The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About12 - Santa Ana Avenue Cottages Appeal - HandoutsCoalition against Santa Ana Ave cottages as a 3 story Development February 28, 2017 Newport Beach City Council City clerks office 100 Civic Center Drive/ PO Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA 92658-8915 Dear Newport Beach City Council, 20442 Santo Ana Ave Newpoo Beach Ca 92660 T 949 214 5063 F 949 630 2943 dunndir -C,gmail.com On behalf of the 'Coalition against Santa Ana Ave cottages as a 3 story Development' we are appeal- ing the planning commission's approval of the Santa Ana Ave cottages. This is a letter to express concern for the safety and compliance of the Santa Ana Ave Cottages proposal. It is also going to open up the city of Newport Beach to fawsuits from all the surrounding properties which are adversely affected by this out of place 3 story property. This 3 story property will also breach the privacy of the surrounding properties and create fire and safety hazards for itself and surrounding properties. Coalition against Santa Ana Ave cottages as a 3 story Development' sites the following reasons: 1. Does not fit the neighborhood - The Santa Ana Ave Cottages proposal does not fit the area. A three story, 7 unit rental apartment complex into an area of one and two story homes? Yes the area is FiMD but all properties whether they are single family residences, or apartments are all 2 story maximum. There are no 3 story dwelling in Newport or in Costa Mesa and the design is not in architec- tural harmony with the rest of the area. Even in the application of the project no where can you find a three story apartment to compare because they dont exist anywhere in Newport beach or Costa Mesa. 2. No precedent for three story dwelling in this area and will breach neighbors privacy - Does the city want to approve and accept the liability of two 33 foot high three story dwellings„ one that is 100 feet long and one 75 feet long just 5 feet from the next doer neighbors which are both sin- gle story single family residences. The wall of 24 windows that rises 33 feet and will be 100 ft long 5 ft from a single story residence is a total breach of privacy and the adjacent properties may seek damages by suing the city Newport Beach and the property owner. 3. Planning commission ignored all the issues brought up by surrounding property owners - Planning commission ignored all the issues raised by Five property owners in the area who wrote let- ters and even ignored the experience of there own inspection by Commissioner Erik Weigand who could not find parking anywhere and It was such an egregious issue for him that he made a formal request to the liaison to Costa Mesa to request more street parking in that area. They have also ig- nored the fact that it will reduce the property values of all properties adjacent to the proposed three story development. We invite all seven commissioners to come meet at the site in person, drive separate cars and lets see where you have to park to visit the 20452 Santa Ana Ave property. You will need to walk a quartet to a half of a mile to park your car. 4. Property Value Decline of all adjacent properties - AII the adjacent and surrounding properties values will drop significantly due to the lack of privacy that a 3 story dwelling will create on the surrounding one story dwellings. Is the city of Newport Beach asking the neighbors to effectively pay for this development by us being forced to take significant property value cuts to approve a 3 story building that does not fit the area and has no precedent in the area? The city is opening itself up to massive liability with this approval due to dealing value of the surrounding property and a breach of privacy to surrounding properties. All properties next to this type of development may sue the city of Newport Beach. 5. Newport Beach opening itself to legal exposure from Property owners adversely affected - As a 7 unit 3 story project it is not a fit for the area and we are unanimously going to appeal this ap- proval. However we support this project as a 2 story design which reflects the density and architec- tural classification of the area without impacting ;parking, violating other property owners rights and exacerbating a precarious intersection's traffic flow and safety. This will violate the surrounding property owners property rights and brining the city of Newport Beach under legal exposure for knowingly approving a project that will cause the decline of many others. 6. Mrs. Brandes gave Blatantly false testimony at the first hearing to the Planning Commission re- garding the next door neighbor supporting the project - I know this because i am the next door neighbor she was falsely claiming that I supported the project. She also gave false testimony to me the next door neighbor that the development would be a two sto- ry development and then the the plans are revealed they were 3 story. This project was approved on False testimony and the city of Newport Beach and Mrs Brandes are liable and can be sued for damages. 