
4 ZlJfJAL Sv -"n ,.c i r A T-0 rA+
P i0-/r/74 A/ 2 R l& q e Al ( m J L i'P,l- J c1Tf)
�7,.rir -rc�.r
92569
City: statc Zip:
r�—'" �,,,�- ^�. ...� -• -fir,_,
�. .�.�- -,ter-
CGPA
- Coal
ht41kiUr- Gener3l Plan Accountability
UP-GES, I -W' to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
--T 1c a wns AT WIAQ- lJ -s FAZI -
Name:
C"Y:'VeWPCIe--r State: CA ZiD
r
---- GPA
Coalition for General Plan Accountability,
D/YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
Name:
City.
Email _
State:.
_ Zip:
Coatitfi'for.General Plan Accountability
$A
-
t YES, I would like toformed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
Address:
Is
CGPA
Coalition foreral Plan Accountability
UfYES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
Name::
AddresOR [ a
State:
City
Email: - Phone:
CGPA
Coalition for Unesal.Plan Accountability
DYES, I would like'to stay yin pi rpiedjof the process to update the general plan.
City. , e�zw (� State: _lQ Zip: ?246 -3
Email:
2
CGRA
Coalitio-afor General Plan Accountability
RrYES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
Nam(
Addis
Car.
MO
Phone:
CIGPA
Coalition for General=ly Accountability
IJVYIS;��W-;Lkf like to stay infolAZEd. of the process to update the general plan.
r The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
A. - j f7 — -A r rn J I
Name:
Address:
City: State: — Zip:
Phone:
- Coalition for General Plan Accountability
IffYES' I would ke� informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most impofo aSs'ue in my neighborhood is:
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
:' YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
M'= q' he most important issue in my neighborhood is:
Add
=::_st State: CA- Zip:
C-GRA
Coalition ckge -Wdl Plan Accountability
NfYES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
Name: `� -/�1� cr-�
CGPA
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
}YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important rssr 1 t
s G
Name:
I
Pik
Coalition for Gral Plan Accountability
R(YES, I would like to stay informed-of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
Ai rer¢ 001S-e- g4d $oa,� --hg4 cc-n UQrs
U
Name:
Address:
City: (/ eG State: ' 1 zip: LC... (� "
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
�Y) S„ �Y Mike to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is: !i
C =cvVe
Name:
£mail: — W G� /��/ 1✓� e i. W pmdeA %7
_ CGPA
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
RYES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is: �Cc ae \ M 0.Y
O — '"vdak E� ov. ' \rin ev- s \Y Q,s.`S
CA) 0. 5LL- r ty�eN� S1'O�y,a \s -7p c-roSS
Pc kA -firow, oing— is e —ro 7�1•e. G \fin2r
r
- "
city: Ill' —
State.
Zip:
h
CGP2k
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
TES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan,
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
city: Ill' —
State.
Zip:
CGPA
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
LVJJ YES$''�ffiuld like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
Th most important issue in my neighborhood is:
I,
C GP2k
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
- - 2 YES, I,ry$Vd like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
ciLY: I
R it
ton Plan Accountability
Pik
Coalit
YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
_0 E 77
'g g
Wo
City:
Email:
State: YV
Phone-
CGPA
Co Jon ioij&nerall PIA
o ntabilv
world like to stay informed, dit&
process U6-41rdate! general pf`a"n"�'�
-The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
CG-Pik
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
R(YES, I would like to stay informed of tl%rocess to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
City: I V I State: v' Zip: 1 L vl)
_.
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
CGPA
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
2(YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
�.a ♦ iii IyM G.:
.L i
Cmail: Phone:
`:_e `L11 P2k ,
A' Coalition for General Plan Actpptability
YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
"'076721FAVII "MIN "Jew. -10rAYMAIIII
WM1
a
CGP24
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
YES, I would like to stay
The most important issuE
7771s 2/� i IME
of the process to update the general plan.
my neighborhood is:
414Z /M /2 - ;D- eyezalplv�iyT " -) 1W41CD
GI klP 7-?-) ti7/J�(e A-Zf T4/L 11161D
.n W -
Coalition for Gerreral Plan Accountability
Y S, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborhood is:
7—/r—,q
Name:
Email:
State: Zip;
CG Pik
Coalition for General Plan Accountability
M/ YES, I would like to stay informed of the process to update the general plan.
The most important issue in my neighborh9pd is:
Fee
Received After Agenda Printed
Agenda Item No. 10
McDonald, Cristal 07 -22 -14
From:
Andy Lingle Iandylingle@gmail.coml
Sent:
Tuesday, July 22, 2014 2:43 PM
To:
Petros, Tony
Cc:
Dept - City Council; City Clerk's Office; Henn, Michael; Hill, Rush; Daigle, Leslie; Selich,
Edward; Curry, Keith; Nancy Gardner
Subject:
Re: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment for July 22nd.Attachmentll
Categories: Leilani
Hi Tony -
You state in your reply that the total volume of traffic "will be reduced, yes reduced ". I think you must mean
that the "growth rate of traffic will be reduced" from that which has been proposed (as is shown in Ed Selich's
graphic "Total Future Average Daily Trips "). There will almost certainly be more cars on the road if the
proposed action is passed, just not as many as there might have been. Asserting that the total volume of traffic
will be reduced seems misleading, unless there is something I don't understand (and that's not impossible).
Andy
On Jul 18, 2014, at 2:13 PM, Petros, Tony wrote:
Andy,
Thank you for the note. I want to make sure you realize that the proposed action would reduce, yes reduce the
total volume of traffic generated in Newport Bech by about 2,500 daily trips. This on top of the 28,000 daily
trips eliminated in the 2006 General Plan. This means a cumulative reduction in more than 30,000 daily trips or
the volume of a four lane arterial -no longer happening in Newport Beach. My support of the General Plan
Amendment does mean I support a reduction in traffic. I want less future traffic in Newport Beach.
Tony Petros
City Council, Newport Beach
(949) 254 -1591
tvetros&ewyortbeachca.gov
On Jul 18, 2014, at 2:01 -PM, "Andy Lingle" <andylingle( lgmail.com> wrote:
Sorry - Forgot to add the attachment,
Andrea
andylingle@gmail.com<mailto:gAdylingle@grnail.com >
Begin forwarded message:
From: Andy Lingle <andylingleAwLiail.com<mailto:andylingle(@,pmail.com >
Date: July 18, 201412:38:30 PM PDT
To: cityclerk&ewportbeachea.sov< mailto :cityclerk(@newpoortbeachca.gov >, Michael Henn
<MHenn(o)NewportBeachCa.gov< mailto:MHennn,NewportBeachCa.gov >, Tony Petros
<tpetros(c�.newportbeachea.gov< mailto :tpetros@,,newportbeachea.gov >,
RHillANewportBeachCa.gov< mailto :RHill(a,NewportBeachCa.gov >, Leslie Daigle
<Leslicidaigle@aol.com< mailto:Leslieidaigle@aol.com >, Ed Selich
< edselich( cr) ,roadrunner.com <mailto:edselich nxoadrunner.com >>, Keith Curry
<CURRYK(@,,pfin. com< mailto: CURRYKa,pfrn. com»
CityCouncil@newportbeachea. gov< mailto :CityCouncil(&newportbeachea. gov>
Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment for July 22nd.
Dear City Council and City Clerk,
Please add this comment from myself and my grandson to Tuesday, July 22nd's City Council
Agenda, Item 10.
Thank you,
Andrea Lingle and her grandson Ben Lingle
andylingle(@, email. com <mailto: andylingle(),gmail.com>
<Will this be our Legacy.docx>
Links Community Mourns Local Lifeguard
Inside the Indy -
....v BrSA Hejhsfflxnr _ - .�. _.�' .�a. w_ ao
Ines-
[an,
.
Ines Lan
vmonw,theach therandwiNC.Ison., - -'
Y a
Condiuonspermining , the paddle 0utwdlbedc.,ea ngUrc
the end of the pier that non - surfers can gather there to watch aqi
Summer Fun p
paracipate:: .. s ".
"SummcrStar Here" with C
Ca Brn is the first lifeguard to dic In the hncofduty, Newpgri
cotton candy, thrill rides and B
Beach Fire Department spokeswoman Jennifer Mareella rnnfim
stuffed nounals as the OC Fair t
to a stnementrelseaed Sunday:.'' -
S
Setsunderwaythisweekend -.' 1
1t is with deep sonow, that the Newport Beach five Departrni
Page 4'" a
aunomwasiheondury death ofone ofour ewq'said NBFDBd
GhefScott Printer caner this. week
Of/the Menu S
Shortly after 5 p.m Sunday,, a Newport Beach rescuehoatider
What Laguna Brach bas to Wfer for a
aswmwe'llodisneswirme6toAf of surfnear l6thsvee[, afn
pre -show during '
'Ingtcapressrri.e.,
Page 12- .
.The high add andstrong np currents made' for bwweekeu
the llfsguards; Pnsrer smd.'I'lieyhad madehuadredsof other m
Lerner Stager, a
alreadybyt}uituneon Sundayhesard - - '
'Buddy -'fhe Buddy Holly Store+' '
'ben entered the ware to reitue the swrmmed Afterhe sueu"s
opens rho weekend atfaguna'.., .