7. Traffic and public safety - Three story and too many units will occlude an already dangerous intersection. Does the city want to approve and accept the liability and block the vision and more than double the traffic coming and going from a property that is less than 100 feet from an Traffic light intersection with an average of one accident every three months and where the posted speed limit 45 mph? This oversight of Public Works will make the city of Newport Beach liable to be sued for dam- ages. 8. Fire Hazard and poor functional design - With no access to the backyard except to walk out of the unit and down exterior stairs and through the garage this is a fire hazard and design flaw that can not be approved without the city accepting the liability of approving such dangerous and haphazard structural design. Also with a 5 foot deep back yard will be a fire hazard for BBQs and there is no room for any fire escapes. This oversight of Fire will make the city of Newport Beach liable to be sued for damages. 9. Parking - By his own admission when Commissioner Erik Weigand came here to inspect the property he could not find parking anywhere in the vicinity. It was such an egregious issue for him that he made a formal request to the liaison to Costa Mesa to request more street parking in that area. Which i explained to him later in the meeting why they can not and will not put parking there. Yet the entire commissioner panel still approved a plan to add four more 3 story units and 12 more cars to this already restrictive parking situation. 'Coalition against Santa Ana Ave cottages as a 3 story Development` When the Newport Beach Planning employee carne out to post the signs of Public notice on the lawn for this very meeting she had to park illegally because there is no parking in the area( See attached picture of the Newport Beach city vehicle illegally parked out front of 20452 San- ta Ana Ave Newport Beach) when they posted the public Notice for this very meeting. 10. Drainage - A Sloped land with drainage out the front of the property is impossible. There lot drains on to my lot. Seven units draining on to my lot. Does the city want to approve and accept the liability of a property with improper drainage and sloping of the lot? In addition the sunken garages will constantly flood the way this property is designed with no backyards in any of the units and expecting the water to drain down the driveway. These garage designs would not hold up with the Rain we have been get- ting and leave the city open to liable to be sued for damages. 11. Aesthetic - The three story block with little to no architectural styling and which looks more a kin to an Eastern European prison cel block than a "cottage". 12. Trash - There is not enough street frontage to provide for each of the 7 dwelling to have 2 or three cans out from of the property. The project will require a 20 to 40 yard dumpster and this has not been included and when added will not allow for enough parking in the already impacted parking situation. There is not room for 21 garbage cans on the street for this development. A 20 to 40 yard dumpster and access to it via a trash truck will take away 2 parking spots leaving the project deficient of parking. 13. Lastly, We challenge the planning department write up of the The class 32 exemption of the CEQA findings based on two blatantly false statements. P 18 1."A similar multi residential development has existed at this property since 1975." A single story triplex is not the same as seven three story condos. and 2. "The amount of Traffic to a from the site will not significantly change." The amount of cars will go up from 6 to 20, an over 300% increase in traffic. Both of these statements are false and can not be used as arguments to create a class 32 ex- emption of the CEQA. They also clearly exhibit a hastily and poorly written staff report. These are the thirteen points that the 'Coalition against Santa Ana Ave cottages as a 3 story Development' sight as why this project 1s not good for the area. The project is trying to put too many units in a property that can not handle it and the neighborhood property owners are be- ing asked to suffer heavy losses property losses in order approve a project that does not fit the area in the first place. In conclusion, The `Coalition against Santa Ana Ave cottages as a 3 story Development' is not anti growth we are interested in maintaining our property values, the architectural harmony and safety of our neighborhood which this 3 story project will erode. We will support a design. with 2 story dwelling and less units which will mitigate the many issues raised with this ap- peal. Solution, by modifying these plans to a 2 story design everyone wins. Mrs. Brandes can im- prove her property, the neighborhood will not lose value from their properties and lastly the city of Newport Beach will avoid an avalanche of lawsuits that these 3 story apartments will generate. Thank you. Sincerely y P-7 - onag Santa Ana Ave cottages as a 3 story Development' �: ,� i �� l "� _ �_ -� �i r9aU.,y� a.. :- �� ' � �: _ -;4 1 ..w � a '� �.�_ r �'�! Y O -S all L \ . � 2 � .. �_� �. I 'wrJi s IS; I • r� +tom ; � � . , 'i '' y 0 Y 3 1