.mademntact mth theman bbth'ofthemwerehitbyalargeway
Plnyhouse.:� P
Pattec explained -
Page13 O
Otherlifeguards aaempmdto asset Carlaon,but the turbWeri
tercondinort and the IBM 12 foci surfmade hditficolt,postet..
Local Focus W
When Calvin didn't resur6ce:amassivesearch Began.
Newport Beach TVlaunchesnew T
There were 25 people in thew star seardting for Carlson, supp
program oan'. - -
- L /FEGUAPD R
Page30';
coASTnI C
City Council Pos
REAL ESTATE GUIDE -
--
Spacious.„umeescapes,: -
Newport's cmwds.
: e
uCyJa`
N
By S. HAtx I NB l"Y :
end tbyhe "
!w a
abouMlcni,: o
tatPveh rdo
Na< ws' !
anfier a
mon- hs so I
yP rfs 3
Gwralwted th r ekto PUStpone this -
- 11,qui f
pLtestyl&e> Gk",,§,'w'#ae y' 5 P
P P°�nrnendmennt rh dtysgmeral 1
171,herecorn
Forum'Z`C'Ir ' -tc",, Bg, 3
planlanduseelerc n
Coinmuritya
t ,u, '
mfr with more than nw dmen pu6hc B
Brandt..
Ines Lan
22 newportbeachindy.com - JULY 11,
Lifeguard
doleroaa and support ffom people aaau.
epmetxd hfeguadstbraugpom toe
Beach LffiVards, Stare Parke persowel:.
PAGE IFRONT
th?oe&on,tt'trand coumry,az Cazlson's
dry,; the Aatemem reads "Hewasgeuu
-yam.
mentheHmpter joined lifeguard and &a
- "Whatfir
orymadena oniln w.
- locHycouunurutym mb rshae
onad lily h rod hu er
and upJ t with othm,alweysamem w
o
byMotherindividualswatchingthe "-
uspress dsympsthy,andmoumushase
inpmwtheag,.,'sbearhpuformanm
28th Were,
wavesfromthe shoreline, tAeptess rdeau
- apl,m-d. -
Placeddowers end cards atmeEfeguad -
.headquarter,
Duringhn l5yearsasa NBlifeguaid,
?^:
Members efthe Orange County Sher
les been,
ff s Deparmiedt Harbor Rural; Laguna:
hfegua*,
Beach LffiVards, Stare Parke persowel:.
"fmnjlyandi
and the Newport Beach Pella Depart-
se..b. .-
mentheHmpter joined lifeguard and &a
- "Whatfir
deParrcentstaHinthessuch.
-.lik ffiaist
Carlson'sbodywaeeventualbe Irsated
sit together
at approxmatdy 8 p.m between 27th and
theefforisu
28th Were,
ihebeghuip
Paramedic nanspond him to Hoag..-
adreirowi
Memorial Hospitil- Preabytedan, where
aperson the
lu,. pronounced dead at 8:15pm., a<
'mairyyrass.
carding to the Orange County Coroner
how sodr,
An autopry L be .owed later fire
:Caclsbmij�
week, aaording to the OC Coroner.
guaidsm,T
The ewuamer that Carlson rescued
beanneale
made it safely to shore, Patter said
bur p6sud -i
Theielusbeenanouryoutmg ofma
He main
General Plan'
although tl
PAGE I FRONT'_
dosd,men
..able
to aim
Council,
all ofthe resolution properlydocmnent
ue the ka ,
l and "not try or it w the fly hue
- Garderab:
torrighCheaoted
- "llneba
"I think that make much more suse,"
rw had ad
h ,s Rl.
on thisf Ga
Staffwil pat together a comphtepack
Lbenewres
et that shows all of the imposed lunges
SaW by
to the poke, ednbrts and resolutson for
'Tuesday, d
ca(mdi to mnssderat the near meeting,'
_Corona del:
SUN
PAGE IFRONT
'j Ben Dolema
au a man
1. 4artmnenat WmeloCdlho[spon;. Mala[ --
frequesrt4
-. pmt co. Drive, Sehch eplana .:
The details All need to be worked out
Ise -- HuplanprdposesnuraVingeleciionic
-6y tmf ee.gincans: be added, but it isa .
-- messagebwrdsmtell howmanypsinuta
vieblemncept
m— - rttakestogetto Newport Center #aaluon
Couiitlhwmav ]ed,e Daigle had a few
.T _. IsFarderthe avport amwa ilteinato
'=., ,.ewitli the plan
mumsversds goiogduough- Cnranndd
Some ntasecnonswould need to be
feel ". Mar ..
` looked m in closer deaad for potential
idkinthehares,she
o Ebel
ark Up